RMF5630 said:And he can say you are one of those tin foil hat conspiracy theory people.Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Ok, then. It's like the 60's styles coming back, if you can pull it off. More power to you!Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:And he can say you are one of those tin foil hat conspiracy theory people.Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Difference is we wear that with honor now. He denies it.
After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
It is a broad topic, there is always room for more researchers.Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
Lol - I wish you the best in your research!
RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
You just added years to the research effort by adding a confounding variable. Never thought of the Triple Sec Margarita. This is how Government research works.He Hate Me said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
RMF5630 said:You just added years to the research effort by adding a confounding variable. Never thought of the Triple Sec Margarita. This is how Government research works.He Hate Me said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
Right! And we are wasting money funding all sorts of worthless **** when this question is out there.Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:You just added years to the research effort by adding a confounding variable. Never thought of the Triple Sec Margarita. This is how Government research works.He Hate Me said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
You dont even know what you dont know!
RMF5630 said:Right! And we are wasting money funding all sorts of worthless **** when this question is out there.Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:You just added years to the research effort by adding a confounding variable. Never thought of the Triple Sec Margarita. This is how Government research works.He Hate Me said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
You dont even know what you dont know!
A few more posts and it is a conspiracy.
This may not be appropriate for Gov't research. It is a high quality, low cost input. When added to Legado tequila, lime juice, and agave syrup, it has been known to produce high quality margaritas that are easy to make and enjoyed by both leftists and conservatives alike.RMF5630 said:You just added years to the research effort by adding a confounding variable. Never thought of the Triple Sec Margarita. This is how Government research works.He Hate Me said:RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
That is an interesting stat to say the least.4th and Inches said:no serious Poll has shown Biden leading Trump for 2024.sombear said:Plenty of polls have Biden leading Trump. And given Biden's low approvals, that is scary.4th and Inches said:
No Dem has polled well against Donald Trump for 2024.
So far, he has been polled against Biden, Harris, Clinton, Buttigieg, Warren, Sanders and Newsom.
Trump beat all of them.
Some of those same pollsters were still using registered voters at two weeks to election. Those polls are weak attempt to show that Biden's approval is better than it really is..
In better news, Philly is reporting a 69% drop in mail in votes(collected only 31% of the 2020 mail in number)
Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Not so. I require some proof. You saying do isn't proof. Court after court said no. You guys line up with Hillary & Stacy, not I.
Married A Horn said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Not so. I require some proof. You saying do isn't proof. Court after court said no. You guys line up with Hillary & Stacy, not I.
Proof is out there. Go watch 2000 mules. Watch on here all the pictures posted of ballot harvestors taking selfies. Watch the DFW homeless guy explain it all to the cops. Watch the Florida Democrat detail the whole operation.
You just willfully blind.
Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Not so. I require some proof. You saying do isn't proof. Court after court said no. You guys line up with Hillary & Stacy, not I.
Proof is out there. Go watch 2000 mules. Watch on here all the pictures posted of ballot harvestors taking selfies. Watch the DFW homeless guy explain it all to the cops. Watch the Florida Democrat detail the whole operation.
You just willfully blind.
You are very gullible
He Hate Me said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Not so. I require some proof. You saying do isn't proof. Court after court said no. You guys line up with Hillary & Stacy, not I.
Proof is out there. Go watch 2000 mules. Watch on here all the pictures posted of ballot harvestors taking selfies. Watch the DFW homeless guy explain it all to the cops. Watch the Florida Democrat detail the whole operation.
You just willfully blind.
You are very gullible
So, you do it why, then?Osodecentx said:He Hate Me said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:Oldbear83 said:
Oso: "Fraud did not change the results in any federal election"
Agree to strongly disagree.
He is one of those guys that says:
'The government told me there was no fraud. Therefore there was no fraud.'
Not so. I require some proof. You saying do isn't proof. Court after court said no. You guys line up with Hillary & Stacy, not I.
Proof is out there. Go watch 2000 mules. Watch on here all the pictures posted of ballot harvestors taking selfies. Watch the DFW homeless guy explain it all to the cops. Watch the Florida Democrat detail the whole operation.
You just willfully blind.
You are very gullible
Repetition of things not true isn't evidence
RMF5630 said:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.4th and Inches said:his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGARMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:You're going about it all wrong, you know.Canada2017 said:RMF5630 said:Osodecentx said:4th and Inches said:wont effect him at all.. he is roding his own wave in FLsombear said:
There's plenty of time for political analysis just as there was plenty of time for Trump to hit Desantis, but no, the buffoon had to do it the weekend before the vote.
