2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

can we go to commercial. this is a disaster of a shitshow

One of the CNN folks (the bald guy? no clue who most of those people are) actually said that "this was an s-show" in the post-mortem.

[JPhillips]

Great Trump tweet:

Wow, every poll said I won the debate last night. Great honer!

[Easy Mac]

Auto-correct was on the "poorly educated" setting.

[Ben E Lou]

Am I the only one who has missed the "Stump For Trump" girls???
Watch: 'Stump for Trump' Reacts to National Review's 'Gang of 22' - Breitbart

[miked]

I think Rubio won big. To date, nobody had really talked about the fact that Trump hired immigrants (apparently this is a big problem since they are doing jobs Americans don't want) or his various scams.

I think, as many people said, these debates don't really help Trump, they mostly hurt the other candidates. Most of the exit polling from the early states show that people who are undecided do not go Trump's way....by a lot. So the notion that his support is capped is totally right. But nobody seems willing to toss in and give up, so he soldiers on.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Great Trump tweet:

Trump had a couple more tweets this morning in which he used "chocker" for "choker" and "leightweight."

Rubio, a few minutes ago, carried live on CNN, said something along the lines of "Just like Trump Tower, he must be hiring foreign workers to do his tweets."

[vex]

Oh snap.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Auto-correct was on the "poorly educated" setting.

Everytime I watch these debates, I have to think that Kasich, Cruz and Rubio are thinking this:

[molson]

Lindsey Graham Just Perfectly Summed Up the 2016 Race: My Party Has Gone Batshit Crazy" | Mother Jones

[NobodyHere]

Ben Carson is the nice guy in the race, and he tried to kill his cousin

[Ben E Lou]

Christie endorses Trump.

[NobodyHere]

I'm pretty surprised by this. I thought he would've endorsed Kasich given his love of having experience as a governor.

Can it be assumed that Christie is vying for the VP nomination? I don't think he would be the worst choice.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Can it be assumed that Christie is vying for the VP nomination?

That was my first thought. With rightward move of the party, he doesn't have much chance for higher office otherwise. Christie doesn't have much to lose by hitching his wagon to Trump.

[larrymcg421]

Christie as VP Nominee just went from 9 cents to 30 cents on PredictIT

[bhlloy]

Ha, was just coming to post the same thing. If he hasn't been promised or at least been hinted VP that's a strange move from the most moderate candidate in the race.

[Neuqua]

I can see Christie trying to get cozy for the VP spot.

Also, if he doesn't think Trump has any chance in the GE, he can still get those Trump donations down the road if he runs again.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Accepting the endorsement of that slimeball is actually one of the more disturbing moves Trump has made in the campaign so far.

Tread lightly Donald, courting the 7 votes Christie had amassed could get expensive.

[EagleFan]

Trump is a slimeball, they are perfect for each other.

[Easy Mac]

Al Sharpton said he'd leave the country if Trump is elected. So that should swing another few million votes Trump's way.

[larrymcg421]

Awesome. I'd be even less likely to vote for Christie than for Trump, so they could make my least favorite ticket of all time.

[Kodos]

Sharpton sucks.

[Ben E Lou]

Christie is now speaking live on CNN introducing Trump at a rally. He just said "I've joined this campaign because...blah blah blah...." And "I am proud and happy to be a part of this team." And he's trashing Rubio using quite Trump-like language. He sounds very much like a VP candidate.

[ISiddiqui]

And of the top 3, really, Trump is probably the most "moderate". I know Rubio likes to portray himself that, but he's not really. And Christie's most famous debate moment was blasting Rubio. He's not going to join up with Cruz, so it leaves Trump.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

He's not going to join up with Cruz, so it leaves Trump.

Lots of folks need a job so I don't blame Christie for pandering, just tbh.

If Trump plays along any more than he did today however -- I mean I might be able to stomach it as some sort of effort to be polite -- then he's going to raise questions he really doesn't need/want to be raising.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Honestly, I never heard of this guy prior to today's story so I'm not offering any commentary about his model or the accuracy thereof. But it's at good as any other random campaign prediction story.

