Total Posts:59|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The "GOP Revolt" Explained

Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In the 2008 US Presidential Election a charismatic Black American named Barack H. Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee. The Republican Party picked an elderly career politician whose only advantage whatsoever was his military record. He wasn't particularly popular among the GOP; most of the people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost.
In 2012 the incumbent Obama, who was still popular among Democrats, was the Democratic nominee. Once again the GOP picked an unpopular, bland candidate, Mitt Romney. The people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost again.
These two elections have created the perception among the GOP voter bloc that the party doesn't care about their wishes whenever picking a Presidential candidate. It is a perception that members of the "Old Guard", a series of often unpopular career GOP politicians who've served in Washington for a long time, would continue to be nominated over people who the GOP voters wanted.
In the early 2010s decade a libertarian movement within the GOP called the "Tea Party" movement emerged upon the scene. A grassroots movement of younger GOP voters, they wanted to change America from the bureaucratic cesspool of government overspending, overtaxation, and overregulation that they perceived America to have become during the Bush and Obama administrations to a nation of small government, freedom galore, and low taxes. Within this movement was elements of being turned off by career politicians who they perceived to be corrupt and an inseparable part of the system which they hated. They knew that the party would probably nominate someone like Jeb Bush or John Boehner in 2016, regardless of what the voters wanted. What they wanted was someone fresh, someone charismatic, a man who would "fight back" against the bureaucracy, someone unstained by the corruption of Washington.
What they wanted was a political outsider.

This brings us to the two GOP main candidates:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks. He offers common-sense (though not necessarily feasible) solutions to all of America's problems. Basically his message is "Screw the bureaucracy, screw Washington; when I'm President I'll fix America by doing these simple common sense things which the majority knows we should be doing and I won't be hindered by PC nonsense." Americans are increasingly uneasy about China. His anti-China talk adds to his appeal. The average GOP voter's belief in small government and free trade is probably outweighed slightly by a desire to take action against the "Chinese threat". He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a strong no-nonsense leader.

Ben Carson is also a political outsider. He has been well-known within the Evangelical community, which has a very high opinion of him, for years. Long before he announced his candidacy. His character is pretty much unquestioned, even among Liberals and atheists. His proven moral character is what draws the GOP voters to him; they care more about the man's character than his race. His image of being a bastion of morality and Christlikeness is strengthened by his refusal to take potshots at Donald Trump and other candidates.
He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a godly, trustworthy, uncorrupt leader.

The mainstream media is baffled how these two men, who make policy statements perceived by the media to be oversimplified, inaccurate, and sometimes idiotic, are faring so well in the race and why more experienced and sensible politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are doing so badly. The reason is often dismissed as "the GOP voters are just plain ignorant".
The real reason, rather, is that the GOP voters don't care. Whatever these two men say is attractive because they embody the qualities that the GOP voters want and an end to the way of doing things that they despise.

And that is why Donald Trump and Ben Carson are so popular.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:08:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Dang...three threads in one day!
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:55:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
In the 2008 US Presidential Election a charismatic Black American named Barack H. Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee. The Republican Party picked an elderly career politician whose only advantage whatsoever was his military record. He wasn't particularly popular among the GOP; most of the people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost.
In 2012 the incumbent Obama, who was still popular among Democrats, was the Democratic nominee. Once again the GOP picked an unpopular, bland candidate, Mitt Romney. The people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost again.
These two elections have created the perception among the GOP voter bloc that the party doesn't care about their wishes whenever picking a Presidential candidate. It is a perception that members of the "Old Guard", a series of often unpopular career GOP politicians who've served in Washington for a long time, would continue to be nominated over people who the GOP voters wanted.
In the early 2010s decade a libertarian movement within the GOP called the "Tea Party" movement emerged upon the scene. A grassroots movement of younger GOP voters, they wanted to change America from the bureaucratic cesspool of government overspending, overtaxation, and overregulation that they perceived America to have become during the Bush and Obama administrations to a nation of small government, freedom galore, and low taxes. Within this movement was elements of being turned off by career politicians who they perceived to be corrupt and an inseparable part of the system which they hated. They knew that the party would probably nominate someone like Jeb Bush or John Boehner in 2016, regardless of what the voters wanted. What they wanted was someone fresh, someone charismatic, a man who would "fight back" against the bureaucracy, someone unstained by the corruption of Washington.
What they wanted was a political outsider.

