So, you're not at all concerned with the "explicit language" used by prior *elected* Presidents such as Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon...
Not to mention THIS unforgivable "potty mouth"....OH MY!
Did I make any statement about my personal opinion? No, I did not. I did wonder how a supporter of his could have seen so little of his chosen candidate as to be oblivious to his language, but you don't have to actually hear a candidate speak to vote for them.
Boostdreamer made the comment he had never seen it, suggesting it was a lie by Ted Cruz. I provided examples that it was not a lie. Whether anyone cares about the cursing or not is immaterial. I was addressing whether or not it existed or was made up by the Cruz campaign.
I'm not suggesting people shouldn't support Trump because he has a gutter mouth. He's from New York and speaks like a New Yorker. I don't say that as good or bad, it simply is, and I'll wager most of his supporters like him for it - swearing and all. I don't think there's a huge number of Trump supporters in the dark about his swearing, like Boostdreamer. I think most have seen it and don't care or think better of him for it.
All true except I didn't suggest it was a lie. I wondered if it was exaggeration. Semantics, some may say. Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things I guess. Thanks for the links.
I love Ann Coulter's take on the Gestapo tactics of Cruz delegates Brownshirting there way to the State delegates slots.
Yet Cruz Fan Boi, like F88 and others said that Trump should have known the rules.
Ann Coulter repeatedly asked for these so called "RULES" from Colorado GOP office and others in other states including the RNC.
While none could really produce them, Ann took it on oneself and research it for herself.
Ann:
"I keep asking someone to send me a copy of THE RULES that direct state parties to ignore the voters and pick their own slate of delegates, but no one can cite such a rule. So I read through "The Rules of the Republican Party" myself -- and guess what? There's no rule instructing state parties to ignore the voters!
To the contrary, the rules were recently rewritten so that delegate selection would "reflect the results of statewide presidential preference elections," according to a statement by Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus. (The nerds will tell us, that's "legislative history," not THE RULES.)
Apparently, what people mean by THE RULES is that there is no RNC rule specifically prohibiting a state party from giving all the delegates to a single nominee, even if that is demonstrably at odds with the will of the voters.
The state parties are given a lot of discretion, so Cruz harasses and cajoles the local party until it awards all the state's delegates to him. Trump keeps winning elections, and Cruz keeps winning sneaky procedural victories....
It's as if Cruz and Trump are playing different sports: Trump keeps belting home runs, while Cruz is berating the umpire until he calls a balk, then prances to home base, telling everyone he hit a grand slam.
True, there's no rule explicitly disallowing a state party from rigging the delegate selection. There's also no rule explicitly disallowing a state party from giving all its delegates to Kim Kardashian.
By that logic, THE RULES also say that a majority of Supreme Court justices can discover a right to abortion, gay marriage or free unicorn rides in the Constitution. There's nothing stopping them, because, as a procedural matter, they get the last word. Those are THE RULES. (And THE RULES "have been known" for centuries!)
But that's very different from saying, See, here it is in black and white: "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
There's no way to appeal a Supreme Court ruling, just as there's no way to prohibit a state party from doing whatever it wants. But I wouldn't go around boasting, "It's THE RULES!" No, you found a procedural loophole. "
All true except I didn't suggest it was a lie. I wondered if it was exaggeration. Semantics, some may say. Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things I guess. Thanks for the links.
Wondered if it was an exaggeration when you posted:
quote
Originally posted by Boostdreamer: You know, I keep hearing Ted talking about Trump yelling, screaming, and cursing. For some reason I've not seen those clips. Lying Ted?
Yeah, you were obviously just "wondering" if it was an "exaggeration." Do you still have that bridge for sale?
Yeah, you were obviously just "wondering" if it was an "exaggeration." Do you still have that bridge for sale?
I'm not a Pulitzer Prize winning author yet. Could it be that I didn't clearly communicate my thoughts? Maybe so...or maybe I'm just a lying asswhole . Don't really feel like defending either side. I'm pretty well known for being willing to clarify any statement I've posted. Feel free to ask or just jump to any conclusion you like. I don't have a Fiero anymore so if I piss everyone off...so be it.
[This message has been edited by Boostdreamer (edited 04-19-2016).]
Trump is dividing the party... as seen here. Interesting.
Party is already split, Cruz Trump and Kasich are just representing the 3 major factions with in the party. The split has been growing since 2008 when Obama beat McCain. McCain lost because conservatives sat out. Romney lost, because conservatives sat out. Now, Trump is taking a huge share of Republican votes and some from democrats, independents and libertarian. But we are suppose to believe that people won't sit out if Cruz is the nominee.