Get ready for President Trump, says election whiz who’s scary accurate | New York Post

[PilotMan]

Doesn't matter who wrote it, it's the Post and the Post is one step below Charmin.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Honestly, I never heard of this guy prior to today's story so I'm not offering any commentary about his model or the accuracy thereof. But it's at good as any other random campaign prediction story.

Hmm, I wonder if the WxRisk guy has any interest in politics...

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Hmm, I wonder if the WxRisk guy has any interest in politics...

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Christie is now speaking live on CNN introducing Trump at a rally. He just said "I've joined this campaign because...blah blah blah...." And "I am proud and happy to be a part of this team." And he's trashing Rubio using quite Trump-like language. He sounds very much like a VP candidate.

I made this post at 1:41 PM. Christie had already been talking for a while, and shortly after I made the post, Trump started speaking. CNN carried every minute of Christie's intro and Trump's speech. No commercials, no cutaways, no commentary. He just finished moments ago. 45+ minutes of free campaign commercial time on CNN.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I made this post at 1:41 PM. Christie had already been talking for a while, and shortly after I made the post, Trump started speaking. CNN carried every minute of Christie's intro and Trump's speech. No commercials, no cutaways, no commentary. He just finished moments ago. 45+ minutes of free campaign commercial time on CNN.

I'm guessing this is the reason for the Trump coverage

GOP jabfest drew 14.5 million, biggest debate audience since December - Feb. 26, 2016

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I'm guessing this is the reason for the Trump coverage

GOP jabfest drew 14.5 million, biggest debate audience since December - Feb. 26, 2016

Oh, I'm sure. Rubio also got around 20 minutes of free uninterrupted coverage for his rally earlier today. I was more just marveling at Trump's uncanny ability to dwarf everyone else in the media. Two hours ago, the talking heads were gushing over Rubio's harsh words to Trump. The "foreign workers" thing was all over their ticker. They were talking about Rubio having changed the race, etc. etc. etc.

Then Trump walked into that room with Christie.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Disagree 100% here. The presence of Trump changes all the rules. When jabbed, he's going to counter-attack, usually in a manner that in past primary seasons would have been called "Un-Presidential" and would have cost him dearly. The very reason that I thought Trump would crush Rubio tonight is that I thought (correctly) that Rubio would go directly after Trump, but I also thought (incorrectly)that it would go like the similar battles Trump had with Jeb...

1. Jeb jabs
2. Trump snarls back
3. Jeb responds, but his response looks nowhere near as strong as Trump's snarl in step 2, making Bush look weak and cowering.

I fully expected Rubio to fall into the same trap in step three, but he did not. Not even close. You don't win a fight with a junkyard dog by adhering to rules made by the ASPCA.

Rubio held his own in the "I can be a bullying asshat" division of the WBC. So that brings up three questions.

A) Will that cut into Trump's support?

B) Will that hurt him among his supporters?

C) Will that improve his standing among undecideds?

It's a strategy based on the idea that A is larger than the others. I've read a lot of reaction, and my sense is that there are a lot of us who enjoyed seeing Trump squirm a bit. Democrats in particular seem happy.

I see it more like Rubio sacrificed himself to take a good shot at Trump. He built his support being the guy with the positive vision. Cruz was the one who saw the threat in letting that go unchecked, and he completely took Rubio off message. This was back when Trump was building his low-ceilinged campaign.

Now, Rubio and Cruz are playing in Trump's home field. This is a home field where substance doesn't matter. What may look like a reasonably strong dig at Trump (and Rubio had a few) was more an acknowledgement that the game is going to played at Trump Tower. Trump's supporters aren't going to care - they just see that Trump loves this stuff and keeps firing back. They're busy pointing out that Trump held his own with Rubio and Cruz ganging up on him, and what was with that screaming Rubio woman the SuperPACs probably put in the front row to try and tilt the playing field. And why did CNN send a hostile partisan to continue the attack immediately after the debate? As long as Trump keeps firing back, they're happy. It's their circus and everyone's playing along now. Trump's strongest moment was at the end when he blamed all of this on "politicians," as if this circus thing has nothing to do with him.

