As Trump takes Nevada, Republicans face facts


Wow, better than the slate of Republican candidates.


^^what she said. You know he’s a buffoon, I know, lots of people know. But a lot don’t and don’t find the distasteful rhetoric he offers so far from their own angry hearts.

It’s understandable many ways, all about where you’re seeing it from. Today we have the benefit of history, but if LBJ pissed on your leg and that’s all you knew of him, would you have necessarily picked him over Goldwater in 64? The same analogy reversed fits for Trump.


That’s ludicrous. If you mean that Trump’s foreign policy “position” is essentially a reversion back to isolationist, strongman tactics better suited to the 1800s than now, then yes, he’s “right behind” Sanders.


As with Gore, many are less concerned by Clinton’s conscience than with judicial appointments — and the women and girls in the south who depend on clinic access.


By that, it appears conservatives feel that Trump will only damage the party if he gains the nomination, which means they would be 1) ignoring the damage he’s done already, and 2) ignoring the rest of their own field of candidates. As has been noted before, Trump’s numerous and offensive outbursts have allowed American conservatives to say all the things openly that they’d already been thinking privately.
This is the bed you made, GOP and supporters, enjoy your uncomfortable and sleepless night.


how does one sleep on a bed made of fire?


I certainly expect that any Clinton appointments would be, if not exactly progressive, at least up-to-date.

They are also ignoring that all those Trump supporters don’t go away with Trump. They get angrier and wait for the next person to latch onto.


The Dilemma of Conservatives Who Say They’ll Never Vote for Donald Trump

…[I]n an editorial in the Times, titled “Why I Will Never Vote for Donald Trump,” Peter Wehner, a top adviser to George W. Bush, wrote, “Mr. Trump is precisely the kind of man our system of government was designed to avoid, the type of leader our founders feared — a demagogic figure who does not view himself as part of our constitutional system but rather as an alternative to it…. For this lifelong Republican, at least, he is beyond the pale. Party loyalty has limits.”


That article was pretty galling:

Eliot Cohen, a professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies and a former State Department official in the second Bush Administration, recently tweeted his “short list” of reasons he would never back Trump: “demagoguery, torture, bigotry, misogyny, isolationism, violence. Not the Party of Lincoln & not me.”

Or Charles Murray saying he wouldn’t back Trump because “He constantly lies about things that can be checked,” which is basically what all Republican candidates have been doing for more than a decade.

A lot of “We won’t vote for him because he is the logical extension of everything we stand for.”


Maybe they don’t like Trump because he mirrors the worst parts of GOP a little to closely and a little too loudly?


and no, Bernie, it’s not about e-mails

Wtf? So you haven’t followed the Sanders campaign at all? This hasn’t been a significant issue with Bernie or his supporters. It’s only the DC bubble and wingnuts who give a shit.


And many conservative GOP members don’t want to be targeted by Trump and duck and cover.

… Mr.Trump took to Twitter, repeatedly branding Ms. Jacobus as a disappointed job seeker who had begged to work for his campaign and had been rejected. “We said no and she went hostile,” he wrote. “A real dummy!” Mr. Trump’s campaign manager told the same story on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”Mr. Trump’s Twitter followers, who number about six million, piled on.

For days, they replied to his posts with demeaning, often sexually charged insults aimed at Ms. Jacobus, including several with altered, vulgar photographs of her face.“Cheri is a nutcase,” wrote @LegendaryTrump. Another Twitter user, @stockedwood, wrote, “How the hell does a woman like her get on the air???”

“They better be careful,” Mr. Trump wrote of [a different victim’s] family, “they have a lot to hide!”“It’s a little surreal when Donald Trump threatens your mom,” Marlene Ricketts’s son, Tom, later told reporters.

:slight_smile: Not Samantha Bee though . . .


I know that Bernie has decided the e-mail issue is not something he wants to address.

When I said “it’s not about e-mails” I was suggesting he should be spending a lot more time on influence buying through the Clinton foundation and a decade of bribes-in-advance paid by Wall Street.

For someone who is supposedly concerned about “money in politics” he seems not to care very much.


Fair enough. I think he believes he doesn’t need to name her every time.


Not sure, but if that’s the bed he or the GOP is using, we should chat up the benefits of getting plenty of ‘rest’.

This is probably the hardest part for me. Living through Dubbya and his administration was bad enough, and I think Trump would be worse on many levels (holy hell, he’d get trounced by Putin’s dimwitted understudy), but this progression through Dubbya’s swaggering vapidity and his neocon choads giving rise to the Tea Party nationalists (itself containing the middling tremors of the contemporary GOP’s fracturing) through to the short fingered vulgarian’s full-on xenophobic, racist, hatemongering “anti-establishment” loon-fest. The crazies never went away, they were just biding their time…it’s is a little bit of a problem for the world’s hegemon, and especially its neighbors, when so many of the locals get, and stay, antsy like this.
Between our politics, and our like-clockwork gun violence, a more seasoned observer might think there are some problems lurking under the red white and blue surface.


The previous administration used Republican Party email servers rather than the ones in the White House. Jeb! used his own server rather than the state government server. Some in Congress boast that they don’t use email - meaning that they have their aides do the emailing, exempting them from archiving and freedom of Information laws.

The email issue that needs to be addressed is “why was it common for both sides to use private servers?”


I disagree. People are excited about Bernie. They’re excited about his message. They’re excited about what he stands for. That’s important.

Folks are just hesitant to believe they can have that much of a good thing in our political climate.

[quote=“RogerStrong, post:174, topic:74203”] […] Some in Congress boast that they don’t use email - meaning that they have their aides do the emailing, exempting them from archiving and freedom of Information laws.

The email issue that needs to be addressed is “why was it common for both sides to use private servers?”

As a semi-cynic and someone who’s familiar with the laws these tactics are implemented to subvert, I’d say the first paragraph answers the question in the second.

Although, in Hilary’s specific defense, the State Department’s IT department was by all reports in an unforgivable shambles. For reasons that are apparently considered completely normal in the U.S. government and in an unfortunate number of private sector companies.

Even in the private sector when things run well, some folks will try to conduct as much business as possible with their own devices and services. The stories I could tell. Though I think I’m under a permanent NDA for all of those? lol

The people making the biggest fuss about this are happy to ignore all the other folks who have been caught doing it. Hilary was wrong but probably had a pretty decent excuse and maybe wasn’t trying to subvert the public interest … per se. The other folks? Not so much.


It just makes me so happy when somebody else remembers Spy magazine :smiley:


Have I told you lately how happy I am that you’re back around here more often?

closed #178

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.