Protests backfire as anti-American images push undecided voters to Trump

[Silver Pines]

No matter what the protestors do, Trump is still as unfit for office as he's always been.  My decision remains the same.

[Mesaclone]

They're scared.  They're intimidated by the PC media, and scared about what will be said about them if they say it.  It's too bad, really, because I think it is one of those "Emperors New Clothes" subjects where once it is broached properly, there will be a lot more people willing to agree publicly.  The left is ripe for a massive PC counter-attack on the issue of what it means to be Americans -- they're the ones endorsing dividing Americans from each other in terms of that whole Reconquista issue, BLM, etc....

And, well....that's kind of the problem.  We do have a guy who is willing to do it, but the "skillfully" part....

Dammit.

As a Trump supporter, I'm fully aware that he often lacks the finesse to address a problem with skill and artful articulation. There seems to be some myth amongst the NeverTrump groups that those of us supporting Trump are blind to his faults. Its just incorrect. That said, selection of a VP who makes that their "issue" and who CAN articulate positions in a more skillful manner can be a big help attacking some of these issues. The very thing I like about Mr. Trump, that he is not afraid to bring up and go after these kinds of issues...is constrained by his personality and, well, crassness. That's a problem, but at least its a failure of technique rather than intent/character. Anyway, my point is that at least he seems to be right on this issue, now he needs to find ways...as you said...to address it with skill, and that might best be done through a strong VP surrogate like a Gingrich (at least, in that intellectual vein).  I have to believe his business background lends itself to strong delegation skills, and this issue may be one in which he steps forward to show that...and to get this thing out on the table. I can only hope.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No matter what the protestors do, Trump is still as unfit for office as he's always been.  My decision remains the same.

I can't argue with that.  I still don't know what the hell I'm going to do.  Leaning against voting for Trump at this point...I really thought that after the primary, he'd be moderating some of the dumb statements and dragging me into supporting him.  It's just not happening to this point -- if anything, the opposite.

Anyway, my point is that at least he seems to be right on this issue, now he needs to find ways...as you said...to address it with skill, and that might best be done through a strong VP surrogate like a Gingrich (at least, in that intellectual vein).  I have to believe his business background lends itself to strong delegation skills, and this issue may be one in which he steps forward to show that...and to get this thing out on the table. I can only hope.

Who he picks as VP, and who else gets openly involved in his campaign to the point where it's obvious that person will have a role in the Administration, is going to be a big factor for me.

[Mesaclone]

No matter what the protestors do, Trump is still as unfit for office as he's always been.  My decision remains the same.

No offense, Catherine. but I doubt there is anything he could do or say that would effect your position. I wish there was a way to persuade folks like yourself, as I think we'll need every conservative to actively vote in this election or we're going to get 3-4 Hillary Court appointments...which will shape our legal future for the next 40+ years. There's no coming back from that...if she gets those appointments, there really is no hope. So every election matters, but this one is truly that once in a generation vote that shapes the courts...and so the country...for a half century.

I respect your opposition, but I do regret that it is so. I fear that we are all going to pay a heavy price.

[Mesaclone]

I can't argue with that.  I still don't know what the hell I'm going to do.  Leaning against voting for Trump at this point...I really thought that after the primary, he'd be moderating some of the dumb statements and dragging me into supporting him.  It's just not happening to this point -- if anything, the opposite.

Who he picks as VP, and who else gets openly involved in his campaign to the point where it's obvious that person will have a role in the Administration, is going to be a big factor for me.

Serious question, who would you like to see him take as a VP?

In my gut, I've always felt that the only way to ever bring the party together  and win...would be for a Trump-Cruz ticket to come together. Sadly, that bridge seems to have been burnt beyond repair...but I do still hold a tiny hope that both men would set aside their personal hatred and put the country ahead of themselves. Just a pipe dream, I know.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Serious question, who would you like to see him take as a VP?

