2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

when I work and live in a place where I put a face to your targets.

You mean criminals and invaders?

Sounds like a charming place.

[NobodyHere]

I;m gathering from this board that JimGA is the Darkside of any political force

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I;m gathering from this board that JimGA is the Darkside of any political force

Apparently.

I'm also little more than a more honest voice for a very fed-up and angry rising tide. That's what Trump is tapping so effectively, it's why he's on the verge of not just winning the primary that's the topic of this thread but outright running away with it.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Apparently.

I'm also little more than a more honest voice for a very fed-up and angry rising tide. That's what Trump is tapping so effectively, it's why he's on the verge of not just winning the primary that's the topic of this thread but outright running away with it.

Ya know, if it weren't for his "American workers make to much" quote than I could get behind Trump. Sadly I shall sit behind Rand Paul as his candidacy fades away to nothing.

[Edward64]

Not going to vote for you Ted but I'm on your side on this one.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/22/politi...ets/index.html

Washington (CNN)Ted Cruz obtained new ammunition Tuesday to shoot at his favorite bogeyman, the mainstream media, after The Washington Post depicted his two young daughters as monkey-like characters doing the bidding of their father.

By early Tuesday evening, backlash to the cartoon had swelled to the point where the Post took down the image and replaced it with an editor's note.

Ann Telnaes, a Post cartoonist, drew an animation of the Republican presidential contender in a Santa outfit, with two hatted creatures, after the family gamely appeared in a parody television advertisement that aired during "Saturday Night Live" this weekend.

In the 90-second spot, "Cruz Christmas Classics," which had nearly 1.5 million views as of Tuesday afternoon, the daughters and Cruz's wife, Heidi, read from a fictional holiday-themed children's book while sitting together on the couch.

Cruz quickly blasted the Post's cartoon.

"Classy. @washingtonpost makes fun of my girls. Stick w/ attacking me--Caroline & Catherine are out of your league," Cruz tweeted Tuesday.

Classy. @washingtonpost makes fun of my girls. Stick w/ attacking me--Caroline & Catherine are out of your league. Twitter / ?

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) December 22, 2015

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Not going to vote for you Ted but I'm on your side on this one.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/22/politi...ets/index.html

This after the Washington Post falsely labelled Trump a White Supremacist a couple of days ago.

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I;m gathering that the MSM is the Darkside of any political force

Adjustments made.

[digamma]

The cartoon's biggest problem is that it isn't funny. It does strike me as Cruz wanting to have it both ways a bit. He has his daughter reading a book which calls Hillary a Grinch in an ad on the one hand, but mocking of that aspect of things is off limits. For me, both the Cruz ad and the cartoon are not well thought out.

[Dutch]

Agreed....but remember, Cruz will eventually go away...the media won't...they should hold themselves above the fray.

[Ben E Lou]

Some new poll numbers from CNN this morning.

[Dutch]

So, when do these number start to matter or are we already there?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sheesh, and here I thought we were at least civilly cool and all.

Well, it has been years since you described what you'd do to me in a PPV WWE-style event, so clearly there's been progress.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But since I now have a prompt for it & all ... I wonder how much wailing & moaning there'd be if our few conservatives actively asshole trolled the f'n (D) primary thread the way some of our more fucktard left wingnuts have done in this one?

I, for one, haven't even started actively trolling you guys. And if Trump keeps on his winning streak, I won't have to.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Wow... Bill Kristol is openly saying that Trump wins the nomination, he'll be part of a movement that starts a new Republican party.

I believe that as much as I believe the people who said they'd leave the country if Bush got a second term.

Originally Posted by Dutch

So, when do these number start to matter or are we already there?

FiveThirtyEight did an article a few weeks back where they said the data from past elections indicates the point at which you can start to believe the polls is about 2 weeks before Iowa.

So, we're still in silly season.

[albionmoonlight]

Before the 2000 election, I was at some craft fair/street fest thing in Chapel Hill. Being Chapel Hill, the vibe was very liberal. You had a few folks out there "organizing" for Nader, trying to get him on the ballot as a third party.