All three will inspire some to stay home on election night. We better have a candidate that is brings votes with him that can offset those he drives away.
Finally got to watch the video clips. I don't use that language often but it seems to be more and more mainstream. People who work with me repeatedly apologize about their language simply because they don't hear me talk like that. I never have asked them to do anything different or to watch their mouth. It is my personal preference to express myself differently.
Trump is the only candidate saying he will be the greatest "jobs" president of all time. Maybe he won't be but at least I know he believes he will be and I know that is one of his major goals. That is the single most important statement in this election as far as I'm concerned.
Again... home state... he should win. If you can't win your home state... you are a Rubio
Butt, butt, butt
1. Texas had more candidates running in that primary and thats why Trump was able to get 60.5% in TX. and Cruz only 48.3% in Texas.
I agree that winning your home state should be safe assumption. Well not safe for Rubio...
However Consider the home state a gimme and look at the second place candidate.
Ohio - Trump, Texas - Trump, New York - Kasich OopS!
The fact that Kasich came in 2nd tell us that not only does Trump pull democrats to vote, his voters will Vote for Kasich over Cruz by huge numbers. Since Kasich will not be the nominee, they will vote Hillary/Sanders if trump is not on the Ballot.
..
2. The democrats (combined) had a turnout of 1.8million and thats about 200,000 more than the republican turnout.
Democratic primary voter turnout 2008 (the last time they had one) 1,862,445 votes "Total" which is exactly the same today - no growth [correction] : (2016) 179,083 which is 72,000 fewer voters this year than last. This is consistent with decrease in democratic primary voter turn out see this year seen across the country. [end correction]
3. Hillary got 1 million voters to Trumps 500,000....
Again - no growth in democratic turn out 8 years later. 2016 Republican turn out - Quadrupled ( in New York )
Democrats, when a solid democratic state like New York produces a growth rate of 400% voter turn out for Republicans, it is fore telling of what is happening in the reset of the country.
I hopefully/cautiously believe we are likely to see an unprecedented Republican turn out that may even top Reagan's results..
Trump Not only won his own state, he received more votes than Romney entire 2012 turn out.
Yes Romney got 62% and Trump only got 60% But percentage of what....
At the least Trump deserves credit for increasing the 2016 voter turnout by 300% from the entire 2012 turn out. That isn't even the entire 2016 voter turn out IT'S JUST THOSE WHO SHOWED UP FOR TRUMP.
But if we want to compare Trump and Romney, well lets go ahead measure the full length of the facts...
Hmm they all beat Romney in actual votes Sorry but Cruz is the "niche" candidate who does not play outside of the religious right playground. He repels more votes than he attracts in states with the highest electoral votes.
5. Trump only does well in open primaries.
Until now.... But Cruz does bad in open primaries. And that just supports the "niche" that is Cruz.....
[This message has been edited by jmclemore (edited 04-20-2016).]
The money was given to their campaign so it CAN be spent on the campaign. What part of this is wrong? Should they keep it and spend it on hookers and blow? That sounds like a G. Bush campaign
quote
Originally posted by Wichita:
One thing that sticks out. Democrats love spending other people's money. Trump has been and always is frugal.
Love the report on the campaign spending in New York with all the candidates.
Total campaign money spent in New York Race:
Trump - $67,000 at a cost of $0.13 per vote.
One thing that sticks out. Democrats love spending other people's money. Trump has been and always is frugal.
That's a business man right there.... cost per customer acquisition cost per voter acquisition
Leadership matters and the less you have, the more it will cost you to buy it. Just look at the list and what they have spent. It's evidence of a leadership vacuum measured by the amount of cash it's sucking out of their campaign.
The money was given to their campaign so it CAN be spent on the campaign. What part of this is wrong? Should they keep it and spend it on hookers and blow? That sounds like a G. Bush campaign
Don't think there is anything wrong with it.
Just a reflection on how different people are stewards of money.
What do you think they will do when it comes to spending YOUR money from taxes, unless you are one of the 50% of Americans who don't contribute a net positive in taxes to the government.
We give government money so they CAN spend it on whatever they believe we should spend it on. Same principle.
You are missing the point.... They have to spend it on the campaign. They can not keep it. You are blaming them for something they are supposed to do. Just saying.
quote
Originally posted by Wichita:
Don't think there is anything wrong with it.
Just a reflection on how different people are stewards of money.