This brings us to the two GOP main candidates:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks. He offers common-sense (though not necessarily feasible) solutions to all of America's problems. Basically his message is "Screw the bureaucracy, screw Washington; when I'm President I'll fix America by doing these simple common sense things which the majority knows we should be doing and I won't be hindered by PC nonsense." Americans are increasingly uneasy about China. His anti-China talk adds to his appeal. The average GOP voter's belief in small government and free trade is probably outweighed slightly by a desire to take action against the "Chinese threat". He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a strong no-nonsense leader.

Ben Carson is also a political outsider. He has been well-known within the Evangelical community, which has a very high opinion of him, for years. Long before he announced his candidacy. His character is pretty much unquestioned, even among Liberals and atheists. His proven moral character is what draws the GOP voters to him; they care more about the man's character than his race. His image of being a bastion of morality and Christlikeness is strengthened by his refusal to take potshots at Donald Trump and other candidates.
He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a godly, trustworthy, uncorrupt leader.

The mainstream media is baffled how these two men, who make policy statements perceived by the media to be oversimplified, inaccurate, and sometimes idiotic, are faring so well in the race and why more experienced and sensible politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are doing so badly. The reason is often dismissed as "the GOP voters are just plain ignorant".
The real reason, rather, is that the GOP voters don't care. Whatever these two men say is attractive because they embody the qualities that the GOP voters want and an end to the way of doing things that they despise.

And that is why Donald Trump and Ben Carson are so popular.

The assessment is OK, but you are dismissing the possible cause for loosing those races. The American people are rejecting the GOP message. Doubling down is what you are doing. See if that works out for you.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:58:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:55:39 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
In the 2008 US Presidential Election a charismatic Black American named Barack H. Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee. The Republican Party picked an elderly career politician whose only advantage whatsoever was his military record. He wasn't particularly popular among the GOP; most of the people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost.
In 2012 the incumbent Obama, who was still popular among Democrats, was the Democratic nominee. Once again the GOP picked an unpopular, bland candidate, Mitt Romney. The people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost again.
These two elections have created the perception among the GOP voter bloc that the party doesn't care about their wishes whenever picking a Presidential candidate. It is a perception that members of the "Old Guard", a series of often unpopular career GOP politicians who've served in Washington for a long time, would continue to be nominated over people who the GOP voters wanted.
In the early 2010s decade a libertarian movement within the GOP called the "Tea Party" movement emerged upon the scene. A grassroots movement of younger GOP voters, they wanted to change America from the bureaucratic cesspool of government overspending, overtaxation, and overregulation that they perceived America to have become during the Bush and Obama administrations to a nation of small government, freedom galore, and low taxes. Within this movement was elements of being turned off by career politicians who they perceived to be corrupt and an inseparable part of the system which they hated. They knew that the party would probably nominate someone like Jeb Bush or John Boehner in 2016, regardless of what the voters wanted. What they wanted was someone fresh, someone charismatic, a man who would "fight back" against the bureaucracy, someone unstained by the corruption of Washington.
What they wanted was a political outsider.

This brings us to the two GOP main candidates:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks. He offers common-sense (though not necessarily feasible) solutions to all of America's problems. Basically his message is "Screw the bureaucracy, screw Washington; when I'm President I'll fix America by doing these simple common sense things which the majority knows we should be doing and I won't be hindered by PC nonsense." Americans are increasingly uneasy about China. His anti-China talk adds to his appeal. The average GOP voter's belief in small government and free trade is probably outweighed slightly by a desire to take action against the "Chinese threat". He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a strong no-nonsense leader.

