2016 Presidential Horse Race

[Irish#1]

George Bush Sr. caused Reagan some major heartburn, too. He called Dutch's economic theory Voodoo economics on the campaign trail, and that term stuck through much of the election cycle. Ultimately he brought Bush on board to attract his supporters so he could win the election. There are multiple examples of candidates choosing someone who they have had disagreements with in the past in order to win elections.

True, but IMO they didn't have the disdain for each other like Bernie and Hillary.

 

[NDgradstudent]

The Latino community has it's own unique struggles and are allowed to have advocacy groups, just like any other race or religion.

Except for whites. That's racist. Or something.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Sorry, but haven't people tried to get him to recuse himself on these types of matters because of work his wife has done?

She has worked as a lobbyist working against the health care bill. That's not the same sort of conflict of interest as someone's ethnicity.

 

[Legacy]

I never thought I would see the day when the Republican Party, which has such a foundation of core principles that clearly define their ideas of government, would devolve into such a quivering mass torn between power and ideals.

The best course of action would be, if they cannot somehow deny Trump the nomination, to run and fund another candidate who does embody all that they believe. Maybe they lose much now, but they would be respected for their stand and it could lead to a better future. Otherwise, this is scorched earth for them and the message is lost.

As the Republican strategist, Ana Navarro said,

"It is highly offensive as a Hispanic. What he is doing is wagging the dog. How dare he. How dare he question a judge's responsibility, a judge's adherence to the Constitution, because he is of Mexican descent? This man was born in East Chicago. He is an American citizen. He is just as American as Donald Trump."

"Mexican-Americans bleed, just as any other American, when they go to war. They bled just as any other American on 9/11. They fight for America. They are Americans. And what he is doing is disgusting. I am livid about it, and if this is his strategy to win over Hispanics, he's got a hell of a wake-up call coming to him come November."

 

[NDinL.A.]

The NAACP was formed when there was systematic oppression and mistreatment of black people and was thus legitimate in its founding. La Raza was formed to foster illegal immigration and form a race-based voting bloc for the Democrat Party. Big difference.

Sorry, that is simply not true. You're making shit up when you say that.

 

[GDomer09]

Trump getting an unfair trial

Trump getting an unfair trial

How many times do we see in the news, minorities complaining about
getting an unfair trial because of their race and/or there being some
racist white judge?

What do most Dems and scared GOP do? They sympathize
with them and question everything about the case.

Trump feels he's getting an unfair trial. He questions that it could be because
the judge is Mexican-American and since most Mexicans have an obvious
dislike towards him right now, that he may be getting a raw deal.

What do most Dems and scared GOP do? They call him a
Racist and don't take 1 second to look into his case.

Oooooh the Hypocrisy!!!!!

If you personaly felt like you were getting an unfair trial, it's only natural to question why. If you looked through all other reasoning, like other racces do, why would you not question it?

 

[GoIrish41]

Well, which is it...are they all idiots and their opinion doesn't matter? Or are they not idiots and their opinion about Trump should matter?

I think, as an institution, the GOP isn't really about anything anymore. They have lost their way. I've been on this site for a decade, and for much of that there have been political threads with the defenders of the "conservatism," "family values," "personal responsibility," "piety" and being "the grown ups in the room." I have consistently argued that they are none of those things. Trump is the vessel that has revealed how full of shit the whole party is, and how all of their cherished principles were so much bullshit. Almost all of the top Republicans have fallen in line like lemmings behind a none conservative, twice divorced, thin skinned, blowhard, lacking a moral compass -- one who is currently embroiled in a trial for selling real estate snake oil under his own name to unwitting citizens, while claiming he is a man of man of the people. They've clearly chosen party over principle, and if I was a Republican I'd feel deep shame about that.

To answer your question ... they are idiots, in my view, and their opinion doesn't matter. They clearly can't be trusted to make decisions, judging by the clown parade of candidates they have put forward over the past couple of decades -- W, who absolutely wrecked the economy and got us involved in two wars? 'Bomb everyone' John McCain and the Princess of Stupid? Mitt 47% Romney? Yet, once again they were duped -- this time by the world's most arrogant used car salesmen.