In my gut, I've always felt that the only way to ever bring the party together  and win...would be for a Trump-Cruz ticket to come together. Sadly, that bridge seems to have been burnt beyond repair...but I do still hold a tiny hope that both men would set aside their personal hatred and put the country ahead of themselves. Just a pipe dream, I know.

I really don't know.  What I don't want is just a ticket-balancer, because I think Trump needs someone he actually might listen to, and who I can respect as an independent thinker at some level.  Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised, because I really do want to vote against Hillary.

[Jazzhead]

To be honest Sink, the actions and words of Trump's supporters push me away from Trump almost as much as Trump himself...and protesters who burn the flag and throw rocks at cops make me feel embarrassed.  I bet some uncommitted voters are turned off by the Trump protesters.

That's how I feel, too.  I oppose Trump is large part because I am disgusted by some of his supporters,  the ones who are alt-right cockroaches,  the ones who defend him uncritically as if they were cultists, and the ones who come on like mobsters to threaten those who won't get on board the Trump train to perdition.     

[Mesaclone]

I really don't know.  What I don't want is just a ticket-balancer, because I think Trump needs someone he actually might listen to, and who I can respect as an independent thinker at some level.  Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised, because I really do want to vote against Hillary.

I sincerely hope he does what's needed to earn the vote of folks like you and Jazz. The onus IS on him, but he can only win back votes to those who are open to the possibility...like you gentleman. I'm honestly terrified of the alternative...and though its cliche' to say so...I genuinely believe this IS one of those once-in-a-century sea change types of elections. People always tend to think that, and only time will grant the perspective to know if its true in this case, but it sure feels true right now.

[sinkspur]

I sincerely hope he does what's needed to earn the vote of folks like you and Jazz. The onus IS on him, but he can only win back votes to those who are open to the possibility...like you gentleman. I'm honestly terrified of the alternative...and though its cliche' to say so...I genuinely believe this IS one of those once-in-a-century sea change types of elections. People always tend to think that, and only time will grant the perspective to know if its true in this case, but it sure feels true right now.

Too much water under the bridge.  Trump has revealed his true self over the course of nearly a year now, and he has not changed or moderated his insulting personality in the least. 

This is who he is.

And, for that reason alone, I could never vote for him.  He is simply too unstable and unfit for the presidency.

[Silver Pines]

No offense, Catherine. but I doubt there is anything he could do or say that would effect your position. I wish there was a way to persuade folks like yourself, as I think we'll need every conservative to actively vote in this election or we're going to get 3-4 Hillary Court appointments...which will shape our legal future for the next 40+ years. There's no coming back from that...if she gets those appointments, there really is no hope. So every election matters, but this one is truly that once in a generation vote that shapes the courts...and so the country...for a half century.

I respect your opposition, but I do regret that it is so. I fear that we are all going to pay a heavy price.

No offense taken, Mesaclone.

Just the other day here, the question was, "What would it take to convince you to vote for Trump?"  My answer was that he would have to morph into another person entirely.  I've had a year to come to understand what kind of person he is, and he is repellent to me.

I don't think there's a chance that Trump will appoint anyone to the Supreme Court who's even close to conservative.   He hasn't a clue about the Constitution or liberty or small government.  When he read off that list of possible nominees, it was obvious someone had composed it for him and that was the first time he was seeing the names.  The man thinks that Supreme Court justices sign bills...does anyone believe he's going to get down and fight for a Constitutional conservative appointee?  Why?  He's seventy years old and supposedly ditched a lifetime of liberalism to become "conservative" just in time to run for president.  He has not one single accomplishment for the cause of Constitutionalism under his belt.  So when people tell me well, but he's going to fight for it on the Supreme Court, I shake my head in amazement.

Hillary is bad, yes.  Very bad.  But I believe we've built her up into our minds to the point that we believe no one could be AS bad.  That's getting into territory where people vote out of sheer panic, and I'm not going to do that.

In the end, the blame for the train wreck heading our way won't fall to people who refuse to sell their souls for Donald Trump.  We didn't choose him; in fact, we spend our time warning his supporters that we would never give our support to such an individual. 

