Sanford announces challenge to Trump

[skeeter]

Or maybe we just don't see that much of a difference in the direction of our country with either one.

The facts are there. No one can force you to acknowledge them or like them. But they are there.

[XenaLee]

No.   I am seeking a way out of the Kobayashi Maru.

You're delusional.   And I mean that sincerely.   

Not voting for Trump, not voting at all, supporting some idiot like Sanford, etc... will all result in a leftist commiecrat win next year.   THAT is the very definition of a "no win" scenario for all freedom-loving, America as founded-loving American patriots.   

[XenaLee]

Or maybe we just don't see that much of a difference in the direction of our country with either one.

Nobody can realistically predict the future.   But.... I do know one thing.   A Trump win will at least stave off and delay our demise as a free nation.  The CommieCrats are trying to destroy us from within.   We all know their drill and the "why" behind it.   Anyone that wouldn't be for that "delay" vs. the immediate destruction the radical leftist (commie) control would bring this nation is.... well...

I don't really have to spell it out... do I?

[Maj. Bill Martin]

You have my motivation bass-ackward.

@Jazzhead

Actually, I was not putting you personally in the category of just wanting Trump to lose -- that's why I only said "most".  I do believe you want a GOP victory.  I just think that your belief that Sanford has a better chance -- primaries through general election -- of winning the Presidency than does Trump to be so counter-factual that very few people actually believe that.  And all those who don't, but nevertheless support Sanford, are the ones I think are emotionally invested in a Trump loss.  Again, that's not you.

I still don't understand how you can be so absolutely certain of a Trump loss in November 2020.  That is more than a year away, and a lot of stuff can happen between now and then to change the polls.  We don't even know who the Democrat nominee is, and more importantly, the voters themselves have not yet been exposed to the full-throated leftist nutbaggery of someone like Warren.  It isn't until her record and statements are fully vetted and publicized that we can have a truly informed opinion as to her prospects, regardless of what polls may say today.

I can understand (though I don't agree with) the idea that Trump is certain to lose the Presidency, so why not roll the dice to see if someone else can win?  The problem with that is Congress.  Trump may be a drag downticket, but at least the party will be more or less united in supporting him, and you'll get the 90% or so of Republicans who support him to turn out at the polls.  That will contain the damage.  But if Trump's supporters see the GOP politicos turning on Trump, I suspect you'd see large numbers of them sit home out of anger.  That would lead not only to losing the Presidency with Sanford or whomever, but a crushing defeat for GOP congressional candidates.  Alienating Trump supporters is the worst possible scenario for GOP congressional candidates in 2020.

A split party is the absolute worst scenario for 2020 -- why else do you believe the WaPo and other parts of the media are pushing for a GOP challenger to Trump?  Do you really think they want a Republican to win in 2020?

[skeeter]

But if Trump's supporters see the GOP politicos turning on Trump, I suspect you'd see large numbers of them sit home out of anger.  That would lead not only to losing the Presidency with Sanford or whomever, but a crushing defeat for GOP congressional candidates. 

You got that right. Given what we are facing in the other party I can't think of anything that would infuriate the base more than the party being perceived as sabotaging the incumbent. The GOP might as well turn out the lights & shutter the place.

[WhatWouldReaganDo]

No.   I am seeking a way out of the Kobayashi Maru.

Pence could win as the incumbent...

[roamer_1]

Then you need to get your eyes checked immediately.  That's dangerously blind.

No, it is true - There is no difference.

[Sanguine]

No, it is true - There is no difference.

Just because you say "no, you're wrong" doesn't make it so.  Back it up if you're serious.

[roamer_1]

A split party is the absolute worst scenario for 2020 -- why else do you believe the WaPo and other parts of the media are pushing for a GOP challenger to Trump?  Do you really think they want a Republican to win in 2020?

Hate to tell you scooter... But your party is already split.

[catfish1957]

Hate to tell you scooter... But your party is already split.

Damn right.  Trump is sorely mistaken, and even lied that he had a 90% approval among GOP voters.  I bet that number is closer to 50-50 among us "very conservative" faction.

[catfish1957]

Pence could win as the incumbent...

A naricissistic delusional Trump will never bow out for the best for the country.

[roamer_1]

Damn right.  Trump is sorely mistaken, and even lied that he had a 90% approval among GOP voters.  I bet that number is closer to 50-50 among us "very conservative" faction.

Doesn't matter... Even if it is roughly 80/20 like the polls I recall say, He can't take a 20% hit. Same with independents, where the lion's share of Conservatives now reside.

He BARELY got across the line against a divided dem party and their worst candidate ever.
Now Dems are in lockstep, guaranteed, and seething mad. It don't really matter who their candidate is, they friggin hate Tumpy. They WILL be out enmasse to vote hm out... Plain and simple.

[Jazzhead]

A naricissistic delusional Trump will never bow out for the best for the country.

Unless he could be convinced that he would be likely to lose and his legacy destroyed.   It is not uncommon for a business to pivot from one style of management to another as conditions change.   Trump was elected as a change agent, and he's accomplished that.  But now we need a conservation agent,  who can preserve and extend those policy directions,  in part by focusing the electorate on both the positive results of economic growth as well as the disaster should we elect a socialist.   To do that, the distraction of the Trump reality show must end.     

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead


I still don't understand how you can be so absolutely certain of a Trump loss in November 2020. 

Of course I am not "absolutely certain".   But what I'm paid to do is help my clients make decisions,  based on sober analysis of the known facts and likely future conditions.  I am not paid to dither while Rome burns because of my lack of "absolutely certainty".

  I see a GOP being led by the nose by an erratic demagogue and afraid to state that the emperor has no clothes.    We need a vehicle by which the GOP rank and file - not party elites who are covering their collective asses - can weigh in on whether the way ahead - and the avoidance of disaster - may require a change in leadership.   