And, just like the customers who buy a lemon from a sleazy prick on the used car lot, they are coming to realize the vehicle they thought was going to get them from A to B, isn't dependable and is probably going to leave them stranded. So, there is still some hope for the Republican Party. It's never too late for reflection or retribution.

In my view, there is no way said retribution is coming during this election. They will not be rewarded for abandoning all principles and putting Trump out in front of their party. But they have a chance to wise up. So, will this be the final hard lesson that will help them pull their heads out of their asses, or will they keep making the same mistakes that they continue to make in general elections and policy positions? Because those behaviors make them appear as angry, cynical, obstructionist, science denying, poor hating, corporate whores. Will they finally realize that what is needed in their party isn't a "true conservative" (the excuse in waiting for many when Trump loses) but a little humility and humanity ... a little outreach to people they have traditionally alienated. Their candidates get worse every four years. I can't wait to see what they role out for 2020. Personally, I hope they learn their lesson ... but I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I think, as an institution, the GOP isn't really about anything anymore. They have lost their way. I've been on this site for a decade, and for much of that there have been political threads with the defenders of the "conservatism," "family values," "personal responsibility," "piety" and being "the grown ups in the room." I have consistently argued that they are none of those things. Trump is the vessel that has revealed how full of shit the whole party is, and how all of their cherished principles were so much bullshit. Almost all of the top Republicans have fallen in line like lemmings behind a none conservative, twice divorced, thin skinned, blowhard, lacking a moral compass, and who is currently embroiled in a trial for selling real estate snake oil under his own name to unwitting citizens.

So, to answer your question ... they are idiots, in my view, and their opinion doesn't matter. They clearly can't be trusted to make decisions, judging by the clown parade of candidates they have put forward over the past couple of decades -- W, who absolutely wrecked the economy and got us involved in two wars? "Bomb everyone John McCain and the Princess of Stupid? Mitt 47% Romney? Yet, once again they were duped -- this time by the world's most arrogant used car salesmen.

And, just like the customers who buy a lemon from a sleazy prick on the used car lot, they are coming to realize the vehicle they thought was going to get them from A to B, isn't dependable and is probably going to leave them stranded. So, there is still some hope for the Republican Party. It's never too late for retribution.

In my view, there is no way that's coming during this election. They will not be rewarded for abandoning all principles and putting Trump out in front of their party. But they have a chance to wise up. So, will this be the final hard lesson that will help them pull their heads out of their asses, or will they keep making the same mistakes that they continue to make in general elections and policy positions? Because those behaviors make them appear as angry, cynical, obstructionist, science denying, poor hating, corporate whores. Will they finally realize that what is needed in their party isn't a "true conservative" (the excuse in waiting for many when Trump loses) but a little humility and humanity ... a little outreach to people they have traditionally alienated. Their candidates get worse every four years. I can't wait to see what they role out for 2020. Personally, I hope they learn their lesson ... but I'm not going to hold my breath.

You've stated many times that you think the American left needs a robust and coherent opposition party both to keep the DNC honest, and for the health of our nation's polity (which I think is wise). So what would that look like to you?

 

[woolybug25]

Can someone explain Paul Ryan to me? I really don't get what he is doing. I admired how steadfast he was in not endorsing him because of the clear philosophical differences between Trump's platform and the platform of the conservative ideal.

When he endorsed him, I saw it simply as giving in to his party and the pressure he was getting to unify the party. Understood.

But now he is saying Trumps statements are "the definition of racism" but still endorsing him. So does that mean that he supports Trump, but not his views? Why endorse him at all? It seems counterintuitive to endorse the candidacy of a candidate you disagree with both in platform and fundamental beliefs. There are other politicians that are "supporting" him, but not "endorsing" him. Why is Ryan choosing to "endorse" him while simultaneously talking about how he vehemently opposes his views?

So what's his goal here?

 

[Irish#1]

The best course of action would be, if they cannot somehow deny Trump the nomination, to run and fund another candidate who does embody all that they believe. Maybe they lose much now, but they would be respected for their stand and it could lead to a better future. Otherwise, this is scorched earth for them and the message is lost.