But why would Trump attack a Republican on the weekend before an election?
He reacts, he doesn't think. He can't keep his mouth shut. There has been 90% of his problems!
Which is why the Republicans need to keep trump's ass off the National ticket in 2024.
1. Like it or not, Trump has more Republican support - by far - than anyone else. Attacking Trump is not going to win over Republicans to your position.
2. Trump has an incredible number of flaws, yet no one else has so effectively identified and attacked the Democrats' campaign of dismantling our Republic since 1993. The only way to become more popular with Republicans is to give Trump praise for what he got right, then identify the next step in bringing the Federal government back to what the Founders set up.
3. There is undeniably an Establishment element to the GOP, just as there is in the Democrats ranks. Protecting mandarins who just want to get rich and personally influential while ignoring their duties is not only morally wrong, but only helps the Democrats, who - despite their corruption - are more unified and focused in their plans.
Old bear,
I agree with you about base support. Where you seem to underestimate is in General election. Trump is poison at a General election level. Women, independents, moderate GOP, and ALL Dems are dead set against him for his flaws and behavior. There are not enough GOP Trump voters to offset those against him.
I am not sure in a Primary Trump could beat a DeSantis. Trumps supporters are vocal and serve a purpose. Similar to the 20 bike people that make sure bike lanes are all over even though 95% of the people never use them. Auto traffic will grow by 40% over next 20 years, yet those 20 people have stopped us building lanes for transit no one rides.... Those are the MAGA supporters, vocal and get their way although they do not represent the 80%....
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:2020 was a different animal. He was the sitting President. I agree 100% with your position on him going in to the 2020 election. We are 100% in agreement.Oldbear83 said:
RMF: "Trump is poison at a General election level."
Only when the GOP refuses to unify, and prefers fracture to focus. Also, there are ways to handle the media rather than play by their rules. A big mistake in 2020 was playing by MSDNC rules.
Where we seem to separate is after the election. His behavior was ridiculous and caused the GOP and Conservatism a lot of problems. I agree with Barr and his analysis that his legal team was a "clown show" and focused on the wrong issue. Personally, I believe it was because "fraud" was the only word Trump could understand versus States not following their procedural rules. "Fraud" played better on Twitter, which is all Trump understands. Once he tried to strongarm Pence, then did that rally and the Jan 6th stuff followed... Game Over.
If he runs, it will all come back on every channel, even Fox will run it. I don't see anyway he overcomes that with the other 240 million US citizens. Sure he 80 million will want him, but we will see such a turnout against. Even half the GOP can't stand him. Stay in social media world, run a PAC, be Kingmaker, Lobby, but hold office??? No way.
I dont remember the number, but I think polling shows a vast majority of republicans believe there was fraud - supported by 2000 Mules among other things. What you are saying about the procedural thing is correct - but that was so they could commit more fraud.
Election fraud is the ONLY issue to many people and focusing on it is a good idea. Any candidate that says there was no election fraud has a low chance of getting most conservative votes.
Fraud did not change the results in any federal election
RMF5630 said:After 30 years of anguishing over politics. I have reached the point where I am researching the benefits of the Original Margarita recipe versus the Tommy Margarita.Married A Horn said:
Seriously though, which side would you rather be on?
Believe everything the government says, no question.
Skeptical of everything the government says, question / verify everything?
I can see value in both. Sometime Gran Marnier is jus the thing. But, others a shot of agave syrup goes better. There is value in the original, but innovation moves the world forward. More research is needed.
Until I figure this quandary out, I am really not prepared to take on Government Conspiracies.
whiterock said:Osodecentx said:Married A Horn said:RMF5630 said:2020 was a different animal. He was the sitting President. I agree 100% with your position on him going in to the 2020 election. We are 100% in agreement.Oldbear83 said:
RMF: "Trump is poison at a General election level."
Only when the GOP refuses to unify, and prefers fracture to focus. Also, there are ways to handle the media rather than play by their rules. A big mistake in 2020 was playing by MSDNC rules.