Ben Carson is also a political outsider. He has been well-known within the Evangelical community, which has a very high opinion of him, for years. Long before he announced his candidacy. His character is pretty much unquestioned, even among Liberals and atheists. His proven moral character is what draws the GOP voters to him; they care more about the man's character than his race. His image of being a bastion of morality and Christlikeness is strengthened by his refusal to take potshots at Donald Trump and other candidates.
He is, in the eyes of the average GOP voter, the epitome of a godly, trustworthy, uncorrupt leader.

The mainstream media is baffled how these two men, who make policy statements perceived by the media to be oversimplified, inaccurate, and sometimes idiotic, are faring so well in the race and why more experienced and sensible politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are doing so badly. The reason is often dismissed as "the GOP voters are just plain ignorant".
The real reason, rather, is that the GOP voters don't care. Whatever these two men say is attractive because they embody the qualities that the GOP voters want and an end to the way of doing things that they despise.

And that is why Donald Trump and Ben Carson are so popular.

The assessment is OK, but you are dismissing the possible cause for loosing those races. The American people are rejecting the GOP message. Doubling down is what you are doing. See if that works out for you.

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:02:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM, TBR wrote:

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.

I'm pretty sure that if no Blacks and no Hispanics voted, the Republicans would win the popular vote much more often.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:04:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 9:02:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM, TBR wrote:

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.

I'm pretty sure that if no Blacks and no Hispanics voted, the Republicans would win the popular vote much more often.

Well that doesn't sound raciest at all!
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:10:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 9:04:36 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:02:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM, TBR wrote:

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.

I'm pretty sure that if no Blacks and no Hispanics voted, the Republicans would win the popular vote much more often.

Well that doesn't sound raciest at all!

I'm just stating a fact. The Dems have played upon black and Hispanic fears and convinced them that the big bad GOP is out to get them. Thus they have gained themselves a voting bloc which will give them tons of votes every election.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:44:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 9:10:41 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:04:36 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:02:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM, TBR wrote:

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.

I'm pretty sure that if no Blacks and no Hispanics voted, the Republicans would win the popular vote much more often.

Well that doesn't sound raciest at all!

I'm just stating a fact. The Dems have played upon black and Hispanic fears and convinced them that the big bad GOP is out to get them. Thus they have gained themselves a voting bloc which will give them tons of votes every election.

Saying that democrats had fooled Hispanics and bough blacks is incredibly dismissive of the voters themselves. What I am trying to get through to you is, you can deflect - blame the media, or insult the voters, but that is not going to change the fact that the GOP is loosing ground year over year.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 4:38:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

This brings us to the two GOP main candidates:

[...]

The mainstream media is baffled how these two men, who make policy statements perceived by the media to be oversimplified, inaccurate, and sometimes idiotic, are faring so well in the race and why more experienced and sensible politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are doing so badly. The reason is often dismissed as "the GOP voters are just plain ignorant".

Marco Rubio is increasingly looking to be the main GOP candidate to challenge Trump and Carson and potentially win the nomination. He has all the characteristics you attribute to an "outsider" and a "fresh face", because of his youth and relative lack of experience in Washington politics. He's demonstrated a no-nonsense demeanor on stage, and has moral/ethical qualities somewhat resembling Carson (at least far more than Trump). Probably even more importantly, he's "one of us" - the kid grew up poor and didn't know what to do with money that landed in his lap, and now he seeks to represent "us". He's neither godly nor god-like in his stature. He's David battling the Washington Goliath.

I think he will get eaten alive by Trump but time will tell. I cannot even begin to imagine Trump throwing support for a candidate that beat him. More than likely he'd kill him, literally if need be, than live down that kind of an outcome, with the shame and the irreparable damage it will do to his brand. I'm of the opinion that Trump's hold on the GOP nomination is not a sure thing (although I'm not sure what will stop him), but if he gets it, he will win in 2016.

The real reason, rather, is that the GOP voters don't care. Whatever these two men say is attractive because they embody the qualities that the GOP voters want and an end to the way of doing things that they despise.

