March 31, 2016

Trump's Narrow Path to 1,237
— Ace

It seems most likely he will not actually make it.

And losing Wisconsin -- where the latest poll has him down 40-30 to Cruz -- would make his difficult road even steeper.

One interesting thing from The Hill article -- in four of the remaining states, most delegates are elected by primary voters, but by state party officials.

Four states out of the remaining 20 break from the traditional primaries and caucuses held elsewhere by sending unbound delegates to the national convention.

These contests will test the organizational strength of the candidates.

Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota and Pennsylvania will either send unbound delegates to the convention, or will elect delegates who have already declared a preference for one of the candidates.

That puts the onus on the candidates to get their supporters elected to the national convention in those states.

So far, Cruz has proven most adept at this.

For instance, Trump won the popular vote in Louisiana, but Cruz might take home more delegates, having succeeded in winning over the five unbound delegates from the state.

It's possible that scenario could play out similarly in Pennsylvania, where party activists will elect 54 of the state's 71 delegates.

I had thought that Pennsylvania would likely go Trump, with Kasich dividing up the non-Trump vote with Cruz. It's possible that Cruz (or Kasich, frankly) could win the lion's share of the votes here.

Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, Trump's SuperPAC is going to work on Cruz, claiming he favors "amnesty" for Syrian refugees.


Posted by: Ace at 09:14 AM | Comments (370)
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Early and often

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:14 AM (fizMZ)

2 Nah. Couldn't be.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:15 AM (QDnY+)

3 My state - PA - sucks complete and utter ass during election years.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:15 AM (Agn5J)

4 Yup... Gonna be a thrill watching the party tear itself apart in my home state.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:17 AM (g8Hfr)

5 Just saw the white board on Fox, More are not for Trump than he has for. 40% just doesn't win you a thing.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:17 AM (fizMZ)

6 I'm having my lawyers look into who I should sue.

Posted by: Donald Trump's Forehead Merkin at March 31, 2016 09:17 AM (mEs7I)

7 Just when you thought it couldn't get any messier...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:17 AM (9krrF)

8 For instance, Trump won the popular vote in Louisiana, but Cruz might take home more delegates, having succeeded in winning over the five unbound delegates from the state. Start cutting checks. Buy them.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (hpmES)

9 3 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 02:15 PM (Agn5J) Now now you are a city with a state not a state with a city. Some evening you need to explain how so many coal miners voted for their own extinction.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (g8Hfr)

10 My state - PA - sucks complete and utter ass during election years. Or so I'm told.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (9krrF)

11 Man the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the convention will be unbelievable.

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (MJuTN)

12 If I didn't know better, I would think that both parties are trying to lose in November.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (Qvgg/)

13 I've been looking into the Pennsylvania delegates, it's confusing as all get out.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (fizMZ)

14 I hate saying this, but I'd rather a Paul Ryan lose a close election to Hillary rather than Trump handing her a 50 state mandate which becomes increasingly likely as each day goes by.

Posted by: mugiwara at March 31, 2016 09:18 AM (p5yW7)

15 >>>Man the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the convention will be unbelievable. well we'll see some history, which anyone who's ever seen history knows is usually an awful thing.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:19 AM (dciA+)

16 All I gotta say is that as a conservative I'm used to being used, abused, then thrown away by the GOPe. And now I'm getting that treatment from Trump. So I'm more or less at home right now.

Posted by: Witchdoktor at March 31, 2016 09:19 AM (PFy0L)

17 Now now you are a city with a state not a state with a city. Some evening you need to explain how so many coal miners voted for their own extinction. My city sucks so much more than my state. PA isn't really a swing state anymore. It's blue, thanks to Philly and Pittsburgh. And Cavil, yes, I approve of that edit.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:19 AM (Agn5J)

18 I hate saying this, but I'd rather a Paul Ryan lose a close election to Hillary rather than Trump handing her a 50 state mandate which becomes increasingly likely as each day goes by.

--

The problem with that scenario is that Ryan might win.....

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:19 AM (Qvgg/)

19 12 Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 02:18 PM (Qvgg/) You win an already existing recession with Uncle Jan Yellen unwilling to play funny money again... so yeah "winning" like Charlie Sheen

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:19 AM (g8Hfr)

20 If I didn't know better, I would think that both parties are trying to lose in November. They know the country is gonna burn in 2017 or 2018 and don't want to be near it when it does.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:20 AM (hpmES)

21 If I didn't know better, I would think that both parties are trying to lose in November. Right? I'm supporting my sixth-favorite candidate because everyone else is so awful.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 09:20 AM (1xUj/)

22 >>If I didn't know better, I would think that both parties are trying to lose in November. Cleaning up after Barack isn't really an appealing employment perk.

Posted by: garrett at March 31, 2016 09:20 AM (mEs7I)

23 The problem with that scenario is that Ryan might win..... Yep. I cannot stand Ryan anymore. I would almost rather have Kasich.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:20 AM (Agn5J)

24 i would rather have Romney than Ryan, though I hear the chatter is that Ryan is the pick.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (dciA+)

25 Ted's for Syrian refugees? Some people shouldn't call other people a liar.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (fizMZ)

26 Like I said. Skip, you are, well, a phenom. Funny, ace, was about to post my very mundane thought on the whole "contested" convention thing. Just this. The parties are private operations. Someone with more info can correct me, but I think as long as they follow their own rules/by-laws, they can do what they want. So if they decide to "steal" a nomination for someone who has received zero votes from a candidate who has received a zillion votes, that's up to them. Even if the beneficiary hasn't even been running in the primaries. Whether it's outrageous, or evil, or treacherous, etc. or not - well that's up to the voters in the general, the potential donors in the general and future, to decide. But it's not actionably illegal (unless it is, under the party's rules). People have every right to get upset about "shenanigans" at any convention. But the proper, meaningful outlet for that resentment is in voting behavior. The parties are not public entities, and far as I know can follow their own rules (which they themselves decide) on anything they do.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (QDnY+)

27 I hate saying this, but I'd rather a Paul Ryan lose a close election to Hillary rather than Trump handing her a 50 state mandate which becomes increasingly likely as each day goes by. Which probably means you'd get Paul Ryan losing a 50 state rout. Although I'm getting a vibe that something even more screwed up than that might happen...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (9krrF)

28 I think if Ryan gets the nom, the loss is spectacular. Supporters of Trump and Cruz would sit home, thinking the GOPe screwed them again.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (Agn5J)

29 Picking up on the "he didn't really want it" I think the more accurate description is he didnt really want it until he was flattered into seeing himself in the role when it became unexpectedly plausible. But let's say he doesn't get the nod. I don't know that his motivation (or lack thereof) would translate into a vigourous third party run. The problem is still that a good portion of the electorate that would have been anti Hill will probably just not turn out. Seriously, Cruz needs a running mate like Sheriff Clarke, who is not only the right guy, but who can suppress (in a legitimate way) the otherwise fanatical block voting of African Americans in the past few cycles.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (k8tEg)

30 Let's instead talk about Kasick's appeal to Trump's "most ardent" supporters today. Kasick said today, to Trump' supporters, that he feels their pain. Kasick said he understands why Trump supporters are so angry -- because the rich are getting richer, government isn't doing its job, and people are losing their jobs/don't have enough job opportunities. What.The.Fark? Kasick isn't the only one saying exactly this, either. The above is the consensus opinion/talking points among the right's TV talking heads. Is this disconnect for real? There is no way they can be this deaf and blind to reality. They're fucking with us. Playing mindgames with us.

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:21 AM (IV1em)

31 So the GOP establishment wins again....well at least voters now know who they really are. And will never vote for a Republican again.

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 09:22 AM (cF0hS)

32 17. Being from Chicago I have zero sympathy for you

Posted by: Navycopjoe at March 31, 2016 09:22 AM (FOThK)

33 i would rather have Romney than Ryan, though I hear the chatter is that Ryan is the pick. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:21 PM (dciA+) ---- Holy Crap. For a guy that didnt even want to be Speaker.....

Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 09:22 AM (8XRCm)

34 Bottom line, all of  this continues  up to and possibly beyond, June 7.

Lovely. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (TOk1P)

35 They know the country is gonna burn in 2017 or 2018 and don't want to be near it when it does. Yeah, I've been getting that kinda vibe too. I get the feeling Scankles won't find the Presidency to be quite the prize she's expecting it to be...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (9krrF)

36 Trump is ahead by 14 in the PA polls

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (zOTsN)

37 Philadelphia is why Pennsylvania goes blue, usually, right?

Because I used to drive back and forth between Illinois and New York on a semi-regular basis, and the sweet rural Pennsylvania I saw every time I did so just didn't seem like blue country.

Posted by: Kensington at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (7Kbxu)

38 This is going to get very cynical: a fellow I know is running as a Kasich delegate, even though he can't stand Kasich. He figures it gives him the best shot in our college town of libtards (even most of the Republicans). He casts one useless vote for Kasich in the first round, and then he plans to gleefully vote for Cruz. Hahaha- No one will ever know, because the delegation doesn't keep track! I'm betting the Cleveland restaurants and bars are going to be free drinks and meals for persuadable delegates, from start to finish. Party workers are going to be practicing their French in preparation for their appointments to Paris. Nonstop fun.

Posted by: MTF at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (/m8T6)

39 you should see the Bernie fans bitching on facebook, you'd almost think they thought Democrats really represented the people.

Posted by: Satan of Cloggenstein Vt at March 31, 2016 09:23 AM (qSIlh)

40 And will never vote for a Republican again. I would be in that boat. If Ryan or some other GOPe squish gets the nod, I'll stay home. If you're going to pick a "better" candidate, pick one. Don't pick a guy who was schooled in a debate against Joe Biden.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (Agn5J)

41 I think if Ryan gets the nom, the loss is spectacular. Supporters of Trump and Cruz would sit home, thinking the GOPe screwed them again.

--

Exactly.  The GOPe wants my money and wants my vote in the fall, but have no interests in common with me, and then spits in my face by installing one of their own as the nominee, despite the fact that 70% of the GOP voters opposed their original     slate.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (Qvgg/)

42 >>we'll see some history, which anyone who's ever seen history knows is usually an awful thing. Did you steal that? Seriously. It's good.

Posted by: garrett at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (mEs7I)

43 30 Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 02:21 PM (IV1em) I don't give a shit about the rich getting screwed...I'd just like the working class to not be.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (g8Hfr)

44 So we may finally have the mythical convention floor fight (not literally of course). Awesome.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (gmeXX)

45 So, in other words, the Rethug nomination process is only slightly less corrupt than the Donk's.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (Nwg0u)

46 37 Philadelphia is why Pennsylvania goes blue, usually, right? Partially. Philly and Pittsburgh turned the state blue.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:24 AM (Agn5J)

47
so you're saying there is still a chance for the vaunted Gilmore/Fiorina ticket.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (ODxAs)

48 puts the onus on ==== *spits* *points hook em horns at the ground* Ain't gonna put no onus on me!

Posted by: Bigby's Fist, Punching 2x As Hard at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (3ZtZW)

49 So assuming Trump can't win on the first ballot, the thought is instead of switching to Cruz on the second they'll bring in an establishment guy like Ryan?

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (MJuTN)

50 Rush is pointing out on his show today that if it goes to a contested convention, the nominee will most likely end up being someone that didn't run in the primaries. All those primary votes were for naught. Hope everyone is going to be happy with the outcome.

Posted by: Stay out da bushes at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (cR/4a)

51 Romney? Ryan? So you don't really want any type of reformation in the Republican party at all, do you? What I'm hearing is that you want to go into 2018 and 2020 with the status quo, as well.

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (IV1em)

52 I just want to get off this ride. I am so, so, so, so sick of this primary season.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (KUaJL)

53 you should see the Bernie fans bitching on facebook, you'd almost think they thought Democrats really represented the people. ---- Yeah.... I thumbed one in the eye by posting "The Democrat Party, where cheating the voters is in the by-laws."

Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (8XRCm)

54 convention floor fight (not literally of course). - Keep telling yourself that.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (Nwg0u)

55 Holy Crap. For a guy that didnt even want to be Speaker..... Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 02:22 PM (8XRCm) Please dohn throw me in the briar patch!

