There continue to be cries for a convention coup to replace Trump as our nominee, some of them were associated with the Ted Cruz campaign. Bob Vander Plaats, former co-chair on the Ted Cruz campaign, is suggesting a coup next month. He says “everything should be on the table” at the convention.Â
Steve Lonegan, Cruz’s director in New Jersey said “It’s time for a delegate revolt”.
Steve Deace, a well known conservative radio host and a part of Cruz’s team in Iowa said it’s time for delegates to “declare your independence”. On his radio show he said,
You can end this and it’s on you to do so. The rules permit you to do so, you have a choice to make: You can suffer the wrath of Trump’s cult now, or you can suffer the wrath of the American voter later.”
Governor Scott Walker is pulling back on his support for Trump and I’ve heard his name tossed around as a possible replacement for Trump at the convention.
“He’s not yet the nominee,” Walker told 27 News in Wisconsin. “Officially that won’t happen until the middle of July and so for me that’s kind of the time frame that, in particular, I want to make sure he renounces what he says—at least in regards to this judge.”
“It’s just sad in America that we have such poor choices right now.”
Illinois Senator Mark Kirk has taken back his support of Trump.
We previously reported the comments of conservative Hugh Hewitt. Â He too is questioning the possibility of a replacement for Trump at the convention.
Will all of this amount to anything? Â Probably not. But it’s up to Trump. If he continues, over the next 5 weeks, to say things like he said about the Judge, he will be digging his own grave and the cries for a convention coup will grow.
69 comments
Trump will flop at the convention because he’ll do nothing to unify the party- just not in his nature. The long knives in the press (plus his own unpredictable mouth) will assure he gets the worst possible coverage and no “bounce” coming out of the convention. After that he will absolutely crater despite anything the rest of us in the party can possibly do to save the situation. Sure we’ll try if he actually walks out of there with the nomination but its looking like a train wreck waiting to happen right now. It would help if he chooses a credible conservative as a running mate, but based on what he’s saying on the stump right now he’s just as likely to select somebody who will appeal to disaffected Bernie voters.
I think his pick will be Chris Christie although I have no clue what he brings to the table.
Here is an interesting article… http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/history-campaign-politics-zachary-taylor-killed-whigs-political-party-213935
Anyone care to comment?
Wow
I and many other American LOVE the audacity of Donald Trump to speak the TRUTH! And BTW good on Corey Stewart for standing up for Donald Trump’s calling out the racist judge!
Unlike most of the other milquetoast, politically-correct GOP, Trump and Stewart have real COURAGE; what a nice, refreshing change.
Trump will be a great President and Stewart will be a great Virginia Governor!
The People have spoken: and they overwhelmingly chose Trump. This is not some fluke; there was no dirty practices. Trump – honestly – won the most primary votes EVER! More than 1.3 MILLION more than previous elections.
And yet some sore-loser, spoilsports are grasping at any means they can to topple the Will of The People.
It is interesting and distressing to watch the #NeverTrump crowd try and justify the complete immorality of their goals for disenfranchising their fellow Americans. “The end justifies the means” in their lack of principles.
He might express the truth of frustration we feel about the ineffectiveness of gocernment, but on a personal scale, he is not an especially truthful,or facrually accurate man. Reference these live tv segments. They are truth. Nobody is telling the viewer what to think, it’s just Trump, live.
https://youtu.be/g14Fk0EnyfQ
Geez, you pick an issue that’s very far down in the weeds of most of our concerns. I literally don’t give a rat’s ass about Japan. Too worried about our own country circling the drain, thank you very much. And it’s not like other politicians don’t ever change their positions, huh. Guess it’s kind of like Ted Cruz flip-flop on amnesty (he was for letting all the illegals stay but not giving them citizenship); or how about like Ted Cruz’s flip-flop on the TPA vote; or what about Ted Cruz’s flip-flop on expanding number of H1B VISAs, etc. Google them if you don’t believe me. Now THOSE issues do interest me – and a lot of other Americans too.
I bring these issues up not to bash Ted Cruz per say, but to point out to his supporters – that there are good and valid reasons why many of us Conservative/Tea Party Republicans have chosen Trump over Cruz. Ted Cruz supporters do NOT have a monopoly on Conservatism, despite what some of them may think.