And that is why Donald Trump and Ben Carson are so popular.

Good analysis.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 2:20:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

I am not stating that any side is good or bad (at least not in the OP), though I'd disagree. The current chaos within the party is the party's way of reforming itself, for better or for worse, and the party will eventually settle down and accept a new status quo of the party.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

Trump has mob connections and ran casinos. He talks about getting into bed with killers on Wall Street (http://zap2it.com..., couldn't find a better source, I guess the mainstream media found that a bit too edgy to focus upon). I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's a list somewhere of people Trump has physically offed in his lifetime.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

Trump has mob connections and ran casinos. He talks about getting into bed with killers on Wall Street (http://zap2it.com..., couldn't find a better source, I guess the mainstream media found that a bit too edgy to focus upon). I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's a list somewhere of people Trump has physically offed in his lifetime.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:29:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

What if Rubio became the clear frontrunner for the GOP and Trump was going to inevitably lose the nomination to him?

Now, I think that's an unlikely scenario, but if that scenario were to come about, what would you peg the chances at?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:29:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"In the 2008 US Presidential Election a charismatic Black American named Barack H. Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee. The Republican Party picked an elderly career politician whose only advantage whatsoever was his military record. He wasn't particularly popular among the GOP; most of the people who voted for him did so because "he's not as bad as Obama". The GOP lost."

In the 2008 US Presidential Election a charismatic Black American named Balack Hussein* Osama , ooops, ,I mean Barack H. Obama was selected as the Democratic nominee by the Republicans and the Democrats.
The republicans wound wind up with an elderly career politician who was born in Panama. He was popular among the GOP, but not very popular.
Republicans made believe they were Democrats and voted in the democrat primary elections. There is no law against doing this.
After adding their votes to the real democrats votes, the democrats had to give the Kenyan American their nomination based on his success in the primary elections.
so,
At this time, after 8 years of George W. the voters must hate the GOP, therefore there is no Republican candidate that most of the people will vote for.
So the Republicans went with Plan B. ,make the democrat nominee someone who is easy to beat.
In November the majority voted for Obama, and did so because "he's not as bad as another ****ing republican ! " . The GOP lost.

* no relation to Saddam Hussein
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:33:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 7:29:24 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

What if Rubio became the clear frontrunner for the GOP and Trump was going to inevitably lose the nomination to him?

Now, I think that's an unlikely scenario, but if that scenario were to come about, what would you peg the chances at?

Even if Marco Rubio becomes a serious threat to Donald Trump, it's still extremely unlikely that he'd be assassinated.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:42:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 7:33:47 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:29:24 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

What if Rubio became the clear frontrunner for the GOP and Trump was going to inevitably lose the nomination to him?

Now, I think that's an unlikely scenario, but if that scenario were to come about, what would you peg the chances at?

Even if Marco Rubio becomes a serious threat to Donald Trump, it's still extremely unlikely that he'd be assassinated.

5%?

Because that's what I'd peg it at. I mean, there are myriad ways for Trump to take him down outside the political process. He could make a well-placed and well-timed phone call to Rubio's sponsor, and that could end his campaign. But, you have to ask yourself, is this a possibility, and is it a possibility that is not available to other candidates, from a capability and character perspective? And I have to conclude yes.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:46:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 7:42:37 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:33:47 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:29:24 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

What if Rubio became the clear frontrunner for the GOP and Trump was going to inevitably lose the nomination to him?

Now, I think that's an unlikely scenario, but if that scenario were to come about, what would you peg the chances at?

Even if Marco Rubio becomes a serious threat to Donald Trump, it's still extremely unlikely that he'd be assassinated.

5%?

Because that's what I'd peg it at. I mean, there are myriad ways for Trump to take him down outside the political process. He could make a well-placed and well-timed phone call to Rubio's sponsor, and that could end his campaign. But, you have to ask yourself, is this a possibility, and is it a possibility that is not available to other candidates, from a capability and character perspective? And I have to conclude yes.