Posted by: Brer Ryan at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (qf6WZ)

56 Ryan? Jeebus. Romney? Seriously? Non-candidate re-treads being inserted into the slot after the most-watched primary season in history? Of course, against one of the worst opposition candidates, evuh. Hard to call that one. Bernard Lewis' "resistible force meeting a movable object".

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (QDnY+)

57 Someone claimed the other day that ND doesn't vote for R candidates in the preezy primary; sure enough:
 
Republican Presidential Caucuses: The Republican Party will not vote at its caucus, allowing its 28 delegates to remain unpledged to a specific candidate.
 
(from the ND elections website)

Posted by: GnuBreed [/i] [/b] at March 31, 2016 09:25 AM (gyKtp)

58 Is this disconnect for real? There is no way they can be this deaf and blind to reality. They're fucking with us. Playing mindgames with us. This constant assumption that these are all hypergeniuses playing 12-dimensional chess who can constantly outwit us is irritating to the extreme. They're largely idiots playing a carefully stacked deck, and that's all.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (9krrF)

59 "Seriously, Cruz needs a running mate like Sheriff Clarke, who is not only the right guy, but who can suppress (in a legitimate way) the otherwise fanatical block voting of African Americans in the past few cycles."

I just want a sheriff-and-sheriff ticket.

Clarke and Arpaio. In either order. Is that so wrong?

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (noWW6)

60 Pennsylvania? Total cluster of fuck, information wise. Only poll I saw, more than a month ago had a four way tie. Yeah, things are a little different since then. I will say this... being anti-abortion is a winner in Pennsylvania. Not sure if that's why trump went so 'out there'. Or simple political inexperience.

Posted by: mega machines at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (fbovC)

61 Man, our primary system is really Byzantine, isn't it? I get the need for state control, but each candidate probably employs several lawyers just to keep it all straight.

Posted by: pookysgirl at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (RIOu8)

62 Which probably means you'd get Paul Ryan losing a 50 state rout.

Although I'm getting a vibe that something even more screwed up than that might happen...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 02:21 PM (9krrF)



This becomes exponentially difficult to predict, with any number of  factors  being added to the mix. 



The easiest  thing for me to wrap my head around now is the likelihood  of   things  growing ever more  insane, the closer we get to November. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (TOk1P)

63 Rush is pointing out on his show today that if it goes to a contested convention, the nominee will most likely end up being someone that didn't run in the primaries. ---- That would be the end.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (8XRCm)

64 >>> Did you steal that? Seriously. It's good. ... no i said it but it's just a minor variation on 'may you never live in interesting times."

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (dciA+)

65 Love it. I've been saying it's going to a convention for awhile now.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (/E+t2)

66 Fine by me.. any way we can do it is fine by me.. Cruz has proven more adept at getting these types of delegates because: a. They are Republican insiders b. Cruz is an actual Republican 3. Trump has no organization - which is the reason he won't let Lewandowski go..

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 31, 2016 09:26 AM (so+oy)

67 We'll see, lot of race to go yet, and Trump this race has turned around to triumph many times when people had him written off. Because I used to drive back and forth between Illinois and New York on a semi-regular basis, and the sweet rural Pennsylvania I saw every time I did so just didn't seem like blue country. Its like Oregon. Lots of rural, conservative countryside, and small, densely populated pockets of leftists that control the state's politics. Texas isn't that way... yet.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (39g3+)

68 Professor Amnesty See this is why a candidate who is a populist can happen. Because they listen to the people. 80% of all voters want the border secure and immigration curtailed, especially islamic immigration And they are about to offer Professor Fucking Amnesty

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (zOTsN)

69 Pretty soon we're all going to snap and launch into the maniacal Joker laugh. Eventually, republican voters will realize hos badly the party screws us on every occasion. Some people just want the world to burn.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (Agn5J)

70 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (Y5I9o)

71 SMOD, O SMOD!!!

WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN ME???

Posted by: Tex Lovera at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (wtvvX)

72 Because I used to drive back and forth between Illinois and New York on a semi-regular basis, and the sweet rural Pennsylvania I saw every time I did so just didn't seem like blue country. One of my favorite quotes from all of politics, James Carville: "You gotta understand, Pennsylvania is Pittsburgh at one end, Philadelphia at the other, and a whole lot of Alabama in between". (Yes, I grew up in Pennsylvania).

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 09:27 AM (1xUj/)

73 @50 I'd be happy with the outcome neither of the D's getting in.

Posted by: David Wellman at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (Hi6cL)

74 Rush is pointing out on his show today that if it goes to a contested convention, the nominee will most likely end up being someone that didn't run in the primaries. All those primary votes were for naught. ----------- I just don't think there is any way to know what would happen. The precedents for this are all pretty old - before primaries. I could see a Perry or Ryan emerging from a floor fight. I think Cruz is probably the one with the best chance because he has been preparing for this. But given Cruz or the field in a floor fight, I guess I would still bet the field. But this is something that Cruz has been preparing for.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (gmeXX)

75 Rush is pointing out on his show today that if it goes to a contested convention, the nominee will most likely end up being someone that didn't run in the primaries. ............ Yeah.. I just heard that.. and his point was that when part insiders talk about denying Trump, they never mention Cruz as the next choice.. so, he surmises it will be someone like Ryan.. hooo boy!

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (so+oy)

76 "Kasick said today, to Trump' supporters, that he feels their pain."

Ah feel yore pain.

Gosh, that sounds AWFULLY familiar. I could swear I've heard that somewhere before. Give me a minute. I'm sure it'll come to mind.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (noWW6)

77 well we'll see some history, which anyone who's ever seen history knows is usually an awful thing. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:19 PM (dciA+) I didn't write "May you live in interesting times" as a greeting card insert.

Posted by: Possibly some Chinese philosopher, also possibly just some guy in a fortune cookie factory who ident at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (F9322)

78 Another Trump article! *rubs hands in glee, posts new sign*

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (hLRSq)

79 70 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan? Turned squish the day after the 2012 election, started going along to get along, and praised Boehner after taking his job.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:28 AM (Agn5J)

80 If the GOP picks someone that didn't actually run in the primaries, thus utterly negating the entire say of every single GOP party member and voter except for a small group of elites... ...that party is dead. Not just "dead to me" but actually, Whig-level, "Know Nothing" Party dead. Nobody will vote for a party that ignores its membership.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (39g3+)

81 >>>Non-candidate re-treads being inserted into the slot after the most-watched primary season in history? no offense, but if trump doesn't get to 1237, and assuming Cruz looks weak himself (I assume Trump will unleash a scorching "Fornicatin' Ted" campaign as he begins to lose) what is your plan? Just pick one of them anyway? Assuming no one actually wins outright, what's the plan? To stand on ceremony, and get demolished? All three branches of government could be in liberal/socialist hands in January 2017.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (dciA+)

82 I hate everyone.

Posted by: chiefjaybob, who hates everyone at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (pGIWI)

83 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan? Big amnesty fan. Looks like Eddie Munster

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (MJuTN)

84 >>"You gotta understand, Pennsylvania is Pittsburgh at one end, Philadelphia at the other, and a whole lot of Alabama in between". Woodchucks, dude.

Posted by: garrett at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (mEs7I)

85 If I didn't know better, I would think that both parties are trying to lose in November. === If its all going to blow up, give it to Trump so he's holding the bag. No? Guess you don't really think its gonna blow up then, do you?

Posted by: Bigby's Fist, Punching 2x As Hard at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (3ZtZW)

86 If Trump doesn't get to 1,237 he doesn't deserve the nomination just because of a plurality. If 1,237 was good enough for Lincoln and Reagan, then it's sure as hell good enough for trump.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (/E+t2)

87 Rush is pointing out on his show today that if it goes to a contested convention, the nominee will most likely end up being someone that didn't run in the primaries.

----

That would be the end.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 02:26 PM (8XRCm)



It fits the "elder statesman"  theory.  A "respected,"  benignly  non-polarizing  figure, to lose  gracefully, and thus  causing  as  soft  a landing as possible for Gope. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (TOk1P)

88
Ya know I said I would never ever do it, but a paul ryan candidacy might make me think of voting for hillary.

I could at least see the knives coming from the front.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (ODxAs)

89 Kasich will take at least some PA delegates because Cruz is an icky conservative and Trump is Trump.

Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (PjWy4)

90 69 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 02:27 PM (Agn5J) People say wife and I looked like Joker and Harley when we were young... favorite t-shirt was Joker from the Killing Joke

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (g8Hfr)

91 i would rather have Romney than Ryan, though I hear the chatter is that Ryan is the pick. Posted by: ace We've been told that the only people eligible are people still running; supposedly the rules don't allow either drop outs OR never-rans to be considered. How could Ryan or Romney be possibilities unless this interpretations are wrong, or they CAN be changed?

Posted by: Official State Department Travel Warning: at March 31, 2016 09:29 AM (326rv)

92 Like I said. Skip, you are, well, a phenom. ==== Psst: everyone just socks Skip for firsties.

Posted by: Bigby's Fist, Punching 2x As Hard at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (3ZtZW)

93 1 Early and often Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 02:14 PM (fizMZ) Mebbe you should change your nic to Carlos Hathcock, you're getting so good.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (kKHcp)

94 >>>Yeah.. I just heard that.. and his point was that when part insiders talk about denying Trump, they never mention Cruz as the next choice.. so, he surmises it will be someone like Ryan.. hooo boy! the establishment has thoughts along these lines, of course.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (dciA+)

95 I believe Sheriff Clarke is a democrat.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (dFi94)

96 *rubs hands in glee, posts new sign* I get all my outrage goods from Mikey NTH's shop. They're fresh out of popcorn, though.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (39g3+)

97 I could see a Perry or Ryan emerging from a floor fight. I think Cruz is probably the one with the best chance because he has been preparing for this. But given Cruz or the field in a floor fight, I guess I would still bet the field. But this is something that Cruz has been preparing for. Posted by: SH ............... Not a lot of prep Cruz can do beside snagging those unawarded delegates.. the party dislikes him almost as much as Trump.. I was thinking about Perry getting it in a contested convention last night.. I would be more than fine with him. However, being from Texas, he could not pick Cruz as his running mate.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (so+oy)

98 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan? Turned squish the day after the 2012 election, started going along to get along, and praised Boehner after taking his job. ----------- I think Ryan would run stronger than people think. I don't think he would bleed as much conservative support as other potential candidates would (e.g., Romeny). But then again, I'm not as down on Ryan as many (Most) on this board are.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (gmeXX)

99 I'm relieved others saw the little birdie. Thought maybe I'd had another stroke.

Posted by: Bernie 2016 at March 31, 2016 09:30 AM (FXW24)

100 Yeah, like Trump delegates will fall all over themselves in a rush to vote for a guy who jokes on late-night shows about running over Trump with a car.

Posted by: mrp at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (JBggj)

101 People say wife and I looked like Joker and Harley when we were young... Excellent! It'll help when The Burnening comes.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (Agn5J)

102 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan? Because he's not perfect on amnesty and that's the only test and everyone fails. Also he has a side-parting and that just won't do.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (1xUj/)

103 Start cutting checks. Buy them. Posted by: rickb223 ------------------- Isn't that why Trump is meeting with the RNC? To make a fantastic deal with them? Using his good brain, of course.

Posted by: Chi at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (LUPlG)

104 >>>Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan? Big amnesty fan. Looks like Eddie Munster But the guy who supports touch back amnesty is the front runner. This is insanity.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (/E+t2)

105 "Kasick said today, to Trump' supporters, that he feels their pain." Make them all Feel Your Pain with a melee weapon from the Outrage Outlet! * Battleaxes! * Broadswords! * Spears! * And many more! Buy two melee weapons and get a Roamn surplus galdius free!!! Don't delay! Slay today!

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (hLRSq)

106 70 Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at March 31, 2016 02:27 PM (Y5I9o) Ryan: 1) Amigo Grande! 2) Budget Cave 3) Loss to Joey Plugz! add in his total unwillingness/ineffectiveness at using traditional methods to ground the lame duck and the rest is just icing on the cake.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (g8Hfr)

107 Damn. This slippery slope is slippery.

Posted by: Uncle Sam at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (mEs7I)

108 Brother Cavil, first of all I didn't say they were supergeniuses or even capable of fooling anyone. Second, I can prove you wrong in one short sentence: Kasick's appeal to Trump supporters, in which he said he clearly understood their "anger" did not include any specific mention of illegals or islamic terrorism. The Republicans know that these two issues are the top 2, but they'd rather lie and say people are angry about the "rich getting richer."

