Would a narrow Trump loss make the survivor a better candidate?

Experts are still predicting a Trump GOP nomination. But Cruz seems to making a move, and there's still a long ways to go. Rubio can't be counted out either, although his chances would seem slim. The question is: Assuming Trump loses a narrow contest for GOP nomination, would that make the actual nominee a better candidate?

The question is based on the theory that all other candidates should know by now that Americans are by and large pissed off about politics as usual. They want someone who is willing to step outside of the box in trying to solve problems in an effective manner, instead of catering to special interests as all Presidents end up doing. They'd like someone with the intestinal fortitude to tackle the tough issues with honest-to-goodness hard work and not empty promises. Trump may be crude... but that is the message he's carrying, and people have flocked to him. So if Trump were to lose (or get the nomination taken away from him).... would that make the survivor a better candidate? Yes? No? Why?

Short answer: no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Experts are still predicting a Trump GOP nomination. But Cruz seems to making a move, and there's still a long ways to go. Rubio can't be counted out either, although his chances would seem slim. The question is: Assuming Trump loses a narrow contest for GOP nomination, would that make the actual nominee a better candidate?

The question is based on the theory that all other candidates should know by now that Americans are by and large pissed off about politics as usual. They want someone who is willing to step outside of the box in trying to solve problems in an effective manner, instead of catering to special interests as all Presidents end up doing. They'd like someone with the intestinal fortitude to tackle the tough issues with honest-to-goodness hard work and not empty promises. Trump may be crude... but that is the message he's carrying, and people have flocked to him. So if Trump were to lose (or get the nomination taken away from him).... would that make the survivor a better candidate? Yes? No? Why?

---

In theory yes, but in action it will be same old same old although it may effect Cruz. Rubio is signed, sealed and delivered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walrus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Experts are still predicting a Trump GOP nomination. But Cruz seems to making a move, and there's still a long ways to go. Rubio can't be counted out either, although his chances would seem slim. The question is: Assuming Trump loses a narrow contest for GOP nomination, would that make the actual nominee a better candidate?

The question is based on the theory that all other candidates should know by now that Americans are by and large pissed off about politics as usual. They want someone who is willing to step outside of the box in trying to solve problems in an effective manner, instead of catering to special interests as all Presidents end up doing. They'd like someone with the intestinal fortitude to tackle the tough issues with honest-to-goodness hard work and not empty promises. Trump may be crude... but that is the message he's carrying, and people have flocked to him. So if Trump were to lose (or get the nomination taken away from him).... would that make the survivor a better candidate? Yes? No? Why?

---

In theory yes, but in action it will be same old same old although it may effect Cruz. Rubio is signed, sealed and delivered.

---

Break it down if you would. Flip mode.
Say Trump gets whooped...that wouldn't make the candidate who won the comeback kid?
I could be missing something but for me
Narrow Trump loss means a splintered, fractured party.
Wide Trump loss means someone has galvanized the people.

Just so you know...I don't think Trump would lose by a wide margin.

A splintered, fractured party doesn't necessarily mean the winner would lose the general election. It's not like you have a JFK standing on the other side. If Trump lost a narrow election, people would still have to make a choice: Cruz, or Hillary. As many faults as Cruz may have, I think many people are terrified of a Hillary presidency. In Cruz's mind, he'd know people within the party are pissed off. Pissed off enough to have supported someone like Trump, definitely a non-politician. Would that make Cruz himself a bit better? I don't see why not.

@ Titofan i was just looking at Republican voters.
I have no clue how Hillary will fare, not even Sanders.

IMO roughly half the AMerican voting population is always pissed off.
What is different now is why Republicans are so fractured.
Their party turned on each other--- Tea Party candidates took on Republican politicians. So they got the outsiders they voted for.
Today they dominate the house and Senate, Titofan... I mean WTF?!
:-\
Midterms was 2010...it's uh... 2016... where is the Tea Party policies on war?
Um..divided.
Where is their policy on crime, education? Maybe a Trump nominee means voters stay home...it's happened before.
How does a true conservative vote for Trump out of party loyalty...and not see them selves going against their own principles?
Pull the lever for someone who has praised parenthood?
Segregate on the basis of religion?
On occasion has stated taxing for resolve..The muthatrucka...wrote a book in support of banning assault weapons...then says he has the right to change his mind.
He sure does. But Damn... Romney did that shit in 2012 Changing positions relative to the party base....so many voters stayed home giving the incumbent the win.