What they were really doing was walking around stoned, holding clipboards, and politely accosting strangers.

Organization and ground game matters. To what extent does Trump have people working for him on the ground doing the nitty gritty of turning that enthusiasm into votes? I really have no idea.

revrew, how's it looking to you in Iowa?

[flere-imsaho]

I think I read in Politico that Trump has more paid staffers in NH than Rubio, with Bush having the most. Just a data point.

[revrew]

Originally Posted by Dutch

So, when do these number start to matter or are we already there?

National numbers matter, but they're not definitive or even necessarily predictive. Once the voting starts (with Iowa), then momentum changes national numbers in a quick hurry.

As for how Iowa looks, there are many here who are saying Cruz has Iowa "in the bag." It's still too early to say that, as Cruz is only now being held up to the national spotlight, but he does currently have a major lead in organization and momentum and a slight lead in the polls. If the Iowa caucus were held today, Cruz would beat Trump by 10 points or more (Cruz~35, Trump~25, everyone else at 10 or less). But there's still 30+ days to go, time for things to change.

Since Iowa was made first in the nation, no candidate has gone on to win the nom without placing in the top 3 in Iowa - it's just too hard to regain the momentum after a beat-down in the "opening quarter." Trump and Cruz have punched their tickets. Still waiting to see who is going to finish #3.

If Trump wins Iowa, given his lead in N.H. and national polling (here's where those polls ARE relevant), I would expect Trump to wrap up the nom quickly.

But if Cruz wins Iowa, it changes things. It becomes a horse race. Trump will likely still win N.H., but S.C. becomes up for grabs, and with a strong ground game in the "SEC primary," Cruz will hang strong and likely finish #1 or #2.

The wildcard here is the still fractured establishment. Jeb has the money, Rubio the likeability, and Christie the support of many in the cigar-filled room. Now that Rubio has shot himself in the foot by bringing up the Gang of 8 (dude? NOT smart), the question is, will the establishment finally get behind Christie to make a play for #3 in Iowa, #1 or #2 in N.H., then catch a ride of momentum?

Despite all the chatter, the GOP nomination is down to a final 4. Trump is the #1 seed, Cruz #2, Christie #3, and Rubio a Cinderella #4. Cruz has the mo ... for now.

[rowech]

I see no way that this doesn't end up as a brokered convention.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by rowech

I see no way that this doesn't end up as a brokered convention.

Trump's polls don't translate to votes because he doesn't have a real GOTV operation, Cruz picks up Trump's supporters, establishment votes split between Bush, Rubio & Christie as all three stay in well past Super Tuesday and thus Cruz cruises (sorry) to a pretty easy majority delegate victory.

The most hilarious scenario for me would be:

1. Trump's polls hold up and he starts winning primaries.
2. The establishment pulls out all the stops to beat Trump, including getting as many of the other candidates to consolidate around one of Rubio, Bush or Christie (making huge promises in so doing)
3. It looks like it's going to work and force a brokered convention
4. Trump & Cruz have a private meeting (they've done this once already, about the most recent debate) and Cruz steps out of the race in order to be Trump's VP.
5. Trump/Cruz vs. Clinton/LOLDOESN'TMATTER
6. America becomes a 3-party country


Actually, upon further reflection, that's my wet dream scenario. As you were.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by rowech

I see no way that this doesn't end up as a brokered convention.

I think I've heard that in PoliSci circles this far out since at least the 2000 primaries... I'm not going to hold my breath that THIS is the year people will hold on to their convictions and not line up behind the frontrunner. (And that's not (just) a shot at voters... it's the politicians too. Maybe a Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio in 2nd place behind Trump would hold out and think they could win, but Trump would just have to talk other down-ballot losers into supporting him, whether by cabinet spots, a VP slot, etc)

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Some new poll numbers from CNN this morning.