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (IV1em)

109 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at March 31, 2016 02:27 PM (Y5I9o)



Who is "we?" 



For some of us, it's that he's a soulless, Gope whore, but for some people  I expect that's a feature, not a bug. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (TOk1P)

110 i would rather have Romney than Ryan, though I hear the chatter is that Ryan is the pick. Posted by: ace .......... Romney/Rubio.. I've been saying for 6 months that is what will come out of Cleveland.. but I would prefer Perry. Either of them would kick Hillary's fat ass.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (so+oy)

111 "I will say this... being anti-abortion is a winner in Pennsylvania. Not sure if that's why trump went so 'out there'. Or simple political inexperience."

Or possibly an undiagnosed case of Tourette's Syndrome.

Maybe if it comes to a brokered convention we could nominate the chick with Tourette's from _Deuce Bigalow, Male Gigolo_. That should go over well.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (noWW6)

112 right now as we speak Trump is lobbying the RNC to change the rules to permit him to win on the first ballot with fewer than 1237. So I don't want to hear any jibber-jabber about changing the rules. It's trump seeking a rules change.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (dciA+)

113 Ryan is an open borders, free flow of labor, border be damned sort of guy And heaven help us if the government is shut down. And he will reduce spending in about 25 years

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (zOTsN)

114 People say wife and I looked like Joker and Harley when we were young... So you're terrifying and she's adorable?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:31 AM (39g3+)

115 So... different day, new Trump lies.


And wasn't it Trump who said last year that we need to take "our fair share" of splodey refugees (spodefugees?).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (3JA/M)

116 If Cruz or Trump is the eventual nominee.... Im pulling the lever for either. If some body chosen by the GOPe emerges as the nominee.... Im done. Finished. Not another dime. Not another minute. I wouldnt help a local Republican run for local school board. I will spend my remaining years tending to my family and reloading ammunition. I will never vote again. I mean it.

Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (8XRCm)

117 I just want a sheriff-and-sheriff ticket. Clarke and Arpaio. In either order. Is that so wrong? If Arpaio wasn't 81 or 83, I'd say yes in a heartbeat.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (hpmES)

118 101 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 02:31 PM (Agn5J) I'll be your deputy sheriff... Looks can be deceiving I am a law and order guy.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (g8Hfr)

119 You know who this benefits?

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (Agn5J)

120 Last guy to do the "get the nomination after all the others flame out" on a late ballot was Warren G. Harding. Can't imagine that working today. People will feel too angry their primary vote didn't count.

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (MJuTN)

121 They are all seeking rules changes. All of them. Except Cruz

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (zOTsN)

122 I'm not as optimistic for a Cruz or Trump win in the General as I once was. Each camp will be sitting home if their candidate is not the nominee. I think this is especially true of the Trump supporters because they will believe they got robbed. Sad state of affairs.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (MSiSP)

123 that party is dead. Not just "dead to me" but actually, Whig-level, "Know Nothing" Party dead. Nobody will vote for a party that ignores its membership. ----------- I just don't see that as being true. Plus it depends on what the candidates say. Assume it is Ryan, we can imaging Trump not supporting, but Cruz would give his full support. I don't think all of Cruz supporters would then walk away with Cruz in full support of Ryan. There are simply too many unknowns.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:32 AM (gmeXX)

124 ryan is a true believer in amnesty. he's passionate about it. He's an anglo Marco Rubio. No sale with this particular cowboy.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (dciA+)

125 guy who jokes on late-night shows about running over Trump with a car. Posted by: mrp at March 31, 2016 02:31 PM (JBggj) It was a joke, get over it. That orange tinted prick insults everybody in case you missed it.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (/E+t2)

126 If Cruz or Trump is the eventual nominee.... Im pulling the lever for either. If some body chosen by the GOPe emerges as the nominee.... Im done. Finished. Not another dime. Not another minute. I wouldnt help a local Republican run for local school board. I will spend my remaining years tending to my family and reloading ammunition. I will never vote again. I mean it. Ding ding ding! Winner winner chicken dinner!

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (hpmES)

127 Romney/Rubio.. I've been saying for 6 months that is what will come out of Cleveland.. but I would prefer Perry. Either of them would kick Hillary's fat ass. Picking Romney for the president means "most of your base sits home and leaves the party because what's the point of even being in a group you have zero input in?"

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (39g3+)

128 I'll be your deputy sheriff... I like being a happy, invisible detective in the worst neighborhood in Philly. I don't want to be a boss of anyone but me... and Vica Kerekes.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (Agn5J)

129 "It seems most likely he will not actually make it." The linked article actually says: "Delegate math experts interviewed by The Hill say that if current trends hold, Trump will finish within a few delegates either above or below that magic number. He faces a tricky path to that threshold." Trump will either recover from a bad March or he won't. If he keeps being his own worst enemy, he won't get near 1,237. If he loses Wisconsin, which looks likely, then next up is NY where Trump can win all 95 delegates if he gets over 50%, which the most recent poll says he will. If so, he's back on track to 1,237 or so. After NY it'll be even clearer that Cruz is running as a spoiler with no chance of getting the nomination. So his effectiveness as a Trump alternative will wither. I expect Kasich will start to do better as the anti-Trump.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (r1fLd)

130 Look, time out... Let's not make blood oaths not to back a "winner" of a contested convention... Abe Lincoln won a contested convention... I still think as I have said for years that Nikki Haley or S Martinez would be the way to curb stomp Hillary! If either of them get the nod I'm game.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (g8Hfr)

131 Jeff Sessions 2016?

Posted by: My Ridiculously Circuitous Plan at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (FohCt)

132 Because he's not perfect on amnesty and that's the only test and everyone fails.

Also he has a side-parting and that just won't do.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 02:31 PM (1xUj/)



Not perfect on amnesty... what a cute phrase.



Sorta  like  a little  bit pregnant.  Some things  ARE  black and white. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (TOk1P)

133 If Billy Graham weren't so old, I'd write his name in.  Maybe I will anyway.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (dFi94)

134 b. Cruz is an actual Republican ------------ Which is just one of the problems I have with him. Yes, he's the most conservative candidate in the race, but he has supported amnesty in the past (even though he says he hasn't).

Posted by: Stay out da bushes at March 31, 2016 09:33 AM (cR/4a)

135 Start cutting checks. Buy them.

Posted by: rickb223 at March 31, 2016 02:18 PM (hpmES)


First, that is explicitly illegal.



Second, there is not enough money in the world to make some people vote for Trump.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (3JA/M)

136 What I forsee is Trump and Cruz close to tied, and neither getting 1237 for the first round, and Cruz winning on the second   or third, due to his   ability to swing delegates.  Cruz may actually be ahead by then    considering    the last few foolish remarks by Trump.

If the GOPe tries to install one of their own, who has not run in the primaries, we will need to    come up with a name for a new party, because the republican party will cease to exist.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (Qvgg/)

137 Sorta like a little bit pregnant. Some things ARE black and white.
=============================================


Who is black and white on immigration?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (dFi94)

138 >>>Ryan is an open borders, free flow of labor, border be damned sort of guy And heaven help us if the government is shut down. And he will reduce spending in about 25 years ... just quoting to say I agree. Paul Ryan is the intellectual leader of GOP office-holders' open-borders faction.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (dciA+)

139 128 Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 02:33 PM (Agn5J) Someone has to keep the flame of order alive even if it glows less than a birthday candle. Wyatt if I am ever in Philly I'll buy you a drink.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (g8Hfr)

140 I'm as sick of Paul Ryan as anyone, he's proven himself to be a squish on pretty much everything, but other than amnesty/border security is there a single issue on which he's more liberal than Trump? And this of course assumes Trump is not entirely full of shit on amnesty/border security, a pretty big assumption.

Posted by: mugiwara at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (p5yW7)

141 123 that party is dead. Not just "dead to me" but actually, Whig-level, "Know Nothing" Party dead. Nobody will vote for a party that ignores its membership. ----------- I just don't see that as being true. Plus it depends on what the candidates say. Assume it is Ryan, we can imaging Trump not supporting, **but Cruz would give his full support.** Talk about cementing RINO bonafides.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:34 AM (hpmES)

142 133 If Billy Graham weren't so old, I'd write his name in. Maybe I will anyway. I'm writing in Superstar Billy Graham, the wrestler.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (Agn5J)

143 Yep, Trump voters will never go for Cruz or any insider. But who cares about Trump voters anyway...they are nothing but a bunch of dunces, it matters not if they show up in November.

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (cF0hS)

144 I just don't see that as being true. Plus it depends on what the candidates say. Why on earth would anyone stay in a party that doesn't even let you vote for the candidate of choice? Why would anyone even stay with a party that ignores the clear outraged, tooth-gnashing fury of the voters and picks the exact class of people everyone is so infuriated over them for shoving at us over and over?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (39g3+)

145 "If Trump doesn't get to 1,237 he doesn't deserve the nomination just because of a plurality." No, but he has a better argument than somebody whose hat wasn't even in the ring. N.B.: I am a Cruz supporter* I'm just saying be cautious in how you do this. *Trump just makes everybody else look like cardboard cutouts this time around.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (hLRSq)

146 Actually, Ryan turned out to be far less impressive than at a casual first glance. Many of his "ideas" on economics are silly, illiterate, stupid - and of course are the basis for disastrous, unpopular policy "ideas" (amnesty). And of course his seriousness or political instincts were on display right off the bat as Speaker when yet ANOTHER cycle of CR vs. regular order appropriations was hand-waved through. Recall that appearing "bright" in the context of Barack Obama being president (go back to the famous 2010 O-care "summit"), um, well let's say that it's a low bar.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (QDnY+)

147 I hate saying this, but I'd rather a Paul Ryan lose a close election to Hillary rather than Trump handing her a 50 state mandate which becomes increasingly likely as each day goes by.

Posted by: mugiwara at March 31, 2016 02:18 PM (p5yW7)


Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (3JA/M)

148 Holy Crap. For a guy that didnt even want to be Speaker.... . Posted by: fixerupper at March 31, 2016 02:22 PM (8XRCm) It's like the Navy. Every captain thinks they will/should be an Admiral, until enough years pass and they aren't. Though maybe there's no expiration date in politics.

Posted by: naturalfake at March 31, 2016 09:35 AM (0cMkb)

149 Look, time out...

Let's not make blood oaths not to back a "winner" of a contested convention...

Abe Lincoln won a contested convention...

I still think as I have said for years that Nikki Haley or S Martinez would be the way to curb stomp Hillary!

If either of them get the nod I'm game.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 02:33 PM (g8Hfr)



I can imagine   some  acceptable candidates who COULD  emerge from a contested  convention.  It  is  for that reason  I don't expect they will. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (TOk1P)

150 "Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota and Pennsylvania will either send unbound delegates to the convention, or will elect delegates who have already declared a preference for one of the candidates." So really they are GOP Stealth Super-Delegates just like the rat-fuck DNC I am going from annoyed to slightly outraged that both parties take so many steps to undo the votes of the Great Unwashed.

Posted by: The Tedster at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (DN9jO)

151 >>Who is black and white on immigration? Look to the cookie!

Posted by: Jerry Seinfeld at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (mEs7I)

152 Trump has assembled an army of honeypots to target delegates and win the nomination.

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (iQIUe)

153 >>> Jeff Sessions 2016? Fuck that turncoat prick.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (/E+t2)

154 I think its a distinct possibility that Trump no longer wants to work to be President and is trying to sabotage his own campaign. What other explanation could there be?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (MSiSP)

155 Someone has to keep the flame of order alive even if it glows less than a birthday candle. Wyatt if I am ever in Philly I'll buy you a drink. Heh, thanks. I love my job, and that's a rare thing. I love my city, just not its politics.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (Agn5J)

156 well, let's just say that I sincerely hope that Trump and Cruz have a secret deal that we finally learn of at the convention. Otherwise the Big Guy only knows whom we'll get stuck with, and he won't tell me.

Posted by: Satan of Cloggenstein Vt at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (qSIlh)

157 Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan?