Donald Trump has won across all the demographics – he’s won young, old, women, men, whites, minorities; Trump’s even won the Evangelical vote.
All of this leads to the point: the American people have chosen Donald Trump. By an overwhelming margin too. Donald Trump is the clear, and massive winner – he’s won more than 1500 delegates. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/trump-trumps-wins-historic-race-record-fashion/
Trying to change the rules in mid-stream, solely to boot Trump at the GOP Convention – as some disgruntled sore losers advocate – is unethical and dishonorable. The end never justifies the means. I’m disappointed in TBE for their trial balloons in throwing principles out the window this way and promoting the overthrowing of our party. Make no mistake: denying the rightful nomination to Trump would NOT save our party; it would destroy it.
We agree on the most important point — I also am concerned about the direction the country is taking. That’s why I’m here, and I assume why most people are here. Because this matters.
For a number of reasons that don’t matter here, I totally agree that Japan is not our biggest issue. But the videos don’t show a Teump who says “My position has changed.” They show a Trump who denies making statements that he has said on TV. That’s lying, not changing position, and its a big deal. And it goes beyond Japan. And it matters.
I understand your point about the way it would look if delegates were unbound specifically to defeat Trump. The people who chose Trump in the beginning will be outraged. But this primary didnt go down like a poker game, and Trump won’t necessarily get the votes in the general election from a broad swath of GOP voters. Why? Because they didn’t buy his Rebel persona and they object to a man who routinely lies and uses insult to avoid questions.
But the fact remains a conversation is badly needed because many voters weren’t willing to vote for Teump and are becoming harder to convince with every new Teump gaffe. And if we do go forward with Teump, many conservatives will refuse to vote for him. Call them spoil sports, haters, whatever.
Without party unity, the GOP candidate isn’t going to the White House.
You and people like you rightly point to the primaries and want the rest of the party to get in line. You see his wealth as an indication of his success and his virtue. You don’t want to hear about anything beyond the need to fight the establishment that betrayed voters.
I and people like me rightly refuse to vote for a man with so little integrity as Trump. We see no concrete evidence to suggest Trump will make a good president, and much to indicate he will be a terrible president. We demand a candidate who has some level of decency, isn’t going on trial for fraud, and doesn’t lie like Trump lies. And we expect you and yours, as Republicans, not to vote for dishonest candidates of low moral character.
So here we are, all conservatives, all adopting positions for valid reasons. What do we do now?
More like clips of Trump denying he said what he did say. Lies come so easily it’s not apparent he knows he is lying
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AuHZ2KwmWYk&feature=youtu.be
Live CNN clips of him claiming he said one thing but other live clips of him saying another. Posted this earlier but must not have saved.
https://youtu.be/g14Fk0EnyfQ
The only thing sinking faster than Trump in the polls this week? The monthly jobs report.
Please let these hijinks ensue, merely for the entertainment value.
Popcorn sales will soar!
If the leadership in the GOP can’t get past the bias the Lame Stream Media will be throwing at the American people from now to November and realize that every word uttered by The Donald will be used against him, our country is done for. When it is a fact that this judge belongs to a “racist” group, why can’t the perceived judicial prejudices in his rulings in this case be called into question? When you add the connections to the Clinton Machine by many involved in The Donald’s case, is it any wonder why so many people have lost faith in the so called leadership of the Republican Party? The GOP has been on the crappy end of the LSM bias since Nixon and it is deplorable that the GOP elites have joined in their deceit. This will not bode well for the party or more importantly, the country.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/06/09/whites-go-back-europe-california-hispanic-state-said-founder-judge-curiels-group/
Too little too late.
Not for me. I still think The Donald will destroy Shrillary with or without the GOP elite. While it would be nice for us all to come together, I’m hoping he does it without them, as they have been worthless for the past 8 years.
Good Lord. Do they not see the enthusiasm Trump has generated? Does it mean nothing that he was able to win over about the strongest primary field the GOP has ever had, going into a Presidential election? This is nothing short of a political phenomenon, and I expect American History will ultimately appreciate Trump (imperfect as he is) was the right man for the Oval Office, at the right time.
Yes, we see it. He won with a plurality, and has generated unusual enthusiasm both for and against him. What do you do if the anti-Trump enthusiasm (based on Mr. Trump’s repeated expressions of his endearing personality) overwhelms Mr. Trump in the polls by say, ten points or more by mid-July?
