User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:10:27 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doubling down on the pedantry I see. I guess FortyFiveAutomatic was correct. Carry on. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The original post said "Most people vote for Trump". It wasnt "Trump received the most votes" or "Trump won the most states". Once again, most people DID NOT VOTE for Trump You cant just redefine words to meet your perception Doubling down on the pedantry I see. I guess FortyFiveAutomatic was correct. Carry on. The stark contrast between you and the majority of the other Cruz supporters in this thread continues to widen. I don't suppose being logical, rational, and objective with the ability to make posts that don't consist of baseless insults is something you could teach them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:11:10 PM EDT
[#2]
 " />
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:13:16 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He has the same effect on a lot of Republicans. See also: 63% unfavorable. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Good point, since Trump gets more Dems to crossover than any other current Republican candidate could dream of. Especially Cruz. He has the same effect on a lot of Republicans. See also: 63% unfavorable. Using the Cruzaiders theory, more people have voted against Cruz than have voted against Donald Trump. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:15:30 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't mind me just popping OST and to laugh at all the people who think Hillary (who's about to lose another state to an admitted communist) could beat the mildly retarded guy that works at the tire shop downtown in the General. I could empty the Supermax Prison in Colorado and find you at least a dozen people that would beat her by 100 delegates. But by all means continue your whining. That seems to be about all yall are good at. It's hard to tell when you're being facetious, what with 1/2 of your recent posts detailing your entrance into porn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:15:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even more people, in fact, did not vote for your creepy Canadian. So what? So which less popular candidate do you think is going to ride in on a white horse and save the republican party? That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him He is right, Donald has gotten the most votes, and more people have voted against TED CRUZ. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:17:28 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He is right, Donald has gotten the most votes, and more people have voted against TED CRUZ. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even more people, in fact, did not vote for your creepy Canadian. So what? So which less popular candidate do you think is going to ride in on a white horse and save the republican party? That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him He is right, Donald has gotten the most votes, and more people have voted against TED CRUZ. "receiving most of the votes" and "getting the most votes" are not synonymous |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:19:29 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OK. Maybe i can dumb this down for you... Which of these two statements is correct: A....Most people voted for Trump B....Most people did not vote for Trump It can only be one or the other but before you answer, here is some reference material for you Popular Vote Totals: Trump................7,863,052' Cruz...................5,782,142 Rubio.................3,470,384 Kasich................2,822,210 Take all the time you need... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Since you like the definition of MOST: Which Republican candidate has received the MOST votes? Trump Which Republican candidate has won the MOST states? Trump Which Republican candidate has been awarded the MOST delegates? Trump The reason your argument is pedantic is the current scenario. We started with a large field of candidates and only a fucking idiot would expect anyone to win the majority of votes. He hasn't won most of the votes cast, but he has won the most votes. I got accused of being pedantic for a joking exchange, but you're being serious. Btw this isn't the first time you've been accused of being pedantic. Posted by FortyFiveAutomatic: But you're such a combative pedantic weirdo that you made an ass of yourself, yet again. and yet again in this thread. The original post said "Most people vote for Trump". It wasnt "Trump received the most votes" or "Trump won the most states". Once again, most people DID NOT VOTE for Trump You cant just redefine words to meet your perception Doubling down on the pedantry I see. I guess FortyFiveAutomatic was correct. Carry on. OK. Maybe i can dumb this down for you... Which of these two statements is correct: A....Most people voted for Trump B....Most people did not vote for Trump It can only be one or the other but before you answer, here is some reference material for you Popular Vote Totals: Trump................7,863,052' Cruz...................5,782,142 Rubio.................3,470,384 Kasich................2,822,210 Take all the time you need... only a FUCKING IDIOT would think someone could win the majority of votes in a large field like the Republicans had this year. Take all the time you need. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:20:09 PM EDT
[#8]
Who gives a happy horseshit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:22:06 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Haha, I love it. What? No more claims that you didn't admit to lying? Kind of hard when the proof that you did gets posted, liar. 