He delivered a budget to the Democrats that not even Obama or Hillary could ever have dreamed of getting.

Who is zooming who here that he is a conservative?

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (ODxAs)

158 You need to reminded that Paul Ryan has betrayed you at every turn for the last 6 years? You need to be reminded that Ryan and Boehner have been passing bill after bill with majority Democrat support in the Republican-led House? You need to be reminded that Paul Ryan has gone out of his way on more than one occasion to scold Conservatives whilst advancing obama's full agenda unabated? You need to be reminded of Paul Ryan joining the chorus led by obama telling "who we are" and "who we are not?"

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (IV1em)

159 I don't see how spawn of mailman can be allowed in the convention with the state state rule in place. If I understand the current rules as the stand, the 8 state rule applies on the second ballot too if no one secures the needed 1237 delegates. So wtf is he doing still running and talking about the convention?

Posted by: L, Elle at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (2x3L+)

160 112 >> It's trump seeking a rules change.
 
Well, maybe we'll get to see some of his self-vaunted deal making skilz in action then.

Posted by: GnuBreed TC>>DT>>>>HC/BS [/i] [/b] at March 31, 2016 09:36 AM (gyKtp)

161 Upton, Tiegen 2016!

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 09:37 AM (Agn5J)

162 >>> Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible). under current rules, which can be (and probably will be) rewritten before the convention.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:37 AM (dciA+)

163 Every candidate from the dawn of time has had some flaws, all you need to do is to pick the one with the least.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:37 AM (fizMZ)

164 Which is just one of the problems I have with him. Yes, he's the most conservative candidate in the race, but he has supported amnesty in the past oh yeah, there are problems with Cruz, a lot of them. He wasn't in my top picks for candidates. He's a lawyer. he hasn't had any real executive experience. He's spent his whole life arguing and talking but not actually doing anything. He's at best soft on immigration when we need blue steel. But he's the least awful of the candidates left. And he does seem to genuinely, from within, get conservatism at a gut and intuitive level.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:37 AM (39g3+)

165 Sorta like a little bit pregnant. Some things ARE black and white.
=============================================


Who is black and white on immigration?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 02:34 PM (dFi94)



Everybody. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:37 AM (TOk1P)

166 >>>You need to reminded that Paul Ryan has betrayed you at every turn for the last 6 years? he's kept perfect faith with the establishment which is what matters to them, of course.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (dciA+)

167 "Can someone remind me again why we don't like Ryan?"

Ryan was the guy who, after crudely cramming through the horrific "cromnibus" budget bill that gave Obama pretty much everything Obama wanted, had his office release a list of "key conservative victories in the budget deal".

Among those "victories"? Relieving the members of Big Labor of the burden of the "Cadillac tax" which Obamacare had been about to impose on their health plans.

Yes, that's right. According to Paul Ryan, helping out a key Democratic constituency to get rid of a painful self-inflicted problem of theirs, and helping further embed Obamacare like an infected tick in the body politic, is a, quote, "key conservative victory".

What are these people smoking?

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (noWW6)

168 82 I hate everyone. Posted by: chiefjaybob, who hates everyone at March 31, 2016 02:29 PM (pGIWI) Yeah, we need to form a club or something.

Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (PjWy4)

169 149 Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 02:36 PM (TOk1P) Agreed, I said "draft one of the lady governors at gunpoint If need be"... b/c "smart" which you know our party isn't.

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (g8Hfr)

170 Well,, I've got soeme good news and some bad news... The good news is, just six more short weeks and I'll be out of this body cast (yea me!). The Bad news is, I'm still gonna' have to wear this inverted funnel over my head so I don't lick myself when I'm sleeping...

Posted by: Michelle Fields at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (HSmrB)

171 10 My state - PA - sucks ... Or so I'm told. Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 02:18 PM (9krrF) Thems be fightin' words dude! :-) Actually once you get out of Philthy, It's rather nice.

Posted by: Drill Thrawl at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (DN9jO)

172 >>> but he has supported amnesty in the past (even though he says he hasn't). Well name one guy of the final three that doesn't or hasn't supported amnesty at some point.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:38 AM (/E+t2)

173 Face it; Hilary will win. Or if you ascribe to the lack of Democrat enthusiasm then perhaps the Republican candidate can squeak by. That means Jeb or Paul Ryno. And that means the country continues to fall apart. Personally, I think Trump's disastrous performance on Chris Matthews will energize the moribund Leftists with fresh "war on women" ammo. Nice job, Donald.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (p4UlV)

174 So I don't want to hear any jibber-jabber about changing the rules. It's trump seeking a rules change. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:31 PM (dciA+) So you are going media dark then? Because that is all that the pundits and commentators have been jibber-jabbering about for weeks now. *shrug* Beats working.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (hLRSq)

175 168 82 I hate everyone. Posted by: chiefjaybob, who hates everyone at March 31, 2016 02:29 PM (pGIWI) Yeah, we need to form a club or something. Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 02:38 PM (PjWy4) I'm in.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (0mRoj)

176 Why on earth would anyone stay in a party that doesn't even let you vote for the candidate of choice? Why would anyone even stay with a party that ignores the clear outraged, tooth-gnashing fury of the voters and picks the exact class of people everyone is so infuriated over them for shoving at us over and over? ----------- Because reality is just not so black and white. I don't want Trump - so I'm part of the 65% that don't want him. Well if there is 65% that don't want Cruz, then what? I certainly think it would be foolish of the GOP to ignore the 70% that do not want a "GOPe" but there are a lot of variables at play. I would expect that Cruz would get some concessions somehow. I'm just willing to wait and see. Picking Jeb would be a mistake. But I think Ryan plays a lot better than most here think. Obviously I could be wrong - very wrong. Just offering my opinion.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (gmeXX)

177 STAND BACK! Optimistic statement incoming! ----------------------------- Despite all the dire warnings and circular firing squads and disintegration of the GOP, things are actually in a good place politically right now. Count our blessings: The "establishment" wing of the GOP has been thoroughly defeated and rejected. The only two candidates remaining in the race are the two candidates MOST DESPISED by the Establishment. All the Bushes, all the squishes, all the moderates, and the go-along-to-get-alongers, all the compromisers have been obliterated during this campaign. We are left with the MOST conservative Constitutionalist and the MOST outsider-y anti-Beltway madman. Considering how bad things couldhave been, this is actually the most pleasing two-man race there could have been, because it's two non-establishment candidates running against each other. Either way, the establishment will lose. Secondly, Hillary is cheating her way to victory, and even the Democrats are complaining bitterly about it, and her negatives remain sky-high and she has NOT picked up any momentum or any new voter demographic. She's still stuck with -- old white ladies -- blacks -- corrupt crony politicians ...and not much else. She remains eminent beatable. I don't give a whit about meaningless "putative matchup" polls at this stage; either Cruz or Trump could easily beat her in the general election. Sander will likely not win, but if he does, he has so many skeletons in the closet, he will be easy to discredit. He's been skating along with very little oppo research so far because he's not worth the effort, but Lord help the man if he ever actually got the nomination. He would be ruinated (by me personally if necessary). Outside of ignorant college students and aging leftists and media members, he has little support anywhere, frankly. And as for Trump, I reiterate my claim that he will NOT be a dictator or even a forceful president at all, but mostly a get-nothing-done lame-ass president, which I count as a good thing. Things are not that bad, really.

Posted by: zombie at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (jBuUi)

178 re 143: are you the 'Pam' whose daughter calls your mother 'mama'? Saw that in the previous thread and was just wondering.

Posted by: Satan of Cloggenstein Vt at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (qSIlh)

179 All these things people are concerned about with Trump the Republican Party has been doing for at least 25 years, at least his squishy policy positions. His main appeal was the border and immigration. Period. Ryan is the new Prince of Open Borders Fuck this I will vote for Trump over Ryan, because I know Ryan doesn't give a shit that 80 percent of the voters, ALL voters, want the border secured He doesn't care about that

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:39 AM (zOTsN)

180 Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible). Posted by: redbanzai Aaannndd we're back to this. Do the rules allow this or not? If not, can they be changed? Cause there seems to be a crapton of people who believe that they either do allow it, or that they can be changed to allow it.

Posted by: Official State Department Travel Warning: at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (326rv)

181 I read the post. *flogs himself*.

Posted by: Oppressed Eyetalian Guy at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (gxIP7)

182 162 Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:37 PM (dciA+) Correct Ace.... we can argue about whether or not our rules should be so malleable but "they are."

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (g8Hfr)

183 >>L 170 Well,, I've got soeme good news and some bad news... The good news is, just six more short weeks and I'll be out of this body cast (yea me!). The Bad news is, I'm still gonna' have to wear this inverted funnel over my head so I don't lick myself when I'm sleeping... ... that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (dciA+)

184 It was a joke, get over it. That orange tinted prick insults everybody in case you missed it.
=======================

"Orange-tinted prick".  Things are a bit tense, aren't they?

In any case, I did say "joke".

Posted by: mrp at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (JBggj)

185 Second, I can prove you wrong in one short sentence: Kasick's appeal to Trump supporters, in which he said he clearly understood their "anger" did not include any specific mention of illegals or islamic terrorism. The Republicans know that these two issues are the top 2, but they'd rather lie and say people are angry about the "rich getting richer." Let me suggest an alternative which is not incompatible with my original formulation: The GOPe is simply so locked into their worldview they cannot conceive of anything different being legitimate. They don't understand the base's anger because they simply don't live in the same world, don't share their experiences, can't comprehend how they think. The 2016 election is, for them, an Outside Context Problem, one they couldn't even conceive was possible, and are still largely uncomprehending of.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (9krrF)

186 I think its a distinct possibility that Trump no longer wants to work to be President and is trying to sabotage his own campaign. What other explanation could there be?Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck  Maybe somebody's going to kidnap his daughter at her wedding?

Posted by: Ross de Perot at March 31, 2016 09:40 AM (fbovC)

187 >>>> Yeah, we need to form a club or something. Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 02:38 PM (PjWy4) ------ Me too. I'll make the sammiches

Posted by: L, Elle at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (2x3L+)

188 >>Do the rules allow this or not? If not, can they be changed? No. Yes.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (/tuJf)

189 Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible).

under current rules, which can be (and probably will be) rewritten before the convention.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:37 PM (dciA+)


Under current rules, under old rule... under any rules that are probable, Paul Ryan, Willard, et al (hell, even Kasich and Rubio) will not be eligible. There is neither precedent nor will to do the complete 180 that would be necessary to make that happen.



You guys are wishcasting (or nightmarecasting).

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (3JA/M)

190 Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible). Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 02:35 PM (3JA/M) The rules will be changed by voice vote. As they were in 2012. And the guy calling the outcome of the voice vote will be a super-reliable, GOPe flunky. As happened in 2012. (Boehner) So, as per usual, another conservative revolution ends with a wet fart. If Cruz can't make it, and increasingly it looks like he can't. Then Trump is the only way to force a GOPe loss by him winning enough votes. YMMV. But, thinking the rules won't change is dream-casting.

Posted by: naturalfake at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (0cMkb)

191 Sorta like a little bit pregnant. Some things ARE black and white.
=============================================


Who is black and white on immigration?


Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 02:34 PM (dFi94)


Everybody.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 02:37 PM (TOk1P)



Look,  I'm going to make this easy on you.   The  illegal  mexican  issue  is an existential threat to this country.  It  is not unlike the abortion question.  There are people  who will tell you abortion is murder.  Any way you slice it, no matter how you slice  it.  Those  who are doing the slicing ARE  pro-abortion.  Period.



Same  with   illegal  mexicans.  If  you are sliding  around  on or at the the borders, you are pro-illegal  mexicans,   period. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (TOk1P)

192 Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:39 PM (0mRoj) I don't think you're allowed to join. There are at least four persons under the age of 17 whom you don't hate, right? They may sometimes make your hair out, but hate-nah

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (w4NZ8)

193 "that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife." I thought that was only in Dearborn.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (0mRoj)

194 They're going to do what they want, no matter what we natter on about.  We have no representation.  I was foolish to think we ever did.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (dFi94)

195 As far as I know someone will have 1237 delegates by the end of the convention.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (fizMZ)

196 Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges? I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture. Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 09:41 AM (1xUj/)

197 Upton, Tiegen 2016! Posted by: Wyatt Earp at March 31, 2016 02:37 PM (Agn5J) Now there's a ticket I could get behind!