Just saying: Ben Carson isn't dead yet, and he'll probably still be alive in 6 months.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:52:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Speaking of Ben Carson, it's interesting to observe that the media is trying to create a Ben Carson scandal by releasing scores of articles talking about his connection with some controversial pharmaceutical company.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:53:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
And Jeb just doubled down on establishment GOP by equating his campaign with John McCain....

Oh man! the money I could have made when Jeb was favored by Vegas odds to win...
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:55:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 7:46:20 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:42:37 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:33:47 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:29:24 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 7:26:36 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 3:59:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:21:50 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 4:41:08 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:08:24 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Donald J. Trump is a political outsider. He is bold, brazen, and shameless whenever he speaks.

I will simply add that without shame there's no conscience, and without conscience one is capable of doing anything within one's power to do, and Trump has a lot of power.

Like I said, I'm talking from the perspective of the average GOP voter. I'm not saying that either candidate is necessarily good.

Yeah, I got that. I was just adding a bit of substance behind my "Donald Trump might kill Marco Rubio" line, which I'm sure a lot of people might take as being sensationalistic.

I can assure you with 99% certainty that Donald Trump will not have Marco Rubio assassinated.

What if Rubio became the clear frontrunner for the GOP and Trump was going to inevitably lose the nomination to him?

Now, I think that's an unlikely scenario, but if that scenario were to come about, what would you peg the chances at?

Even if Marco Rubio becomes a serious threat to Donald Trump, it's still extremely unlikely that he'd be assassinated.

5%?

Because that's what I'd peg it at. I mean, there are myriad ways for Trump to take him down outside the political process. He could make a well-placed and well-timed phone call to Rubio's sponsor, and that could end his campaign. But, you have to ask yourself, is this a possibility, and is it a possibility that is not available to other candidates, from a capability and character perspective? And I have to conclude yes.

Just saying: Ben Carson isn't dead yet, and he'll probably still be alive in 6 months.

I don't think Ben Carson has a chance at defeating Trump. When push comes to shove, a pacifist like Carson is going to step aside. Or, Trump will start to attack him hard...Trump's supporters love that stuff, and it may instill doubt in Carson's credibility. Sooner or later, if you throw enough mud, something is going to stick. Carson on the other hand, because of the qualities you outlined, has his hands tied (assuming he wanted to).

The only question in my mind is when Carson will step aside.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 8:56:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

If the black vote was 50/50 in 2012, Romney would have won the election.

However, since 1964 (i.e. the Southern Strategy) the black vote has been at least 80% democrat. (http://www.factcheck.org...)

No lies, no Democratic deception, this was the GOP under Nixon entering a Faustian bargain, and the devil is taking his due.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 12:06:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 8:56:36 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

If the black vote was 50/50 in 2012, Romney would have won the election.

However, since 1964 (i.e. the Southern Strategy) the black vote has been at least 80% democrat. (http://www.factcheck.org...)

No lies, no Democratic deception, this was the GOP under Nixon entering a Faustian bargain, and the devil is taking his due.

In 1968 Nixonization may have been a betrayal of the black community. However, the South was WAY more racist back then. There's no reason for continued black support of the Democrats merely on the ground of the GOP being the main party of the South.
That they're still voting for the Dems today is largely due to the continued Dem playing of the race card long after it became dishonest to still do so.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 2:49:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 9:10:41 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:04:36 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:02:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 9:00:14 PM, TBR wrote:

Regardless of the reason as to why they lost 2008 and 2012 (which, more likely, is that the HIspanics and Blacks have bought into the Dems' false narrative of GOP racism and that they liked Obama), I'm simply stating how the GOP voters felt about those two candidates.

The GOP voters are a shrinking population. They are NOT winning popular votes in the house either (although they win seats). You can dismiss the reasons that Hispanics and blacks vote democratic, but that will not win you any elections.

I'm pretty sure that if no Blacks and no Hispanics voted, the Republicans would win the popular vote much more often.

Well that doesn't sound raciest at all!