If the republican party were to fund or back another candidate after Trumps wins the nomination, that would be the death of the republican party IMO. It would show a divisive group that can't agree and it would take years for them to recover from that. Their best strategy is to go with Trump and work with him to get him to tone things down.

 

[NDinL.A.]

How many times do we see in the news, minorities complaining about
getting an unfair trial because of their race and/or there being some
racist white judge?

What do most Dems and scared GOP do? They sympathize
with them and question everything about the case.

Trump feels he's getting an unfair trial. He questions that it could be because
the judge is Mexican-American and since most Mexicans have an obvious
dislike towards him right now, that he may be getting a raw deal.

What do most Dems and scared GOP do? They call him a
Racist and don't take 1 second to look into his case.

Oooooh the Hypocrisy!!!!!

If you personaly felt like you were getting an unfair trial, it's only natural to question why. If you looked through all other reasoning, like other racces do, why would you not question it?

Hold up, first off - TRUMP is being treated unfairly??? Have YOU yourself seen the facts of the case? The people he duped were treated unfairly by that POS. It’s not just this one case in CA, there is another one on the docs in CA as well as NY, and Texas had him dead to rights, so much so that he immediately stopped doing the fake U there when they busted him (but made a deal with a friend in high places that stopped the lawsuit). So get out of here with that Trump-fed BS that he’s getting a raw deal.

Secondly, dude, what he said was racist. I’m not a scared Republican – I have a brain and can easily see a racist statement when I see one. He clearly said, MULTIPLE times, that the judge could not do the job fairly because of his race. WTF else do you need to know? It’s not “PC” to call someone a racist when they say racist shit. It’s called having a brain.

And where do you get off defending Trump by saying Hispanics don’t like him? He himself says it all the time: “Latinos love me!” “Hispanics love me!” “We’re doing VERY well with Latinos…you’ll see.” So by his own words, Latinos love him – so why is worried about a judge who is so principled that he took on the Mexican Cartel and had to be put into hiding for a year?

Don’t worry, I already know your response: “B-b-b-b-b-but, he belongs to a hate group! He’s an activist! He’s a liberal!” Sorry dude, Trump initially ONLY talked about him being a Mexican and that he’s building a wall. Over and over and over again he said that. It wasn’t until he got his sharks after the judge that they dug up the La Raza BS (those morons got it confused with a different group under the same name LOL) that he started to use that against him. But at first, before he knew all that, he was just tired of getting his ass kicked in court so he used the “He’s a Mexican” racist line, even though the guy is as American as Trump. He deserves everything he is getting and more, and the people that enable his racist BS is helping him usher Hilary right into the White House. Well done.

 

[Shamrock Theories]

Trump says openly racist things and his supporters cheer in delight.

Name one. I'll wait.

After this, why is anyone even wasting their time talking with this person?

Hlarious

 

[dales5050]

Except for whites. That's racist. Or something.

White men to be more specific.

 

[woolybug25]

After this, why is anyone even wasting their time talking with this person?

Hlarious

Why would anyone waste their time with answering it? Honestly, Trump could call all black people lazy, with no explanation or frame of reference, and people like you would be on here saying:

- He's being treated unfairly
- His comment is being misconstrued
- He's not saying "All black people", there are good ones too... I suppose...
- The people calling him racist have agendas

blahblahblah... People aren't responding to comments like that because we have been talking about it for months, while being completely disregarded. There is literally not one thing that GoIrish could have said that wouldn't have been met by one of those excuses. It would be wasted effort.

 

[NDgradstudent]

I think, as an institution, the GOP isn't really about anything anymore. They have lost their way.

The GOP is such a disaster and yet dominates state legislatures and has a large majority in Congress. Presidential politics is only one part of politics.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Can someone explain Paul Ryan to me? I really don't get what he is doing. I admired how steadfast he was in not endorsing him because of the clear philosophical differences between Trump's platform and the platform of the conservative ideal.

When he endorsed him, I saw it simply as giving in to his party and the pressure he was getting to unify the party. Understood.