Posted by: OneEyedJack at March 31, 2016 09:42 AM (kKHcp)

198 Yes, that's right. According to Paul Ryan, helping out a key Democratic constituency to get rid of a painful self-inflicted problem of theirs, and helping further embed Obamacare like an infected tick in the body politic, is a, quote, "key conservative victory". What are these people smoking? Dried yak dung.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:42 AM (hpmES)

199 Four states out of the remaining 20 break from the traditional primaries and caucuses held elsewhere by sending unbound delegates to the national convention. These contests will test the organizational strength of the candidates. LOL. That's some pretty funny writing, there. Whoever wrote that ought to be doing standup.

Posted by: ThePrimoridalOrderedPair at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (zc3Db)

200 "He's a lawyer."

And unfortunately Ted talks like one when on the stump.

There are election cycles where the voters are open to electing a wonk who uses big words and references abstract concepts. There are election cycles where the voters don't want wonkery and want things kept short, simple and punchy. This cycle appears to be one of the latter.

(Remembering here the classic _Onion_ parody of the 1980 race. Where Carter was putting forth longwinded wonk fodder like gas mileage improvement proposals, and Reagan was simply saying "Kill the bastards!" over and over again.)

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (noWW6)

201 Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges? I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture. Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages? Dark, dank, smelly. No reason for a "good" person to go down there.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (hpmES)

202 who do you think writes the convention rules, redbanzai? It's the delegates -- who are almost all party activists and officials. People speak of "Cruz's delegates" and "Trump's delegates." But those delegates are one thing: PARTY delegates. The idea that the party cannot rewrite the rules, *as it did in 2012 to deny Ron Paul delegates some states,* is silly.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (dciA+)

203 Maybe if it comes to a brokered convention we could nominate the chick with Tourette's from _Deuce Bigalow, Male Gigolo_. That should go over well. === She was just a shadow of the one in IIRC The Mechanic with Charles Bronson what screamed stuff like "...mmMmMonkey VOMIT!!1!

Posted by: Bigby's Fist, Punching 2x As Hard at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (3ZtZW)

204 You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife. Wow, you mean a divorce case got ugly and brutal and horrible over millions of dollars? Say it isn't so! Trump is a bad enough guy on the face of things without this kind of reaching. You're gonna pull a tendon.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:43 AM (39g3+)

205 that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:40 PM (dciA+) ________________ I know,, that was pretty good...

Posted by: Michelle Fields at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (HSmrB)

206 If you are sliding around on or at the the borders, you are pro-illegal mexicans, period.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 02:41 PM (TOk1P)

==========================================



I understand that.  My question was, which candidate or politician is strictly black or white on this issue?  All the time without exception or wiggle room.  Is there one?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (dFi94)

207 What baffles me is the mind of a creature like Rubio. He betrays the voters who put him in office, QUITS the job they gave him, says they should give him a BETTER job, and when they refuse, takes his 170 little votes to convention so that what, the Party will GIVE him the job, and then we all fall in line and vote for him? Kasich has a more comprehensible line, at least to VP. There's a distinguished history of flakes and assholes as Veep. Hell, even Trump would have a solid claim as VP on both counts.

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (Kucy5)

208 I hate everyone. I don't call myself a political misanthrope for nothing.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (9krrF)

209 Like we're told daily, Trump will win, Cruz can't win, Trump will beat Hillary and Unicorns fart cotton candy.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (2PHKP)

210 >>Do the rules allow this or not? If not, can they be changed?

No.

Yes.

Posted by: JackStraw at March 31, 2016 02:41 PM (/tuJf)



Yep.  That's  all  there  is to it.



Except to say, does  ANYBODY  really think   if  it  comes  to it, Gope  is going to allow themselves to be tied  to Trump  vs.  Cruz?  In a contested  convention? 



Really?



No.  I mean... really???

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (TOk1P)

211 Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, Trump's SuperPAC is going to work on Cruz, claiming he favors "amnesty" for Syrian refugees. Well ... there are still truckloads of teddy bears and soccer balls to hand out ...

Posted by: ThePrimoridalOrderedPair at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (zc3Db)

212 re 177: And as for Trump, I reiterate my claim that he will NOT be a dictator or even a forceful president at all, but mostly a get-nothing-done lame-ass president, which I count as a good thing. Zombie, I have said before and I'll repeat myself: if Trump makes it to the White House, his seemingly limitless desire to be great will most likely make him want to go down in the books as a great president. I saw on facebook the other day that Senator Senile wants to spend a trillion dollars to create 13 million jobs and rebuild our infrastructure. God only knows that my cat knows as much about infrastructure as the Burlington Jackass, but my response to Sanders would be three words: "Wollman Ice Rink"

Posted by: Satan of Cloggenstein Vt at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (qSIlh)

213 Speaking of Wyatt reminded me that in the last Presidential election parts of Philadelphia voted 100% for Barak, not one Wyatt voted for Mittens.

Posted by: Skip at March 31, 2016 09:44 AM (fizMZ)

214 It is now clear to me that to the majority of Republicans in Washington the Tea Party movement was no different from the OWS movement. All they saw was an angry resentful mob. An angry mob that needed to be pacified with government scraps, empty promises, and sweet nothings.

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:45 AM (IV1em)

215
Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges?

I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture.

Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages?

---

Bridges fell down a   lot, so probably scary places. 

I would guess that   the theme of    trolls under bridges were a product of an   always     dark space under a route that had to be taken (most people could not swim back then).

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:45 AM (Qvgg/)

216 The GOP can make up any rules it wants. And we know they don't want Trump or Cruz, so expect rules changes.

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2016 09:45 AM (MJuTN)

217 I don't think the delegates will rewrite the rules to allow anyone else *unless* the remaining candidates look like sure losers. which they might.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:45 AM (dciA+)

218 As far as I know someone will have 1237 delegates by the end of the convention.
==========

Hmmm.... what are the RNC rules on quorum calls?

Like, if more than 1/2 the delegates walk out?

Posted by: mrp at March 31, 2016 09:45 AM (JBggj)

219 Under current rules, under old rule... under any rules that are probable, Paul Ryan, Willard, et al (hell, even Kasich and Rubio) will not be eligible. There is neither precedent nor will to do the complete 180 that would be necessary to make that happen. You guys are wishcasting (or nightmarecasting). Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 02:41 PM (3JA/M) Are you trying to ruin pundits and steal the bread from their starving children's mouths? If they cannot toss-up ever more Rube Goldberg inspired fevered plans what will become of comments threads like this?

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 09:46 AM (hLRSq)

220 If you are sliding around on or at the the borders, you are pro-illegal mexicans, period.


Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 02:41 PM (TOk1P)
==========================================

I understand that. My question was, which candidate or politician is strictly black or white on this issue? All the time without exception or wiggle room. Is there one?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 02:44 PM (dFi94)



They're  all politicians.  So no.  None of them  will ever say anything that  expresses  their position in  black and white terms.



Because  they are, indeed, politicians. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:46 AM (TOk1P)

221 that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:40 PM (dciA+) Ace, really.....you often have good points to make. You don't need to be this desperate.

Posted by: Jen the original at March 31, 2016 09:46 AM (ph1j2)

222 Ryan: 1) Amigo Grande! 2) Budget Cave 3) Loss to Joey Plugz! add in his total unwillingness/ineffectiveness at using traditional methods to ground the lame duck and the rest is just icing on the cake. -- This. What, pray tell, has Ryan done to stop the socialist avalanche? Nothing. Quite the contrary, he appears to have just buckled under and given King Putt everything he wanted. Some people may make the effort to get off their couches and vote for him in November, but my money is on the biggest "stay home" bloc of voters the GOP has ever seen.

Posted by: Donald Trump at March 31, 2016 09:46 AM (pVkEV)

223 I would guess that the theme of trolls under bridges were a product of an always dark space under a route that had to be taken (most people could not swim back then).

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 02:45 PM (Qvgg/)

==============================================



I read a storybook about that just yesterday.  Tripp Trapp.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:46 AM (dFi94)

224 >>> Wow, you mean a divorce case got ugly and brutal and horrible over millions of dollars? Say it isn't so! Trump is a bad enough guy on the face of things without this kind of reaching. You're gonna pull a tendon. um, how is this reaching? It all happened. And if assholes are going to continue to bait, laughing up Michelle Fields being roughed up by Trump's thug, then I'm going to bait right the fuck back.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (dciA+)

225 Do the rules allow this or not? If not, can they be changed? Cause there seems to be a crapton of people who believe that they either do allow it, or that they can be changed to allow it.

Posted by: Official State Department Travel Warning: at March 31, 2016 02:40 PM (326rv)


They can be changed to allow it. Hell the Republican Party as a private entity could in theory change the rules to have the nominee chosen via a game of naked Johnny on the Pony... but they would have to have the votes on the rules committee and those rules would have to be affirmed by the delegates.


So while they can change the rules (and stupidly did in 2012), there is no precedent. AT. ALL. to allow someone who hasn't even been running for President to get the nomination.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (3JA/M)

226
The good news is the Dems will be running the worst candidate in the history of prez elections.  Only a party like the Repubs could lose to a candidate like that.

Oh...wait...

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (ODxAs)

227 I'm just trying to figure out who the GOPe would put up in a contested convention that I'd vote for in the general. No one springs to mind. I guess that's a bad thing.

Posted by: Witchdoktor at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (eytER)

228 Like we're told daily, Trump will win, Cruz can't win, Trump will beat Hillary and Unicorns fart cotton candy. I have it on good authority that its skittles.

Posted by: President Barack Hussein O'Bama at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (39g3+)

229 /sock

Posted by: Lady in Black - Death to the Man Bun at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (pVkEV)

230 Yes, that's right. According to Paul Ryan, helping out a key Democratic constituency to get rid of a painful self-inflicted problem of theirs, and helping further embed Obamacare like an infected tick in the body politic, is a, quote, "key conservative victory". What are these people smoking? Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 02:38 PM (noWW6) Maybe we're the one smoking something thinking "conservative" means rolling back the size of government or effectively opposing Democrats.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (uURQL)

231 Fuck that turncoat prick.
Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 02:36 PM (/E+t2)
Please do explain.

Posted by: My Ridiculously Circuitous Plan at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (FohCt)

232 Polls seem to be swinging around a lot lately, latest Marquette poll via The Hill March 31, 2016, 11:39 am Cruz, Trump in dead heat in Wisconsin poll http://tinyurl.com/zjkkx79

Posted by: kbdabear at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (sfgg2)

233 It is now clear to me that to the majority of Republicans in Washington the Tea Party movement was no different from the OWS movement. All they saw was an angry resentful mob. An angry mob that needed to be pacified with government scraps, empty promises, and sweet nothings. Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 02:45 PM (IV1em) They saw them differently. If you recall, the Weeping Boner thought the Tea party was too violent and nasty ... but he "understood" the frustrations of the Occupoopers, which was amazing because the Occupoopers didn't even understand themselves.

Posted by: ThePrimoridalOrderedPair at March 31, 2016 09:47 AM (zc3Db)

234 TYPO - Ace "One interesting thing from The Hill article -- in four of the remaining states, most delegates are elected by primary voters, but by state party officials." I'm guessing there should be a NOT in there.

Posted by: Anthony Weiners Ghost at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (N1ljp)

235 Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges? Bridges were liminal spaces, transitions from one thing or place to the next. The Romans had a deity for bridges, even had its high priest as the official head cleric of the Roman state. You may be familiar with the title: Pontifex Maximus. It's still in use in an altered form, 2000 years later, thus proving that there is such a thing as immortality in this world--if you're a bureaucracy.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (9krrF)

236 >>>Ace, really.....you often have good points to make. You don't need to be this desperate. um it's desperate how? His wife claimed this, and Trump's lawyer claimed (erroneously) you can't rape your wife. Oh I see -- you think that Ivanna's word, after she got paid off, is the *truthful* word.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (dciA+)

237 I'm just trying to figure out who the GOPe would put up in a contested convention that I'd vote for in the general. No one springs to mind. I guess that's a bad thing. -------------- Perry?

