djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2016 16:32:39 GMT -5
I get it. Trump doesn't appear from what I can see to have the organizational ground game needed to really capitalize on the caucus format. (I haven't studied him that in-depth so I may be wrong there.) Better for him in states that don't require as much from his supporters.
Still, I AM laughing at Rand Paul. Agreed to pay for the caucuses and didn't last nearly to them.
there is another odd thing about Rand. he tried to subvert the state constitution so that he could run BOTH for his Senate seat and for President (even though he is a law and order candidate). then, even when it was clear that he was going to get dragged over barbed wire, he stayed IN the primaries- despite the fact that every day he stayed in was costing him capital in his home state. i really don't get some people. he should have been the first OUT of the race. everyone would have forgiven him for it.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,561
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 5, 2016 16:55:20 GMT -5
I get it. Trump doesn't appear from what I can see to have the organizational ground game needed to really capitalize on the caucus format. (I haven't studied him that in-depth so I may be wrong there.) Better for him in states that don't require as much from his supporters.
Still, I AM laughing at Rand Paul. Agreed to pay for the caucuses and didn't last nearly to them.
there is another odd thing about Rand. he tried to subvert the state constitution so that he could run BOTH for his Senate seat and for President (even though he is a law and order candidate). then, even when it was clear that he was going to get dragged over barbed wire, he stayed IN the primaries- despite the fact that every day he stayed in was costing him capital in his home state. i really don't get some people. he should have been the first OUT of the race. everyone would have forgiven him for it. For the benefit of those who may not know, this is exactly why Kentucky Republicans have a caucus system this year for the first time in decades. There is a state law that a candidate cannot appear on the same ballot in two places, so Rand had to agree to pay for the caucuses on a different day so that it would not cost the state Republican Party to hold them. Otherwise he would not have been able to run to keep his Senate seat.
Should we give him credit for creative thinking? And for self-confidence? Or should we instead ask, "What the hell were you thinking?"
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 5, 2016 17:00:43 GMT -5
Considering he never had a shot to get close to the White House and I doubt any candidate would want him as a Veep, I think the third choice is the only one.
Furthermore, regardless of what Libertarian hubris he suffers from, this mistake should make all voters question his decision making abilities....like McCain with Palin, and just reject and ignore him from this point forward.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2016 17:01:08 GMT -5
there is another odd thing about Rand. he tried to subvert the state constitution so that he could run BOTH for his Senate seat and for President (even though he is a law and order candidate). then, even when it was clear that he was going to get dragged over barbed wire, he stayed IN the primaries- despite the fact that every day he stayed in was costing him capital in his home state. i really don't get some people. he should have been the first OUT of the race. everyone would have forgiven him for it. For the benefit of those who may not know, this is exactly why Kentucky Republicans have a caucus system this year for the first time in decades. There is a state law that a candidate cannot appear on the same ballot in two places, so Rand had to agree to pay for the caucuses on a different day so that it would not cost the state Republican Party to hold them. Otherwise he would not have been able to run to keep his Senate seat.
Should we give him credit for creative thinking? And for self-confidence? Or should we instead ask, "What the hell were you thinking?"
either he is a high stakes gambler, or he was very unclear about his prospects. i am not sure which.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,561
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 5, 2016 17:04:37 GMT -5
Even setting aside the issue of expense for him and his campaign, what is the "cost" of forcing all of your party's voters to go to all of that extra trouble? How many will think less of him for it?
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 5, 2016 17:44:25 GMT -5
Kansas was just called for Cruz 49% to Trump's 24% Cruz is winning with early returns in Kentucky, and Maine also.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,487
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 5, 2016 18:59:05 GMT -5
The tiresome thing about both the Republican and Democratic primaries and caucuses is we have to have them yet again in four years. And then four years after that and so on. I look forward to death.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2016 20:22:13 GMT -5
Kansas was just called for Cruz 49% to Trump's 24% Cruz is winning with early returns in Kentucky, and Maine also. i don't think he has much of a chance in Kentucky- but Rubio is getting killed across the board.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 9:49:22 GMT -5
So who won what?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,226
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 6, 2016 9:56:22 GMT -5
Your lunch money first. Then I will do your homework for you.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 10:41:03 GMT -5
Looks like Sen. Cruz came out about 15 delegates ahead. djAdvocate: Who's going to win CA? Rubio, I presume (assuming he's still in the race by then)?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 12:50:18 GMT -5
first of all, i missed badly on Maine, but i got everything else right.
Trump and Rubio underperformed in pretty much every contest, and Kasich and Cruz overperformed. it appears that votes flowed from Carson to Cruz, which makes sense, as Rubio and Trump are a bad fit for Carson's voters.
all three men missed their marks yesterday. if every primary were like yesterday, we would have a brokered convention.