What do you think they will do when it comes to spending YOUR money from taxes, unless you are one of the 50% of Americans who don't contribute a net positive in taxes to the government.
We give government money so they CAN spend it on whatever they believe we should spend it on. Same principle.
You are missing the point.... They have to spend it on the campaign. They can not keep it. You are blaming them for something they are supposed to do. Just saying.
Actually they don't have to spend it on a campaign. They can return it to the donors or donate it to a charity. They also can bank it for as long they want.
Actually they don't have to spend it on a campaign. They can return it to the donors or donate it to a charity. They also can bank it for as long they want.
If I donated, I would be PO'ed if they didn't spend what was given to them, for the purpose of winning. Then, of course, people would complain that those democrats are pocketing the money or giving it away. No win situation.
Trump has spent little, because he has had that option at the primary level. He gets a lot of free media attention because of his mouth and let's face it, the GOP candidates are "not the best". When he goes up against Hillary, he will have to step up his spending. Most polls show Trump is trailing Hillary... it is her election to lose.
When he goes up against Hillary, he will have to step up his spending. Most polls show Trump is trailing Hillary... it is her election to lose.
He has to seriously up his game if he goes up against her. She's no amateur when it comes to political mudslinging. However so far, Hillary has also shown that she wasn't expecting to have to work for the nomination either. I'm pretty sure she thought she was going to run unopposed and the White House would be hers because Obama owed it to her for the 2008 election. It would be an interesting match up in the debate forum. A man who didn't think he would do as well as he is and a woman who isn't doing as well as she was expecting. The polls are showing that this country really doesn't trust either one of them with Trump being the least trustworthy of the two. I'm really concerned for the future of this country if this is the best we could come up with for candidates. Time will tell and this will definitely be an "interesting" election year.
Head to head, votes to votes, Hillary may be winning now. Once Bernie, Ted, and John get out, there will be a very interesting division of those voters. I don't see Hillary persuading many from any of those other camps over to her side. If she can't bring those votes, she'll lose in a landslide.
The way this country chooses it's President seems to be based on likability more than leadership. Trump will have his hands full with Hillary if they're the nominees. Both can scream and shout, but it may come down to who does it better and with a smile. Sad yes, but it seems to be that way.
Canadian Cruz? I agree. The GOP is fractured and neither one of those candidates will be able to pull in enough votes to beat Hillary. Unless something changes dramatically, I just can't see Trump pulling it off. He has angered many potential voters, so much so that they will stay home instead of supporting him.
Canadian Cruz? I agree. The GOP is fractured and neither one of those candidates will be able to pull in enough votes to beat Hillary. Unless something changes dramatically, I just can't see Trump pulling it off. He has angered many potential voters, so much so that they will stay home instead of supporting him.
Cruz has angered potential voters to the point where he's not relevant.
As was pointed out elsewhere. Cruz need Trump supporters to win the Presidency. Trump doesn't need Cruz supporters.
I'm not seeing where Trump has angered potential voters... I see where he's brought millions of potential voters to the polls, more than I've ever seen. Perhaps you mean that Trump has given the people who are angry a voice, a way to show their anger?
Someone earlier said Trump was believed to be less honest than Hillary..... Trump hasn't changed his stance on many things since the 80's. He's been saying the same things, in the same ways for over 30 years... The things he has changed his opinion on I'm ok with too. I've changed my views over the years. I'm not getting the "lack of honesty" people are seeing.
Trump may be brash, but I think he's the most honest guy in the race.
Something else I've thought about.
Cruz or Trump against Hillary.
Lets face it. Unless she is indicted, Hillary is going to be the nominee for the Dems. No need to argue Bernie anything. Hillary drops out, and the establishment drops in someone they like. Hillary starts out at 47% of the vote no matter what.
Cruz Vs Hillary. Hillary wins Voter turnout is moderate. Hillary gets around 50.5% of the vote.
Trump Vs Hillary. Trump wins. Voter turnout is high. Trump gets 51% of the vote. Trump wins because he also appeals to the "Blue Dog Democrat" that everyone forgets still exists.
Cruz has a very large following, but he leans far right and isn't able to draw the more central in the party. We've talked about the problem with the Left and the right before. The Tea Party is far right, the Occupy group is far left. Both represent the extremes of their parties. Extremes does not mean majority. Yet each party panders to these extremes because they are the loudest. Everyone else (in both parties) is out working, trying to survive, and these guys are yelling and screaming causing the party to ignore us (both parties once again.)