Last think this over...and holla back about it. When Trump invited the Clinton's to his wedding..
Not the Romney's, the Bush's, the Limbaughs...Those who wed..invite their loved ones.. and those who share a like mindedness. Agree or disagree?:confused:

This means a Trump presidency is just as likely to pass a universal healthcare system as democrats. Likely to flip and flop on taxes, like Reagan who raised taxes (several) times.
And he will have the same Paul Ryan that is being called Boehner II.
He will inherit a republican base DEEPLY split on the war on terror.
He will inherit the same industries that beg for deregulation like the Koch Brothers and their billion dollar corporations
.
He will inherit those thousands of lobbyists descending on Congress. Not him.Swooping in on the Senate, not him. For the billion dollar pharmaceutical industries that pay off the FDA..Food and Drug Administration..to look the other way.
And his followers are fucking fool's to think he can ban an entire religion.

You are correct that many are afraid of Hillary...but think this over. Republican voters have zero tolerance for Democrats PERIOD, be it Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Edwards, John Kerry, Al Gore back to Jimmy Carter. IMO the extreme left and right loathe the other party...regardless of who the nominee is...

The flipflopping you mention is what I fear most about politicians. Trump may not be a career politician, but he's shown he can flipflop with the best of them. Hillary is another one. She's been caught in so many lies she can hardly keep track of them herself. On top of that she's extremely unlikeable and untrustworthy. How can she be expected to stand up to foreign policy crises when she's been so incredibly inept regarding issues like her own damn emails and the Benghazi situation? IMO, either of those two (Trump, Hillary) would represent dangerous situations for the US were either of them to be elected POTUS. On Trump I personally don't put too much stock into him inviting the Clintons to his wedding. I may be wrong on that, but there's a lot of other things to worry about regarding Trump. For starters, he is the opposite of presidential, whatever that means, and he's bound to start WWIII by just being his bombastic, impulsive self.

The splintered Republican party you mention is one of the reasons I dislike the present two-party system, although admittedly it's what's been done pretty much since Day One. You're basically forced to follow the party line on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE out there, whether you agree with them or not. There's no room for agreeing with some Democratic principles, but other Republican ones. It takes away individuality, IMO. What you mention about extreme right and left loathing the other party, regardless of who the nominee is..... just emphasizes my point. It's wrong, IMO, not to mention short-sighted, to boil everything down to elephant vs. mule.

But what really worries me is how the quality of presidential candidates has gone way south. Is it just me? Or has this election turned into somewhat of a "who's the less bad candidate to vote for"? Of the ones left with any chance to win, there's not a lot to choose from.

There's only one viable candidate.

The Trump vote has collapsed since that last debate when he got attacked by Fox and the other candidates. In Louisiana Trump had 40+% of the early voting with Cruz on 20-25 but then Cruz won the vote on the night of the primary. If that keeps up Cruz could take over.

But Cruz is even more unelectable than Trump. He's got even more hard right positions on immigration than Trump and is the strongest conservative running for prez since Goldwater. The fucker wants to return to the gold standard too.

He's also completely full of shit. Fancy pants Harvard lawyer, Goldman Sachs wife, funded by Goldman, big hedge funds, big oil interests. He's basically a Bush-like globalist corporate servant but he's doing a great job of pretending to be an outsider candidate.

Agreed. It's not that Trump is bad to me. It's that he represents the opposite of what Conservatives look for in a candidate.

At least IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthless rocco

There's only one viable candidate.

---

Really?!?!?!:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

The Trump vote has collapsed since that last debate when he got attacked by Fox and the other candidates. In Louisiana Trump had 40+% of the early voting with Cruz on 20-25 but then Cruz won the vote on the night of the primary. If that keeps up Cruz could take over.