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (gmeXX)

238 My typically too-long comment above was right on this topic of rules, and "corruption" in the process. The parties are private entities. The only sanction/control outsiders (voters) have over them is ..... through voting. If something is seen as a "corrupt bargain" (the name for the most famous "contested" nomination process), then ...... news flash, the party will probably suffer through suppressed turnout from its own partisans and even sympathetic independents. But - we'll see. Sort of like head/head polling for prez elections in March, it's hard to really know much about how things will eventually transpire.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (QDnY+)

239 Bridges were a great ambush site for highwaymen.

Posted by: OneEyedJack at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (kKHcp)

240
I
understand that. My question was, which candidate or politician is
strictly black or white on this issue? All the time without exception or
wiggle room. Is there one?


Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 02:44 PM (dFi94)


They're all politicians. So no. None of them will ever say anything that expresses their position in black and white terms.

Because they are, indeed, politicians.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 02:46 PM (TOk1P)



And let me amend that by saying, sure, there are congresscritters who speak in absolute  terms.  I can't  tell  you which  ones, because  I generally don't listen  to the utterings  of congresscritters. 



I acknowledge  some of them are right honorable  and decent people.  I paint the whole  lot of them  with a broad  brush, but yes, I know there are exceptions. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (TOk1P)

241 162 >>> Paul Ryan isn't running for President and will not get the nomination (no one but Trump or Cruz will be eligible). under current rules, which can be (and probably will be) rewritten before the convention. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:37 PM (dciA+) Not quite correct. After the second ballot it is a free for all.

Posted by: Drill Thrawl at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (DN9jO)

242
Are you trying to ruin pundits and steal the bread from their starving children's mouths? If they cannot toss-up ever more Rube Goldberg inspired fevered plans what will become of comments threads like this?

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 02:46 PM (hLRSq)


LOL

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (3JA/M)

243 that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife. Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (uURQL)

244 And if assholes are going to continue to bait, laughing up Michelle Fields being roughed up by Trump's thug, then I'm going to bait right the fuck back. Well, that's fair enough. But its reaching to use divorce case accusations as some evidence of malfeasance. Its a presumption of accuracy from an embittered, money-grasping source.

Posted by: President Barack Hussein O'Bama at March 31, 2016 09:48 AM (39g3+)

245 Has anybody here ever spoken with a politician at a rally or wherever? You try to say a few words about what's important to you or something. They don't listen to you. Even if you tell them "good job on so-and-so." They just look at you and smile, shake your hand, and try to quickly move on to the next fool who supports them. They don't care what you think. They don't want to hear it.

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (IV1em)

246 30 Posted by: intellectual nudity Huh? You find it hard to believe that Trump's most ardent supporters (The Apple Trumpling Gang -- hey, I think you came up with that one)...are -- gasp -- populist? Really? That's evidence of a disconnect? Have you not read the comments here in the last six months? Every other thread has been class warfare and reverse snobbery, with The Apple Trumpling Gang ragging on elites and rich fat cats. They burned Kevin Williamson in effigy claiming he called them all hillbilly-heroin-addicted sister-humpers. The very crux of Trump's candidacy itself is They-Terk-Er-Jerbs. Yeah, some disconnect. Wherever did anyone get that idea of the Apple Trumpling Gang.

Posted by: Pastafarian at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (LqrRo)

247 And if assholes are going to continue to bait, laughing up Michelle Fields being roughed up by Trump's thug, then I'm going to bait right the fuck back.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:47 PM (dciA+)


Yup

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (2PHKP)

248 I'm holding out for Scott Walker on the third ballot. He actually ran, he's a midwesterner, he's got some backbone, people don't seem to hate him like they do Cruz and Trump, and he's a governor. The young, vigorous alternative to the old, shrill hag.

Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (PjWy4)

249 anyone think that trump's alleged rape isn't going to be fodder for the liberal PACs just because we've, for some reason, decided it's off-limits in the primary? So anyway here's a fucking hint: STOP. BAITING. Unless you want to be baited right back.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (dciA+)

250 I read that Trump was about 20 points ahead of Cruz in NY. How many delegates would that give him?

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (iQIUe)

251 Posted by: kbdabear at March 31, 2016 02:47 PM (sfgg2)
=========================================


Marquette polls are usually quite accurate.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (dFi94)

252 143 Yep, Trump voters will never go for Cruz or any insider.

>But who cares about Trump voters anyway...they are nothing but a bunch of dunces, it matters not if they show up in November.

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 02:35 PM (cF0hS)


Some Americans sure loath their fellow citizens as soon as they can see November from THEIR house.

Wow. Just wow. They matter not. Nice conservative attitude, hope you never find yourself on the wrong side of your contribution mattering.

Not. 


Posted by: cind at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (nRbbW)

253 So, looks like organization will be a factor in winning the nomination, what a concept. And that SuperPAC might want to listen to their God Donald, he's the one for amnesty (touchback) and was for letting in Syrian refugees a lot later than Cruz. Well, considering how easily and often Trump lies, guess it's to be expected.

Posted by: Tyrconnell at March 31, 2016 09:49 AM (jeKFO)

254 I'm holding out for Scott Walker on the third ballot. He actually ran, he's a midwesterner, he's got some backbone, people don't seem to hate him like they do Cruz and Trump, and he's a governor. The young, vigorous alternative to the old, shrill hag.

Posted by: joncelli, Bridge Troll and Crossbow Afficianado at March 31, 2016 02:49 PM (PjWy4)

===========================================



I could live with that.  Might even throw some money that way.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (dFi94)

255 ... but he has supported amnesty in the past (even though he says he hasn't). Posted by: Stay out da bushes at March 31, 2016 02:33 PM (cR/4a) That statement is just false.

Posted by: spypeach at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (nyYhO)

256 You may be familiar with the title: Pontifex Maximus. Wow. Seriously wos. The shit you can learn here.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (1xUj/)

257 >>>Like, if more than 1/2 the delegates walk out? Please, you really think delegates will walk out? Delegates are only required to vote to their candidate on the first ballot. After that their state rules release them on following ballots. Btw, cruz is lapping up trumps delegates with people who will vote for him after the first ballot. Trump is out of his league when it comes to this. Not to mention Rubio is holding on to his to deny trump and cruz any support.

Posted by: Arson Wells at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (/E+t2)

258 "Start cutting checks. Buy them." Trump seems awfully reticent to spend any money. I bet if he released those tax returns we'd know why.

Posted by: Harun at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (UBBWX)

259 I'm holding out for Scott Walker on the third ballot. He actually ran, he's a midwesterner, he's got some backbone, people don't seem to hate him like they do Cruz and Trump, and he's a governor. The young, vigorous alternative to the old, shrill hag. ------------ Entirely possible, could be a potential bridge candidate. Would have my support (for whatever that is worth). My worry with him is that he didn't run really well, so may not be ready for a national campaign. But may not be a problem if going against Hillary. I still think his lack of a college degree would play well.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:50 AM (gmeXX)

260 Trolls live under bridges for the same reason toll booths do. Its a choke point.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:51 AM (39g3+)

261 "Behold, a God who whines"

Posted by: Lurker Primus at March 31, 2016 09:51 AM (tHP3B)

262 Cruz/Walker would be a great announcement.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 09:51 AM (2PHKP)

263 If we're changing the rules anyway, I say we throw out ballots entirely, give every degate a club, and last man standing wins it. At least it'd be quality entertainment.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 09:51 AM (Nwg0u)

264 -
Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges?
--------

Trolls/homeless people could always use a free roof.

Posted by: irright at March 31, 2016 09:51 AM (pMGkg)

265 Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (uURQL)

==========================================



Yikes.  Meeting with officiating pastor at 3.  Sh*t's about to get real.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (dFi94)

266 Were thumbscrews used on Michelle Fields? I hear those are particularly nasty.

Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (IV1em)

267 I got one issue It's the border. Close it. That's it. That's what I will vote on. And if it's Ryan it will write in somebody. Period

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (zOTsN)

268 Oh I see -- you think that Ivanna's word, after she got paid off, is the *truthful* word. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (dciA+) So ... you're saying that Ivanna is a liar?

Posted by: ThePrimoridalOrderedPair at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (zc3Db)

269 Please, you really think delegates will walk out? Delegates are only required to vote to their candidate on the first ballot. After that their state rules release them on following ballots. ------------ For the first time in over a generation the delegates will finally have some real power. No way they walk out. This is the best cycle ever to be a delegate.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (gmeXX)

270 anyone think that trump's alleged rape isn't going to be fodder for the liberal PACs just because we've, for some reason, decided it's off-limits in the primary?

---

This

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 31, 2016 09:52 AM (Qvgg/)

271 266 Were thumbscrews used on Michelle Fields? I hear those are particularly nasty. Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 02:52 PM (IV1em) She was put in an armbar.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (0mRoj)

272 I will just be glad when all this is over. I am just overloaded on politics. It's just been an increasingly loud argument from both sides, turning great places like the HQ and others into a weird depressing place. I think I am going to start tuning shit out, listen to more music, read more books, go hiking more on weekends and start paying more attention in September. At this point three's nothing anyone that hasn't voted yet can do and it's all noise. Meh.

Posted by: Minnfidel at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (btH0m)

273 I'm holding out for Scott Walker on the third ballot. He actually ran, he's a midwesterner, he's got some backbone, people don't seem to hate him like they do Cruz and Trump, and he's a governor. The young, vigorous alternative to the old, shrill hag.

------------

Entirely possible, could be a potential bridge candidate. Would have my support (for whatever that is worth).

My worry with him is that he didn't run really well, so may not be ready for a national campaign. But may not be a problem if going against Hillary.

I still think his lack of a college degree would play well.

Posted by: SH at March 31, 2016 02:50 PM (gmeXX)


If Walker wanted to be President, he should have stayed in the race. He is not eligible now.



Alternately, if the voters had wanted him, they would have voted for him.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (3JA/M)

274 #252 Sorry Cind....forgot my sarc tag!

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (cF0hS)

275 Cruz/Walker would be a great announcement. - This has been going around on lefty sites. http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/walkernazi.asp

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (Nwg0u)

276 Mark Levin on LevinTV has explained the circumstance resulting in a candidate not succeeding in winning the primary according to the rules that have been in place since I think, 1860; by way of Lincoln and Reagan, historically. He makes the point, "Why should we change the rules to accommodate the likes of Trump, let alone, any candidate?" Rules are rules. If none of the people running, accomplish the task, count up all the opposition votes against the man who is in "the lead". Get it? More votes against them, than for them. These rules have been in place a LONG TIME. All you people suggesting that if we face a convention like in Lincoln and Reagan's time, we abandon the Party? What??

Posted by: Sharon W at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (Xhsh5)

277 Amnesty for Syrians. Well you gotta hand it to Trump there.

Posted by: Unfettered Power at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (mcm0N)

278 Trolls live under bridges because that's appealing to Norwegians.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (dFi94)

279 ace, just one unimportant voice here, but I vote for a *continuation of the Michelle Fields parodies/ace Trump boorish/freakish record smack-downs*. That is, instead of a cease-fire in both. The Fields stuff has been sort of funny (it will get a bit tedious soon, just from repetition/getting stale), and you are at your best when pissed and and in insult-mode. It's a cycle of rhetorical violence that I can appreciate.

Posted by: rhomboid at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (QDnY+)

280 nood post on the idea of a White Knight suddenly being discovered

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (dciA+)

281 243 that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife.

Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (uURQL)


I read that too. Right before the passage on clubbing your wife for no sandwiches.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (2PHKP)

282 Unless you want to be baited right back. Posted by: ace So, you're calling for an armistice?

Posted by: Ross de Perot at March 31, 2016 09:53 AM (fbovC)

283 "It is now clear to me that to the majority of Republicans in Washington the Tea Party movement was no different from the OWS movement."

Observe the half-hearted, half-assed way in which the Beltway Republican establishment went about "investigating" Lois Lerner's illegal measures levied against the various Tea Party organizations.

They were quietly happy to have had Lerner doing so. They were none too pleased when the scheme got rumbled and it had to stop. And they weren't in any hurry to see anyone actually, y'know, _punished_ for it.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 31, 2016 09:54 AM (noWW6)

284 Were thumbscrews used on Michelle Fields? I hear those are particularly nasty. Screw. Singular. What with only one arm.........