Cruz won in delegates, but Trump is still ahead of his target of 374 (by today).
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 12:51:12 GMT -5
Cruz is the winner in Maine. I don't know whether to be happy or sad. for Democrats, you should have mixed feelings. on the one hand, it is great seeing an asshole like Trump lose. on the other hand, he is a much easier candidate to defeat.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 12:51:45 GMT -5
Looks like Sen. Cruz came out about 15 delegates ahead. djAdvocate : Who's going to win CA? Rubio, I presume (assuming he's still in the race by then)? Rubio claims he is going all the way to the convention, and he has the money to do it. and yes, i think he does well in the blue states.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 12:52:50 GMT -5
Cruz won two, Trump won two, and they split the delegates, basically. but since Cruz won more delegates, Saturday was his day.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 13:15:58 GMT -5
this was a tweet to Nate Silver last night from a colleague, which sums it up pretty well:
Ted Cruz's very, very good week: - wins TX, OK, AK - GOP takes on Trump - good debate - wins KS, ME - wins late LA vote - Rubio in freefall
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 6, 2016 13:50:39 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 5, 2024 13:30:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2016 16:26:38 GMT -5
Any thoughts on Tuesday, March 8th? Hawaii, Michigan, Mississippi, and Idaho.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 17:02:47 GMT -5
Any thoughts on Tuesday, March 8th? Hawaii, Michigan, Mississippi, and Idaho. Trump is well ahead in MI and MS. no polling data on Idaho and Hawaii, but i would guess that Trump will have trouble in both.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 17:14:41 GMT -5
this thread is not about the general election, but i thought i would add the following, just for insight. there are TWO reasons that Cruz and Rubio didn't go after Trump earlier. the reason that they state, and which everyone knows, is that both felt it was better to not take him seriously, and watch him fade away like Bachmann and Cain. the reason they DIDN'T state is this: Trump doesn't play by the rules that have governed nominations for .... well forever. since there WERE nominations. he and his supporters love to break rules. and yes, some of those rules suck, and it is fun to break them. but the decorum rules are not, and here is why. when the GE rolls around, all of the smack that is brought up by these four candidates will be used by the Clinton campaign. furthermore, they are really not spending ANY time talking about Clinton any more. she is running the table. and the result is that, wheras she was tied with Cruz a few weeks ago, and only 5% up on Trump in HTH polls, she is now up in double digits against Trump and 7% -vs- Cruz. in other words, the nasty turn that has been taken IN ORDER TO BEAT TRUMP (and yes, i really DO feel it was necessary) is bloodying everyone other than Clinton. this might end well. Trump might lose, and comity might be restored. but it is not going to happen soon. and in the mean time, Clinton is stockpiling fodder for her campaign. so, wheras she might have crushed Trump before, now she will crush everyone other than Kasich. the old strategy of Reagan: not to speak ill of your other GOP candidates- that is so very gone. it was a recipe that put the GOP in the WH 5 out the last nine presidential cycles, led to a conservative Supreme Court, and absolutely rewrote the map for the GOP in the last (2) decades. and we are watching it all collapse for the ego and ambitions of ONE MAN. and Virgil wonders why i am blasting away at Trump 24/7.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 17:55:44 GMT -5
Mr. Trump is doing no more than what your electoral system allows him to do. He's being rewarded for running the kind of campaign the system rewards. He's resonating with voters because he's saying the things the voters want to hear.
The GOP establishment created him and created the rules. Frankly, they deserve to be destroyed.
Whoever takes the helm in 2017 is going to preside over four years (at least) of precipitous decline. I wouldn't wish the US Presidency on my worst enemy. The prospect of the Republicans winning in 2016 is what should worry you if you value the legacy of the party.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 17:57:48 GMT -5
Mr. Trump is doing no more than what your electoral system allows him to do. He's being rewarded for running the kind of campaign the system rewards. He's resonating with voters because he's saying the things the voters want to hear. The GOP establishment created him and created the rules. Frankly, they deserve to be destroyed. Whoever takes the helm in 2017 is going to preside over four years (at least) of precipitous decline. I wouldn't wish the US Presidency on my worst enemy. The prospect of the Republicans winning in 2016 is what should worry you if you value the legacy of the party. does good create evil, Virgil? this is a general question- not related to Trump or the GOP in any particular way.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 5, 2024 13:30:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2016 18:46:28 GMT -5
Cruz is the winner in Maine. I don't know whether to be happy or sad. Be sad. A stuffed snow leopard would make a better President than Cruz would.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 19:27:42 GMT -5
Rubio got 71% of the vote in Puerto Rico, so this one is going to go "winner take all" for him:
Returns showed Rubio with 24,866 votes, followed by Donald Trump at 4,494 and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas at 2,922, with 95 percent of voting centers reporting.