The warnings were disregarded and the Trump fans got what they wanted. They're going to get what they bought and paid for, and the fault will be their own.

[Mesaclone]

No offense taken, Mesaclone.

Just the other day here, the question was, "What would it take to convince you to vote for Trump?"  My answer was that he would have to morph into another person entirely.  I've had a year to come to understand what kind of person he is, and he is repellent to me.

I don't think there's a chance that Trump will appoint anyone to the Supreme Court who's even close to conservative.   He hasn't a clue about the Constitution or liberty or small government.  When he read off that list of possible nominees, it was obvious someone had composed it for him and that was the first time he was seeing the names.  The man thinks that Supreme Court justices sign bills...does anyone believe he's going to get down and fight for a Constitutional conservative appointee?  Why?  He's seventy years old and supposedly ditched a lifetime of liberalism to become "conservative" just in time to run for president.  He has not one single accomplishment for the cause of Constitutionalism under his belt.  So when people tell me well, but he's going to fight for it on the Supreme Court, I shake my head in amazement.

Hillary is bad, yes.  Very bad.  But I believe we've built her up into our minds to the point that we believe no one could be AS bad.  That's getting into territory where people vote out of sheer panic, and I'm not going to do that.

In the end, the blame for the train wreck heading our way won't fall to people who refuse to sell their souls for Donald Trump.  We didn't choose him; in fact, we spend our time warning his supporters that we would never give our support to such an individual. 

The warnings were disregarded and the Trump fans got what they wanted. They're going to get what they bought and paid for, and the fault will be their own.

Well, we've all bantered back and forth on the blame game...but in the end it doesn't matter who's at fault. If Hillary Clinton becomes president, we are all at fault.

And unlike yourself, I do believe it would be apocalyptically bad for this nation if she became president...her impact on the courts alone cannot be underestimated no matter how hyperbolic one gets. She would shape the next half century of the court and how it defines the constitution...no words can express the damage that would do to our country. You may argue what a Trump appointment would be...but there is no poitically feasible scenario in which his appointees are not more conservative than what Hillary will appoint. It wouldn't be achievable even if in his heart of hearts that's what he wanted...it still could not happen politically. So while you might get a Roberts from him instead of a Scalia...you won't get a Sotomayor or a Ginsberg which is a certainty under Hillary.

[Jazzhead]

Clinton as the next President would indeed be terrible for America.   So why put up the one nominee who would be worse?   As Sink says,  it's Trump's temperament that disqualifies him for the Presidency.  He simply cannot be trusted with the nuke codes.   I've always supported the GOP nominee, be he conservative or RINO.   This year I cannot - even as I know full well that with Clinton, we're screwed.   

I still hold out hope that the delegates will be permitted to vote their consciences and select a new face who can unite all of us who want to oppose the return of the Clintons. 

[Mesaclone]

Clinton as the next President would indeed be terrible for America.   So why put up the one nominee who would be worse?   As Sink says,  it's Trump's temperament that disqualifies him for the Presidency.  He simply cannot be trusted with the nuke codes.   I've always supported the GOP nominee, be he conservative or RINO.   This year I cannot - even as I know full well that with Clinton, we're screwed.   

I still hold out hope that the delegates will be permitted to vote their consciences and select a new face who can unite all of us who want to oppose the return of the Clintons.

Look Jazz, I understand your desire there...but the primary is truly over. We could argue over why people chose Trump, but its a moot point. He is the nominee and there really is no way to undo that. If you can't support him than you can't, I'm not going to hate on you or act like you're not a good Republican. I'm sure you are doing what your conscience dictates. My conscience tells me that there is no greater danger to the nation than Mrs. Clinton, and I would literally vote for a lump of coal if it was the only thing running against her...so for me this is an easy choice. That said, I do see important and positive policy positions held by Mr. Trump that I believe will help the nation going forward. I realize his erratic history in terms of political positions, but I also know that political reality will hold him to certain positions regardless...including guys like Paul Ryan in congress who will be restraining/limiting factors.