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
more *nervous laughter* from a known liar. got that quote ready for us, liar? When have I admitted I lied? More lies from a member of the trump cult. Where's that quote liar? Pretty sad that you lie so much you can't even keep track of them. Unfortunately for you your post was quoted before you could edit it out. Pretty sad you're so accustomed to lying, that you project that on others who don't. Want to quote me where I met your own standard for the definition of a "cruz zealot" in your own thread, liar? Haha, I love it. What? No more claims that you didn't admit to lying? Kind of hard when the proof that you did gets posted, liar.
more lies from a trump sycophant. typical are you proud of yourself? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:23:49 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "receiving most of the votes" and "getting the most votes" are not synonymous no one said they were But pretending that only one of those statements is important is just a bit disingenuous. Which is what people have been trying to point out to you, but you seem to be a bit slow on the uptake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:24:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok, maybe I can dumb this down for you. I'm not real hopeful, since you apparently didn't read anything I wrote, but here goes: only a FUCKING IDIOT would think someone could win the majority of votes in a large field like the Republicans had this year. Take all the time you need. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The original post said "Most people vote for Trump". It wasnt "Trump received the most votes" or "Trump won the most states". Once again, most people DID NOT VOTE for Trump You cant just redefine words to meet your perception Doubling down on the pedantry I see. I guess FortyFiveAutomatic was correct. Carry on. OK. Maybe i can dumb this down for you... Which of these two statements is correct: A....Most people voted for Trump B....Most people did not vote for Trump It can only be one or the other but before you answer, here is some reference material for you Popular Vote Totals: Trump................7,863,052' Cruz...................5,782,142 Rubio.................3,470,384 Kasich................2,822,210 Take all the time you need... only a FUCKING IDIOT would think someone could win the majority of votes in a large field like the Republicans had this year. Take all the time you need. Then maybe someone shouldnt have said that most people voted for him, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:34:23 PM EDT
[#12]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:34:51 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Using the Cruzaiders theory, more people have voted against Cruz than have voted against Donald Trump. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Good point, since Trump gets more Dems to crossover than any other current Republican candidate could dream of. Especially Cruz. He has the same effect on a lot of Republicans. See also: 63% unfavorable. Using the Cruzaiders theory, more people have voted against Cruz than have voted against Donald Trump. This is a fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:42:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So you want me to go along with this lie that most people have voted for Trump AND that I am somehow going to be responsible for Hillary winning in November? As has been said before, you Trumpets have been warned over and over about how high Trump's negatives are, about how destroying the GOP alone wont be enough to get him to the White House, that he SUCKS in interviews, that between two liberals running for President, people will pick the Democrat, etc. Now you want to blame me and people like me for not filing in to support a man who spent his entire life advocating for those things that i have opposed and that we told you could not win in the general? Not fucking likely Please don't call me names -- I've clearly stated that I don't support Trump and never have. You're arguing that the Republican party should disenfranchise their voters, and choose someone else. That's what you want, whether it be Cruz (it won't be), or whoever. What do you think happens to those voters who voted clearly against the establishment? Add up Cruz and Trump's votes, the majority of those votes go away if you do that. So again, what's your plan? Kasich can manage to pull in one single state. That's it. Nobody else gives a fuck about him, because he's actually a democrat. Not kind of, not used to be, is. He's running on the Republican ticket, but he's a democrat. His SCOTUS nominees will be liberals like him. Cruz has no chance at the nomination. It's not going to happen, contested convention or no. So you want the GOP to step in and "save the party" from Trump. Who is going to do this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:49:48 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please don't call me names -- I've clearly stated that I don't support Trump and never have. You're arguing that the Republican party should disenfranchise their voters, and choose someone else. That's what you want, whether it be Cruz (it won't be), or whoever. What do you think happens to those voters who voted clearly against the establishment? Add up Cruz and Trump's votes, the majority of those votes go away if you do that. So again, what's your plan? Kasich can manage to pull in one single state. That's it. Nobody else gives a fuck about him, because he's actually a democrat. Not kind of, not used to be, is. He's running on the Republican ticket, but he's a democrat. His SCOTUS nominees will be liberals like him. Cruz has no chance at the nomination. It's not going to happen, contested convention or no. So you want the GOP to step in and "save the party" from Trump. Who is going to do this? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So you want me to go along with this lie that most people have voted for Trump AND that I am somehow going to be responsible for Hillary winning in November? As has been said before, you Trumpets have been warned over and over about how high Trump's negatives are, about how destroying the GOP alone wont be enough to get him to the White House, that he SUCKS in interviews, that between two liberals running for President, people will pick the Democrat, etc. Now you want to blame me and people like me for not filing in to support a man who spent his entire life advocating for those things that i have opposed and that we told you could not win in the general? Not fucking likely Please don't call me names -- I've clearly stated that I don't support Trump and never have. You're arguing that the Republican party should disenfranchise their voters, and choose someone else. That's what you want, whether it be Cruz (it won't be), or whoever. What do you think happens to those voters who voted clearly against the establishment? Add up Cruz and Trump's votes, the majority of those votes go away if you do that. So again, what's your plan? Kasich can manage to pull in one single state. That's it. Nobody else gives a fuck about him, because he's actually a democrat. Not kind of, not used to be, is. He's running on the Republican ticket, but he's a democrat. His SCOTUS nominees will be liberals like him. Cruz has no chance at the nomination. It's not going to happen, contested convention or no. So you want the GOP to step in and "save the party" from Trump. Who is going to do this? Well, if you have never supported Trump, i apologize. Its just that the preemptive blaming of people who have principled stands against Trump for a Hillary win seems to be all the rage with Trump supporters these days. To answer your question...its not my place to have a plan. it is up to the Republican party to put forth the nominee that is in the best position to win in November. If Trump gets the majority of delegates at the convention, then so be it. He should be the nominee If he doesnt, however, rules that have been in place (and applied numerous times) may lead to the party choosing someone else. It wont be stealing or shenanigans or dirty tricks. It will be an application of the rules with plenty of precedent behind it. If the GOP loses then, well, its on them |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:54:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How exactly does bringing in a candidate who is not a conservative work when trying to show independents how conservatism works? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just an observation.... Much of the reason Trump has a "negative" rating is because of the supporters of other candidates' comments, and the news media picking up on it and running with it. Most trump supporters I've met have been supportive of Trump, but willing to support the nominee if hhe didn't get it. Cruz/Rubio/etc. Are generally fanatical about "THEIR candidate or nothing", and it directly reflects in media coverage. It also giarantees Hillary the win. There simply are NOT enough "conservatives" left to win an election on their own, and the vast majority of independant voters are NOT going to be comfortable voting for a pew-jumper. They are more concerned about the economy and the naton, and far less about abortion and what they perceive as an attempt to enforce religious beliefs on them. Use Trump as the bridge to bring in the independants. Show them conservatism works. Keep your religious views OUT of government (but protect them from attack). Shift the country back to the right over time. WIN. Don't fuck up by whining that you'll take your ball and go home. How exactly does bringing in a candidate who is not a conservative work when trying to show independents how conservatism works? And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:57:23 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just an observation.... Much of the reason Trump has a "negative" rating is because of the supporters of other candidates' comments, and the news media picking up on it and running with it. Most trump supporters I've met have been supportive of Trump, but willing to support the nominee if hhe didn't get it. Cruz/Rubio/etc. Are generally fanatical about "THEIR candidate or nothing", and it directly reflects in media coverage. It also giarantees Hillary the win. There simply are NOT enough "conservatives" left to win an election on their own, and the vast majority of independant voters are NOT going to be comfortable voting for a pew-jumper. They are more concerned about the economy and the naton, and far less about abortion and what they perceive as an attempt to enforce religious beliefs on them. Use Trump as the bridge to bring in the independants. Show them conservatism works. Keep your religious views OUT of government (but protect them from attack). Shift the country back to the right over time. WIN. Don't fuck up by whining that you'll take your ball and go home. How exactly does bringing in a candidate who is not a conservative work when trying to show independents how conservatism works? And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. If, as a member of a board like this, you need details about Cruz's 2A stance, then there is no point trying to explain conservatism to you Perhaps you should read up on Cruz a bit more |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:02:53 AM EDT
[#18]
 " />