Cruz is the voice of the far Right extreme. He can draw the Tea Party voters in all day long, they are loud and he gets noticed. But because he doesn't represent a "true majority" nothing really ever happens.
Trump represents a much wider swath of people. He goes from about the middle of Cruz's supporters all the way across into the middle of the Democrat voters. He's actually (in my view) an honest representation of our nation. He's the one that the working class views as their guy because he speaks for them. He's been speaking for them for a long time, and will continue to for a long time to come. (as they see him.)
Hillary had a chance to be the "voice of the middle", but spent so much time trying to "out left Bernie" that she ended up out in no mans land. She still gets 47% of the vote, no matter what happens. That many people will vote for her simply because she is a Democrat and they always vote party line. The difference is that the 3% missing from the 50% she wins by I mentioned earlier would "walk across party lines" to vote for Trump instead of Hillary, With Cruz those 3% just stay home.
You are missing the point.... They have to spend it on the campaign. They can not keep it. You are blaming them for something they are supposed to do. Just saying.
Define "keep it"..... They can take advantage of several rules that allow them to claim "take" a portion of the donated money for themselves.. You know, like declaring your campaign spending as a loan that will be repaid by donations. I wonder what the interest rate would be. I also wonder how much they pay themselves for speaking.
They have a lot of options for spending donated campaign funds. they can pay themselves a salary and I suspect the can also pay themselves for speaking and performing publicly. They can pay themselves for meeting with other candidates and party officials. They can charge the campaign for all of their campaign related activities.
Hmmm, his comment on Abortion... which he has flipped, flopped and flipped on since the 80s. Did you see how fast he flipped when his supporters didn't like what he said? I thought he got whiplash. This is just one example of how he has angered people (in this case women). Trump says what gets him attention. Is that honesty? How has he created/kept US workers employed? How exactly is he going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it? How is he going to deport every Muslim (or whatever he wants to do with them today)? He is only telling his supporters EXACTLY what they want to hear. He has no REAL solutions to anything. Another problem is that he doesn't have enough supporters to win the Presidency. He will have to moderate his stance to win more and that will anger his "angry" base. Most people polled do not trust Trump, so he has a long way to go and he will need GOP support to do it.
quote
Originally posted by Fats:
Cruz has angered potential voters to the point where he's not relevant.
I'm not seeing where Trump has angered potential voters... I see where he's brought millions of potential voters to the polls, more than I've ever seen. Perhaps you mean that Trump has given the people who are angry a voice, a way to show their anger?
Trump hasn't changed his stance on many things since the 80's. He's been saying the same things, in the same ways for over 30 years... The things he has changed his opinion on I'm ok with too. I've changed my views over the years. I'm not getting the "lack of honesty" people are seeing.
Define "keep it"..... They can take advantage of several rules that allow them to claim "take" a portion of the donated money for themselves.. You know, like declaring your campaign spending as a loan that will be repaid by donations. I wonder what the interest rate would be. I also wonder how much they pay themselves for speaking.
They have a lot of options for spending donated campaign funds. they can pay themselves a salary and I suspect the can also pay themselves for speaking and performing publicly. They can pay themselves for meeting with other candidates and party officials. They can charge the campaign for all of their campaign related activities.
Hmmm, his comment on Abortion... which he has flipped, flopped and flipped on since the 80s. Did you see how fast he flipped when his supporters didn't like what he said?
I believe you are missing the point. The "supporters" you mention weren't his "supporters" they were the typically outraged Right and Left. The loud people that I talked about toward the end of my last post.
quote
I thought he got whiplash. This is just one example of how he has angered people (in this case women). Trump says what gets him attention. Is that honesty?
Is that _________ (insert irrelevant thing.)
quote
How has he created/kept US workers employed? How exactly is he going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it?
All has already been talked to death. Go to his website if you can't "get enough" from whatever news source you watch.
quote
How is he going to deport every Muslim (or whatever he wants to do with them today)? He is only telling his supporters EXACTLY what they want to hear.
This is bullshit, and you know it's not true. Your bending crap, funny... You lie and lie and lie, all while accusing someone else of lying. **** off.
quote
He has no REAL solutions to anything. Another problem is that he doesn't have enough supporters to win the Presidency.
He has more people, supporters, that have voted for him in primaries than the Republicans have had vote since the 1980's. Turnout is up 70% across the board in Republican primaries. Where do you see "not enough supporters"?
quote
He will have to moderate his stance to win more and that will anger his "angry" base. Most people polled do not trust Trump, so he has a long way to go and he will need GOP support to do it.