I think we all want the same thing...conservative governance. Sadly, we may get the exact opposition when Hillary Clinton is sworn into office. Worse, as she reshapes the courts we may have no way to come back from her ideological position...it will be imposed on us, as a nation, in an irreversible fashion.

[Silver Pines]

Well, we've all bantered back and forth on the blame game...but in the end it doesn't matter who's at fault. If Hillary Clinton becomes president, we are all at fault.

And unlike yourself, I do believe it would be apocalyptically bad for this nation if she became president...her impact on the courts alone cannot be underestimated no matter how hyperbolic one gets. She would shape the next half century of the court and how it defines the constitution...no words can express the damage that would do to our country. You may argue what a Trump appointment would be...but there is no poitically feasible scenario in which his appointees are not more conservative than what Hillary will appoint. It wouldn't be achievable even if in his heart of hearts that's what he wanted...it still could not happen politically. So while you might get a Roberts from him instead of a Scalia...you won't get a Sotomayor or a Ginsberg which is a certainty under Hillary.

But I didn't say Hillary wouldn't be bad for the country, did I?  In fact, I stated that she would be.  I don't know why you're attempting to twist what I said.

The thing is, I don't believe Trump will be any better.  I think the man is unstable and utterly unfit for office.  He's a liberal sleaze, nothing more, and he is completely amoral.  I don't know how on earth you figure such a person would be a better choice.  There's simply no reason for you to believe he would be an improvement, unless you just believe what he says he will do----and I wouldn't trust the pathological liar as far as I could throw him.  Remember, only recently he said he was "catering" to the Republicans at the moment.

Like I said, I think the mistake is in thinking that no one on earth could ever or would ever be as bad as Hillary.  That's an emotional judgment.

It's too bad you folks didn't take us at our word when we cautioned you against nominating Trump.  You were dismissive of us then, but, as I expected, you're trying to set us up to take the blame when he loses.  It won't work; you'll have to own your mistake.

[Mesaclone]

But I didn't say Hillary wouldn't be bad for the country, did I?  In fact, I stated that she would be.  I don't know why you're attempting to twist what I said.

The thing is, I don't believe Trump will be any better.  I think the man is unstable and utterly unfit for office.  He's a liberal sleaze, nothing more, and he is completely amoral.  I don't know how on earth you figure such a person would be a better choice.  There's simply no reason for you to believe he would be an improvement, unless you just believe what he says he will do----and I wouldn't trust the pathological liar as far as I could throw him.  Remember, only recently he said he was "catering" to the Republicans at the moment.

Like I said, I think the mistake is in thinking that no one on earth could ever or would ever be as bad as Hillary.  That's an emotional judgment.

It's too bad you folks didn't take us at our word when we cautioned you against nominating Trump.  You were dismissive of us then, but, as I expected, you're trying to set us up to take the blame when he loses.  It won't work; you'll have to own your mistake.

First, I didn't intend to suggest you didn't say Hillary would be bad for the country...if it came across that way my apologies. What I was suggesting is that I think you are way understating just how horrific 4-8 years of her in the White House would be.  I hope that clarifies what I was saying. And while I would not argue that "no one" on earth could be as bad as Hillary, I think in realistic political terms its true that there is nobody who would do more damage to the welfare of the nation. Nobody, especially and including Mr. Trump.

As for taking you for your word, it just doesn't work like that. For example, I don't get to tell Cruz supporters that they shouldn't vote Cruz because of what I will do if he wins...that would be terrible arrogance on my part and I think its unjust in any primary to declare the candidates of other Republicans as being anathema. Certainly, be FOR your guy...and accept that others do the same based on their positions and conscience. A party can't work if everybody gets to blackball everyone else's supported candidate. So this "we warned you" stuff is not OK in my opinion. Think about it like this, if Cruz had won the primary we'd be in the same dilemma with a #NEverCruz movement saying just what you are saying now. So the party itself can't win, because we have a bunch of supporters who will blackball the nominee if its not "their guy".  In that situation, there is no way to achieve unity...and without that its nearly impossible to win an election. Which partially explains why we keep losing elections.