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 09:54 AM (hpmES)

285 Donald used to tear off Ivana's arms and beat her with them. She got better, though.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 09:54 AM (0mRoj)

286 Unless you are a dictator, the issue of illegal immigration is not a black and white issue. It's close though and a conservative President should be able to just make sure the laws on the books now are being enforced fully. There would tremendous pushback that would effect the President in his handling of other issues and he would have to balance his actions. No one will be happy.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 31, 2016 09:54 AM (MSiSP)

287 The allegations of his ex wife will be used against Trump in the general. But then. Juanita Broderick.

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:54 AM (zOTsN)

288 Trolls live under bridges for the same reason toll booths do. Its a choke point. Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 02:51 PM (39g3+) Honestly, I've never seen a toll booth under a bridge.

Posted by: ThePrimoridalOrderedPair at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (zc3Db)

289 >>Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent ... to equitable misery. You left that last part off.

Posted by: garrett at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (mEs7I)

290 Alternately, if the voters had wanted him, they would have voted for him. Wait, wasn't he out before the first primaries?

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (9krrF)

291 Shake & Tumble Glitterbug privilege. Trump's new campaign song.

Posted by: Unfettered Power at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (mcm0N)

292 281 243 that's hilarious. You know what else is hilarious? Donald Trump's wife accused him of rape and then his lawyer claimed that under New York Law a husband can not rape his wife. Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent. Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (uURQL) I read that too. Right before the passage on clubbing your wife for no sandwiches. Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 02:53 PM (2PHKP) Marriage is a temporary commitment to sexual privation, followed by your wife raping your pocketbook via the court system.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (0mRoj)

293 Btw, cruz is lapping up trumps delegates with people who will vote for him after the first ballot. Trump is out of his league when it comes to this. Not to mention Rubio is holding on to his to deny trump and cruz any support.
============

Do you have some numbers and names?

Posted by: mrp at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (JBggj)

294 This could all be settled peacefully and fairly with a few back room coin flips. 

That's how the democrats do it.

*wink*

Posted by: Agent Cooper at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (0q1Bt)

295 if you ever got a look at what lives under the bridges in parts of some places like NYC, you'd understand the "trolls under bridges" thing.

Posted by: Satan of Cloggenstein Vt at March 31, 2016 09:55 AM (qSIlh)

296 Were thumbscrews used on Michelle Fields? I hear those are particularly nasty.
Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 02:52 PM (IV1em)

She was put in an armbar.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:53 PM (0mRoj)


Assault is still assault. Nasty uncivil behavior is still nasty uncivil behavior. and Corey Lewandowsky and the entire Trump campaign were (and are) still in the wrong.


As are Trump supporters here who continue with the personal nastiness toward Michelle Fields.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (3JA/M)

297 For the first time in over a generation the delegates will finally have some real power. No way they walk out. Walking out is an expression of power. Cruz/Walker would be a great announcement. Sure. From the GOPe that has a death wish for Cruz, thinks Walker is "extreme" and complains that the biggest problem with Donald Trump is that he's not "one of them." President Obama is more likely to apologize for violating the law and close the Department of Education tomorrow.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (39g3+)

298 I'm tempted to hope for General James Mattoon Scott.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (Nwg0u)

299 Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent ... to equitable misery. Except when it's not Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:55 PM (0mRoj) Except when it's not

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (w4NZ8)

300 Juanita Broderick, she never recanted

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (zOTsN)

301 >> I've never seen a toll booth under a bridge. It's more like a gloryhole. But, you know, not as classy.

Posted by: Anthony Keidis at March 31, 2016 09:56 AM (mEs7I)

302 Oh I see -- you think that Ivanna's word, after she got paid off, is the *truthful* word. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (dciA+) So are you saying that someone who can lie after they are "paid off" cannot possibly lie before they are paid off?

Posted by: Jen the original at March 31, 2016 09:57 AM (ph1j2)

303 Alternately, if the voters had wanted him, they would have voted for him.

Wait, wasn't he out before the first primaries?

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 02:55 PM (9krrF)


Yes he was... that hasn't stopped many Rand Paul folks though

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:57 AM (3JA/M)

304 Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent. Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (uURQL) I read that too. Right before the passage on clubbing your wife for no sandwiches. Posted by: AlaBAMA at March 31, 2016 02:53 PM (2PHKP) Marriage is a temporary commitment to sexual privation, followed by your wife raping your pocketbook via the court system. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:55 PM (0mRoj) Marriage 2.0. Progress!

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 09:57 AM (uURQL)

305 no offense, but if trump doesn't get to 1237, and assuming Cruz looks weak himself ...what is your plan? Just pick one of them anyway?

Did you ever get an answer? 

Posted by: pep at March 31, 2016 09:57 AM (3e8zv)

306 If we're changing the rules anyway, I say we throw out ballots entirely, give every degate a club, and last man standing wins it. At least it'd be quality entertainment.------Anonosaurus Wrecks Roller blades too. I want it to be bloody and hilarious.

Posted by: Tilikum KAW SPI at March 31, 2016 09:58 AM (u0kqM)

307 Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges? I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture. Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages? ==== I think it's more meant in a Freudian sense. Ask Huma.

Posted by: Bigby's Fist, Punching 2x As Hard at March 31, 2016 09:58 AM (3ZtZW)

308 I don't think the ex Mrs trump lied. I tend to think it's true. Just like Juanita Broderick

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 09:58 AM (zOTsN)

309 And if assholes are going to continue to bait, laughing up Michelle Fields being roughed up by Trump's thug, then I'm going to bait right the fuck back. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:47 PM (dciA+) ________________________ That was hurtful.... ~sniff-sniff~

Posted by: Michelle Fields at March 31, 2016 09:58 AM (HSmrB)

310 When ever I think of Michelle Fields, I think of the one armed man in The Fugitive. Or the one armed pole dancer (dont ask), in Rantoul, IL.

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 09:59 AM (iQIUe)

311 Marriage is a lifelong vow to consent


... to equitable misery.


Except when it's not


Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:55 PM (0mRoj)


Except when it's not

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2016 02:56 PM (w4NZ


I agree Fen... I have seen many happy, lifelong marriages. Mine wasn't one of them but those marriages, and not mine, are how it is supposed to be.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 09:59 AM (3JA/M)

312 >>>>>> Oh I see -- you think that Ivanna's word, after she got paid off, is the *truthful* word. Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:48 PM (dciA+) ------- See. I hate being forced to defend Trump bc I voted for Cruz in my primary and I'm still in the willing to vote for Trump and that's about it camp, but this isn't a fair argument. Ivana said that a fight she and Donald had felt emotionally like rape, not that she was physically raped. Yes, the lawyers reply was beyond retarded. I'm not going to defend that insipid retort. To claim that Ivana was paid off to walk back this back is like Trump diehards claiming that you're getting paid by Salem media or the GOPe to be anti Trump. By all accounts, Ivana has retained a very good, amicable relationship with Trump after their divorce. He praises her as an excellent mom and gives her all the credit for how great his oldest kids have turned out. With that, I'm not going to argue on Trumps behalf anymore. He can defend himself and should have to answer for all his walk backs and foot in mouth moments

Posted by: L, Elle at March 31, 2016 09:59 AM (2x3L+)

313 Yes he was... that hasn't stopped many Rand Paul folks though Well yeah, but that's Paul folks. They kinda scare me TBH...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Restorationist at March 31, 2016 09:59 AM (9krrF)

314 I don't think the delegates will rewrite the rules to allow anyone else *unless* the remaining candidates look like sure losers.

which they might.

Posted by: ace at March 31, 2016 02:45 PM (dciA+)



And seriously, I  think  we can honestly assess the  phrase  "sure losers"  to  include  guys they think  COULD  win.  Or, they reach a point where  they expect to lose the top of  the ticket, and start calculating the decision based on who will do the least  amount of damage  downticket.



I don't always assume Gope is  ALWAYS  evil,  just most of  the time, and if they decide to field a nominee for President  based on keeping a majority  in the House and Senate, then I don't know that that is a bad  decision.  It might be the best of a number  of  bad options for them. 

Posted by: BurtTC at March 31, 2016 10:00 AM (TOk1P)

315 Assault is still assault. Nasty uncivil behavior is still nasty uncivil behavior. and Corey Lewandowsky and the entire Trump campaign were (and are) still in the wrong. As are Trump supporters here who continue with the personal nastiness toward Michelle Fields. - Ignore the ticking time bomb! Trump's shoes are scuffed!

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 10:00 AM (Nwg0u)

316 She was put in an armbar. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 02:53 PM (0mRoj) Do not bait the Banhammer.

Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet - Source for Your Primary Season Melee Weapons! at March 31, 2016 10:00 AM (hLRSq)

317 Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges? I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture. Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages? One entrance, one exit, good place to get ambushed by highwaymen looking for a toll?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (uURQL)

318 "I read that Trump was about 20 points ahead of Cruz in NY. How many delegates would that give him?" Latest NY poll: Trump 56, Kasich 19, Cruz 20 If you're over 50% it's WTA -- so 95. Polls in WI are all over. Latest has Cruz up 1% over Trump. Cruz really has to win WI to keep a sliver of credibility.

Posted by: Ignoramus at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (r1fLd)

319 >> I agree Fen... I have seen many happy, lifelong marriages. Go ahead. Curry her favor. She'll just kill you last.

Posted by: garrett at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (mEs7I)

320 I think that Hillary will get slammed right back with her husbands boorish and criminal behavior, which was exacerbated by her own trashing of his victims character

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (zOTsN)

321 Has Trump deliberately aborted his run in Wisconsin.  Voters are Akin to know.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (DL2i+)

322 She was put in an armbar. You mean like an ant? So we can extract DNA and bring... sorry, that's amber. Never mind

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (39g3+)

323 Seriously, Cruz needs a running mate like Sheriff Clarke, who is not only the right guy, but who can suppress (in a legitimate way) the otherwise fanatical block voting of African Americans in the past few cycles. Posted by: xnycpeasant at March 31, 2016 02:21 PM (k8tEg) Whatever suppression advantages Clarke's race provides within the black community would be entirely undone by his profession.

Posted by: KillianThyme at March 31, 2016 10:01 AM (n2r4H)

324 Hillary raped Juanita Broderick?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 31, 2016 10:02 AM (MSiSP)

325 My God, it's full of fraud.

Posted by: Diebold Voting Machines, Inc. at March 31, 2016 10:02 AM (bGLSw)

326 322 She was put in an armbar. You mean like an ant? So we can extract DNA and bring... sorry, that's amber. Never mind Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 03:01 PM (39g3+) We could cross her DNA with a starfish and she could grow her arm back.

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 10:02 AM (0mRoj)

327 224 Posted by: intellectual nudity at March 31, 2016 02:49 PM (IV1em) Eh sorta. Look I donated enough in 08,'10, '12, and '14 to get called in person by 4 or so House Members. They humor you, laugh when you point out the insanity of the game.... but mostly they want another check. Guess how much I have donated this cycle?

Posted by: sven10077 at March 31, 2016 10:02 AM (g8Hfr)

328 I think that Hillary will get slammed right back with her husbands boorish and criminal behavior, which was exacerbated by her own trashing of his victims character Depending on the GOP candidate, yes. Ryan won't go there. Romney won't go there. Jeb won't go there. The GOPe is to afraid of being called sexist. Too afraid of angering allies and hurting any relationship with the Clinton Foundation.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 10:03 AM (39g3+)

329 Hillarys husband raped and abused women, while Hillary herself was in charge of "bimbo eruptions" , and ruined their lives with character assassination

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 10:04 AM (zOTsN)

330 As are Trump supporters here who continue with the personal nastiness toward Michelle Fields. Posted by: redbanzai at March 31, 2016 02:56 PM (3JA/M) _________________________________ I'm with you 100% sister!

Posted by: Michelle Fields at March 31, 2016 10:04 AM (HSmrB)

331 Hillary raped Juanita Broderick? Verbally and in her reputation, yeah.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 10:04 AM (39g3+)

332 I understand that the he-man women hater's club (j/K)have had unhappy marriages and bitter and expensive divorce proceedings and I am sorry about that. It sounds very painful (as divorces can be painful for women too),but I don't want that to be the last word here. There are many people who are happily married here too. And as far as raping my husband's wallet, we'll-----I don't know. Having a teenager who never stops eating or growing has helped deplete both of our wallets and (FS) losing a job and having to go to another one in your late 50s where you are a paid a quarter of what you made before didn't help either.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2016 10:04 AM (w4NZ8)

333 --
324 Hillary raped Juanita Broderick? Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 31, 2016 03:02 PM

--------------

If I had, she'd have needed more than just some ice on it.