But Cruz is even more unelectable than Trump. He's got even more hard right positions on immigration than Trump and is the strongest conservative running for prez since Goldwater. The fucker wants to return to the gold standard too.

He's also completely full of shit. Fancy pants Harvard lawyer, Goldman Sachs wife, funded by Goldman, big hedge funds, big oil interests. He's basically a Bush-like globalist corporate servant but he's doing a great job of pretending to be an outsider candidate.

---

What a blow hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthless rocco

There's only one viable candidate.

---

Really?!?!?!:o

---

Yup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

The Trump vote has collapsed since that last debate when he got attacked by Fox and the other candidates. In Louisiana Trump had 40+% of the early voting with Cruz on 20-25 but then Cruz won the vote on the night of the primary. If that keeps up Cruz could take over.

But Cruz is even more unelectable than Trump. He's got even more hard right positions on immigration than Trump and is the strongest conservative running for prez since Goldwater. The fucker wants to return to the gold standard too.

He's also completely full of shit. Fancy pants Harvard lawyer, Goldman Sachs wife, funded by Goldman, big hedge funds, big oil interests. He's basically a Bush-like globalist corporate servant but he's doing a great job of pretending to be an outsider candidate.

---

I'm not sure it collapsed, rather Rubio and Cruz found one state each.
Trump is unelectable only to the extreme left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

The Trump vote has collapsed since that last debate when he got attacked by Fox and the other candidates. In Louisiana Trump had 40+% of the early voting with Cruz on 20-25 but then Cruz won the vote on the night of the primary. If that keeps up Cruz could take over.

But Cruz is even more unelectable than Trump. He's got even more hard right positions on immigration than Trump and is the strongest conservative running for prez since Goldwater. The fucker wants to return to the gold standard too.

He's also completely full of shit. Fancy pants Harvard lawyer, Goldman Sachs wife, funded by Goldman, big hedge funds, big oil interests. He's basically a Bush-like globalist corporate servant but he's doing a great job of pretending to be an outsider candidate.

---

I'm not sure it collapsed, rather Rubio and Cruz found one state each.
Trump is unelectable only to the extreme left.

---

We'll find out tonight and a week from now. If Trump wins Florida and Ohio it's all over. If he doesn't the GOP establishment will spend the next few months attacking him from every angle and spend tens of millions trying to make him so toxic to the electorate that the GOP voters will accept a coup at the convention and somebody moderate getting the nomination.

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

Trump can be a master manipulator tossing chum in the water. He says he worries about Rubio being sued over citizenship giving Dems ammo. Then he threatens to sue him over same and threatens to sue Cruz because his adds are "unfair" :-X. He blames Sanders for thug like behavior of protesters and that there is no violence at Trump rallies, then he mentions that any attempt to refuse him the nomination once delegates are reached "could result in riots". Some asshole sucker punches a protester and goes on camera saying next time we might have to kill him...next day Trump is doing interview suggesting he'll pay his legal fees. More and more though it seems the 'movement-anger-mistrust' of politicians leading him rather than other way around. He will certainly be the Republican candidate at which time we'll possibly get a definitive plan or policy on something and less double speak and emotional red meat. Shit, the guy is more of a politician than many are willing to admit.