Exactly. He will be down by 10% in July and that percentage will grow.
Every generation or so since the mid-20th century, American voters (particularly on the Republican side) tend to look for a candidate seen as “not of DC.” In the 1950s, we had Ike. In the 1980s, we had former Governor Ronald Reagan (easily the best President of my lifetime).
I suspect that some of the loudest nevertrumpers in the comments are at least in part, an element of an effort by the clintons and dnc to depress turnout on the Republican side. Paid trolls, so to speak. Because I’ve seen even the most ardent supporters of other candidates in the primaries I know on a personal basis, pledge to vote Trump in November. That doesn’t mean they’ll heavily campaign for him, but that’s fine. There are people like myself that will do that en masse.
Then you have the punditry class inside that believes in their own infallibility; that those of us on the right are a monolithic bloc that takes our marching orders from them. Not so fast, we are critical and independent thinking here on the American Right.
Those of us who were early supporters–I in fact signed the petition in my home County of Henrico to have Trump listed on the Primary Ballot–in fact see The Donald created the heir to the Reagan Coalition for this generation. He’s growing the Republican Base, without selling out on amnesty for illegal aliens. He has the intangibles (or “it factor” if you will) and appeal to make it exciting to vote for a Republican President, again.
The more professional/traditional candidates were at a historical disadvantage going into this election. For example, if Cruz really knew his history he’d:
1) know the first candidate to announce they’re running for the GOP nomination tends to lose the nomination race
2) Understand no GOPer since Harding has gone right from the Senate to the Oval Office.
3) Realize Nixon was the last one who served as a Senator, but he was a VP before running for President.
Lastly, Trump has a strong economic message. If you have read his The Art of the Deal you’d see a method to his campaigning. I sincerely doubt he’d actually jack up tariffs to 35%, that is simply an opening position in negotiations. But as Reagan did in the 80s to help H-D motorcycles, a tariff hike (or just threat of one) would encourage our industries to stay American. People seem to forget, the great deregulation promises that Trump is advocating for (such as reigning in the job-killing nuts at the EPA). You watch, Trump is going to lock up a good portion of the union voters, just like Reagan did.
Any nevertrumpers that lean Republican by the time November is here, just might find their votes being outsourced to non-traditional Republican voters. Trump is also being embraced by paleoconservatives, such as Pat Buchanan. Thus, he’s bringing back into the fold conservatives who were absolutely disgusted by the neocons/gung-ho interventionists. Take this poll, for example (with the caveat of it being done by Pew);
it could be argued that Trump Republicans are more conservative than the other blocs in the primaries:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/11/trump-supporters-differ-from-other-gop-voters-on-foreign-policy-immigration-issues/?utm_content=bufferb789c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
There are more than enough Republicans ready for an enthusiastic American leader, and Trump is that man.
Glad to hear we’re endorsing critical thinking. I’ll reread those threats people made to sick their dad’s VFW friends on me…
Threats? I hope you aren’t seriously mistaking simple ridicule for threats.
Is this the part where I post the excuse about how you would have served longer but you got hurt and on and on? Or is it the exercise in shaming when you discuss wreath laying?
But I stand corrected. It wasn’t a threat. It was a really asinine, spineless way to shame somebody, followed by incredibly vain half retraction from somebody who got their medical discharge and wants to use it like a stick. Or an excuse. So that is critical thinking how?
Call it what you want, just don’t call it a threat.
I was absolutely devastated my time in was shortened to 2.5-years by that freak lower back injury in intensive training at Fort Pickett. Everybody that knows me well, knew I wanted to serve out a full commitment, if not a full career. But the PULHES ratings I got on the permanent profile threw a wrench in that for good. It’s hard to wear body armor, when they prohibit you from doing so on your profile. I thank God for the time I did serve and know that because of the shit my dad saw, he is grateful I didn’t see time overseas. Yet, he is also saddened for me that I got hurt doing what I wanted to do, after graduating from VT. I suppose long-term military service just not what the Amighty has planned for me.
As for Trump, I absolutely believe he’s the best shot we have at keeping the American Dream alive for the next generation. He’s a true success. Just as Americans before me did the same for us. I will never empathize with someone taking a dive in the election, just out of spite for the primaries not going their way. I stand by that. It’s your prerogative to disagree strongly.