Where we seem to separate is after the election. His behavior was ridiculous and caused the GOP and Conservatism a lot of problems. I agree with Barr and his analysis that his legal team was a "clown show" and focused on the wrong issue. Personally, I believe it was because "fraud" was the only word Trump could understand versus States not following their procedural rules. "Fraud" played better on Twitter, which is all Trump understands. Once he tried to strongarm Pence, then did that rally and the Jan 6th stuff followed... Game Over.
If he runs, it will all come back on every channel, even Fox will run it. I don't see anyway he overcomes that with the other 240 million US citizens. Sure he 80 million will want him, but we will see such a turnout against. Even half the GOP can't stand him. Stay in social media world, run a PAC, be Kingmaker, Lobby, but hold office??? No way.
I dont remember the number, but I think polling shows a vast majority of republicans believe there was fraud - supported by 2000 Mules among other things. What you are saying about the procedural thing is correct - but that was so they could commit more fraud.
Election fraud is the ONLY issue to many people and focusing on it is a good idea. Any candidate that says there was no election fraud has a low chance of getting most conservative votes.
Fraud did not change the results in any federal election
That is a minority opinion
whiterock said:RMF5630 said:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.4th and Inches said:his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGARMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:You're going about it all wrong, you know.Canada2017 said:RMF5630 said:Osodecentx said:4th and Inches said:wont effect him at all.. he is roding his own wave in FLsombear said:
There's plenty of time for political analysis just as there was plenty of time for Trump to hit Desantis, but no, the buffoon had to do it the weekend before the vote.
But why would Trump attack a Republican on the weekend before an election?
He reacts, he doesn't think. He can't keep his mouth shut. There has been 90% of his problems!
Which is why the Republicans need to keep trump's ass off the National ticket in 2024.
1. Like it or not, Trump has more Republican support - by far - than anyone else. Attacking Trump is not going to win over Republicans to your position.
2. Trump has an incredible number of flaws, yet no one else has so effectively identified and attacked the Democrats' campaign of dismantling our Republic since 1993. The only way to become more popular with Republicans is to give Trump praise for what he got right, then identify the next step in bringing the Federal government back to what the Founders set up.
3. There is undeniably an Establishment element to the GOP, just as there is in the Democrats ranks. Protecting mandarins who just want to get rich and personally influential while ignoring their duties is not only morally wrong, but only helps the Democrats, who - despite their corruption - are more unified and focused in their plans.
Old bear,
I agree with you about base support. Where you seem to underestimate is in General election. Trump is poison at a General election level. Women, independents, moderate GOP, and ALL Dems are dead set against him for his flaws and behavior. There are not enough GOP Trump voters to offset those against him.
I am not sure in a Primary Trump could beat a DeSantis. Trumps supporters are vocal and serve a purpose. Similar to the 20 bike people that make sure bike lanes are all over even though 95% of the people never use them. Auto traffic will grow by 40% over next 20 years, yet those 20 people have stopped us building lanes for transit no one rides.... Those are the MAGA supporters, vocal and get their way although they do not represent the 80%....
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
In a crowded field, 25% is enough.
In a few early primaries, delegates are selected proportional to one's share of the vote. But that quickly converts to "winner take all." That is purposeful. Up front, you have three small states, each in sone way representative of different but important slices of the electorate, which are proportionately allocated. The reason? To give a grassroots candidate time to catch fire. But then they switch over to wholly or mostly winner-take-all. Why? To force closure. An upstart has to quickly turn a good showing in the first 3 primaries into a national organization that raises money prodigiously. It's an almost impossible task.
AT this point, any candidate at +50% is invulnerable in anything larger than a 2 candidate field. Trump at 53% (lowest poll I've seen) and Desantis at 27% (same poll that had Trump at 53) is so gruesome an opponent that the only challengers who'd run are those posturing for a VP or candidate slot.
Learn the rules and the process and you'll get why Trump is furthest thing from vulnerable. (At this point). He'll need to be below 40 to be vulnerable and below 30 to be beatable.
There's just no mathematical path to defeat him. Today.