As for who is worse between Hillary and Trump, I have no way to convince you that you are wrong so I won't really try. I wish there was some stellar point I could make or winning argument but it seems you are not open to this at this point. As I said before, I'll just choose to respect that you are doing what you think is right. But I have to add, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to come back from 8 years of Hillary...the nation will be forever changed, dramatically and for the worse. This is my opinion, of course, and no more valid than your own...and I won't argue that there isn't some bit of pure emotion in it. Lets just both hope things aren't as bad as they seem that somehow the nation can endure a Hillary regime.

 

[Silver Pines]

First, I didn't intend to suggest you didn't say Hillary would be bad for the country...if it came across that way my apologies. What I was suggesting is that I think you are way understating just how horrific 4-8 years of her in the White House would be.  I hope that clarifies what I was saying. And while I would not argue that "no one" on earth could be as bad as Hillary, I think in realistic political terms its true that there is nobody who would do more damage to the welfare of the nation. Nobody, especially and including Mr. Trump.

As for taking you for your word, it just doesn't work like that. For example, I don't get to tell Cruz supporters that they shouldn't vote Cruz because of what I will do if he wins...that would be terrible arrogance on my part and I think its unjust in any primary to declare the candidates of other Republicans as being anathema. Certainly, be FOR your guy...and accept that others do the same based on their positions and conscience. A party can't work if everybody gets to blackball everyone else's supported candidate. So this "we warned you" stuff is not OK in my opinion. Think about it like this, if Cruz had won the primary we'd be in the same dilemma with a #NEverCruz movement saying just what you are saying now. So the party itself can't win, because we have a bunch of supporters who will blackball the nominee if its not "their guy".  In that situation, there is no way to achieve unity...and without that its nearly impossible to win an election. Which partially explains why we keep losing elections.

As for who is worse between Hillary and Trump, I have no way to convince you that you are wrong so I won't really try. I wish there was some stellar point I could make or winning argument but it seems you are not open to this at this point. As I said before, I'll just choose to respect that you are doing what you think is right. But I have to add, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to come back from 8 years of Hillary...the nation will be forever changed, dramatically and for the worse. This is my opinion, of course, and no more valid than your own...and I won't argue that there isn't some bit of pure emotion in it. Lets just both hope things aren't as bad as they seem that somehow the nation can endure a Hillary regime.

Thank you for the apology.

There was no arrogance involved in warning you that we would not fall in line and vote for a liberal if you made the grave mistake of nominating him.  Sure, some people don't like Ted Cruz, but he's a solid Constitutional conservative.  We agree with his policies because he's one of us.  Comparing him with Trump simply doesn't work.  Donald is a liberal.  You shouldn't be surprised that conservatives won't support him; in fact, as I said to one of my husband's family who has fallen under the thrall of Trump, "It amazes me that you think I would."  The man is antithetical to everything I believe.

Apart from his politics, Trump is a vile human being.  I don't want to have to stand before God and explain why I supported a man who openly mocked a disabled person; who tried to smear the appearance of his rival's wife; who tries to destroy everyone who crosses him with lies and personal attacks; and who waved a Bible around to prove his "Christianity" when, in fact, Ben Carson admitted that Trump is only now considering the idea of a higher power.

You could very well be right that we might not come back from eight years of Hillary.  This is why, after eight years of Obama, it's a tragedy that so many people fell under the spell of a woefully unprepared, unfit reality show celebrity.

[Mesaclone]

Thank you for the apology.