There's things to like about Trump... and there's things that scare the hell out of me. Where to start.... For starters, nothing is lukewarm with the guy. You either like something a hell of a lot, or you despise it. Trump is obviously a smart guy. No way he would have been as successful as he's been if he wasn't. It's his business smarts that appeal to a lot of people, maybe hoping that he can run the government the way a good business is run. He's also extremely assertive. Another quality I believe appeals to a lot of people. People who feel the U.S. has lost some of its global clout for some reason or another. He shoots from the hip. That's not necessarily a good thing, especially for a POTUS.... but yet many people also like that, because they equate it with not talking the political double-speak that politicians are known for. As far as Trump being a racist, I'm not totally convinced that he is in fact a racist. Fiercely protective of the U.S. way of life, maybe. To the point of saying less-than-intelligent things he'll never be able to deliver.... most definitely. But I don't think he's racist. It'll be interesting to see how he transforms himself (if he does at all) as it becomes more and more apparent that he'll be the Republican nominee (barring some sort of coup). Will he reach out for the expertise and assessment he should know he needs in areas not in his wheelhouse? Will he be adept at choosing people to surround himself with? Will he tone down some of his outrageous comments? Who the hell knows. I will say this: The prospect of a Hillary presidency scares me. And from the looks of it so far, Sanders has zero chance. So it'll be some Republican against Hillary. If it's Trump, look out. I'm tempted to say the country would be better off with Donald than Hillary. But Donald can be dangerous, especially in areas such as foreign policy. He'd be better served by choosing the right people to surround himself with. And why shouldn't he be good at that? It's what a savvy businessman does. It's what Reagan did during his own presidency. Regardless, I can't shake the feeling that it's not like the good ol' days, when you could look up at the Presidential candidates with honest to goodness respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

But Cruz is even more unelectable than Trump

---

I'm not sure it collapsed, rather Rubio and Cruz found one state each.
Trump is unelectable only to the extreme left.

---

We'll find out tonight and a week from now. If Trump wins Florida and Ohio it's all over. If he doesn't the GOP establishment will spend the next few months attacking him from every angle and spend tens of millions trying to make him so toxic to the electorate that the GOP voters will accept a coup at the convention and somebody moderate getting the nomination.

---

1 out of 2 The state where the convention is to be held voted for their Governor aka Kasich.
He has no chance though.

Cruz IMO greatest screw up was leading the call to shut down the government
The Republicans still haven't forgiven him for that.


Along with Sarah dingbat Palin who said Republicans must “stand firm,” “not blink,” and not “allow the media to drive this whole narrative” that a shutdown would be bad for Republicans rather it would allow Americans to see how irrelevant the federal government is.

So let's shut down the government...than hold a protest about the shutdown....
That.uhh....Cruz asked for....Bring veterans....tell them Obama doesn't care about you....why else would he allow us to shut down the government?:-\

Then they took the National Park Service’s protective barriers, and then threw them at the White House....
Few know that this started off as a let's defund Obama care movement.
When it failed...they decided to bring in troops...which in reality were about 30-40 vets who showed up with Confederate flags...and the rest err Tea Party folk.

Oh the government opened back up ..Healthcare act ...still in tact.
But at least we got to hear the pledge of Allegiance

...while holding confederate flags...thanks Ted Cruz...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

Bernie or at least Bernieism is the future of the Democratic party. Bernie has absolutely overwhelming 80-90% support from under 30 voters. For all the talk about Trump resetting the coalitions between the two big parties eventually a Bernieist will be the Democratic nominee and get elected. The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years. In a 50 50 country that gives a basically huge game over lead to the Democrats from round about now.

Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Trump can be a master manipulator tossing chum in the water. He says he worries about Rubio being sued over citizenship giving Dems ammo. Then he threatens to sue him over same and threatens to sue Cruz because his adds are "unfair" :-X. He blames Sanders for thug like behavior of protesters and that there is no violence at Trump rallies, then he mentions that any attempt to refuse him the nomination once delegates are reached "could result in riots". Some asshole sucker punches a protester and goes on camera saying next time we might have to kill him...next day Trump is doing interview suggesting he'll pay his legal fees. More and more though it seems the 'movement-anger-mistrust' of politicians leading him rather than other way around. He will certainly be the Republican candidate at which time we'll possibly get a definitive plan or policy on something and less double speak and emotional red meat. Shit, the guy is more of a politician than many are willing to admit.

---

You're making the fantastic assumption that GOP candidates eventually come up with plans and policies. :)

Other than massive tax cuts, deregulation of business and the financial industry and making government smaller none of them ever have plans or policies. They're a party that believe that government doesn't work and when they get elected they set about proving it.

Voters in this election have the choice between an extreme nominee (Trump, Cruz) or voting for a moderate Republican (Hillary). Everybody except Trump is a more of the same politician (free trade, no regulation of Wall Street, immigrant/cheap labour-friendly corporate servant government) but at least Trump is offering something a little different with the trade and the wall. That could attract a lot of voters.

More to say on this.

Just when I think the Anti-Trump movement has found a wedge between he and potential supporters...the next article is about the unbelievable disdain Republicans has for Ted Cruz.

Republicans have shouted down Ted Cruz on the Senate floor (several) times and remind him often that he called fellow Republican, McConnell a liar...on the senate floor. Hard to imagine Trump could lose narrowly, when his Republican rivals are loathed by Republican voters, like they are Democrats or something...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

Bernie or at least Bernieism is the future of the Democratic party. Bernie has absolutely overwhelming 80-90% support from under 30 voters. For all the talk about Trump resetting the coalitions between the two big parties eventually a Bernieist will be the Democratic nominee and get elected. The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years. In a 50 50 country that gives a basically huge game over lead to the Democrats from round about now.

Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

---

The prevalence of a popularity in left wing politics among younger people has almost always been the case though. As people get older they will tend to become a little more conservative. The idea of a socialist country that may appear attractive in your teens and twenties become something a little more balanced as most people move into middle age.

Trump will be the 45th US President

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Trump will be the 45th US President

---

45th....and last?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

Bernie or at least Bernieism is the future of the Democratic party. Bernie has absolutely overwhelming 80-90% support from under 30 voters. For all the talk about Trump resetting the coalitions between the two big parties eventually a Bernieist will be the Democratic nominee and get elected. The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years. In a 50 50 country that gives a basically huge game over lead to the Democrats from round about now.

Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

---

The prevalence of a popularity in left wing politics among younger people has almost always been the case though. As people get older they will tend to become a little more conservative. The idea of a socialist country that may appear attractive in your teens and twenties become something a little more balanced as most people move into middle age.

---

There's been a gigantic sea change in people born after 1980. During the 50s-1980 people used to split 50-50 roughly when they got old enough to vote, the number remained a few points either side of fifty for decades. Now 1980s and afterwards are overwhelmingly lefties. The GOP is increasingly the party of older white folks.

After the 2012 the GOP produced a report (google gop autopsy) on the failed 2012 campaign and they came to the conclusion that they had to pass comprehensive immigration reform if they were ever to become competitive in national elections again. They started off well with Rubio pushing an immigration bill but then the base rebelled so much that Rubio ended up voting against his own bill so he didn't get primaried. Then Donald Trump and his wall came along.

From about 2020 or 2024 the Democrats will be unbeatable in national elections if the voting bases stay the same. Trump might just shake things up though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

Bernie or at least Bernieism is the future of the Democratic party. Bernie has absolutely overwhelming 80-90% support from under 30 voters. For all the talk about Trump resetting the coalitions between the two big parties eventually a Bernieist will be the Democratic nominee and get elected. The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years. In a 50 50 country that gives a basically huge game over lead to the Democrats from round about now.

Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

---

The prevalence of a popularity in left wing politics among younger people has almost always been the case though. As people get older they will tend to become a little more conservative. The idea of a socialist country that may appear attractive in your teens and twenties become something a little more balanced as most people move into middle age.

---

There's been a gigantic sea change in people born after 1980. During the 50s-1980 people used to split 50-50 roughly when they got old enough to vote, the number remained a few points either side of fifty for decades. Now 1980s and afterwards are overwhelmingly lefties. The GOP is increasingly the party of older white folks.

After the 2012 the GOP produced a report (google gop autopsy) on the failed 2012 campaign and they came to the conclusion that they had to pass comprehensive immigration reform if they were ever to become competitive in national elections again. They started off well with Rubio pushing an immigration bill but then the base rebelled so much that Rubio ended up voting against his own bill so he didn't get primaried. Then Donald Trump and his wall came along.

From about 2020 or 2024 the Democrats will be unbeatable in national elections if the voting bases stay the same. Trump might just shake things up though.

---

Crock of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years.

I'm not sure about this...imo the sheep...era, uh people swing to both sides oh, every 6-10 years.
What validates my claim and disputes your claim is the Senate and Congress.. Since 2008, Democrats have lost 13 Senate seats, 69 congressional seats, and over 400 state legislative seats...& growing...doesn't sound like a 3% increase.



Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

---

The prevalence of a popularity in left wing politics among younger people has almost always been the case though.

Today I disagree with this assessment. Please Google, youtube Ron Paul revolution(2008) He spoke at many college campuses...but because mainstream media and the right wing-hate-machine media had a Virtual Ron Paul BLACK OUT...few know how many young people are flirting with libertarianism.
Again in 2012 Republican National committee changed rules that took delegates from Paul.. gave them to Romney. Paul had the biggest increase of youth voters over both parties when it came to voters under 25.

As people get older they will tend to become a little more conservative.
I agree.

The idea of a socialist country that may appear attractive in your teens and twenties become something a little more balanced as most people move into middle age.

---

True to a degree. 1910-1920 or so no less than 50 mayoral seats went to socialist candidates. From city council to Senate and Congress...American people voted them in. Socialism in America early 1900s under an aging Eugene Debs wasn't limited to youth.


There's been a gigantic sea change in people born after 1980. During the 50s-1980 people used to split 50-50 roughly when they got old enough to vote, the number remained a few points either side of fifty for decades. Now 1980s and afterwards are overwhelmingly lefties. The GOP is increasingly the party of older white folks.

I agree the GOP is, has & will always be primarily white. Most young who do go democratic is not a choice on desire, rather the best of the worst.

After the 2012 the GOP produced a report (google gop autopsy) on the failed 2012 campaign and they came to the conclusion that they had to pass comprehensive immigration reform if they were ever to become competitive in national elections again. They started off well with Rubio pushing an immigration bill but then the base rebelled so much that Rubio ended up voting against his own bill so he didn't get primaried. Then Donald Trump and his wall came along.

IMO this is partially true. Hispanics can tip the vote Democratic, if whites who espouse conservative values stay home. It is also a side swipe to African-Americans. Conservative have many articles, columns questioning how to court the Hispanic vote, but not the African-American vote.

The elephant in the room I argue is the bullshit war against a stateless enemy called: The war on terror. Many Moderates to Conservative flip flopped and no longer support the war on terror. No longer discuss WMD. Those who do speak on waging this stupid ass war against stateless enemies, are losing voters more so than those who don't support immigration reform.

From about 2020 or 2024 the Democrats will be unbeatable in national elections if the voting bases stay the same. Trump might just shake things up though.

---

By 2020...America will probably have lost value to Transglobal corporations. She along with China, Russia, British will be under the control of said trans global corporation(s).. some may call it the new world order, shadow government.
End result the republic that practiced a democracy via a voting process.will be a historical concept.

Less we forget American founding fathers saw fit to give voting rights to white men......



Who owned property.

As Miles isn't around these days, I feel I should lift up the mantle and quote Chomsky: "This country was founded on the principle that the primary role of government is to protect property from the majority....and so it remains". I mainly know it as the quote is in a Manic Street Preachers song though...educated on rock n roll!

Even when you look back at the sixties, and the Summer of Love, there were large numbers of people against war and supporting left leaning parties, even into Communism and Socialism, but when those people grew older, certainly in terms of those who I know who have moved closer to the center than they were back then, I do think that the population shifts right as it ages.

You get older and you get sicker and you start wanting to think about health care and where your dollars are going to go when you retire in a few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walrus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I'm not 100% sure how the primary system works, but it looks like Trump's campaign just gets stronger and stronger. As a history buff, a lot of his rhetoric seems to close to the rise of fascism to me, and the way that broad statements were too attractive when compared with those politicians who chose to stick with what they actually could achieve.

Clinton seems to be nailed on and although I like Bernie Sanders, he's way left of where most of the Democrats ever elected have been.

---

Bernie or at least Bernieism is the future of the Democratic party. Bernie has absolutely overwhelming 80-90% support from under 30 voters. For all the talk about Trump resetting the coalitions between the two big parties eventually a Bernieist will be the Democratic nominee and get elected. The Demographics in America are moving to the Democratic side about 3% every four years. In a 50 50 country that gives a basically huge game over lead to the Democrats from round about now.

Assuming Trump doesn't reset the coalitions of voters and steal a big chunk of Democrats Hillary will win but long term America will look like Bernieland.

---

The prevalence of a popularity in left wing politics among younger people has almost always been the case though. As people get older they will tend to become a little more conservative. The idea of a socialist country that may appear attractive in your teens and twenties become something a little more balanced as most people move into middle age.

---

There's been a gigantic sea change in people born after 1980. During the 50s-1980 people used to split 50-50 roughly when they got old enough to vote, the number remained a few points either side of fifty for decades. Now 1980s and afterwards are overwhelmingly lefties. The GOP is increasingly the party of older white folks.

After the 2012 the GOP produced a report (google gop autopsy) on the failed 2012 campaign and they came to the conclusion that they had to pass comprehensive immigration reform if they were ever to become competitive in national elections again. They started off well with Rubio pushing an immigration bill but then the base rebelled so much that Rubio ended up voting against his own bill so he didn't get primaried. Then Donald Trump and his wall came along.

From about 2020 or 2024 the Democrats will be unbeatable in national elections if the voting bases stay the same. Trump might just shake things up though.

---

Crock of shit.

---

Which part?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

This country was founded on the principle that the primary role of government is to protect property from the majority....and so it remains". I mainly know it as the quote is in a Manic Street Preachers song though...educated on rock n roll!

Check out the quote from Henry Berry, House of Delegates in 1832 on government protecting property.
I quote
"Sir, I am sick with this clamor in this debate about this property, this wealth. The right of property in slaves is entirely the creature of the positive law. All our rules of property is under control of the legislature."

I interpret that as:
1.The majority to keep property away from is the people-the minority were owners of property, while the majority aka common owned nothing. End result non property owners weren't even allowed to vote...what principles....

2. The principle(s) in which this nation was founded were addressed as the Articles of Confederation. Property owners to free masons redefined said principals via Constitution. End result: privatization of money/banking to taxation via amendment. Men like Patrick Henry who said give me liberty or give me death, was so against the ratification, he stressed the Bill of Rights to ensure said principals would be inclusive, not exclusive.

Even when you look back at the sixties, and the Summer of Love, there were large numbers of people against war and supporting left leaning parties, even into Communism and Socialism

True but...think this over...Evangelicals from Jimmy Swaggart, Pat Buchanan, Pat Roberts, Oral Roberts, Billy Graham, The Dobsons...Christians seemed okay with war, denial of voting rights to blacks, segregation against all minorities. So the liberals, hippies, didn't all turn socialism out of philosophical views. Socialists to Marxists, communists were addressing such issues that conservatives and Christians were ignoring....

, but when those people grew older, certainly in terms of those who I know who have moved closer to the center than they were back then, I do think that the population shifts right as it ages.

---

My take is similar...the Democratic party took on these issues, while Ronald Reagan, Christians, racists left the party and turned Republican. Leaving unsolved issues to liberals who offered government subsidies, welfare.

By 1980 a second generation actually became dependent on government for food, rent, health.
Republicans in general felt no obligation, so they just ridiculed democrats from the side line.
So I, too..even as a black man find myself lamenting over blacks to Hispanics asking for food stamps. Rental assistance. Some say that makes me conservative as I grow older.
We equate personal responsibility as conservative. It is a lie. Wealthy men like Donald Trump can skirt his responsibilities through constant bankruptcies and tax loopholes common people know nothing about. But it dIdn't make him liberal, it makes him business savvy, go figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

As Miles isn't around these days, I feel I should lift up the mantle and quote Chomsky: "This country was founded on the principle that the primary role of government is to protect property from the majority....and so it remains". I mainly know it as the quote is in a Manic Street Preachers song though...educated on rock n roll!