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:07:31 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If, as a member of a board like this, you need details about Cruz's 2A stance, then there is no point trying to explain conservatism to you Perhaps you should read up on Cruz a bit more Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just an observation.... Much of the reason Trump has a "negative" rating is because of the supporters of other candidates' comments, and the news media picking up on it and running with it. Most trump supporters I've met have been supportive of Trump, but willing to support the nominee if hhe didn't get it. Cruz/Rubio/etc. Are generally fanatical about "THEIR candidate or nothing", and it directly reflects in media coverage. It also giarantees Hillary the win. There simply are NOT enough "conservatives" left to win an election on their own, and the vast majority of independant voters are NOT going to be comfortable voting for a pew-jumper. They are more concerned about the economy and the naton, and far less about abortion and what they perceive as an attempt to enforce religious beliefs on them. Use Trump as the bridge to bring in the independants. Show them conservatism works. Keep your religious views OUT of government (but protect them from attack). Shift the country back to the right over time. WIN. Don't fuck up by whining that you'll take your ball and go home. How exactly does bringing in a candidate who is not a conservative work when trying to show independents how conservatism works? And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. If, as a member of a board like this, you need details about Cruz's 2A stance, then there is no point trying to explain conservatism to you Perhaps you should read up on Cruz a bit more Perhaps if you make the effort to reply to a post you should actually respond with, say, 'a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump.' Posting an insult without a response just shits up the thread and makes you look bad, Clyde. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:08:34 AM EDT
[#20]
oops doubletap
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:14:14 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, if you have never supported Trump, i apologize. Its just that the preemptive blaming of people who have principled stands against Trump for a Hillary win seems to be all the rage with Trump supporters these days. To answer your question...its not my place to have a plan. it is up to the Republican party to put forth the nominee that is in the best position to win in November. If Trump gets the majority of delegates at the convention, then so be it. He should be the nominee If he doesnt, however, rules that have been in place (and applied numerous times) may lead to the party choosing someone else. It wont be stealing or shenanigans or dirty tricks. It will be an application of the rules with plenty of precedent behind it. If the GOP loses then, well, its on them Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you want me to go along with this lie that most people have voted for Trump AND that I am somehow going to be responsible for Hillary winning in November? As has been said before, you Trumpets have been warned over and over about how high Trump's negatives are, about how destroying the GOP alone wont be enough to get him to the White House, that he SUCKS in interviews, that between two liberals running for President, people will pick the Democrat, etc. Now you want to blame me and people like me for not filing in to support a man who spent his entire life advocating for those things that i have opposed and that we told you could not win in the general? Not fucking likely Please don't call me names -- I've clearly stated that I don't support Trump and never have. You're arguing that the Republican party should disenfranchise their voters, and choose someone else. That's what you want, whether it be Cruz (it won't be), or whoever. What do you think happens to those voters who voted clearly against the establishment? Add up Cruz and Trump's votes, the majority of those votes go away if you do that. So again, what's your plan? Kasich can manage to pull in one single state. That's it. Nobody else gives a fuck about him, because he's actually a democrat. Not kind of, not used to be, is. He's running on the Republican ticket, but he's a democrat. His SCOTUS nominees will be liberals like him. Cruz has no chance at the nomination. It's not going to happen, contested convention or no. So you want the GOP to step in and "save the party" from Trump. Who is going to do this? Well, if you have never supported Trump, i apologize. Its just that the preemptive blaming of people who have principled stands against Trump for a Hillary win seems to be all the rage with Trump supporters these days. To answer your question...its not my place to have a plan. it is up to the Republican party to put forth the nominee that is in the best position to win in November. If Trump gets the majority of delegates at the convention, then so be it. He should be the nominee If he doesnt, however, rules that have been in place (and applied numerous times) may lead to the party choosing someone else. It wont be stealing or shenanigans or dirty tricks. It will be an application of the rules with plenty of precedent behind it. If the GOP loses then, well, its on them You reflexively attack anyone who does not toe your party line with name calling and other shit-slinging, because you can't allow for the possibility of any other thought outside your narrow "Trump is evil" bubble. These rules have not been applied "numerous times", and the times they have been have led the party to utter defeat. You don't have a candidate that can do what you want right now. I suspect that Trump will win, and will win fairly big, throughout the rest of the primaries, which will make all this moot -- but if he doesn't, and he comes up just shy of that number, and the party chooses some other establishment hack (and that includes Cruz), there's going to be hell to pay at the polls, and you get Hillary and you end the idea of a republican party for all time in America. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:16:05 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just an observation.... Much of the reason Trump has a "negative" rating is because of the supporters of other candidates' comments, and the news media picking up on it and running with it. Most trump supporters I've met have been supportive of Trump, but willing to support the nominee if hhe didn't get it. Cruz/Rubio/etc. Are generally fanatical about "THEIR candidate or nothing", and it directly reflects in media coverage. It also giarantees Hillary the win. There simply are NOT enough "conservatives" left to win an election on their own, and the vast majority of independant voters are NOT going to be comfortable voting for a pew-jumper. They are more concerned about the economy and the naton, and far less about abortion and what they perceive as an attempt to enforce religious beliefs on them. Use Trump as the bridge to bring in the independants. Show them conservatism works. Keep your religious views OUT of government (but protect them from attack). Shift the country back to the right over time. WIN. Don't fuck up by whining that you'll take your ball and go home. How exactly does bringing in a candidate who is not a conservative work when trying to show independents how conservatism works? And it depends on what your definition of "conservative" is. So far, all I've seen and heard about Cruz being a "conservative" is his 2nd Amendment stance (but not a lot of details) and some Obamacare objections. How about a list of five(5) points regarding Cruz that define his "conservatism". Then the same for Trump. Cruz is a hardcore evangelical who probably has been sticking his dick where it doesn't belong, and wrote one of the 67 amicus briefs that went to SCOTUS about Heller, which did absolutely nothing to change anyone's mind as the result of Heller was completely determined by Scalia. That's it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:35:32 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it your position that he purposely makes bad business decisions? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean like Trump Airlines? Is it your position that he purposely makes bad business decisions? No, but he isn't immune from making bad ones either. I guess on the bright side, he did hang on to that nice 757 he flies around in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 12:44:07 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
more lies from a trump sycophant. typical are you proud of yourself? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sad that you lie so much you can't even keep track of them. Unfortunately for you your post was quoted before you could edit it out. Pretty sad you're so accustomed to lying, that you project that on others who don't. Want to quote me where I met your own standard for the definition of a "cruz zealot" in your own thread, liar? Haha, I love it. What? No more claims that you didn't admit to lying? Kind of hard when the proof that you did gets posted, liar.
more lies from a trump sycophant. typical are you proud of yourself? You admitted you lied. I pointed out how funny it was that someone who admitted they lie keeps calling someone else a liar. Oh, and generally sycophants don't say things about the person they support like "I'm not a a fan of them" and "he's far from my ideal candidate." But hey, you've already admitted that you tell lies so I'm sure you won't let that get in your way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 1:15:27 AM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 1:26:12 AM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 2:04:08 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Even more people, in fact, did not vote for your creepy Canadian. So what? So which less popular candidate do you think is going to ride in on a white horse and save the republican party? That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him most most/ <input src="" height="14" type="image" width="14" style="font-size: small; font-family: arial, sans-serif;" /> |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 2:37:05 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You reflexively attack anyone who does not toe your party line with name calling and other shit-slinging, because you can't allow for the possibility of any other thought outside your narrow "Trump is evil" bubble. These rules have not been applied "numerous times", and the times they have been have led the party to utter defeat. You don't have a candidate that can do what you want right now. I suspect that Trump will win, and will win fairly big, throughout the rest of the primaries, which will make all this moot -- but if he doesn't, and he comes up just shy of that number, and the party chooses some other establishment hack (and that includes Cruz), there's going to be hell to pay at the polls, and you get Hillary and you end the idea of a republican party for all time in America. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you want me to go along with this lie that most people have voted for Trump AND that I am somehow going to be responsible for Hillary winning in November? As has been said before, you Trumpets have been warned over and over about how high Trump's negatives are, about how destroying the GOP alone wont be enough to get him to the White House, that he SUCKS in interviews, that between two liberals running for President, people will pick the Democrat, etc. Now you want to blame me and people like me for not filing in to support a man who spent his entire life advocating for those things that i have opposed and that we told you could not win in the general? Not fucking likely Please don't call me names -- I've clearly stated that I don't support Trump and never have. You're arguing that the Republican party should disenfranchise their voters, and choose someone else. That's what you want, whether it be Cruz (it won't be), or whoever. What do you think happens to those voters who voted clearly against the establishment? Add up Cruz and Trump's votes, the majority of those votes go away if you do that. So again, what's your plan? Kasich can manage to pull in one single state. That's it. Nobody else gives a fuck about him, because he's actually a democrat. Not kind of, not used to be, is. He's running on the Republican ticket, but he's a democrat. His SCOTUS nominees will be liberals like him. Cruz has no chance at the nomination. It's not going to happen, contested convention or no. So you want the GOP to step in and "save the party" from Trump. Who is going to do this? Well, if you have never supported Trump, i apologize. Its just that the preemptive blaming of people who have principled stands against Trump for a Hillary win seems to be all the rage with Trump supporters these days. To answer your question...its not my place to have a plan. it is up to the Republican party to put forth the nominee that is in the best position to win in November. If Trump gets the majority of delegates at the convention, then so be it. He should be the nominee If he doesnt, however, rules that have been in place (and applied numerous times) may lead to the party choosing someone else. It wont be stealing or shenanigans or dirty tricks. It will be an application of the rules with plenty of precedent behind it. If the GOP loses then, well, its on them You reflexively attack anyone who does not toe your party line with name calling and other shit-slinging, because you can't allow for the possibility of any other thought outside your narrow "Trump is evil" bubble. These rules have not been applied "numerous times", and the times they have been have led the party to utter defeat. You don't have a candidate that can do what you want right now. I suspect that Trump will win, and will win fairly big, throughout the rest of the primaries, which will make all this moot -- but if he doesn't, and he comes up just shy of that number, and the party chooses some other establishment hack (and that includes Cruz), there's going to be hell to pay at the polls, and you get Hillary and you end the idea of a republican party for all time in America. Give me a break. I didnt attack you because you dont toe a party line. i assumed you were a Trump supporter because you used the exact same line of attack they do. and second, i suppose that if you think that brokered conventions lead to utter defeats, you've never heard of President Lincoln on President Eisenhower. ...and by the way, the second you call Cruz an "establishment hack", you reveal yourself to be either willfully misleading or a Trump supporter....not that there's a difference. I suppose i was right to begin with |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 2:43:49 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Give me a break. I didnt attack you because you dont toe a party line. i assumed you were a Trump supporter because you used the exact same line of attack they do. and second, i suppose that if you think that brokered conventions lead to utter defeats, you've never heard of President Lincoln on President Eisenhower. ...and by the way, the second you call Cruz an "establishment hack", you reveal yourself to be either willfully misleading or a Trump supporter....not that there's a difference. I suppose i was right to begin with Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You reflexively attack anyone who does not toe your party line with name calling and other shit-slinging, because you can't allow for the possibility of any other thought outside your narrow "Trump is evil" bubble. These rules have not been applied "numerous times", and the times they have been have led the party to utter defeat. You don't have a candidate that can do what you want right now. I suspect that Trump will win, and will win fairly big, throughout the rest of the primaries, which will make all this moot -- but if he doesn't, and he comes up just shy of that number, and the party chooses some other establishment hack (and that includes Cruz), there's going to be hell to pay at the polls, and you get Hillary and you end the idea of a republican party for all time in America. Give me a break. I didnt attack you because you dont toe a party line. i assumed you were a Trump supporter because you used the exact same line of attack they do. and second, i suppose that if you think that brokered conventions lead to utter defeats, you've never heard of President Lincoln on President Eisenhower. ...and by the way, the second you call Cruz an "establishment hack", you reveal yourself to be either willfully misleading or a Trump supporter....not that there's a difference. I suppose i was right to begin with I didn't use any "line of attack". I'm not sure you know what that even means. Don't try to use the exception to prove the rule -- and who is your Lincoln and your Eisenhower? You don't have one. There isn't one. So try again. And Cruz? Yeah. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's a politician's politician. He doesn't believe at least 80% of what he says. Have you watched him? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 2:46:53 AM EDT
[#30]
Sorry if it's already been posted. I thought this thread would be the perfect place for this.....
Glenn Beck raped by Ted Cruz “I have to tell you, it’s been a hard Monday morning. We’ve all been raped by Ted Cruz,” Glenn Beck said during his online show this morning.