There was no arrogance involved in warning you that we would not fall in line and vote for a liberal if you made the grave mistake of nominating him.  Sure, some people don't like Ted Cruz, but he's a solid Constitutional conservative.  We agree with his policies because he's one of us.  Comparing him with Trump simply doesn't work.  Donald is a liberal.  You shouldn't be surprised that conservatives won't support him; in fact, as I said to one of my husband's family who has fallen under the thrall of Trump, "It amazes me that you think I would."  The man is antithetical to everything I believe.

Apart from his politics, Trump is a vile human being.  I don't want to have to stand before God and explain why I supported a man who openly mocked a disabled person; who tried to smear the appearance of his rival's wife; who tries to destroy everyone who crosses him with lies and personal attacks; and who waved a Bible around to prove his "Christianity" when, in fact, Ben Carson admitted that Trump is only now considering the idea of a higher power.

You could very well be right that we might not come back from eight years of Hillary.  This is why, after eight years of Obama, it's a tragedy that so many people fell under the spell of a woefully unprepared, unfit reality show celebrity.

And many feel as strongly anti-Cruz as you do anti-Trump...so in that sense the comparison is apt. The point being that in a primary we can all support who we will, but we don't get to dictate to others who they should support...nor to try and control their support by blackballing certain candidates. This is not to say you are obligated to vote for the nominee, but it shows just how we can NEVER unify behind any candidate as a party when each faction feels it can be #NEver____ fill in the blank.

As for your perception of Mr. Trump, you have to understand that there are many of us who do not seem in the way you do...in fact, I believe your perception of him to be radically different than the reality.  Just as you would likely see my strong dislike of Cruz in a similar fashion. From my perspective, Trump IS stongly conservative and strongly populist...both qualities that admire in a president. We have all the same facts as you pertaining to Mr. Trump, we are not naive or gullible, nor do we idol worship or blind ourselves to our candidates faults...but our assessment of the man is no less rational and principled than your own.

And you are right that its a tragedy, but none of us are guiltless in that tragedy...including Trump supporters and the #NeverTrumps. None of us can wash our hands and pretend its the others fault when Hillary takes over.

[Fantom]

That's how I feel, too.  I oppose Trump is large part because I am disgusted by some of his supporters,  the ones who are alt-right cockroaches,  the ones who defend him uncritically as if they were cultists, and the ones who come on like mobsters to threaten those who won't get on board the Trump train to perdition.     

Indeed...looks a lot like someplace else..... some other time.. circa 1928.

[Fantom]

And many feel as strongly anti-Cruz as you do anti-Trump...so in that sense the comparison is apt. The point being that in a primary we can all support who we will, but we don't get to dictate to others who they should support...nor to try and control their support by blackballing certain candidates. This is not to say you are obligated to vote for the nominee, but it shows just how we can NEVER unify behind any candidate as a party when each faction feels it can be #NEver____ fill in the blank.

As for your perception of Mr. Trump, you have to understand that there are many of us who do not seem in the way you do...in fact, I believe your perception of him to be radically different than the reality.  Just as you would likely see my strong dislike of Cruz in a similar fashion. From my perspective, Trump IS stongly conservative and strongly populist...both qualities that admire in a president. We have all the same facts as you pertaining to Mr. Trump, we are not naive or gullible, nor do we idol worship or blind ourselves to our candidates faults...but our assessment of the man is no less rational and principled than your own.

And you are right that its a tragedy, but none of us are guiltless in that tragedy...including Trump supporters and the #NeverTrumps. None of us can wash our hands and pretend its the others fault when Hillary takes over.

Lot of words that mean nothing.

Ted Cruz , and his supporters.. as well as Kasich ones, and the rest do not need to unify behind trump.

It is up too the "winner"..trump to unify us... to seal the deal. I doubt trump ..or his nasty followers can do so.

Good luck winning Bernie voters.

[Silver Pines]

And many feel as strongly anti-Cruz as you do anti-Trump...so in that sense the comparison is apt. The point being that in a primary we can all support who we will, but we don't get to dictate to others who they should support...nor to try and control their support by blackballing certain candidates. This is not to say you are obligated to vote for the nominee, but it shows just how we can NEVER unify behind any candidate as a party when each faction feels it can be #NEver____ fill in the blank.

