GOP Master thread

[Dan]

True. Hillary is adored by hers

You're nuts.

[JTZ]

JTZ, you forgot the pass part again.

This will be the least numbers game party line vote of all time...

I think we will agree they are both unfavorable candidates? Didn't want say hated in a PC thread. 

When that is the situation IMHO you don't have much choice but to vote party lines. How could you switch parties for someone you (insert your own word)?

[Dan]

I think we will agree they are both unfavorable candidates? Didn't want say hated in a PC thread. 

When that is the situation IMHO you don't have much choice but to vote party lines. How could you switch parties for someone you (insert your own word)?

Do I go with the one I hate but know that the path they will take won't lead to a catastrophe or do I go with the one I hate but might turn out to be decent or might just lead to catastrophe?

Is that a party line decision?

[JTZ]

Do I go with the one I hate but know that the path they will take won't lead to a catastrophe or do I go with the one I hate but might turn out to be decent or might just lead to catastrophe?

Is that a party line decision?

I thought we were talking about this election? 

All seriousness that sounds like and independent approach and not a "D" or "R" approach.

[elit]

Great line! "Our only hope is that somewhere down the road, Hillary will kick in a hotel room door to get back some bobble heads she feels she's owed."

[ExGingi]

Do I go with the one I hate but know that the path they will take won't lead to a catastrophe

or do I go with the one I hate but might turn out to be decent or might just lead to catastrophe?

Is that a party line decision?

Dan, I know you like to use hyperbole at times, but I am not sure this is your intenti here.

Catastrophe?! What catastrophe? How much power do you really think the POTUS has? And given what you KNOW about Trump, do you really think he is interested in committing suicide?

People are are also saying Brexit is (use your own negative adjective). In reality it's simply the unknown and uncharted. But after all, things will work out somehow or another, and it might (will IMHO) end up better than had the outcome been remain.

I am personally scared of the most influential outcome of this (and any) Presidential election, the SCOTUS nominations. Given past experience, I would definitely choose the unknown (and tell me that you know who Trump might nominate) over the known (who is being pushed even further left than her own agenda).

The bottom line of this election cycle (as well as many things happening all over the world, in totally uncharted territory) for us, is to simply stop putting so much trust in our power, and in our leaders, and realize who is really running the show!

[hachover]

You're nuts.

No one is debating that- try to stick to the points being discussed instead

[aygart]

Do I go with the one I hate but know that the path they will take won't lead to a catastrophe or do I go with the one I hate but might turn out to be decent or might just lead to catastrophe?

Is that a party line decision?

Which is the one you think may lead to catastrophe? I assume you mean the one who would pander to the terrorists, allow Iran to get nukes, nominate quacky Supreme Court Justices, advance degenerative social policies, expose classified information to adversaries, sell out foreign policy to the highest "donor" etc. I am not so sure it is only that she "may" lead to catasrophe.

[Dan]

I'm just as scared about those things as I am about a promised trade-war that cripples our economy and inciting anti-semitism without even having a clue:
http://observer.com/2016/07/an-open-letter-to-jared-kushner-from-one-of-your-jewish-employees/

[aygart]

I'm just as scared about those things as I am about a promised trade-war that cripples our economy and inciting anti-semitism without even having a clue:
http://observer.com/2016/07/an-open-letter-to-jared-kushner-from-one-of-your-jewish-employees/

What incited the antisemitism in the article-his tweet or hers?

[Dan]

No candidate in my lifetime has managed to incite the anti-semitism that Trump has managed without even being president.

[skyguy918]

What incited the antisemitism in the article-his tweet or hers?

No candidate in my lifetime has managed to incite the anti-semitism that Trump has managed without even being president.

I wouldn't go so far as to say incite. But without a doubt he's been playing toward that demographic, and made absolutely no effort to quiet that aspect of his support base.

[aygart]

No candidate in my lifetime has managed to incite the anti-semitism that Trump has managed without even being president.

What did he incite? Without everyone looking to pounce on every word of his as bigoted a lot of this wouldn't exist.

[aygart]

I wouldn't go so far as to say incite. But without a doubt he's been playing toward that demographic, and made absolutely no effort to quiet that aspect of his support base.

Do you think that the Hillary tweet was intended by Trump to insinuate that she is "owned by Jews" or to mean that she is a criminal who will do anything for money?

[Dan]

It was created by someone who most definitely did.

And Tweeted by Trump either playing to that demo or that he's just clueless about its significance as shown by his media retort afterward.
Either option is downright scary for a President.

[Dan]

I wouldn't go so far as to say incite. But without a doubt he's been playing toward that demographic, and made absolutely no effort to quiet that aspect of his support base.

Either way it's quite uncomfortable.

[skyguy918]

Do you think that the Hillary tweet was intended by Trump to insinuate that she is "owned by Jews" or to mean that she is a criminal who will do anything for money?

Hard to be sure about anything, but we've seen this often enough out of him that it's hard not to think he's doing it intentionally. Not that he necessarily thinks HRC is owned by Jews, but he thinks it'll push the right buttons for certain voters.

[aygart]

Hard to be sure about anything, but we've seen this often enough out of him that it's hard not to think he's doing it intentionally. Not that he necessarily thinks HRC is owned by Jews, but he thinks it'll push the right buttons for certain voters.

Where have you seen "enough of this"? Can you give more examples? My feeling is that they simply don't give enough attention to what they repeat and retweet. That is a big mistake since it allows the bigot narrative to continue and be confirmed, and may be fatal to his campaign, but I have yet to see that he is intentionally riling up the bigot voting block. They are on his side anyhow-why would he keep doing that?

[skyguy918]

Where have you seen "enough of this"? Can you give more examples? My feeling is that they simply don't give enough attention to what they repeat and retweet. That is a big mistake since it allows the bigot narrative to continue and be confirmed, and may be fatal to his campaign, but I have yet to see that he is intentionally riling up the bigot voting block. They are on his side anyhow-why would he keep doing that?

I'm talking about violence at rallies and speeches, other times he's retweeted things from very racist sources, etc. Not paying attention to what they repeat and retweet is probably a very naive explanation, but even if it's not, it's not a very good excuse for a presidential candidate. Like I said, it's hard to be sure, but my perspective is that a pattern has emerged, and the most likely explanation is the one I put forth. As far as having them on his side already - it doesn't actually work like that. He still needs as many of these people to actually turn up to vote as possible, and riling them up is the best way to do so.

[davidmal]

My vote is for Kanye.... You see now you get it

It's one big joke