In the end it doesn't matter what I say to you. You will just ignore logic and push your biased agenda.
Brad
[This message has been edited by Fats (edited 04-21-2016).]
In the end it doesn't matter what I say to you. You will just ignore logic and push your biased agenda.
Brad
Now that is funny. I give you evidence, like his Abortion Flop-Flip, and you blow it off as nothing. THIS shows you (well, not YOU), that he only says what people want to hear and he screwed the pooch on this one, so he flipped back (flopped, then flipped). Also, he wasn't against abortion, years ago... flip. The guy is an empty suit and supporters says, "he will win"... really, is everyone that arrogant to think so? Well, then, why should he even campaign anymore? Just tell all his loyal fans to just write his name in. The guy has a SLIM chance of winning the election. If Hillary screws up, then the chances are better. If she buckles down and runs a good campaign, Trump is out. That isn't biased, that is reality, most of the media and polls are saying the same thing. The only ones who don't want to hear it are staunch Trump supporters. They are blinded by his brand. Trump brings a lot of entertainment to this and he is better than Canadian Cruz, but to think he is going to win... well, that is denying facts. Trump has a tough battle ahead of him and instead of a bunch of "yes men", he needs people to start noticing that the emperor doesn't have any clothes
Trump is dividing the party... as seen here. Interesting.
Very true, but he's only widening rifts that already existed. The GOP has had disparate factions that have been growing apart for a while. The TEA Party originated by disenfranchised Republicans wanting the party to take a more Libertarian/Conservative approach. (Originally, that is. The more religious portion has become associated with it since, but it was originally primarily about smaller government & lower taxes)
The US has had political parties come and go. We may be seeing the end of the GOP as it has existed for generations.
Now that is funny. I give you evidence, like his Abortion Flop-Flip, and you blow it off as nothing. THIS shows you (well, not YOU), that he only says what people want to hear and he screwed the pooch on this one, so he flipped back (flopped, then flipped). Also, he wasn't against abortion, years ago... flip. The guy is an empty suit and supporters says, "he will win"... really, is everyone that arrogant to think so? Well, then, why should he even campaign anymore? Just tell all his loyal fans to just write his name in. The guy has a SLIM chance of winning the election. If Hillary screws up, then the chances are better. If she buckles down and runs a good campaign, Trump is out. That isn't biased, that is reality, most of the media and polls are saying the same thing. The only ones who don't want to hear it are staunch Trump supporters. They are blinded by his brand. Trump brings a lot of entertainment to this and he is better than Canadian Cruz, but to think he is going to win... well, that is denying facts. Trump has a tough battle ahead of him and instead of a bunch of "yes men", he needs people to start noticing that the emperor doesn't have any clothes
As I said, but you ignored. His supporters aren't the ones throwing the fit, the people that had already decided to go with someone else were the ones throwing a fit.
To me, and a LOT of other people the abortion crap is a distraction, and that's it.
Facts Heh, go ahead and tell me about facts, Fact Boy.
The guy is an empty suit and supporters says, "he will win"... really, is everyone that arrogant to think so? Well, then, why should he even campaign anymore? Just tell all his loyal fans to just write his name in. The guy has a SLIM chance of winning the election. If Hillary screws up, then the chances are better. If she buckles down and runs a good campaign, Trump is out. That isn't biased, that is reality, most of the media and polls are saying the same thing. The only ones who don't want to hear it are staunch Trump supporters. They are blinded by his brand. Trump brings a lot of entertainment to this and he is better than Canadian Cruz, but to think he is going to win... well, that is denying facts. Trump has a tough battle ahead of him and instead of a bunch of "yes men", he needs people to start noticing that the emperor doesn't have any clothes
What's funny is that again and again the system has said "Trump can't win _____." And he's won. Again and again. Your reality is skewed toward the establishment that you have been suckered into believing, you are the problem here, or you wouldn't be going on about things that aren't even half truths.
He has to seriously up his game if he goes up against her. She's no amateur when it comes to political mudslinging. However so far, Hillary has also shown that she wasn't expecting to have to work for the nomination either. I'm pretty sure she thought she was going to run unopposed and the White House would be hers because Obama owed it to her for the 2008 election. It would be an interesting match up in the debate forum. A man who didn't think he would do as well as he is and a woman who isn't doing as well as she was expecting. The polls are showing that this country really doesn't trust either one of them with Trump being the least trustworthy of the two. I'm really concerned for the future of this country if this is the best we could come up with for candidates. Time will tell and this will definitely be an "interesting" election year. 