I don't see A as being particularly large. And since the only way Trump is stopped is if he still has that low ceiling, the A strategy is the wrong strategy.

What about B? Rubio went against everything he was until recently. It couldn't have helped. And C? Maybe Rubio tapped into the group that wants politics to resemble the WBC, but doesn't like Trump? I don't see that group as being all that undecided this late in the game.

Republicans were certainly in a bind. The right strategy would be for Cruz/Rubio/Kasich to get together and work out a way for one of them to go head-to-head with Trump on the issues. To try and combine the anti-WBC vote, which hopefully is still large. I don't see that happening now. To further mix sports metaphors, this was Rubio going all-in with a weak hand.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Al Sharpton said he'd leave the country if Trump is elected. So that should swing another few million votes Trump's way.

I guess if Sanders and Trump win, this could be my justification for voting Trump.

[Solecismic]

Has there ever been a major party that had zero chance of carrying the home states of both the Presidential and VP candidates?

Right now, this looks like a smart move for Trump. Not sure it's a good one down the road.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Rubio held his own in the "I can be a bullying asshat" division of the WBC. So that brings up three questions.

A) Will that cut into Trump's support?

B) Will that hurt him among his supporters?

C) Will that improve his standing among undecideds?

It's a strategy based on the idea that A is larger than the others. I've read a lot of reaction, and my sense is that there are a lot of us who enjoyed seeing Trump squirm a bit. Democrats in particular seem happy.

I see it more like Rubio sacrificed himself to take a good shot at Trump. He built his support being the guy with the positive vision. Cruz was the one who saw the threat in letting that go unchecked, and he completely took Rubio off message. This was back when Trump was building his low-ceilinged campaign.

Now, Rubio and Cruz are playing in Trump's home field. This is a home field where substance doesn't matter. What may look like a reasonably strong dig at Trump (and Rubio had a few) was more an acknowledgement that the game is going to played at Trump Tower. Trump's supporters aren't going to care - they just see that Trump loves this stuff and keeps firing back. They're busy pointing out that Trump held his own with Rubio and Cruz ganging up on him, and what was with that screaming Rubio woman the SuperPACs probably put in the front row to try and tilt the playing field. And why did CNN send a hostile partisan to continue the attack immediately after the debate? As long as Trump keeps firing back, they're happy. It's their circus and everyone's playing along now. Trump's strongest moment was at the end when he blamed all of this on "politicians," as if this circus thing has nothing to do with him.

I don't see A as being particularly large. And since the only way Trump is stopped is if he still has that low ceiling, the A strategy is the wrong strategy.

What about B? Rubio went against everything he was until recently. It couldn't have helped. And C? Maybe Rubio tapped into the group that wants politics to resemble the WBC, but doesn't like Trump? I don't see that group as being all that undecided this late in the game.

Republicans were certainly in a bind. The right strategy would be for Cruz/Rubio/Kasich to get together and work out a way for one of them to go head-to-head with Trump on the issues. To try and combine the anti-WBC vote, which hopefully is still large. I don't see that happening now. To further mix sports metaphors, this was Rubio going all-in with a weak hand.

I suppose the difference here is that we fundamentally disagree on how "over" this nomination is. I contend that while it won't be mathematically over on Tuesday, practically speaking, it is over on Tuesday without a true game-changer. Group A & B aren't going to change much. Tribalism a powerful force, especially when attacks are as nasty as last night. Tribe Trump can say that their man held his own despite the attacks, and Tribe Rubio can say that their guy brought down the big bully. The advantage I see in going all-in like that is the chance that you pick up small groups from Tribes Cruz/Kasich/Carson who wish their guy would "get tough" with Trump. Trump supporters are angry, which is a big part of why he is working. But undecideds and supporters of the other guys are getting increasingly angry at Tribe Trump for "ruining the Republican Party"/"putting Clinton into the White House"/"embarrassing the country"/etc. Going all in like that at least gives him a *chance* of tapping into that anger, and in so doing increases the odds of supporters and the establishment leaning on the others to drop out and support Rubio.

Do I think it will work? Probably not.
Do I think he had any other good options? Nope.

[corbes]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Has there ever been a major party that had zero chance of carrying the home states of both the Presidential and VP candidates?

Even Mondale carried Minnesota!


Somehow I don't think Trump is working from the Mondale playbook.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I suppose the difference here is that we fundamentally disagree on how "over" this nomination is. I contend that while it won't be mathematically over on Tuesday, practically speaking, it is over on Tuesday without a true game-changer. Group A & B aren't going to change much. Tribalism a powerful force, especially when attacks are as nasty as last night. Tribe Trump can say that their man held his own despite the attacks, and Tribe Rubio can say that their guy brought down the big bully. The advantage I see in going all-in like that is the chance that you pick up small groups from Tribes Cruz/Kasich/Carson who wish their guy would "get tough" with Trump. Trump supporters are angry, which is a big part of why he is working. But undecideds and supporters of the other guys are getting increasingly angry at Tribe Trump for "ruining the Republican Party"/"putting Clinton into the White House"/"embarrassing the country"/etc. Going all in like that at least gives him a *chance* of tapping into that anger, and in so doing increases the odds of supporters and the establishment leaning on the others to drop out and support Rubio.

Do I think it will work? Probably not.
Do I think he had any other good options? Nope.

The Trump phenomenon is different from anything else we've ever seen. Rubio's approach last night was similar to NFL teams that blindly copy the last Super Bowl winner, having no idea how the game plans and personnel actually work.

I agree that some sort of game-changing move is necessary to stop Trump. But you have to play to your strengths. Rather than copying a strategy that works for Trump because he is an actual outsider with a yuuge personality, better moves were available.

It would be unprecedented, but I think the way to stop Trump is for Rubio, Cruz and Kasich to actually get together somehow. Cruz is probably ideologically too far to the right to do that, but that's the only way we get past March 15 without Trump. It's not enough for them to simply stop attacking each other, as they did last night. They have to get together, then whichever candidate remains has to refuse to engage in the personal battles.

Instead, we have a genuine circus today. Rubio and Trump each accusing each other of flop-sweat, of all things (it worked for Kennedy only because Nixon actually was sweating profusely - he didn't have to point anything out). And Trump seizes the day with his first real endorsement of consequence. He moved forward while Rubio focused on sweat.

[albionmoonlight]

When guys like Christie are endorsing Trump, is it still correct to call him the non-establishment candidate?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

It would be unprecedented, but I think the way to stop Trump is for Rubio, Cruz and Kasich to actually get together somehow.

Oh, I agree that that would be the best way, but I think it's less likely to happen/work than Rubio's gambit working. I think an even more difficult issue than the perception that Cruz is too far to the right is that the #2 and #3 candidates are far too similar. Unless somehow Kasich can worm his way into #3 on Super Tuesday (yeah, no chance,) I can't imagine Cruz or Rubio accepting anything less than VP in a deal.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I agree that some sort of game-changing move is necessary to stop Trump.

Not really. The surefire way to stop Trump is to have him run in a presidential election against Hillary Clinton.

[larrymcg421]

I think Cruz would tell Rubio and Kasich to fuck off if they approached him with a deal.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

When guys like Christie are endorsing Trump, is it still correct to call him the non-establishment candidate?

That can be spun both ways easily enough however. With the endorsement, is it still correct to call Christie part of the establishment?

(I ain't buying that spin, nor am I selling it ... but it could exist)

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I think Cruz would tell Rubio and Kasich to fuck off if they approached him with a deal.

"We need to make this happen." -my inner Bill Simmons

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

It would be unprecedented, but I think the way to stop Trump is for Rubio, Cruz and Kasich to actually get together somehow. Cruz is probably ideologically too far to the right to do that

I see this written a lot, and it's wrong. All three are similar on ideology and policy, which we can either call far right, or right in the middle of today's GOP.

Where they actually differ is style. Cruz is a disrupter, Rubio is an establishment conservative, while Kasich has the "executive" style of a governor.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I see this written a lot, and it's wrong. All three are similar on ideology and policy, which we can either call far right, or right in the middle of today's GOP.

Where they actually differ is style. Cruz is a disrupter, Rubio is an establishment conservative, while Kasich has the "executive" style of a governor.