As for your perception of Mr. Trump, you have to understand that there are many of us who do not seem in the way you do...in fact, I believe your perception of him to be radically different than the reality.  Just as you would likely see my strong dislike of Cruz in a similar fashion. From my perspective, Trump IS stongly conservative and strongly populist...both qualities that admire in a president. We have all the same facts as you pertaining to Mr. Trump, we are not naive or gullible, nor do we idol worship or blind ourselves to our candidates faults...but our assessment of the man is no less rational and principled than your own.

And you are right that its a tragedy, but none of us are guiltless in that tragedy...including Trump supporters and the #NeverTrumps. None of us can wash our hands and pretend its the others fault when Hillary takes over.

The point is that Republicans who insist on nominating a know-nothing liberal can't expect conservatives to unify behind that.  They shouldn't pretend to be surprised when it doesn't happen, especially when told over and over that it wouldn't.

My stance on Trump has nothing to do with perception, but with hard facts and with events that have happened during his campaign.  They're indefensible, and so is he.

You could have nominated a conservative, but you wanted the reality show guy.  Own it.

I don't understand why you're concerned, anyway.  Early on, we were told our votes didn't matter, Trump could win just fine without them, etc.  Isn't that still true?

[Fishrrman]

markomalley wrote:
"Sadly, I would imagine that this analysis is exactly correct."

The analysis IS correct.

What can't be so easily analyzed is your response to it.

Do you not expect Euro Americans to watch scenes like these, and NOT BE angry at the protesters and supportive of Trump...?

[Mesaclone]

The point is that Republicans who insist on nominating a know-nothing liberal can't expect conservatives to unify behind that.  They shouldn't pretend to be surprised when it doesn't happen, especially when told over and over that it wouldn't.

My stance on Cruz has nothing to do with perception, but with hard facts and with events that have happened during his campaign.  They're indefensible, and so is he.

You could have nominated a rational man, but you wanted the 500 Club Religious kook.  Own it.

I don't understand why you're concerned, anyway.  Early on, we were told our votes didn't matter, Cruz could win just fine without them, etc.  Isn't that still true?

See how easily shifting the perspective is...and you get the same ultimate message of arrogance and condescension. The way you feel about Trump is how even more Republicans feel about Cruz...you dismiss their view and see yours as uniquely "true". That's not a reasonable way to be part of a party, because your approach...while it may make you feel superior...results in neverending defeat. That makes it just plain foolish. Your belief in principle and integrity is no more authentic or valuable than those of us who support Mr. Trump. As for votes being needed, any GOP candidate needs every vote they can muster...nobody is arguing otherwise. That said, I don't expect some to have the ability to see outside their own perspective...or to even see "big picture" as to what will ruin the nation vs just having someone you dislike in the White House.

Its unfortunate you seem locked into this belief that your views are morally superior and/or better informed than those of Trump supporters...rest assured, they are not.

[Right_in_Virginia]

That's how I feel, too.  I oppose Trump is large part because I am disgusted by some of his supporters,  the ones who are alt-right cockroaches, 

@Jasshead

I'm a Trump supporter, Jazz ... and I'm just curious.  I've not heard the term "alt-right cockroach" used to describe me before.  What does this mean?

Thanks.

[Fishrrman]

Mesaclone wrote above:
"As a Trump supporter, I'm fully aware that he often lacks the finesse to address a problem with skill and artful articulation. There seems to be some myth amongst the NeverTrump groups that those of us supporting Trump are blind to his faults. Its just incorrect. That said, selection of a VP who makes that their "issue" and who CAN articulate positions in a more skillful manner can be a big help attacking some of these issues."

Jeff Sessions might be the guy to do it.
Newt Gingrich? Perhaps him too.

[Mesaclone]

What is with this Euro Americans crap?

Not liking that either. I'd just go with American.