Heh, caught this one at the gym this morning... I know picking on CNN is low-hanging fruit, but it's not "running away with" if your own poll has his numbers within the M.O.E. of the last poll, Ted Cruz's numbers within the M.O.E. (and rising), and all of a 1-point gain!

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by digamma

The cartoon's biggest problem is that it isn't funny. It does strike me as Cruz wanting to have it both ways a bit. He has his daughter reading a book which calls Hillary a Grinch in an ad on the one hand, but mocking of that aspect of things is off limits. For me, both the Cruz ad and the cartoon are not well thought out.

+1

Though if Cruz is using his kids in campaign commercials, he's opening them up to being a target of the media.

[flere-imsaho]

Edit: I didn't realize Cruz was using his kids to make a personal attack. I change my mind - he can't have it both ways.

[tarcone]

Wrong thread, but why the love for Clinton, flere? What is she going to do? I will admit she will probably be better than Obama. But I think she is the most likely to be impeached as well.

[flere-imsaho]

Clinton's not my ideal candidate, but my ideal candidate a) probably doesn't exist and b) isn't electable anyway.

Since I don't believe Sanders has a shot at the nomination, my choices are Clinton or any of the realistic GOP nominees. None of the realistic GOP nominees are anywhere close to my policy views, and certainly not closer than Clinton is, so the choice (for me) is pretty straightforward.

Edit: My ideal candidate is probably Josiah Bartlet.

[ISiddiqui]

There is a Dem primary thread FWIW . Btw, this is why no one trolls there.. because the Dem primary is fairly dull. Also, if anyone on this board has love for Clinton, it's likely me (I likely have given more to her campaign than anyone else here, I'd imagine).

[flere-imsaho]

Fine, I'll post in the other thread. Fuckers.

[Swaggs]

I think Rubio had/has his shot, but he just does not seem willing to put his feet on the ground, kiss babies, and play retail politics. At this point, it is hard to see him winning any states and I recently saw that he is not even polling particularly well in Florida. I think Christie and Jeb will each have another shot to play the establishment candidate.

I would never vote for him, but I think Cruz is a political genius and the favorite to win. He will likely win Iowa and then clean up on Super Tuesday (he's been working those states and has consolidated the evangelicals).

[flere-imsaho]

Ruh-Roh:

The study finds that Trump performs about six percentage points better online than via live telephone interviewing and that his advantage online is driven by adults with higher levels of education. Importantly, the differences between online and live telephone persist even when examining only highly engaged voters.

Or, put another way, there are plenty of people out there who are not going to tell a phone pollster that they're going to vote for Trump, thus his actual support might be even higher than his polling suggests.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I would never vote for him, but I think Cruz is a political genius and the favorite to win. He will likely win Iowa and then clean up on Super Tuesday (he's been working those states and has consolidated the evangelicals).

You can fault Cruz for a lot of things, but you have to admit he's worked very, very hard to make himself a contender.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

You can fault Cruz for a lot of things, but you have to admit he's worked very, very hard to make himself a contender.

Very similar to Obama understanding the way the primary system worked in 2008 over Hillary.

This will be an interesting election to look back on, as neither Cruz or Trump have many notable endorsements from elected officials.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

(he's been working those states and has consolidated the evangelicals).

I'm going to use this as a prompt for an observation that I'm honestly not sure anyone polls for specifically (since it'd be hard to get honest answers to it I suspect).

I think there is a great number of evangelicals that have reached the conclusion that at this point it might very well just take an absolute bastard to get the political job done.

Most of you can imagine why my social circles look like with a fair bit of accuracy. I can't tell you the last time there was any mention of religion with regard to Trump, or even of Christianity in general when it comes to the Presidential field. Short of him showing up with a pentagram on his forehead I'm not sure that religion trumps (no pun intended) the rest of his campaign platform.

In other words I don't believe there's anything at all like a consolidated Cruz evangelical movement and that, among them, the numbers would be very similar to the general GOP population.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think Rubio had/has his shot, but he just does not seem willing to put his feet on the ground, kiss babies, and play retail politics. At this point, it is hard to see him winning any states and I recently saw that he is not even polling particularly well in Florida. I think Christie and Jeb will each have another shot to play the establishment candidate.