Cobretti said:
State legislatures and state parties have a say in how delegates are elected/allocated, too. Some states with very small weak party infrastructure tend to follow guidance from RNC. Others are more robust, particularly Texas. In many respects, the Republican Party of Texas IS the national Republican party. The RPT state convention is actually larger than the GOP National Convention....the largest political convention in the world. And of course, each of those state parties have an executive committee (I am a former member) elected at state conventions. That is to say, the RNC does not order the state parties around. It does, however, set the rules for the National Convention (to which you allude). But when a candidate has over 50% support of primary voters.....convention rules won't matter much. They did in 2016 because Trump was riiiight on the edge of clearing the bar. That made rules about unbinding a potential risk, should he not secure the nomination on the first two ballots - a big number of delegates pledged to him had personally supported other candidates earlier in the process.....so would they hold to him if unbound? Prolly not. So he hired Paul Manafort to fix that problem And boy did he. A third of the delegates at the RPT convention that year were brand new "who the hell are you" souls who showed up, took their job seriously, and significantly strengthened the party. it was a VERY impressive effort. It made the party stronger.RMF5630 said:Quote:Quote:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.Quote:his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGAQuote:
Old bear,
I agree with you about base support. Where you seem to underestimate is in General election. Trump is poison at a General election level. Women, independents, moderate GOP, and ALL Dems are dead set against him for his flaws and behavior. There are not enough GOP Trump voters to offset those against him.
I am not sure in a Primary Trump could beat a DeSantis. Trumps supporters are vocal and serve a purpose. Similar to the 20 bike people that make sure bike lanes are all over even though 95% of the people never use them. Auto traffic will grow by 40% over next 20 years, yet those 20 people have stopped us building lanes for transit no one rides.... Those are the MAGA supporters, vocal and get their way although they do not represent the 80%....
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
In a crowded field, 25% is enough.
In a few early primaries, delegates are selected proportional to one's share of the vote. But that quickly converts to "winner take all." That is purposeful. Up front, you have three small states, each in sone way representative of different but important slices of the electorate, which are proportionately allocated. The reason? To give a grassroots candidate time to catch fire. But then they switch over to wholly or mostly winner-take-all. Why? To force closure. An upstart has to quickly turn a good showing in the first 3 primaries into a national organization that raises money prodigiously. It's an almost impossible task.
AT this point, any candidate at +50% is invulnerable in anything larger than a 2 candidate field. Trump at 53% (lowest poll I've seen) and Desantis at 27% (same poll that had Trump at 53) is so gruesome an opponent that the only challengers who'd run are those posturing for a VP or candidate slot.
Learn the rules and the process and you'll get why Trump is furthest thing from vulnerable. (At this point). He'll need to be below 40 to be vulnerable and below 30 to be beatable.
There's just no mathematical path to defeat him. Today.
In the Primary. The only way if he is over 50% is if the RNC Rules Committee gets involved. In 2016 they didnt unbind. If they do the Paul Ryans may have the last say.
I don't think Trump makes it to the Convention, he will be prosecuted for something first and disqualify him.
Cobretti said:
Disagree on several fronts. DeSantis will take Reagan route, no way he puts himself on Trump's ticket and especially as his #2 expected to toe Trump loyalty even to his own demise. No way.whiterock said:State legislatures and state parties have a say in how delegates are elected/allocated, too. Some states with very small weak party infrastructure tend to follow guidance from RNC. Others are more robust, particularly Texas. In many respects, the Republican Party of Texas IS the national Republican party. The RPT state convention is actually larger than the GOP National Convention....the largest political convention in the world. And of course, each of those state parties have an executive committee (I am a former member) elected at state conventions. That is to say, the RNC does not order the state parties around. It does, however, set the rules for the National Convention (to which you allude). But when a candidate has over 50% support of primary voters.....convention rules won't matter much. They did in 2016 because Trump was riiiight on the edge of clearing the bar. That made rules about unbinding a potential risk, should he not secure the nomination on the first two ballots - a big number of delegates pledged to him had personally supported other candidates earlier in the process.....so would they hold to him if unbound? Prolly not. So he hired Paul Manafort to fix that problem And boy did he. A third of the delegates at the RPT convention that year were brand new "who the hell are you" souls who showed up, took their job seriously, and significantly strengthened the party. it was a VERY impressive effort. It made the party stronger.RMF5630 said:Quote:Quote:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.Quote:his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGAQuote:
Old bear,
I agree with you about base support. Where you seem to underestimate is in General election. Trump is poison at a General election level. Women, independents, moderate GOP, and ALL Dems are dead set against him for his flaws and behavior. There are not enough GOP Trump voters to offset those against him.