But now he is saying Trumps statements are "the definition of racism" but still endorsing him. So does that mean that he supports Trump, but not his views? Why endorse him at all? It seems counterintuitive to endorse the candidacy of a candidate you disagree with both in platform and fundamental beliefs. There are other politicians that are "supporting" him, but not "endorsing" him. Why is Ryan choosing to "endorse" him while simultaneously talking about how he vehemently opposes his views?

So what's his goal here?

Ryan is a true conservative and he has a backbone and a core set of beliefs in which he stands on. You may not agree with his views and his policy decisions, but he has a value system that he truly believes in.

He simply loathes Trump. He knows Trump is a fraud and has seen right through him. Aside from the flip-flopping and his left of center views, Ryan also hates the way Trump treats people, and is scared shitless for the future of the Republican party, because Trump keeps alienating the minority groups that other Republicans have been trying to embrace.

So when Trump won the nomination, that put Ryan in an impossible position as Speaker of the House, because he hates Trump and knows Trump is a charlatan and not a conservative at all. But he was under immense pressure to back the GOP nominee. After several conversations with Trump, you can tell that he reluctantly (and not glowingly) endorsed (? - I mean, was it an endorsement? He said he'd vote for him lol) Trump. And of course, the very next day, Trump said his racist comment and made Ryan and the rest of the GOP look like fools. So he's back to condemning Trump.

The thing is, like I said, he is under immense pressure to keep backing Trump. And in his mind, Trump is better than any Democrat, so he will still support(ish) Trump while also pushing Trump to change his ways as well as getting a more conservative platform at the convention. Given the position he has been put in, I actually respect Paul Ryan a lot for holding off as long as he did, and for telling it like it is with Trump this week - with Trump being as vindictive and petty as he is, Ryan is putting his political career on the line.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Name one. I'll wait.

"The judge cannot do his job fairly because he is Mexican."

That was easy.

White men to be more specific.

Man, you guys got it rough. You poor, poor thing.

Wait, you're the same Einstein that said that a peaceful protester is just as bad as a violent one that threw rocks at police LOL. Keep writing, please - you crack me up.

 

[woolybug25]

The thing is, like I said, he is under immense pressure to keep backing Trump. And in his mind, Trump is better than any Democrat, so he will still support(ish) Trump while also pushing Trump to change his ways as well as getting a more conservative platform at the convention. Given the position he has been put in, I actually respect Paul Ryan a lot for holding off as long as he did, and for telling it like it is with Trump this week - with Trump being as vindictive and petty as he is, Ryan is putting his political career on the line.

It's strange to me that so many people are supporting him under the pretense that he will "change once he is president", especially considering that Trump himself tells everyone straight up that he isn't going to change.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/27/donald-trump-just-served-notice-that-hes-wont-change-and-then-he-proved-it/

Furthermore, if Ryan truly believes him to be a charlatan, then how would supporting him further the conservative agenda? They would knowingly be putting the Manchurian Candidate into office. It's hard to push the conservative agenda when the person you prop up as the leader of the movement is the total opposite.

I agree that he is putting his career on the line, which confuses me even more. How does toting the line help? He either reluctantly supports him and he wins, which leaves Ryan as an outsider in his own party. Or he adamantly refutes his ideals and leads the movement to right the conservative ship back to what it originally intended. Trump loses, he wins.

Say Trump, win or lose, completely fractures the party and give them a black eye in the views of mainstream America. How can he effectively lead a movement to bring back the conservative ideals to politics when he supported the problem?

 

[wizards8507]

"The judge cannot do his job fairly because he is Mexican."

That was easy.

Lol. You apparently don't know what "racist" means. Or maybe it's "Mexican" that confuses you.

"Mexican" is not a race. It's literally impossible to be racist against "Mexicans."

After this, why is anyone even wasting their time talking with this person?

Hlarious

I'm sorry, but who the fuck are you?

 

[NDinL.A.]

Lol. You apparently don't know what "racist" means. Or maybe it's "Mexican" that confuses you.

"Mexican" is not a race. It's literally impossible to be racist against "Mexicans."


I'm sorry, but who the fuck are you?

LOL...seriously? I know what it means - I'm using the word as everyone has been using it, everywhere.

The dude says bigoted things all the time, and my example is a SURE-FIRE example of what a bigot he is.