I'm just stating a fact. The Dems have played upon black and Hispanic fears and convinced them that the big bad GOP is out to get them. Thus they have gained themselves a voting bloc which will give them tons of votes every election.

Your claim may be factual, but your explanation for it is not. Rather than resort to a persecution complex, perhaps you should check out "The Southern Strategy" employed by the GOP in the 60's. That should make clear why voting demographics are the way they are even to this day.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 2:56:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 12:06:12 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 8:56:36 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

If the black vote was 50/50 in 2012, Romney would have won the election.

However, since 1964 (i.e. the Southern Strategy) the black vote has been at least 80% democrat. (http://www.factcheck.org...)

No lies, no Democratic deception, this was the GOP under Nixon entering a Faustian bargain, and the devil is taking his due.

In 1968 Nixonization may have been a betrayal of the black community. However, the South was WAY more racist back then. There's no reason for continued black support of the Democrats merely on the ground of the GOP being the main party of the South.
That they're still voting for the Dems today is largely due to the continued Dem playing of the race card long after it became dishonest to still do so.

Ah, I posted just a bit too soon, as you have already addressed my point here. However, you are merely in denial now. The GOP has done virtually nothing since The Southern Strategy to make up for it. They essentially admit to losing the black vote and attempt to get the rest of the electorate as best they can.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,067
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 3:00:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 2:56:08 AM, Fly wrote:
At 10/31/2015 12:06:12 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 8:56:36 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

If the black vote was 50/50 in 2012, Romney would have won the election.

However, since 1964 (i.e. the Southern Strategy) the black vote has been at least 80% democrat. (http://www.factcheck.org...)

No lies, no Democratic deception, this was the GOP under Nixon entering a Faustian bargain, and the devil is taking his due.

In 1968 Nixonization may have been a betrayal of the black community. However, the South was WAY more racist back then. There's no reason for continued black support of the Democrats merely on the ground of the GOP being the main party of the South.
That they're still voting for the Dems today is largely due to the continued Dem playing of the race card long after it became dishonest to still do so.

Ah, I posted just a bit too soon, as you have already addressed my point here. However, you are merely in denial now. The GOP has done virtually nothing since The Southern Strategy to make up for it. They essentially admit to losing the black vote and attempt to get the rest of the electorate as best they can.

It really shouldn't be necessary for them to "make up for it". Simply dropping its former racist element (which they've done) should be enough. That the party was in the past responsible for helping security black liberties and rights should gain them a few points.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 3:05:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 3:00:06 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/31/2015 2:56:08 AM, Fly wrote:
At 10/31/2015 12:06:12 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/30/2015 8:56:36 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 10/30/2015 2:17:44 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
First of all, it's funny how the Tea Party have been cast as heroes here when they're the ones who've ruined the Republicans.

Second, in studying the 2012 election, you'll see that even when corrected for racial tones, the black vote for Obama was negligible in determining his victory.

If the black vote was 50/50 in 2012, Romney would have won the election.

However, since 1964 (i.e. the Southern Strategy) the black vote has been at least 80% democrat. (http://www.factcheck.org...)

No lies, no Democratic deception, this was the GOP under Nixon entering a Faustian bargain, and the devil is taking his due.

In 1968 Nixonization may have been a betrayal of the black community. However, the South was WAY more racist back then. There's no reason for continued black support of the Democrats merely on the ground of the GOP being the main party of the South.
That they're still voting for the Dems today is largely due to the continued Dem playing of the race card long after it became dishonest to still do so.

Ah, I posted just a bit too soon, as you have already addressed my point here. However, you are merely in denial now. The GOP has done virtually nothing since The Southern Strategy to make up for it. They essentially admit to losing the black vote and attempt to get the rest of the electorate as best they can.

It really shouldn't be necessary for them to "make up for it". Simply dropping its former racist element (which they've done) should be enough. That the party was in the past responsible for helping security black liberties and rights should gain them a few points.

Shouldn't be necessary? Says you. I feel like I can only repeat what I've already said. And, again, the Southern Strategy cancels out your claim to gaining "points."
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz