Top Republicans believe Paul Ryan will be nominee

[Relic]

You're assuming that the people who vote in the primaries constitute the entire GOP base.  They do not.  You're also assuming that he delegate count is a good proxy for the actual popular interest. It isn't, in particular because the delegate count is skewed by the winner take all states.  Take these factors into account and the number who represent the hard core base for Trump becomes quite small when compared to the actual GOP base in the general election.

Well then, by all means, the GOP should drive off every last one of them. That will strengthen the party.

[HonestJohn]

Well then, by all means, the GOP should drive off every last one of them. That will strengthen the party.

It probably will, as it would finally allow the GOP to put forth a positive message to Hispanics, youth, and women voters.  Which would be a vast improvement to the current message that, in essence, says, "We hate you, we despise you, we want you stripped of all rights and kicked out of 'our' country".

A simple recovery back to a 50-50 balance in those voter blocks would be a net positive, even factoring in the loss of the Trump side of the GOP.

[Sanguine]

It probably will, as it would finally allow the GOP to put forth a positive message to Hispanics, youth, and women voters.  Which would be a vast improvement to the current message that, in essence, says, "We hate you, we despise you, we want you stripped of all rights and kicked out of 'our' country".

A simple recovery back to a 50-50 balance in those voter blocks would be a net positive, even factoring in the loss of the Trump side of the GOP.

I think the message has been "we really don't believe in anything except our own self-enrichment, and we sure as hell aren't going to risk our cushy jobs to stand up for you people."

[HonestJohn]

I think the message has been "we really don't believe in anything except our own self-enrichment, and we sure as hell aren't going to risk our cushy jobs to stand up for you people."

It's called 'representing the wishes of the voter'.  If the voter wants a certain policy or position, they will vote for it.  So a political party either changes to meet the new policy/positions... or they go extinct.

Case in point, womens issues and unions. 

In the 1960-late 70s, the equal-rights amendment was pushed by the GOP and abortion had no place at the national level.  Furthermore, the GOP supported unions in the 1950s.

Now, the GOP doesn't support any of these positions.

[Relic]

It probably will, as it would finally allow the GOP to put forth a positive message to Hispanics, youth, and women voters.  Which would be a vast improvement to the current message that, in essence, says, "We hate you, we despise you, we want you stripped of all rights and kicked out of 'our' country".

A simple recovery back to a 50-50 balance in those voter blocks would be a net positive, even factoring in the loss of the Trump side of the GOP.

I really hate when people twist things for their own benefit.
You are deserving of contempt.

[HonestJohn]

I really hate when people twist things for their own benefit.
You are deserving of contempt.

Who said that all Mexicans are rapists?  Who talks about Megan Kelly's bloody 'whatever'?

You heap contempt on Trump, for he twists his words to maximize the hatred in his base.

And now, who is going for the personal attacks?  YOU.

[Sanguine]

Who said that all Mexicans are rapists?  Who talks about Megan Kelly's bloody 'whatever'?

You heap contempt on Trump, for he twists his words to maximize the hatred in his base.

And now, who is going for the personal attacks?  YOU.

John, he never said "all Mexicans are rapists".  He just didn't.

[HonestJohn]

Who defines what is positive to those groups?  You?  Who defines what is an improved message?  You?  All I see is an emotional argument similar to what the left makes.  You claim the message your opponents support is "we hate you, we despise you, we want you stripped of all your rights and kicked out..."  That's not a substantive argument.  That is emotional manipulation, trying to discredit based on feelings rather than fact.

If you want to change things, do it the legitimate way.  But don't sell it with emotional smears or lie to get your guy elected.  Do it the legitimate way.   We are a nation of laws.  When people break them, there are consequences.  The "but they feel bad" argument is illegitimate.  The "but it doesn't work" argument is worth weighing, but also somewhat illegitimate in that the total elimination of crime will never happen.  Men are corrupt.  Maybe we should ditch our laws against theft because they are not working.  People keep stealing.  etc.

Who defines positive to those groups?  THEY DO!  They show it by voting our way.

It's that simple.  The more negatively viewed the GOP is... the less votes we get from them.  So, we're pretty negatively viewed at the moment.  And the first step in getting out of this hole is to *STOP DIGGING*.

I pointed out that if we simply managed to right the scales and return to a rough 50-50 voter distribution with these groups, we'd take in more votes than we'd lose.  Which means more elections going in our favor.

[HonestJohn]

John, he never said "all Mexicans are rapists".  He just didn't.

Verbatim quote from Trump:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
- Donald Trump

So, yes, he didn't say all Mexicans.  He said all Mexican immigrants into the United States.

[Relic]

Who defines what is positive to those groups?  You?  Who defines what is an improved message?  You?  All I see is an emotional argument similar to what the left makes.  You claim the message your opponents support is "we hate you, we despise you, we want you stripped of all your rights and kicked out..."  That's not a substantive argument.  That is emotional manipulation, trying to discredit based on feelings rather than fact.

If you want to change things, do it the legitimate way.  But don't sell it with emotional smears or lie to get your guy elected.  Do it the legitimate way.   We are a nation of laws.  When people break them, there are consequences.  The "but they feel bad" argument is illegitimate.  The "but it doesn't work" argument is worth weighing, but also somewhat illegitimate in that the total elimination of crime will never happen.  Men are corrupt.  Maybe we should ditch our laws against theft because they are not working.  People keep stealing.  etc.

John, he never said "all Mexicans are rapists".  He just didn't.

It's just his own brand of "hyperbole".

This board has become very tiresome due to that kind of garbage going on.
I notice a few new posters, all with the same general point of view, using similar tactics.

Coincidence?

[Relic]

Verbatim quote from Trump:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
- Donald Trump

So, yes, he didn't say all Mexicans.  He said all Mexican immigrants into the United States.

Poor HonestJohn, either the nickname is a misnomer, or you're unable to read with any level of comprehension.

[HonestJohn]

It's just his own brand of "hyperbole".

This board has become very tiresome due to that kind of garbage going on.
I notice a few new posters, all with the same general point of view, using similar tactics.

Coincidence?

More snide innuendo, Relic?  You are copying the Trump side's playbook to a 'T'.

[HonestJohn]

Poor HonestJohn, either the nickname is a misnomer, or you're unable to read with any level of comprehension.

More insults.  Trump side to a 'T'.

[Relic]

More insults.  Trump side to a 'T'.

Well, a couple of things to clarify.
You're saying the Trump side resorts to insults more than the other side? Is that what I'm reading?

Second, I'm not on the Trump side, that has been posted. I am on the side of Trump supporters, because I, too, am sick of the status quo, and arrogant without merit people that support the status quo. Those Trump supporters, in general, aren't racist, or stupid, or whatever other characterization you want to use. They are Americans who are unhappy with the direction of the country. This really has the feel of the liberal attacks on the Tea Party. And some of the posters here seem to have adopted that liberal approach, if not world view.

[A-Lert]

It's a difficult business for Republicans these days. I agree, they seem as though they don't want to win the White House.

Cynical? Yes. Accurate? You tell me.

The GOPers are afraid if Trump wins they'll actually have to accomplish something.

[HonestJohn]

Well, a couple of things to clarify.
You're saying the Trump side resorts to insults more than the other side? Is that what I'm reading?

Second, I'm not on the Trump side, that has been posted. I am on the side of Trump supporters, because I, too, am sick of the status quo, and arrogant without merit people that support the status quo. Those Trump supporters, in general, aren't racist, or stupid, or whatever other characterization you want to use. They are Americans who are unhappy with the direction of the country. This really has the feel of the liberal attacks on the Tea Party. And some of the posters here seem to have adopted that liberal approach, if not world view.

Yes.  *VERY MUCH SO!*

I don't forget attempts to smear my name and the only people who have... have been on the Trump side.  And I see the *EXACT* same pattern coming from you!