I am not sure in a Primary Trump could beat a DeSantis. Trumps supporters are vocal and serve a purpose. Similar to the 20 bike people that make sure bike lanes are all over even though 95% of the people never use them. Auto traffic will grow by 40% over next 20 years, yet those 20 people have stopped us building lanes for transit no one rides.... Those are the MAGA supporters, vocal and get their way although they do not represent the 80%....
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
In a crowded field, 25% is enough.
In a few early primaries, delegates are selected proportional to one's share of the vote. But that quickly converts to "winner take all." That is purposeful. Up front, you have three small states, each in sone way representative of different but important slices of the electorate, which are proportionately allocated. The reason? To give a grassroots candidate time to catch fire. But then they switch over to wholly or mostly winner-take-all. Why? To force closure. An upstart has to quickly turn a good showing in the first 3 primaries into a national organization that raises money prodigiously. It's an almost impossible task.
AT this point, any candidate at +50% is invulnerable in anything larger than a 2 candidate field. Trump at 53% (lowest poll I've seen) and Desantis at 27% (same poll that had Trump at 53) is so gruesome an opponent that the only challengers who'd run are those posturing for a VP or candidate slot.
Learn the rules and the process and you'll get why Trump is furthest thing from vulnerable. (At this point). He'll need to be below 40 to be vulnerable and below 30 to be beatable.
There's just no mathematical path to defeat him. Today.
In the Primary. The only way if he is over 50% is if the RNC Rules Committee gets involved. In 2016 they didnt unbind. If they do the Paul Ryans may have the last say.
I don't think Trump makes it to the Convention, he will be prosecuted for something first and disqualify him.
Here's the problem for any candidate wanting to knock Trump off: he's over 50% GOP support in every poll taken this year. That's a guaranteed nomination, no matter what the rules are. The investigations are not going to move the needle. They're going to harden his support. The reasoning goes like this: if we let the media and Democrats use the J6 Cmee to take him out, they will do it every cycle on something on someone. Need to stand up to the bullying now. Defeat it. Then return the favor just for the purposes of deterrence.
And as we find ourselves in the timeframe of primary 12-18 month from now and it's clear that Trump has the nomination sewed up, you are going to see a number of people who you were convinced would NEVER take the VP role turn around and see it. Because it is the surest path to nomination in 2028. Not even close.
Republicans/conservatives have always had a cultural quirk when it comes to candidates. We tended to want an "above reproach" candidate who can easily brush off the inevitable Democrat broadsides re deplorability. "rise above it, be statesmanlike, etc...." That fit the old GOP complexion of country club business types....leaders who had to make things work, who frowned on anti-establishmentarian populism that got in their way of building prosperity for their communities. But that sentiment is receding. Most GOP voters understand that the game is rigged, double standards. Republicans get prosecuted for stuff Dems get excused on. Media imbalance is preposterous. And, most importantly, the GOP has changed. It's not "our daddy's GOP." It's a multi-racial working class party now. WE are the anti-establishmentarians against corporate boardrooms who pander to woke cultural institutions.RMF5630 said:Disagree on several fronts. DeSantis will take Reagan route, no way he puts himself on Trump's ticket and especially as his #2 expected to toe Trump loyalty even to his own demise. No way.whiterock said:State legislatures and state parties have a say in how delegates are elected/allocated, too. Some states with very small weak party infrastructure tend to follow guidance from RNC. Others are more robust, particularly Texas. In many respects, the Republican Party of Texas IS the national Republican party. The RPT state convention is actually larger than the GOP National Convention....the largest political convention in the world. And of course, each of those state parties have an executive committee (I am a former member) elected at state conventions. That is to say, the RNC does not order the state parties around. It does, however, set the rules for the National Convention (to which you allude). But when a candidate has over 50% support of primary voters.....convention rules won't matter much. They did in 2016 because Trump was riiiight on the edge of clearing the bar. That made rules about unbinding a potential risk, should he not secure the nomination on the first two ballots - a big number of delegates pledged to him had personally supported other candidates earlier in the process.....so would they hold to him if unbound? Prolly not. So he hired Paul Manafort to fix that problem And boy did he. A third of the delegates at the RPT convention that year were brand new "who the hell are you" souls who showed up, took their job seriously, and significantly strengthened the party. it was a VERY impressive effort. It made the party stronger.RMF5630 said:Quote:Quote:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.Quote:Quote:
his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGA
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
In a crowded field, 25% is enough.