[Jazzhead]

He BARELY got across the line against a divided dem party and their worst candidate ever.
Now Dems are in lockstep, guaranteed, and seething mad. It don't really matter who their candidate is, they friggin hate Tumpy. They WILL be out enmasse to vote hm out... Plain and simple.

Correct.  And that is why we must react to the reality we face, not as we wish it would be.   Trump is not going to win re-election, folks.   The sooner we face that reality, the sooner we can decide to do something about it.   

[Mesaclone]

Doesn't matter... Even if it is roughly 80/20 like the polls I recall say, He can't take a 20% hit. Same with independents, where the lion's share of Conservatives now reside.

He BARELY got across the line against a divided dem party and their worst candidate ever.
Now Dems are in lockstep, guaranteed, and seething mad. It don't really matter who their candidate is, they friggin hate Tumpy. They WILL be out enmasse to vote hm out... Plain and simple.

And you're marching right along with them in "useful idiot" lockstep. There is dumb. Damn Dumb. And then there's conservatives who believe its worth having a crushing leftist electoral victory in order to force the GOP back towards "true conservatism". Dumb as a word can't even touch that kind of abject idiocy.

[Sanguine]

[Jazzhead]

And then there's conservatives who believe its worth having a crushing leftist electoral victory in order to force the GOP back towards "true conservatism". Dumb as a word can't even touch that kind of abject idiocy.

Don't misrepresent what is being said.  This is (certainly for me) all about preventing a Dem victory in 2020.   Trump was the needed change agent in 2016,  but he is not what is needed today.   The task is to preserve his policy directions,  not allow them to be swept away in a socialist tide made possible by perhaps irrational but still palpable hatred of the current President.   

[Mesaclone]

Correct.  And that is why we must react to the reality we face, not as we wish it would be.   Trump is not going to win re-election, folks.   The sooner we face that reality, the sooner we can decide to do something about it.

Here's reality. President Trump is the 2020 GOP presidential candidate. There is zero chance of any other person filling that role. Zero. No primary will change that, he isn't "stepping down and endorsing" anyone. He IS running and he IS the GOP/Conservative candidate for 2020. Done deal. Over. Period.

So you and everyone else who doesn't want an uber-Socialist takeover of every branch of government better hope you are wrong in your assessment, and had best fight like hell to keep it from happening. The alternative is, literally, the end of conservatism as a political force in the United States.

[Jazzhead]

Here's reality. President Trump is the 2020 GOP presidential candidate. There is zero chance of any other person filling that role. Zero. No primary will change that, he isn't "stepping down and endorsing" anyone. He IS running and he IS the GOP/Conservative candidate for 2020. Done deal. Over. Period.

So you and everyone else who doesn't want an uber-Socialist takeover of every branch of government better hope you are wrong in your assessment, and had best fight like hell to keep it from happening. The alternative is, literally, the end of conservatism as a political force in the United States.

I agree with your assessment of the stakes.   And it is precisely because I agree that I must shout from the rooftops that a replacement for Trump must be found.   LBJ didn't announce he wasn't running for re-election until late March of 1968.   NOW is the time to begin the discussion about a replacement for Trump,  and to begin to marshal an opposition.

In September of 1967 Eugene McCarthy was barely known.   By March of 1968,  he had won the New Hampshire primary and LBJ could see the handwriting on the wall.   

[Cyber Liberty]

Here's reality. President Trump is the 2020 GOP presidential candidate. There is zero chance of any other person filling that role. Zero. No primary will change that, he isn't "stepping down and endorsing" anyone. He IS running and he IS the GOP/Conservative candidate for 2020. Done deal. Over. Period.

So you and everyone else who doesn't want an uber-Socialist takeover of every branch of government better hope you are wrong in your assessment, and had best fight like hell to keep it from happening. The alternative is, literally, the end of conservatism as a political force in the United States.

Your respondent does not believe in the same "conservatism" you and I understand.  The apex of his conservatism is not Reagan and Goldwater, it's Jack Kemp and John Kasich.  Once that is understood, all of the ridiculous arguments and prognostications fall into place.  Even the idiotic reference to a scene in an old Star Trek flick.  "If we don't dump Trump our Starship will blow up."

[skeeter]

And you're marching right along with them in "useful idiot" lockstep. There is dumb. Damn Dumb. And then there's conservatives who believe its worth having a crushing leftist electoral victory in order to force the GOP back towards "true conservatism". Dumb as a word can't even touch that kind of abject idiocy.

Some may actually believe this. It may be stubborn kind of principle on a dead ender level not seen since Lt Onoda took to the jungle. But at least its based on belief.

Others just think we're that stupid and will try stirring this sh*t right up until the election. These types are pretty easy to spot.

[TomSea]

Sanford has a good pro-life record, the bozos are those who abandon the pro-life cause, best to see the backs of them. Next!

[XenaLee]

Sanford has a good pro-life record, the bozos are those who abandon the pro-life cause, best to see the backs of them. Next!

Really?   So.... does this mean you're going to support Sanford against Trump?

[roamer_1]

Of course I am not "absolutely certain".   But what I'm paid to do is help my clients make decisions,  based on sober analysis of the known facts and likely future conditions.  I am not paid to dither while Rome burns because of my lack of "absolutely certainty".

  I see a GOP being led by the nose by an erratic demagogue and afraid to state that the emperor has no clothes.    We need a vehicle by which the GOP rank and file - not party elites who are covering their collective asses - can weigh in on whether the way ahead - and the avoidance of disaster - may require a change in leadership.

That's right - but you will find no dark horse. Won't happen. Sanford will be blocked.

The only chance of a Dark Horse will have to come from a 3rd party... And that is a damn little chance.