Yup. Notice my use of "perception" in my response to Jim on this.

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I think an even more difficult issue than the perception that Cruz is too far to the right is that the #2 and #3 candidates are far too similar.

I agree that Cruz and Rubio are very similar in policy and different in style, but I still think that a bigger issue is that a ticket with
two Cuban-American freshman Senators on it makes no sense. You need Kasich as VP. *MAYBE* if Rubio is #3 on Super Tuesday, you could get him to subjugate his ego "for the good of the party" and accept Secretary of State or something, but I can't imagine Cruz settling for anything less than VP.

The other issue is the concern about the party losing Tribe Trump pretty much permanently if you make an unprecedented and obvious effort to force Trump out, then turn around and lose in the general election. Therefore any ticket with Cruz at the top doesn't make sense. So again, you're left with Rubio-Kasich, in which case Cruz very likely stays in this thing and therefore hands the nomination to Trump anyway.

[Ben E Lou]

On another note, I don't agree with all of the conclusions this article draws, (almost definitely written by a Sanders supporter hoping to influence the nomination,) but there's one particular section that reads really well in the "Trump voice" mentioned earlier in this thread.

Trump will capitalize on his reputation as a truth-teller, and be vicious about both Clinton’s sudden changes of position (e.g. the switch on gay marriage, plus the affected economic populism of her run against Sanders) and her perceived dishonesty. One can already imagine the monologue:

“She lies so much. Everything she says is a lie. I’ve never seen someone who lies so much in my life. Let me tell you three lies she’s told. She made up a story about how she was ducking sniper fire! There was no sniper fire. She made it up! How do you forget a thing like that? She said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the guy who climbed Mount Everest. He hadn’t even climbed it when she was born! Total lie! She lied about the emails, of course, as we all know, and is probably going to be indicted. You know she said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! It was a lie! Thousands of American soldiers are dead because of her. Not only does she lie, her lies kill people. That’s four lies, I said I’d give you three. You can’t even count them. You want to go on PolitiFact, see how many lies she has? It takes you an hour to read them all! In fact, they ask her, she doesn’t even say she hasn’t lied. They asked her straight up, she says she usually tries to tell the truth! Ooooh, she tries! Come on! This is a person, every single word out of her mouth is a lie. Nobody trusts her. Check the polls, nobody trusts her. Yuge liar.”

LINK: Current Affairs | Culture & Politics

[albionmoonlight]

Trump will capitalize on his reputation as a truth-teller, and be vicious about both Clinton’s sudden changes of position (e.g. the switch on gay marriage, plus the affected economic populism of her run against Sanders) and her perceived dishonesty. One can already imagine the monologue:

“She lies so much. Everything she says is a lie. I’ve never seen someone who lies so much in my life. Let me tell you three lies she’s told. She made up a story about how she was ducking sniper fire! There was no sniper fire. She made it up! How do you forget a thing like that? She said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the guy who climbed Mount Everest. He hadn’t even climbed it when she was born! Total lie! She lied about the emails, of course, as we all know, and is probably going to be indicted. You know she said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! It was a lie! Thousands of American soldiers are dead because of her. Not only does she lie, her lies kill people. That’s four lies, I said I’d give you three. You can’t even count them. You want to go on PolitiFact, see how many lies she has? It takes you an hour to read them all! In fact, they ask her, she doesn’t even say she hasn’t lied. They asked her straight up, she says she usually tries to tell the truth! Ooooh, she tries! Come on! This is a person, every single word out of her mouth is a lie. Nobody trusts her. Check the polls, nobody trusts her. Yuge liar.”

"Yeah, well I might be a liar, but at least I didn't lie about really being Joe Biden!" Joe Biden is Donald Trump FInal Edition - Same Possessed dude - YouTube

Checkmate, Clinton.

[flere-imsaho]

Agreed on all counts, Ben.

Also, I read that quote and totally got Trump's voice with it.

Biden would have been the perfect candidate to run against Trump. It's very worrying that I can't think of any other young Democrats of whom I can say that.

[NobodyHere]

Trump will capitalize on his reputation as a truth-teller

da fuq?

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

da fuq?

They called Iago honest, too.