One of his co-hosts chimed in, “You can’t rape the willing, and we were all willing.” Glenn Beck’s rape jokes were just the start of a strange soliloquy about his relationship with Ted Cruz and how much Beck and his co-hosts adore the Republican presidential candidate. Glenn Beck goes on to describe how Ted Cruz romanced him and “backed [him] into a bathroom stall” just after an interview discussing the U.S. Constitution, which, according to Beck, left him “needing a cigarette.” “When he said to me, he said Glenn, we need a more perfect union, I thought he was talking to me about the Constitution but then he looked at me with those strong brown eyes, oh my gosh he backed me into a bathroom stall,” Glenn Beck said this morning during his online show for the Blaze. Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2936531/glenn-beck-talks-cruz-sex-scandal-i-was-raped-by-ted-cruz/#wGxcsZXjX9e1bwSL.99 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 3:07:03 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't use any "line of attack". I'm not sure you know what that even means. Don't try to use the exception to prove the rule -- and who is your Lincoln and your Eisenhower? You don't have one. There isn't one. So try again. And Cruz? Yeah. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's a politician's politician. He doesn't believe at least 80% of what he says. Have you watched him? I find it remarkable one can believe this while defending Trump. I don't know how you can believe anything Trump says. Cruz is the one with a proven track record. If Cruz was really a "politician's politician" you'd think he would have more friends in the Senate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:03:03 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just an observation.... Much of the reason Trump has a "negative" rating is because of the supporters of other candidates' comments, and the news media picking up on it and running with it. Most trump supporters I've met have been supportive of Trump, but willing to support the nominee if hhe didn't get it. Cruz/Rubio/etc. Are generally fanatical about "THEIR candidate or nothing", and it directly reflects in media coverage. It also giarantees Hillary the win. There simply are NOT enough "conservatives" left to win an election on their own, and the vast majority of independant voters are NOT going to be comfortable voting for a pew-jumper. They are more concerned about the economy and the naton, and far less about abortion and what they perceive as an attempt to enforce religious beliefs on them. Use Trump as the bridge to bring in the independants. Show them conservatism works. Keep your religious views OUT of government (but protect them from attack). Shift the country back to the right over time. WIN. Don't fuck up by whining that you'll take your ball and go home. This! Trump has negative numbers because he is a progressive and the majority of the Republican party can see it. He talks like a 3rd grader and has zero substance when he talks. Sadly there are enough that find that appealing and in a scattered field they fell behind the one at their level. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:04:53 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most people don't hate him. Most people vote for him actually. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He'll pick up some percentage of the "not Hillary" vote. Believing that he will overcome a 63% (average) unfavorable rating by picking up those votes is folly. I've been assured it's the media's fault that people hate Trump. Why would anyone have disdain for him beforehand?  ~35% is not equal to most. In fact is well below most. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:24:18 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I find it remarkable one can believe this while defending Trump. I don't know how you can believe anything Trump says. Cruz is the one with a proven track record. If Cruz was really a "politician's politician" you'd think he would have more friends in the Senate. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I didn't use any "line of attack". I'm not sure you know what that even means. Don't try to use the exception to prove the rule -- and who is your Lincoln and your Eisenhower? You don't have one. There isn't one. So try again. And Cruz? Yeah. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's a politician's politician. He doesn't believe at least 80% of what he says. Have you watched him? I find it remarkable one can believe this while defending Trump. I don't know how you can believe anything Trump says. Cruz is the one with a proven track record. If Cruz was really a "politician's politician" you'd think he would have more friends in the Senate. Why, in your world, must anyone who does not bow to your messiah be "defending Trump"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:25:10 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
~35% is not equal to most. In fact is well below most. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He'll pick up some percentage of the "not Hillary" vote. Believing that he will overcome a 63% (average) unfavorable rating by picking up those votes is folly. I've been assured it's the media's fault that people hate Trump. Why would anyone have disdain for him beforehand? ~35% is not equal to most. In fact is well below most. Do we really have to do this dumb shit again, Sydney? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:33:24 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do we really have to do this dumb shit again, Sydney? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He'll pick up some percentage of the "not Hillary" vote. Believing that he will overcome a 63% (average) unfavorable rating by picking up those votes is folly. I've been assured it's the media's fault that people hate Trump. Why would anyone have disdain for him beforehand? ~35% is not equal to most. In fact is well below most. Do we really have to do this dumb shit again, Sydney? Words mean things. Mean what you say. Say what you mean. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 4:53:17 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Words mean things. Mean what you say. Say what you mean. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've been assured it's the media's fault that people hate Trump. Why would anyone have disdain for him beforehand? ~35% is not equal to most. In fact is well below most. Do we really have to do this dumb shit again, Sydney? Words mean things. Mean what you say. Say what you mean. Why don't you go to Merriam Webster and see what definition #2 for "most" is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 5:21:36 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, you're playing semantics games. Winning "most" -- if you define it as 50% or greater -- of the votes is almost impossible in a 17 man field. It's less impossible in a 3 man field, but still difficult. And tell me again, which states has Cruz won with over 50% of the vote? Not even his own home state? And Kasich is just in the race as a spoiler. So tell me again, which less popular candidate is going to save the party at the brokered convention you keep hoping for, knowing that brokered convention is going to end the republican party, put Hillary in the white house for eight years, and permanently swing the court into a left-wing ideologue anti-Constitution decision factory? You realize you're working to end the right to keep and bear arms in this country by playing games, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even more people, in fact, did not vote for your creepy Canadian. So what? So which less popular candidate do you think is going to ride in on a white horse and save the republican party? That wasn't the point. A poster stated that Trump had received "most " of the votes. I merely corrected him Yes, you're playing semantics games. Winning "most" -- if you define it as 50% or greater -- of the votes is almost impossible in a 17 man field. It's less impossible in a 3 man field, but still difficult. And tell me again, which states has Cruz won with over 50% of the vote? Not even his own home state? And Kasich is just in the race as a spoiler. So tell me again, which less popular candidate is going to save the party at the brokered convention you keep hoping for, knowing that brokered convention is going to end the republican party, put Hillary in the white house for eight years, and permanently swing the court into a left-wing ideologue anti-Constitution decision factory? You realize you're working to end the right to keep and bear arms in this country by playing games, right? 69.2 % of Utah. You were saying? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:07:56 AM EDT
[#39]
I will vote for Trump if he wins the nomination.
What you guys do not understand (or want to admit )is that if trump does not win it out right Cruz hS a very good chance at the second vote. I think both sides agree on three things. Fuck obama Fuck hillary Fuck anyone except Trump and Cruz who thinks they will steal this nomination at the convention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:15:28 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I will vote for Trump if he wins the nomination. What you guys do not understand (or want to admit )is that if trump does not win it out right Cruz hS a very good chance at the second vote. I think both sides agree on three things. Fuck obama Fuck hillary Fuck anyone except Trump and Cruz who thinks they will steal this nomination at the convention. End of thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:25:00 AM EDT
[#41]
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:34:28 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet? That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:36:05 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet? That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. I haven't seen or heard anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 7:53:21 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I haven't seen or heard anything. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet? That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. I haven't seen or heard anything. me either, but the way some of the posters in this thread are posting, one would think that the evidence has been shown all over the internet. Either that or said posters are loaded with confirmation bias and full of crap. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 8:02:38 AM EDT
[#45]
Wisconsin is Tuesday. Maybe it will be dropped -along with one or more women coming forward to confirm the affairs - tomorrow. That would make sure Cruz doesn't have time to really refute the evidence before the voting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 8:11:42 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet? That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. How often does Anon actually deliever on this shit? I mean they got some Scientology stuff, busted some people killing kittens, nothing else all that notable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 8:16:14 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nickleback sucks. Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 8:42:32 AM EDT
[#48]
I'm with you guys
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 9:15:21 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How often does Anon actually deliever on this shit? I mean they got some Scientology stuff, busted some people killing kittens, nothing else all that notable. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's been a week. Has Anonymous released that video yet? That is a good question. Still waiting on all the evidence. It is apparent that many here have already seen the evidence. I wish they would share. How often does Anon actually deliever on this shit? I mean they got some Scientology stuff, busted some people killing kittens, nothing else all that notable. I just figured someone else had put that information out there, since so many in this thread say the accusations are true. I mean who needs proof, when confirmation bias and opinion will do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2016 9:35:14 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I will vote for Trump if he wins the nomination. What you guys do not understand (or want to admit )is that if trump does not win it out right Cruz hS a very good chance at the second vote. I think both sides agree on three things. Fuck obama Fuck hillary Fuck anyone except Trump and Cruz who thinks they will steal this nomination at the convention. The GOPe surrogates are letting you think that now but the truth is either trump will win or you will see Kasich/Rubio as the ticket. Cruz is being used but he is it part of the plan. Trump is the only one strong enough to win against the will of the party. Cruz has zero chance of that kind of upswell, |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