Satisfied?

 

[wizards8507]

LOL...seriously? I know what it means - I'm using the word as everyone has been using it, everywhere.

The dude says bigoted things all the time, and my example is a SURE-FIRE example of what a bigot he is.

Satisfied?

Absolutely not. Illegal immigration is a problem. Our southern border (with Mexico) is not secure. Those are independently true statements of fact, regardless of what color skin Mexican people have. Trump has not said a single negative word against "brown people," and if he had that would be racist. Speaking out against a country is not the same as speaking out against a race. The former is a matter of national security while the latter is a matter of racism. I've only heard Trump speak on the former.

 

[dales5050]

Man, you guys got it rough. You poor, poor thing.

You know the most amusing thing I find from asshole liberals?

If you talk to them about food stamp abuse they are very quick to point out how the majority of food stamp users are white.

Then if you talk to them about about how for whites are the only group who are not allowed to have organizations to help them...like blacks and latinos have, they mock about how tough whites must have it.

You then ask them if they are smart enough to see the connection and they look at you with a stupid blank stare.


I guess Blacks and Mexicans want exclusivity on sympathy handouts and quotas. You lucky bastard.

 

[woolybug25]

Absolutely not. Illegal immigration is a problem. Our southern border (with Mexico) is not secure. Those are independently true statements of fact, regardless of what color skin Mexican people have. Trump has not said a single negative word against "brown people," and if he had that would be racist. Speaking out against a country is not the same as speaking out against a race. The former is a matter of national security while the latter is a matter of racism. I've only heard Trump speak on the former.

Why would anyone waste their time with answering it? Honestly, Trump could call all black people lazy, with no explanation or frame of reference, and people like you would be on here saying:

- He's being treated unfairly
- His comment is being misconstrued
- He's not saying "All black people", there are good ones too... I suppose...
- The people calling him racist have agendas

blahblahblah... People aren't responding to comments like that because we have been talking about it for months, while being completely disregarded. There is literally not one thing that GoIrish could have said that wouldn't have been met by one of those excuses. It would be wasted effort.

.

 

[EddytoNow]

Ryan is a true conservative and he has a backbone and a core set of beliefs in which he stands on. You may not agree with his views and his policy decisions, but he has a value system that he truly believes in.

He simply loathes Trump. He knows Trump is a fraud and has seen right through him. Aside from the flip-flopping and his left of center views, Ryan also hates the way Trump treats people, and is scared shitless for the future of the Republican party, because Trump keeps alienating the minority groups that other Republicans have been trying to embrace.

So when Trump won the nomination, that put Ryan in an impossible position as Speaker of the House, because he hates Trump and knows Trump is a charlatan and not a conservative at all. But he was under immense pressure to back the GOP nominee. After several conversations with Trump, you can tell that he reluctantly (and not glowingly) endorsed (? - I mean, was it an endorsement? He said he'd vote for him lol) Trump. And of course, the very next day, Trump said his racist comment and made Ryan and the rest of the GOP look like fools. So he's back to condemning Trump.

The thing is, like I said, he is under immense pressure to keep backing Trump. And in his mind, Trump is better than any Democrat, so he will still support(ish) Trump while also pushing Trump to change his ways as well as getting a more conservative platform at the convention. Given the position he has been put in, I actually respect Paul Ryan a lot for holding off as long as he did, and for telling it like it is with Trump this week - with Trump being as vindictive and petty as he is, Ryan is putting his political career on the line.

Paul Ryan is one of the Republican leaders that I have respected over the past few years. He has normally kept his distance from the extremists on the far right of his party, and he has shown a willingness to compromise without abandoning his conservative principles. However, I do question his continued endorsement of Trump. How can Ryan publicly state that Trump's recent comments are the definition of racism while continuing to support Trump? Either you're against racism or you're not. You can't oppose racism while continuing to support the racist. At some point you've got to stand up for what's best for the country. No one expects Ryan to endorse Hillary Clinton. He has every right to stand on his conservative principles. But unless those principles include racism, Ryan has to reconsider his endorsement of Trump.