not sure where i got that. maybe NBC.
reporting is really sloppy here. but i suspect i have this right. Cruz came in third, which is probably the first of four contests he places third in.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 19:44:05 GMT -5
Mr. Trump is doing no more than what your electoral system allows him to do. He's being rewarded for running the kind of campaign the system rewards. He's resonating with voters because he's saying the things the voters want to hear. The GOP establishment created him and created the rules. Frankly, they deserve to be destroyed. Whoever takes the helm in 2017 is going to preside over four years (at least) of precipitous decline. I wouldn't wish the US Presidency on my worst enemy. The prospect of the Republicans winning in 2016 is what should worry you if you value the legacy of the party. does good create evil, Virgil? this is a general question- not related to Trump or the GOP in any particular way. No. Evil creates evil. Sometimes evil of one kind creates evil of another kind.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Mar 6, 2016 19:47:27 GMT -5
Mr. Trump is doing no more than what your electoral system allows him to do. He's being rewarded for running the kind of campaign the system rewards. He's resonating with CERTAIN KINDS OF voters because he's saying the things those voters want to hear. The GOP establishment created him and created the rules. Frankly, they deserve to be destroyed. Whoever takes the helm in 2017 is going to preside over four years (at least) of precipitous decline. I wouldn't wish the US Presidency on my worst enemy. The prospect of the Republicans winning in 2016 is what should worry you if you value the legacy of the party. Fixed it for you
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 20:31:17 GMT -5
does good create evil, Virgil? this is a general question- not related to Trump or the GOP in any particular way. No. Evil creates evil. Sometimes evil of one kind creates evil of another kind. fair enough. thanks. it seems to me that sometimes things are independent variables, as well. as in, some things CHOOSE to come into existence, but are not a necessary consequence of other things existing. edit: i think the Trump phenomena is not a predictable outcome of GOP "failure". i think it is far more complex than that.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 20:49:06 GMT -5
No. Evil creates evil. Sometimes evil of one kind creates evil of another kind. fair enough. thanks. it seems to me that sometimes things are independent variables, as well. as in, some things CHOOSE to come into existence, but are not a necessary consequence of other things existing. edit: i think the Trump phenomena is not a predictable outcome of GOP "failure". i think it is far more complex than that. I really don't. Granted, I'm not as deeply in tune with the election as you are, but everything I've seen suggests to me that the sine qua non of Mr. Trump's campaign is his utter disregard for the Republican party establishment, the press, globalist ideology, and political correctness. Intentionally or not, he represents opposition to all these things. There's really very little else to his campaign, and there doesn't need to be.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,479
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 6, 2016 20:58:22 GMT -5
fair enough. thanks. it seems to me that sometimes things are independent variables, as well. as in, some things CHOOSE to come into existence, but are not a necessary consequence of other things existing. edit: i think the Trump phenomena is not a predictable outcome of GOP "failure". i think it is far more complex than that. I really don't. Granted, I'm not as deeply in tune with the election as you are, but everything I've seen suggests to me that the sine qua non of Mr. Trump's campaign is his utter disregard for the Republican party establishment, the press, globalist ideology, and political correctness. Intentionally or not, he represents opposition to all these things. There's really very little else to his campaign, and there doesn't need to be. i agree that Trump is/represents those things, but i disagree that it was: a) earned, in the sense that i think of the term b) a necessary or predictable consequence of those things. furthermore, that list is fairly disparate, for reasons i can articulate if you wish. i also think the way you are using "globalist" is kind of ambiguous. Trump himself is, in one very real sense, a "globalist" himself. i have a question for you: how far do you think he can ride the "anti-PC" train?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2016 21:10:00 GMT -5
I really don't. Granted, I'm not as deeply in tune with the election as you are, but everything I've seen suggests to me that the sine qua non of Mr. Trump's campaign is his utter disregard for the Republican party establishment, the press, globalist ideology, and political correctness. Intentionally or not, he represents opposition to all these things. There's really very little else to his campaign, and there doesn't need to be. i agree that Trump is/represents those things, but i disagree that it was: a) earned, in the sense that i think of the term b) a necessary or predictable consequence of those things. furthermore, that list is fairly disparate, for reasons i can articulate if you wish. i have a question for you: how far do you think he can ride the "anti-PC" train? I think he'll win the Republican nomination. There's no way he wins the general election. If he was evening coming close, they'd take him out. It's a critical juncture. The money boys need somebody loyal at the helm to protect their interests while the system comes apart.
|
|