It's like the Fred Thompson campaign. Seemingly has all the tools, but appears completely uninterested in campaigning.

[flere-imsaho]

But at least with Fred he had the excuse of being old & tired.

[ISiddiqui]

To be fair, I don't think Fred could even be bothered to give an excuse .

[JonInMiddleGA]

In fairness to the Fred Thompson campaign, his presidential bid came just after treatment for the lymphoma that would (7 years later) kill him.

While his statements at the time indicated that he was in remission in hindsight it doesn't seem like an awful stretch to at least wonder if that played a part in his largely non-existent campaigning.

[flere-imsaho]

I just looked up "Fred Thompson 2008 Campaign" on YouTube, and even with knowing now how his health was, he still looks more vital, dynamic and presidential than Rubio.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm going to use this as a prompt for an observation that I'm honestly not sure anyone polls for specifically (since it'd be hard to get honest answers to it I suspect).

I think there is a great number of evangelicals that have reached the conclusion that at this point it might very well just take an absolute bastard to get the political job done.

Most of you can imagine why my social circles look like with a fair bit of accuracy. I can't tell you the last time there was any mention of religion with regard to Trump, or even of Christianity in general when it comes to the Presidential field. Short of him showing up with a pentagram on his forehead I'm not sure that religion trumps (no pun intended) the rest of his campaign platform.

In other words I don't believe there's anything at all like a consolidated Cruz evangelical movement and that, among them, the numbers would be very similar to the general GOP population.

Cruz reportedly has lined up a faith-based leader in every county in Iowa and is working on doing the same in South Carolina. I know that not every evangelical is cut from the same cloth, but I would guess a fair number are turned on by the same hot button issues (on family values, security, employment, marriage, and abortion). Cruz has essentially targeted a population that is easy to locate and can be easily converted into voters.

There is, of course, some overlap, but I think that population's hot button issues are different from the military/ex-military folks, the Appalachian coal miners and their families (here in WV, Western PA, KY, etc), the business/free capitalism folks, and folks that want strict interpretation of the constitution and/or no intervention from government.

The coal miners here may be Christians, but they are largely more driven to vote to change the EPA than to repeal gay marriage. The Libertarians, by and large, could care less who marries who and would rather not incarcerate folks for smoking weed behind closed doors, whereas plenty of my Facebook friends are disgusted by those things enough to post daily about those topics. I think there is a pretty big tent available to the GOP for a smart politician. Cruz knows how Iowa works (at least the caucus-goers) and will shift gears in the general, I'm sure.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think I may have spotted the difference in what you're saying and the anecdotal impression I'm getting

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Cruz reportedly has lined up a faith-based leader in every county in Iowa and is working on doing the same in South Carolina.

I don't get a sense all that many rank-and-file evangelicals (hyper-Christians, uber-Christian-rights, whatever label you want) are interested in paying attention to someone telling them how to vote this time around.

It's not as though my circles have a shortage of folks who fit into that category (although not as high a percentage many of the mega-church variety as might exist in in the general population) but they appear to be split along roughly the same proportions as the national polls show the race.

If anything, the organized religion types that I see leaning away from Trump are not what I'd described as evangelicals but rather those that are more lukewarm religiously, Christian-right-lite if you will.

[NobodyHere]

Rand Paul gets into the Festivus spirit

Rand Paul airs grievances against GOP rivals for 'Festivus' - CNNPolitics.com


There's actually some pretty good zingers in there.

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, pretty good sense of humor. I think he needs to bring more of that to the debate stage (he's done some, but not enough).

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by digamma

In all fairness, I think there is a good bit of posting on both sides of the aisle in both threads. And let's face it, the Republican contest is waaaaaay more interesting for pretty much everyone.

I mean what would the trolling be.