In a few early primaries, delegates are selected proportional to one's share of the vote. But that quickly converts to "winner take all." That is purposeful. Up front, you have three small states, each in sone way representative of different but important slices of the electorate, which are proportionately allocated. The reason? To give a grassroots candidate time to catch fire. But then they switch over to wholly or mostly winner-take-all. Why? To force closure. An upstart has to quickly turn a good showing in the first 3 primaries into a national organization that raises money prodigiously. It's an almost impossible task.
AT this point, any candidate at +50% is invulnerable in anything larger than a 2 candidate field. Trump at 53% (lowest poll I've seen) and Desantis at 27% (same poll that had Trump at 53) is so gruesome an opponent that the only challengers who'd run are those posturing for a VP or candidate slot.
Learn the rules and the process and you'll get why Trump is furthest thing from vulnerable. (At this point). He'll need to be below 40 to be vulnerable and below 30 to be beatable.
There's just no mathematical path to defeat him. Today.
In the Primary. The only way if he is over 50% is if the RNC Rules Committee gets involved. In 2016 they didnt unbind. If they do the Paul Ryans may have the last say.
I don't think Trump makes it to the Convention, he will be prosecuted for something first and disqualify him.
Here's the problem for any candidate wanting to knock Trump off: he's over 50% GOP support in every poll taken this year. That's a guaranteed nomination, no matter what the rules are. The investigations are not going to move the needle. They're going to harden his support. The reasoning goes like this: if we let the media and Democrats use the J6 Cmee to take him out, they will do it every cycle on something on someone. Need to stand up to the bullying now. Defeat it. Then return the favor just for the purposes of deterrence.
And as we find ourselves in the timeframe of primary 12-18 month from now and it's clear that Trump has the nomination sewed up, you are going to see a number of people who you were convinced would NEVER take the VP role turn around and see it. Because it is the surest path to nomination in 2028. Not even close.
Second, I am not sure Trump survives the legal actions that are still going on and that will come after the mid-terms as a viable candidate. He still has DOJ and the Jan 6th crap plus the document scheme (Dem scheme) to deal with and survive. What they are using the Espionage Act of 1917 is almost indefensible against if they go that route. They are not playing for jail time, just not able to hold office.
After all that you think he is still the nominee, might as well give the Dems the White House if they run someone competent. One thing the GOP has in their favor, the Dems haven't run someone competent since Bill Clinton.
That guy, Jeff Tiedrich and JoJo From Jersey are all paid to post pro democrat messages. The dems have figured this out and they have these people on the payroll to push their narratives. I dont think the repubs do the same thing and many of the famous conservative twitter posters have been banned, shadow banned or had their followers throttled. Hopefully that is changing but since the 2016 elections it has not been a level playing field.Harrison Bergeron said:Cobretti said:
No one represents twatter Idiocracy than that idiot.
whiterock said:Republicans/conservatives have always had a cultural quirk when it comes to candidates. We tended to want an "above reproach" candidate who can easily brush off the inevitable Democrat broadsides re deplorability. "rise above it, be statesmanlike, etc...." That fit the old GOP complexion of country club business types....leaders who had to make things work, who frowned on anti-establishmentarian populism that got in their way of building prosperity for their communities. But that sentiment is receding. Most GOP voters understand that the game is rigged, double standards. Republicans get prosecuted for stuff Dems get excused on. Media imbalance is preposterous. And, most importantly, the GOP has changed. It's not "our daddy's GOP." It's a multi-racial working class party now. WE are the anti-establishmentarians against corporate boardrooms who pander to woke cultural institutions.RMF5630 said:Disagree on several fronts. DeSantis will take Reagan route, no way he puts himself on Trump's ticket and especially as his #2 expected to toe Trump loyalty even to his own demise. No way.whiterock said:State legislatures and state parties have a say in how delegates are elected/allocated, too. Some states with very small weak party infrastructure tend to follow guidance from RNC. Others are more robust, particularly Texas. In many respects, the Republican Party of Texas IS the national Republican party. The RPT state convention is actually larger than the GOP National Convention....the largest political convention in the world. And of course, each of those state parties have an executive committee (I am a former member) elected at state conventions. That is to say, the RNC does not order the state parties around. It does, however, set the rules for the National Convention (to which you allude). But when a candidate has over 50% support of primary voters.....convention rules won't matter much. They did in 2016 because Trump was riiiight on the edge of clearing the bar. That made rules about unbinding a potential risk, should he not secure the nomination on the first two ballots - a big number of delegates pledged to him had personally supported other candidates earlier in the process.....so would they hold to him if unbound? Prolly not. So he hired Paul Manafort to fix that problem And boy did he. A third of the delegates at the RPT convention that year were brand new "who the hell are you" souls who showed up, took their job seriously, and significantly strengthened the party. it was a VERY impressive effort. It made the party stronger.RMF5630 said:Quote:Quote:You don't need 51% to win the Nomination. When push comes to shove, Trump will not be the nominee. If he is, the GOP is going to be in for a rough time. You are spending too much time around MAGA-types. They are good at convincing themselves and trying to intimidate those that disagree that they are right and in the majority. Until Trump pulls his crap, which he will.Quote:Quote:
his base is at least 55% of the "GOP". Neither side wins without support of the other.. you way underestimate MAGA
People forget how bad he was after election day. How brutal his surrogates were - Rudi? Powell? I do not believe they did anything illegal, but it was a clown show. Totally destroyed his credibility with alot of the voters. He will continue to intimidate, but I believe GOP will do everything they can to NOT have Trump as the nominee. Trump's behavior brought on the January 6th Commission crap. Nobody wants that in the White House again.