Even when you look back at the sixties, and the Summer of Love, there were large numbers of people against war and supporting left leaning parties, even into Communism and Socialism, but when those people grew older, certainly in terms of those who I know who have moved closer to the center than they were back then, I do think that the population shifts right as it ages.

---

There was a big number of hippies in the sixties but there was also an equally big establishment/counter-revolution group of new voters. You've seen Animal House. You had Bluto and D-Day but you also had Marmelade and Niedermeyer.

They have actual numbers of these things going back generations and from the Millenial generation (born 1980 and afterwards) onwards voters are now strongly Democratic in numbers they never have been before. Partisanship at least in America also tends to stick. Once you decide whether you're a righty or a lefty you tend to stay that way.

Message to the next POTUS (if not Donald Trump):

I've written you the following message free of charge. You can even claim it as your own.

"Although I've been elected POTUS, the message from the people is loud and clear. Americans are TIRED of politics as usual... tired of promises that aren't kept... tired of politicians pandering to special interests groups... tired of the same ol' same ol' when it comes to our nation's economy, foreign policy, healthcare, social issues, crime, and everything else that occupies our mind. Americans are tired of seeing the parade of politicians who, if they only exercised the same rigor to their Presidency as they had done to their campaign, we'd all be a lot better off."

"Well... let me just say that, understanding some of the skepticism that may surround me given the fact that I, and not Donald Trump, is POTUS... nevertheless I am here to assure each and every one of you that your message has been heard loud and clear. No more politics as usual. No more empty promises to fall on jaded ears. No more making people so fed up that they would vote for a man with absolutely no experience in foreign matters, or beliefs so unstable and shaky that they would put in danger all of society. The fact that Donald Trump was even a possible candidate for POTUS speaks volumes of just how tired people are of business as usual. Believe me... this message will not go ignored. I will make it my personal responsibility and the responsibility of this Administration that we will govern with the utmost passion, integrity, and energy to restore Americans' faith in our government."

Trump 755
Cruz 545

Minus-
Rubio 171
Kasich 143.
------------Republicans haven't been this divided since.....

2012: Romney 1,743 to 2nd place Santorum 267
2008: McCain 1,563 to 2nd place Romney 272
2000: Bush 1,496 to 2nd place McCain 244
1996 Bob Dole 1,926 to 2nd place Pat Buchanan 43
1988 Bush 1,139 to 2nd place Pat Robertson 31.

1976

Interesting that when Reagan was the 3rd man in 1976..making the claims that Trump makes today, he didn't Buck the tide, complain or challenge.
In fact he chose a liberal running mate...which caused him to fall in the last few polls.
(Just Like Trump is falling in the last few)

Interesting because #1. Reagan didn't know the man aka Richard Schweiker .

Sounds like he was bowing to a system/establishment that picked for him. Why else would he pick a V.P. ....He knew dick about?

1980 Reagan wanted to run with Ford...who didn't want to be a V.P. why bring this up?
Because....when it failed...at the last moment he chose Bush ..a dude he called weak.
Just like when McCain talked about politicians wasting money..like an Alaskan bridge to nowhere....then choose that very person-aka Dingbat Palin.
..

Reagan
McCain
.2 different candidates...choosing running mates......
They knew little about...and shared few interests and ideas.

Wilder is that after Reagan said he would change the climate of big business , he brought in Don Regan from Merryl Lynch...to become Secretary of Treasury.

This is the dude that was heard saying to President Reagan "
"You need to speed it up"

while giving a speech.
----please------Youtube it...then ask yourself; would the leader of the free world allow some former CEO to tell him...get on with it already?????

Sounds like Ronald Reagan was everything that Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama & the next so called leader of America really is....
A God damned pawn.

Trump can't undo what has been perfected by the unknown elite. He's changed parties 5 friggin times since 1987...talk in shit about votes being potentially ignored. Hey Trump Clown!!! Votes matter when it's the presidential election as in electoral and popular.
Today it's about delegates..which are representatives...uh ..humans. Cruz has 575 representatives to do what the rules allow them to do....haggle for more in the case of a stand off....just like with Reagan...in 1976....oh, and he didn't cry thief about it.