 

[ACamp1900]

NDinLA is now being labeled a liberal... I'm still just taken by how surreal this whole process has been...

We must like our politics shaken, not stirred...

 

[woolybug25]

AS it apparently stands now according to the last page... NDinLA is a liberal...

We must like our politics shaken, not stirred...

The irony is that the conservative is being labeled a liberal for not supporting the liberal posing as a conservative. lol

 

[wizards8507]

Why would anyone waste their time with answering it? Honestly, Trump could call all black people lazy, with no explanation or frame of reference, and people like you would be on here saying:

Don't be ignorant. If Trump said black people are lazy, he's lose all but 0.5% of his support and he'd be summarily dismissed by this entire board. The fact is, he hasn't said anything anywhere near "black people are lazy."

I'll concede the following: Trump is an idiot. Trump is ignorant and tone deaf when it comes to speaking about race. Many racists support Trump.

None of that rises to the level of race-based hatred on the part of Trump himself. I'm sure Trump would agree that a white-skinned person coming into the country illegally should be deported just the same as any dark-skinned person coming into the country illegally.

 

[dshans]

The irony is that the conservative is being labeled a liberal for not supporting the liberal posing as a conservative. lol

I'm getting dizzy.

I think it's time for a beer.

And maybe a nap.

Give me a wake up call in time for Thanksgiving dinner.

 

[GoIrish41]

You've stated many times that you think the American left needs a robust and coherent opposition party both to keep the DNC honest, and for the health of our nation's polity (which I think is wise). So what would that look like to you?

It would look a lot like the Republican Party looked when my hair was a lot darker and my gut was a little less "mature." It would be filled with men of principle, yes, but men who understood that politics is about compromise for the good of the country. It would be informed by one of my political heroes, Teddy Roosevelt, who championed the "Square Deal," promising Americans fairness as he set about breaking the trusts, regulating railroads, and ensuring purity of food and drug supplies.

Despite Richard Nixon's deep flaws and paranoia-fueled misteps in Watergate, he was still the man who opened up diplomatic relations between China and the United States. He championed the arts and humanities, enforced desegregaton of southern schools and established the Environmental Protection Agency. I think despite his drawbacks, Nixon did some good.

The Republican Party that I'd seek would include men like Dwight Eisenhower, who was behind the expansion of the United States -- adding Alaska and Hawaii as states and linking the nation together with massive investment in the creation of the nation's interstate highway system. It would include men like Bob Dole and PHil Graham whose statesmanship and civility allowed them to work with their opponents to get things done.

Believe it or not, the first vote I ever cast was for Ronald Reagan, who I viewed as a man of principle and conviction. In hindsight, I have concluded that the economic policies that he promoted ultimately diminished the standard of living for the average familly in the country, and set the stage for an era of greed. But, I have no doubt, nor should anyone else, that he wholeheartedly believed he was doing the right thing.

I don't think that is the case anymore in the Republican Party. I think that party, for the most part, placed party over principle long ago. I believe, as we have discussed before, that what we are witnessing today is the inevitable unraveling of a party that has ignored its own base in favor of corperate interests for far too long.

In short, the party I'd seek would return to moderation, civility, conviction, environmental stewartship and rational principled thought, and away from divisiveness, fearmongering, indifference to the poor, war as a business model, and disproven economic theories.

 

[wizards8507]

It would look a lot like the Republican Party looked when my hair was a lot darker and my gut was a little less "mature." It would be filled with men of principle, yes, but men who understood that politics is about compromise for the good of the country. It would be informed by one of my political heroes, Teddy Roosevelt, who championed the "Square Deal," promising Americans fairness as he set about breaking the trusts, regulating railroads, and ensuring purity of food and drug supplies.

That's a contradiction in terms for anyone who believes in their principles in good faith, left or right.

I believe that the policies of the Left are bad for the country. Compromise means giving the other side some of what they want. For any politician who sincerely believes in his positions, "compromise" cannot be done for the good of the country because compromise means allowing things that you consider bad to come to pass.

On any hypothetical issue: I believe "never" is good for the country and "always" is bad for the country. If I compromise and pass a bill that says "sometimes," I'll be complicit in something that I believe will do harm to the country.