By the way, my Chesapeake Bay Retriever would win against Biden. Not a tough bar to cross. DeSantis, Haley, even Pompeo would beat Biden and his cast of characters. This is THE WORST Presidential performance in history!
In a crowded field, 25% is enough.
In a few early primaries, delegates are selected proportional to one's share of the vote. But that quickly converts to "winner take all." That is purposeful. Up front, you have three small states, each in sone way representative of different but important slices of the electorate, which are proportionately allocated. The reason? To give a grassroots candidate time to catch fire. But then they switch over to wholly or mostly winner-take-all. Why? To force closure. An upstart has to quickly turn a good showing in the first 3 primaries into a national organization that raises money prodigiously. It's an almost impossible task.
AT this point, any candidate at +50% is invulnerable in anything larger than a 2 candidate field. Trump at 53% (lowest poll I've seen) and Desantis at 27% (same poll that had Trump at 53) is so gruesome an opponent that the only challengers who'd run are those posturing for a VP or candidate slot.
Learn the rules and the process and you'll get why Trump is furthest thing from vulnerable. (At this point). He'll need to be below 40 to be vulnerable and below 30 to be beatable.
There's just no mathematical path to defeat him. Today.
In the Primary. The only way if he is over 50% is if the RNC Rules Committee gets involved. In 2016 they didnt unbind. If they do the Paul Ryans may have the last say.
I don't think Trump makes it to the Convention, he will be prosecuted for something first and disqualify him.
Here's the problem for any candidate wanting to knock Trump off: he's over 50% GOP support in every poll taken this year. That's a guaranteed nomination, no matter what the rules are. The investigations are not going to move the needle. They're going to harden his support. The reasoning goes like this: if we let the media and Democrats use the J6 Cmee to take him out, they will do it every cycle on something on someone. Need to stand up to the bullying now. Defeat it. Then return the favor just for the purposes of deterrence.
And as we find ourselves in the timeframe of primary 12-18 month from now and it's clear that Trump has the nomination sewed up, you are going to see a number of people who you were convinced would NEVER take the VP role turn around and see it. Because it is the surest path to nomination in 2028. Not even close.
Second, I am not sure Trump survives the legal actions that are still going on and that will come after the mid-terms as a viable candidate. He still has DOJ and the Jan 6th crap plus the document scheme (Dem scheme) to deal with and survive. What they are using the Espionage Act of 1917 is almost indefensible against if they go that route. They are not playing for jail time, just not able to hold office.
After all that you think he is still the nominee, might as well give the Dems the White House if they run someone competent. One thing the GOP has in their favor, the Dems haven't run someone competent since Bill Clinton.
Trump was proof that a GOP candidate could win on a muddy track, give it back as good as he got.
So, no. Completely disagree with the premise of your article that the DOJ and J6 stuff will be fatal. They won't be able to get the trials underway, and certainly not all the appeals done, before the election. It'll be an issue, balanced by the "issues" the GOP congress digs up in its investigations. it will be the muddiest track for a presidential in our lifetimes. We cannot avoid that. We just gotta win it. And it's going to take one tough SOB to do it.
I will not bend to Democrat corruption of legal institutions.
You should not either.