Now post the part in which you generously say I don’t owe you an apology, and the pity trilogy will be complete.
Here’s the point — what you did there was the exact opposite of critical thinking. Critical thinking is a technique that first asks whether we are looking broadly enough at a situation. Critical thinking takes in piecEs that don’t fit and causes us to reconsider existing paradigms.
Thay “high horse” rant was closed-minded and the narrowest thinking possible. The remarks were designed to kill any conversation and critical thinking in one stupid, juvenile post. They were pejoritive, presumptuous, and wrong all at the same time.
Critical thinking? Give me a break.
Thank you Michael for your 23 years of service to our country in uniform and your continued service to our country. We are still a free nation because of men like you. And we thank you for that freedom. Semper Fi
Thanks, Jeanine, Semper Fi. Wasn’t aware I posted that on here. I was fortunate to have worked with the finest individuals I’ve ever met.
I owe you thanks for being central to a digital version of the town commons. We need this badly. We need the chance to offer our ideas, and differ respectfully. A lot is riding on it.
Yes indeed we do. You didn’t post it on here. I know things. 🙂
If only Trump were electable, I would to see your vision of America come to fruition.
Trump is running against a very flawed candidate. He is a lot more electable than Ted Cruz.
With Cruz would be guaranteed to carry Texas and Georgia. With Trump both of them are iffy.
Cruz supporters are in denial. In their mind Cruz won and the voters who voted against him are irrelevant.
Facts are stubborn things.
And you think that Trump is not a very, very, flawed candidate? How can anyone win without the black, female, Independant, and Hispanic vote? And let’s not forget about the media.
It ain’t going to happen. You are either dreamin’ or smokin’ something funny. No indictment, no Trump victory. Hell, he may lose even if Hillary is indicted.
To be fair, Ma’am, weren’t we told that Dole, McCain and Romney were all highly electable?
They were at least competitive.
804hokie,
Thanks for your detailed response. I can assure you that I am not some Democrat shill. Jeanine knows me and can verify. I honestly believe that Trump is a very flawed candidate.
Concerning historical precedent: Well, we’ve smashed all of those this time anyway, haven’t we? (One can say that every election defies some precedent.)
Reagan “heir:” Trump has spent most of his life as a Democrat and cannot begin to articulate the things Reagan stood for. In addition, Reagan (and Eisenhower, for that matter) had class, of which Trump is sadly lacking. Trump cannot begin to articulate conservatism, whether it is being pro-life, limits on entitlements, foreign policy, etc. His stated tax plan is decent, but then he goes off about taxing “rich hedge fund manager” or some other populist nonsense. His views on trade are quite the opposite of what Reagan stood for. Then again, he may not mean very much of what he says (assuming he knows what he is saying, which I kinda doubt).
Concerning Cruz: Your claim that he is “part of the Bush dynasty” is unsupported. No one can accuse Cruz of being part of any dynasty, like him or hate him.
Concerning the paleo-conservatives: Yeah, that does not reassure most of us. Sure, many real conservatives may like Trump, but that is an expression of frustration, not attraction to his actual policy positions. Reagan would likely have been more in agreement with the “neo-cons” for whom you express dislike. In any case, we have an enemy out there that will attack us, and Trump seems to think we can bomb and leave, as if no one else will fill the vacuum. Not gonna work. To be truthful, I question whether or not Trump really wants to win sometimes, given the way he acts.
I have taken polls that show that I am in major agreement with Trump and his stated positions. Unfortunately, I don’t believe that Trump believes what he says. Why none of this bothers Trump’s supporters is a bit of a mystery, but I attribute a lot of it to anger and some to cult-like behavior.
As for me, I am #NeverHillary and will likely fill in the bubble for Trump. However, I am not really voting FOR Trump, and will not campaign for him the way I have campaigned for other Republican candidates for the past 20+ years. There will be no Trump yard signs or bumper stickers for me. I am hoping that Trump has a decent running mate who will replace Trump as early as 2017 if it comes to that.
My main hope at this point is that the GOP divorces itself from Trump the way an engaged couple calls off a wedding before experiencing a bad marriage.
Well said!
804 Hokie if the Pew study is correct, Trump’s base lies at the far right. If that group’s views are having being embraced less than cometely throughout the GOP, where do you see the source for the outsourcing effort?
Yes, less than 50% of Republicans of Republicans voted for Trump. That means about one third of the population in this country supports Trump. That’s not enough to win the general election.
Or you could view it through the prism that even more Republican voters did not support the individual candidates facing Trump.
And 2/3 of Virginia voters did Not prefer Trump’s signature angry-drunk, foot-in-mouth style of being different. When the general election comes around, most of them will still not prefer his style, and they will be joined by the remainder of the voting public.
Agree. Pathetic isn’t it? We finally have an election where we have a real chance of taking back our country and our Constitution and we blow our chances with Donald Trump. Virtually any other Republican candidate would have been beaten Hillary handily. Such a shame to see more of our rights go down the tube as Hillary abolishes free speech, takes all of our guns away (as she has promised), and makes our country completely borderless. And we could have stopped all of it so easily by nominating an electable candidate. Very sad.
which primary candidate could beat Hillary?
Early polls showed Rubio would have had very broad appeal.
No they didn’t, his best pre Florida primary national poll was 19% and after his crushing defeat in Florida his home state (carrying only one county in the whole state, Miami-Dade) his national numbers really tanked to single digits. Do you just make this stuff up?
Not quite sure how to respond to that. I could respond by asking: Do you have any friends? Did your parents continue to beat you after you turned 18? Have you given up wife beating yet? Did you say the electroshock went well? How do you like living in your parents basement? Do you still have to wear the ankle bracelet? Did Viagra fix the problem?
But I won’t ask any of those question because I would have to be a crass, presumptuous a**hole to do that. Instead, because my going in position is that strangers come to this site to offer something and (yes) most people can walk and chew gum without drooling or mouth breathing,
I won’t ask any of those questions.
And your point is what exactly besides you are an ill mannered, ass and still completely wrong regarding Marco Rubio’s broad appeal based on any factual context. You aren’t improving the commenting environment here with your personal attacks on others that often border on being unhinged. If you can’t be polite at least try to be correct or willing to accept the fact when you are not.
Be polite? Like you were polite when you asked “Do you just make this stuff up?” If you don’t think that’s rude, you need to reconsider your use of language. You want a good commenting environment? Leave out the sarcasm and derision you put in with that very first question.
I’m happy to reboot this to a polite level whenevery you’re ready.
You still haven’t supported your Rubio contention which was refuted with fact. Your tirate hardly equated to me questioning a statement that you still can’t back up. I think no thanks to the reboot your behavior will be telling over time and I would just as soon avoid your behavioral outbursts so manufacture baloney to your hearts content and let the fellow commenters on this blog make their own judgments, I’ve made mine.
Negative. Refuting with fact – politely – goes something like this: “Not from what I’m seeing. The Pew Research Center Poll on January 24th had Rubio’s approval rating at 24% and Trump was at 35%.” What’s your source?
–Here, I provided credible attribution. That’s the difference between assertion and fact.
–Note the absence of the gratuitous lesson on counties intended to show the author’s superior command of fact and his willingness to school others
— the question on sources is just that — a question on sources. No derision, no incredulity.
That’s the standard in academia, professional circles, and in most places guided by respect. That’s the format used in my first post of this thread. Now compare that to your reaction, and tell me all about being offended from the moral high ground.
Here is Trump head-to-head against Clinton sample (including ALL the candidates) to compare to your Rubio only poll that excludes any other options, from the same clear RealClear polling agency around the same timeframe. Comparison result Trump over plus 15% percentage points above the Rubio numbers. Your frist data support case – a TOTAL FAIL. Further the Trump polling numbers have clearly been improving in this area while Rubio has simply fallen off the map as a rejected candidate.
Rubio out polled Trump only once very early in his campaign in July of 2015, by August of 2015 he had completely cratered as the trend time line graph shows below if you understand it. He had just one more bump when the GOP establishment got behind him after Jeb was driven from the contest in Dec 2015-Jan 2016 becoming somewhat competitive with Cruz, but never coming anywhere close to Trump’s polling numbers. Then his home state Florida primary and a complete voter rejection along with a complete polling collapse. Frankly the one poll you refer to is largely meaningless as it assumes a Rubio nomination to compare it’s solo head to head numbers against Clinton which never was even a remote reality when you actually look at all the primary candidate rankings together.