First insults, then innuendo to try and get others support for the 'next' step... being a call to ban members.  You have gone, in just two hours, from step one... to step two.  I am expecting you to now call for Myst to ban not just myself, but anyone that might even speak up on my behalf.

You should look back at the locked threads and compare. 

---

On a different thread, I pointed out how I disagreed with your assessments.  You focused some substance and some nits.  I responded to your substance AND nits.  Then came your snark.  I called you on it.  Then came your insults and innuendo, which you then carried to *THIS* unrelated thread!

That is beyond the pale of what I consider acceptable behavior.

[Relic]

Yes.  *VERY MUCH SO!*

I don't forget attempts to smear my name and the only people who have... have been on the Trump side.  And I see the *EXACT* same pattern coming from you!

First insults, then innuendo to try and get others support for the 'next' step... being a call to ban members.  You have gone, in just two hours, from step one... to step two.  I am expecting you to now call for Myst to ban not just myself, but anyone that might even speak up on my behalf.

You should look back at the locked threads and compare. 

---

On a different thread, I pointed out how I disagreed with your assessments.  You focused some substance and some nits.  I responded to your substance AND nits.  Then came your snark.  I called you on it.  Then came your insults and innuendo, which you then carried to *THIS* unrelated thread!

That is beyond the pale of what I consider acceptable behavior.

Who gives a rat's behind what you consider acceptable? When you take ownership of this site, let me know. Otherwise, I don't care.

I reply in kind. If I attack, it's because you made it apparent that would be the environment.

You barely read what's posted, you make assumptions, you do much of what you accuse me of doing. Projection?

You are very worthy of contempt. And while you "don't forget attempts to smear", I simply laugh.
This is a little forum, in a little corner of the internet, so small, only a few of us notice it. You really should get over yourself. On second thought, don't. I like the entertainment you provide.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

All Trump supporters are potential JimRob's IMO. First step is suspicious about "covert dems" or "concern trolls". There was a huge 26 page thread about this a week or back. "lots of dems on this board" or something.

Then came warnings from management about not calling Trump an "orange baboon".

Eventually the zots and viking kitties aren't far behind. Happens every time.

[truth_seeker]

It's just his own brand of "hyperbole".

This board has become very tiresome due to that kind of garbage going on.
I notice a few new posters, all with the same general point of view, using similar tactics.

Coincidence?

Refugees from other sites, often banned.

Come here and run the good people away.

[Sanguine]

Refugees from other sites, often banned.

Come here and run the good people away.

Well, that's a really welcoming attitude!  New people are bad.   

[Relic]

All Trump supporters are potential JimRob's IMO. First step is suspicious about "covert dems" or "concern trolls". There was a huge 26 page thread about this a week or back. "lots of dems on this board" or something.

Then came warnings from management about not calling Trump an "orange baboon".

Eventually the zots and viking kitties aren't far behind. Happens every time.

Really? Let me know when zots and Viking kitties show up?
The only one I've ever seen suspended, not banned, worked very hard to earn that suspension. That user is back, and did tone it down.

You know what they call it when you're intolerant of those with opinions that differ from your own?

A bigot.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Well, that's a really welcoming attitude!  New people are bad.   

They left FR to form their own little FR.

[Relic]

Well, that's a really welcoming attitude!  New people are bad.   

Really? You're going to do it too.

TS's comment was regarding new users displaying certain characteristics in their posting style.
You get all, *ahem*, hurt and take it to mean all new users?

I don't let much annoy me anymore, but twisting someone's words in that way just irritates me.

[Relic]

They left FR to form their own little FR.

If you don't like it, there are options. And management has nothing to do with your options.

[Sanguine]

Really? You're going to do it too.

TS's comment was regarding new users displaying certain characteristics in their posting style.
You get all, *ahem*, hurt and take it to mean all new users?

I don't let much annoy me anymore, but twisting someone's words in that way just irritates me.

Nope, no twisting going on on my part.  You must have me confused with someone else.