R Poster: Hillary sucks and hid e-mails.
D Poster: WE KNOW! BUT WE'VE GOT NO ONE BETTER.

Err - the Republicans could point out the farce that is Bernie Sanders being repeatedly ignored by the media and establishment because they're pretty much committed to Hilary being the winner in advance ...

The Democrat situation is pretty much the inverse of the Republican one, Trump sucks all the media attention, whereas Sanders can't get much of a sniff of it because he's very reasonable and civil in the main.

(it'd be nice if they are least had upheld the illusion of choice in my opinion ... but hey ho )

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Err - the Republicans could point out the farce that is Bernie Sanders being repeatedly ignored by the media and establishment because they're pretty much committed to Hilary being the winner in advance ...

I guess they could if they wanted to play fast and loose with the facts. Though I guess that is what trolling is about.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Trump's polls don't translate to votes because he doesn't have a real GOTV operation

Only half the story. The way delegates to the convention are actually assigned isn't always 1:1 with voting results. Having infrastructure to drive your voters to the polls is important, but you need the infrastructure to make sure your delegate slates are the ones sent to the convention, as well. I mean, that mostly matters for caucus states, not so much for primary states, but it is a part of the calculus that hasn't been bandied about much when discussing Trump's infrastructure.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I guess they could if they wanted to play fast and loose with the facts. Though I guess that is what trolling is about.

+1 "The establishment" maybe, but does anyone really think "the media" is so in the tank for Hilary they don't even want the illusion of a Democratic race? Sanders never had a chance because he has no charisma or energy, which sucks, but it's not a conspiracy.

[flere-imsaho]

If the GOP race was a snoozefest I'm sure the media would be trying to generate some sort of controversy in the Democratic race, but there's really been no need.

[flere-imsaho]

A good point, Sack. Of course that's a double-edged sword for the Establishment. If Trump's exit polls don't translate to delegates, they'll have yet another Twitter War on their hands.

[QuikSand]

Huckabee: Top 3 finish in Iowa or bust | TheHill

Seems fair.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Huckabee: Top 3 finish in Iowa or bust | TheHill

Seems fair.

He must be furious that the evangelical vote seems to be going to Cruz and not him.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

He must be furious that the evangelical vote seems to be going to Cruz and not him.

He had two previous chances to capitalize and didn't take them. People move on.

[Ben E Lou]

Trump gonna Trump.

Hillary Clinton has announced that she is letting her husband out to campaign but HE'S DEMONSTRATED A PENCHANT FOR SEXISM, so inappropriate!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 27, 2015

[BishopMVP]

Hahaha amazing. I've always disliked Hilary on a visceral level, and I think it's primarily because she was clearly in a loveless marriage (for at least the last 15 years). It's more acute because I grew up under one, but I just can't trust or support someone who coldly makes the political decision to stay with their spouse even when they don't want to be in the same room. Since these things stopped being about competency or beliefs a long time ago someone might as well pur her on the spot about that.

Also saw an incredibly bad Jeb Bush ad last night... Opening line was "only one candidate has stood up to Donald Trump"...

[QuikSand]

Some items seeping out from Carson camp suggest he's weighing a drop out. I wouldn't be surprised, but the timing seems a little weird.

Step back, though, and working super hard personally on the ground in Iowa for the next five weeks sounds like an awful heavy lift. And that's precisely what a candidate like him would need to be doing if he wanted to somehow get back into this thing. The semi-graceful exit now ahead of a sad 6th place finish sounds better and better, in that light.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Some items seeping out from Carson camp suggest he's weighing a drop out. I wouldn't be surprised, but the timing seems a little weird.

Step back, though, and working super hard personally on the ground in Iowa for the next five weeks sounds like an awful heavy lift. And that's precisely what a candidate like him would need to be doing if he wanted to somehow get back into this thing. The semi-graceful exit now ahead of a sad 6th place finish sounds better and better, in that light.

Given that he's been doing book tour events and paid speaking gigs during his run, it seems pretty clear that the whole thing was originally conceived as a personal fund raising scheme.