As for the National Review reference it provides no actual polling data to support your conjecture at all and is just a Rubio is our guy article from a #NeverTrump publication that published and stood by an article that claimed working class Americans should all just die off and fade into history. It’s not worth wrapping your garbage in unless you agree with that position.
So lets say perhaps you weren’t just making stuff up out of thin air, maybe the problem here is you don’t understand polling output. I consider the topic finished unless you have a need to defend an indefensible position. If so go ahead I am no longer interested in wasting my time with you.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
Interesting content at that link. I’ll gladly grab a survey methodology tome and learn something new, but I’m pretty sure my first statement “Early polls showe Rubio would have had very broad appeal” is supported by the references at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_rubio_vs_clinton-3767.html and http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430981/marco-rubio-best-republican-candidate-democrats-nightmare. If you consider them to be speculative when other sources you cite from the same organizations are suthoritative, you’re obviously wedded to your story. So be it.
I can see why this must be frustrating. If I didnt want to discuss something, I would find discussion pages to be a waste of time also. But then I probably wouldn’t look at a discussion page in the first place.
Voters who are committed to Donald Trump aren’t going to become any more committed by commenting here, and posting the kind of things you posted? Derision isn’t a technique known for its ability to charm undecided people to jump on the train.
My source is the National Review article from February 8, “Marco Rubio: Republican Dream, Democratic Nightmare,” http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430981/marco-rubio-best-republican-candidate-democrats-nightmare and the realclearpolitics poll it referenced. The data on Rubio has since been removed but you can find it here http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_rubio_vs_clinton-3767.html
What was your source?
That you for asking the obvious question to this broken record repetition of crazy town speaks. Who indeed? Here is what Trump did
Trump’s total final popular vote count was 13,266,277 according to the RealClearPolitics vote count as of Wednesday morning. This count doesn’t include the most recent totals for California which are listed at 1,146,548. This is the largest vote count in ANY presidential primary in American history.
His final delegate count was 1542 (95 of those unbound) for the nomination requirement of 1,237. His closest rival, so far off on the horizon as barely visible is Ted Cruz with 559 delegates.
Now if your want to maintain that over 7 million Trump votes were derived from non Republican votes (Democrats, space aliens(?) i guess it’s your right to do so but this nonsense is frankly getting weird and difficult to not just laugh at. The reason Trump left 16 losers behind him in a pile of detritus was because ALL of them were soundly rejected.. No maybes, might be or detritus they were flat rejected period.
Primary blowouts do not necessary lead to general election blowouts but if this nominee follows the general election trend lines he will pick up additional Republican votes not shed them. That’s how it has consistently worked even for former controversial candidates like Barry Goldwater.
Virtually any of them. Hillary is so flawed Rubio, Cruz, Carson, Fiorina, Walker, Kasich, Paul, even Trump’s VP Chris Christie would have a better chance.
None of them could come anywhere near winning even a single primary state except Cruz but all could defeat the Clinton machine except the actual guy who crushed them all almost effortlessly.You have taken leave of your senses. What are you doing trolling your own blog? I give up you can’t rebut insanity.
None of them? Romney was stronger than any of them.
Last couple weeks you were on the Trump train? Now, it seems as if you got off the train?
Hasn’t Trump stated he won’t be discussing the judge further? Case closed.
The problem is what outrageous and stupid thing will the gaffe machine say next.
He can’t unsay what he’s said. Stuff like this is embarrassing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g14Fk0EnyfQ
I sure hope so. I sure hope he has finally learned his lesson but I’m not optimistic.
This is stupid. We can’t win by alienating all the folks who voted for Trump. Trump is the nominee…folks need to come to terms with it.
And I despise him.
Many of us are stilling hoping for a Jeanine Martin/Heidi Cruz ticket.
lol
And there are individuals that still question why Republicans can’t win when they have the opportunity and won’t fight when the stakes are the country. Today’s Republican Party would have been running the Tory concession stands outside Valley Forge during the winter of 1777-1778.
Amen! You hit the nail right on the head.
We can’t win by alienating the Trump voters, but we won’t win by alienating the rest of conservatives and the swing voters who will not only vote for Trump, but also for senators and congressional reps
Why? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Aside from RINOs and Republicans who have thrown their principles out, Trump supporters are generally unpleasant, threatening, whining, and cussing Democrats who stand only for their own bitterness. Why would I want someone like that on my side? Especially when they don’t share my ideals?