Posted by: Hillary Rape-em Clinton at March 31, 2016 10:05 AM (pMGkg)

334 I am very happily married

Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 10:05 AM (zOTsN)

335 We could cross her DNA with a starfish and she could grow her arm back. Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 03:02 PM (0mRoj) ========== But then she wouldnt have fingers but those little suckers. fingers vs suckers - you decide!

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 10:05 AM (iQIUe)

336 They can be changed to allow it. Hell the Republican Party as a private entity could in theory change the rules to have the nominee chosen via a game of naked Johnny on the Pony... but they would have to have the votes on the rules committee and those rules would have to be affirmed by the delegates. So while they can change the rules (and stupidly did in 2012), there is no precedent. AT. ALL. to allow someone who hasn't even been running for President to get the nomination. Posted by: redbanzai Okay then. The goal posts just moved from it can't possibly happen (wishcasting, nightmare casting, cattlecall casting, whatever) to "no precedent". I've said this before: The Republican party violated their own rules and promised Sen Cokebear that she could keep her seniority and committee seats as a reward for running AGAINST the winner of the Republican primary. Like Hell there ain't precedent.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2016 10:06 AM (326rv)

337 Yeah I don't get... look its fun to goof on stuff, that's classic HQ, riffing on a topic and doing callbacks. But really? Maybe laughing at a woman being hurt isn't the best hill to die on huh? I mean, seriously. Yes, she wasn't hurt that badly. Yes, she overreacted to what reporters have dealt with for.. I dunno as long as reporters have existed. Yes, she's called "wolf" so much in the past it was difficult to believe her at first. And yes, she's a leftist twit reporter so low on the esteem totem pole. But mocking a hurt woman? That's your best shot?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 10:06 AM (39g3+)

338 The only good thing about this primary season is that people are learning just how the delegates are elected and when (and if) those delegates are bound by the results of the state primary or caucus. I'm not being snarky, it's good for people to know how the process works.

Posted by: alexthechick - Destroyer of Gaia and Seductress of Savagery at March 31, 2016 10:06 AM (mf5HN)

339 I'm with you 100% sister! Posted by: Michelle Fields at March 31, 2016 03:04 PM (HSmrB) ========== 100% - one arm = 80%

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 10:07 AM (iQIUe)

340 Hillarys husband raped and abused women, while Hillary herself was in charge of "bimbo eruptions" , and ruined their lives with character assassination And she is lauded and gets to run for the Presidency!

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 10:07 AM (hpmES)

341 >>>The idea that the party cannot rewrite the rules... i noticed whenever reince is asked, "will you support the nominee?" he says, "we (the rnc) will support the eventual nominee" eventual...

Posted by: concrete girl at March 31, 2016 10:07 AM (ceWrl)

342 It's not going to be Ryan or Romney. They don't even have a campaign. The master manipulators of the GOP (who can't even hold their senators together but somehow have every official of every state level organization held in lockstep) need 1237 delegates. Where do they get those? Cruz has the best campaign organization. He started the delegate game long before anybody else. This stuff is Cruz's strong area. Let's say the GOPe gets ALL of Rubio/Kasich. They need 800 more and it isn't coming from camp Cruz. As terrible as the Trump campaign is, do you really think all those delegates will jump ship? The GOPe doesn't like Cruz, but what they really hate is losing their jobs. They'll rally around him to preserve the downticket and protect themselves from their state's voters.

Posted by: JT at March 31, 2016 10:07 AM (DcVaI)

343 Posted by: ThunderB at March 31, 2016 03:05 PM (zOTsN) Yes you sound like you are, dear. I'm glad. :^)

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at March 31, 2016 10:07 AM (w4NZ8)

344 The GOPe doesn't like Cruz, but what they really hate is losing their jobs. They know a Cruz win means losing their phony baloney jobs. He represents the wing of the party that wants them all fired.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 10:09 AM (39g3+)

345 280 nood post on the idea of a White Knight suddenly being discovered Posted by: ace and I thought we had found a shitload of them during Fieldsgate

Posted by: x at March 31, 2016 10:11 AM (nFwvY)

346 Nigerian 'witch child' who was left for dead by his parents makes AMAZING recovery https://goo.gl/RsR4OS

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 10:12 AM (iQIUe)

347 But mocking a hurt woman? That's your best shot? Would we mock a hurt guy? Geraldo's broken nose? Etc?

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/i][/b] at March 31, 2016 10:13 AM (hpmES)

348 Wisconsin polls from RCP are much closer than Ace would have us believe.

http://tinyurl.com/zhaelaj

Posted by: Off the reservation at March 31, 2016 10:14 AM (YlqSL)

349 How can a kid get that plump in 2 months??? Hmmmm...

Posted by: Trumpanarchy With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 10:14 AM (iQIUe)

350 et's say the GOPe gets ALL of Rubio/Kasich. They need 800 more and it isn't coming from camp Cruz. As terrible as the Trump campaign is, do you really think all those delegates will jump ship? The GOPe doesn't like Cruz, but what they really hate is losing their jobs. They'll rally around him to preserve the downticket and protect themselves from their state's voters. Posted by: JT No one said that ALL of them will jump ship. The way this kind of voting works is either a clear winner comes in with 1237, in which case it's a formality. if not, then the bargaining and angst begins to see if they can deal with one another to get the 1237 there before that first round. If still no lucky 1237, then it's round after round, and it becomes more and more of an endurance contest, which the media loves. This guys' ahead; this one is fading on round #5. Eventually people get crossed off lists, deals get made, and people vote 1237 to gain consensus and go the Heck home. If the rules relaly do get flushed, then the shitshow opens up as the list of people eligible grows. And judging from the number and actual people talking about exactly that, this is either the Mother of all threats, or they are planning on doing exactly this.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2016 10:15 AM (326rv)

351 347 But mocking a hurt woman? That's your best shot? Would we mock a hurt guy? Geraldo's broken nose? Etc? Posted by: rickb223 at March 31, 2016 03:13 PM (hpmES) Scott Sterling!

Posted by: Insomniac at March 31, 2016 10:15 AM (0mRoj)

352 But mocking a hurt woman? That's your best shot? Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 31, 2016 03:06 PM (39g3+) She's a liar and mounting an SJW attack on right wing figure. My guns are always pointed at the Left. So when "conservatives" step in the line of the fire deliberately, I know whose side they're on.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 31, 2016 10:15 AM (uURQL)

353 And if assholes are going to continue to bait, laughing up Michelle Fields being roughed up by Trump's thug, then I'm going to bait right the fuck back. - The threat to the Republic is not Trump or Lewandowski or any other Repuican or conservative thug. The threat to the Republic is from #BLM, OWS, Soros, and the rest of the Hillary, and particarly Sanders thugs. They are trying to assert the thug's over every aspect of our lives. Your concern about this nothing event is enabling the real thugs by justifying their thug behavior. How many Sanders events have been shut down by the thugs? How many Trump events have been shut down or disrupted by thugs? I prefer Cruz but if he gets the nod, the thugs will go after him. He is an evil Republican after all. If you want to be outraged about this arm grab, go right ahead but I'll reserve my outrage for attacks on the Republic.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 31, 2016 10:17 AM (Nwg0u)

354 Jump to the bottom. One of the best blogging ideas of the new millenium, Ace. I hope you're collecting royalties.

Posted by: DM at March 31, 2016 10:17 AM (9Oz8g)

355 test

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at March 31, 2016 10:18 AM (iQIUe)

356 Christopher Taylor: They're consolidating the votes to bring Cruz over the top in exchange for concessions in the unlikely event he actually beats Hillary. But mainly they just want to save the downticket. Cruz does that--his whole general election strategy is using superior organization to turn out the base--Trump or "nerd from Wisconsin who didn't even run" lead to a straight Dem sweep.

Posted by: JT at March 31, 2016 10:19 AM (DcVaI)

357 Blue Hen: And somehow the unnamed GOP shadow elite does this better than either the Trump or Cruz campaigns? So much better that they overcome a huge starting disadvantage? Campaign organization and strategy is Cruz's strongpoint. Shady back room deals is Trump's. The nomination is very, very likely to go to one of them.

Posted by: JT at March 31, 2016 10:24 AM (DcVaI)

358 274 #252 ....forgot my sarc tag!
My sincere apology, Pam, between people all of a sudden championing the amnesty loving, changed my mind, drop out first, Scott Walker, AGAIN, and the loathing of all things Trump, I let my bad mood get out of control, AGAIN.


Posted by: cind at March 31, 2016 10:25 AM (nRbbW)

359 Wildly OT. Why do trolls live under bridges?

I mean in the Joseph Campbell sense, our myths reflect the psyche and the culture.

Were bridges scary places in the Middle Ages?


Because just admitting some asshole robbed you is embarrassing.  Same reason drunks get alien probed vs. BillyBob fcuked him.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at March 31, 2016 10:27 AM (DL2i+)

360 So Cruz saves the downticket Rinos? Fuck that.

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 10:27 AM (cF0hS)

361 Cind....I liked what you said...it's ok to be angry.

Posted by: Pam at March 31, 2016 10:34 AM (cF0hS)

362 STOP.

BAITING.


Ah, so you think willpower will restore mastery over your domain.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at March 31, 2016 10:35 AM (DL2i+)

363 In other news, president of Emory has a spine: http://campusreform.org/?ID=7428.

Posted by: CCO at March 31, 2016 10:42 AM (/Fsqp)

364 Trump will simply send some of his associates to the delegates of the unbound states and perform imminent domain on their kneecaps. Problem solved.

Posted by: Max Entropy at March 31, 2016 11:40 AM (cgtTL)

365 If by some cosmic joke Trump wins the nom and general, I don't see him running for a second term. In a mere four years, he's enhanced his brand as a former president (hey, they all look good afterward) and it's back to the good life. And that's all he ever wanted.

Posted by: debzeppelin at March 31, 2016 11:57 AM (ttFRc)

366 I remember when I sold pictures of my young girlfriend handcuffed and naked to a magazine. They called me a dirty old man and a pornographer. Turns out, i was just being presidential!

Posted by: Hugh Hefner at March 31, 2016 12:51 PM (Ndje9)

367 Me too!

Posted by: Bob Guccione at March 31, 2016 12:52 PM (Ndje9)

368 Ditto!

Posted by: Larry Flynt at March 31, 2016 12:52 PM (Ndje9)

369 Sung to the Beach Boys "Wouldn't it be Nice" Wouldn't it be nice to have a convention And we would enjoy the wait so long And wouldn't it be nice for Trump win it So Clinton gives us the where we belong

Posted by: Youare Assholes at March 31, 2016 06:38 PM (pLHRs)

370 You gotta figure Trump gets the winner-takes-all in NY, CT, DE and NJ, for 190 delegates (NY is winner-take-all for over 50%, and last I heard Trump had 64%, other than that, it's winner-take-all by district, which means he would still probably win virtually all the delegates anyway.). After that, he needs about 1/2 of the remaining "bound" delegates. Barring some major shift, it should go all the way to 07JUN, when CA's 172 delegates are up for grabs. Sometimes I hear Trump stands to do really well in CA, but sometimes it doesn't sound like he's so far ahead. The main change I see is that after NY, Cruz may be mathematically eliminated outright, and officially being a "spoiler" may hurt him, besides being WAY behind in delegates. It will become very obvious that a vote for Cruz will be a vote for convention chaos. The thing is, something like 60%-70% of the voters voted anti-establishment. Convention chaos favors the establishment, and Cruz being supported by the establishment right now is "damaged goods" - an establishment tool. I don't understand why Trump hasn't pushed THAT theme, instead of posting unflattering pictures of Cruz' wife.

Posted by: Optimizer at March 31, 2016 07:04 PM (/q6+P)

Hide Comments | Add Comment




What colour is a green orange?




252kb generated in CPU 0.4, elapsed 1.4564 seconds.
64 queries taking 1.1798 seconds, 608 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.