You Knew Damn Well Trump was a Snake Before You Let Him In

[Sanguine]

Well good for you.  Hillary is terrible but she's not nuts.

Trump is nuts.  Cannot vote for crazy.

Sink, you're sorta making my point.  DT is not going to be effective as Pres., HRC will be very effective. Horrible reason to pick one over the other, but there it is.

[ABX]

Sink, you're sorta making my point.  DT is not going to be effective as Pres., HRC will be very effective. Horrible reason to pick one over the other, but there it is.

The only potential solice that I have, and I have absolutely no plan to support or vote for either Hillary or Trump in either way, is she is so damaged within her own party, she has so many criminal cases potentially blowning up against her, and her health seems to be declining rapidly, that she may also be ineffective and possibly may not last as long. If the Republicans can retain the House and Senate, and if the pressure can be continued to be put on to expose her corruption via Wikileaks, then her term could be kept completely blocked with legal wranglings against her even up to the point of impeachment. Something we would be less willing to do with a leader from our own party of whom our reps would want to defend and be an apologist for.

I'm starting to understand Thomas Payne's quote regarding better to have a leader you can oppose than one you are forced to defend.

[musiclady]

Because we lost. And yes, I do mean we - people of principle. That is done. And I hate losing. I am not looking forward to losing again. HRC in WH is mega losing.

Have you read my piece that is still above the fold? Would very much welcome your thoughts on that thread.

Can you refute the mathematical fact that a not Trump vote is a boost to Hillary's margin?

I will be glad to read your piece when I get an extra minute, @don-o , but my conscience cannot be reduced to mathematics.  It runs deeper than that.

I cannot cast a vote for an amoral, serial adulterer, who is also a pathological liar, a narcissist, completely corrupt, a big government leftist, pro-abortion, and borderline insane (at best).

And I will not be persuaded to go against my conscience no matter how sincere the efforts to make me do so are.

I will not vote for Hillary.  I will not vote for Trump.

Whatever choice I make on election day as to whom I will vote for, or whether I vote for the President or not, is yet to be decided.  But I cannot vote for someone who so violently opposes every moral and political value I have.

[don-o]

I will be glad to read your piece when I get an extra minute, @don-o , but my conscience cannot be reduced to mathematics.  It runs deeper than that.

I understand that. All of it. Because I have been there.

[r9etb]

You know what? I was saying the same thing. Then.

That "I told you so" seems to be a convenient excuse for hunkering down and paving the road for Her Heinousness. It quit working for  me on July 5.

Trump's doing a fine job of losing, all by himself.

The whole "vote for Trump or Hillary wins" trope presupposes that there's actually a "lesser of two evils" here, and that Trump is it.

Got news for you, though: they're equally evil.  I'm not voting for evil.

[don-o]

Trump's doing a fine job of losing, all by himself.

The whole "vote for Trump or Hillary wins" trope presupposes that there's actually a "lesser of two evils" here, and that Trump is it.

Got news for you, though: they're equally evil.  I'm not voting for evil.

Please engage this

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,218923.msg1000871/topicseen.html#msg1000871

[youknowwho]

You know what? I was saying the same thing. Then.

That "I told you so" seems to be a convenient excuse for hunkering down and paving the road for Her Heinousness. It quit working for  me on July 5.

Conservativism is the only thing that save this country.

Conservatism won't survive Trump.  He will have unfettered power to squash it, with the GOPE right there with him. People who are voting for him, who would usually defend conservatism,  won't.  They adjust their sails to conform to Trump policy. They won't fight him. 

But they'll fight Hillary.  And hopefully they'll come back around to understandimg how important conservativism is in the first place.

But it will survive Hillary.

[r9etb]

Please engage this

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,218923.msg1000871/topicseen.html#msg1000871

It's not compelling.  My apparent choice is between two manifestly unqualified candidates, or to have nothing to do with either of them.  I choose the latter.

The only advantage of a Trump presidency is his likely and quick impeachment.  To vote for him on that basis is beyond irresponsible.

[JustPassinThru]

Sink, you're sorta making my point.  DT is not going to be effective as Pres., HRC will be very effective. Horrible reason to pick one over the other, but there it is.

This is a very worthwhile point.

 

[JustPassinThru]

Conservativism is the only thing that save this country.

Conservatism won't survive Trump.  He will have unfettered power to squash it, with the GOPE right there with him. People who are voting for him, who would usually defend conservatism,  won't.  They adjust their sails to conform to Trump policy. They won't fight him. 

But they'll fight Hillary.  And hopefully they'll come back around to understandimg how important conservativism is in the first place.

But it will survive Hillary.

Conservatism bows to NO man.  Witness Cruz' steadfast grip of principles over personalities.

I don't think Trump can destroy it.  He may try to tar it with his appropriation of the label; but conservatives who are conservatives, who are smart enough to understand what is conservatism, will not be affected.

Madame Rodham, as noted, will be effective in the leveling of America.  Trump, being insane, will be less so. 

It's the same reason I looked forward to Bernie's nomination.  Bernie's ideology is exponentially more lethal; but the man himself is a bozo.  Easily dealt with.

Cankles, not so much.

[r9etb]

Conservatism bows to NO man.

True in theory, perhaps, but not in practice. 

Just look at the last at least 5 primary cycles: "Conservatism" has fallen to the point of extended bickering over which candidate is most deserving of "The Mantle of Reagan." 

Where are the debates over conservative ideas?  Where's the discussion of why conservative ideas are better than what's currently running the country?  There's little or none of that anymore -- hasn't been since, maybe, GWB's first campaign.  "Conservatism" as a movement is very sick.

Witness Cruz' steadfast grip of principles over personalities.

And that, too, is a fallacy.  Politics is about personalities, just as much as it's about principles.  Politics is about people dealing with one another, and those who don't play well with others generally don't succeed.  Leadership, character, vision ... those are all personality things, not ideas; and in the political world they're indispensable.   

[don-o]

It's not compelling.  My apparent choice is between two manifestly unqualified candidates, or to have nothing to do with either of them.  I choose the latter.

The only advantage of a Trump presidency is his likely and quick impeachment.  To vote for him on that basis is beyond irresponsible.

All right. How about coming to the thread and showing how I am wrong?  I assert that "the lesser of two evils" argument for "none of the above" is a matter of placing a judgement question in an incorrect category.

[skeeter]

Conservatism bows to NO man.  Witness Cruz' steadfast grip of principles over personalities.

Good point. In a Washington DC that everyone agrees has become hopelessly corrupt and dysfunctional then any person who adhere to conservative principles will be considered a pariah.

If we want improvement we need politicians who tell current beneficiaries of government largess they can no longer rig the game in their own favor - the Ethanol lobby for example.

Of course this is why conservatives are the least popular figures in town.

But thats just what this country needs right now. Its the only answer. But I do not think the collective we are wise enough to choose it.

[r9etb]

All right. How about coming to the thread and showing how I am wrong?  I assert that "the lesser of two evils" argument for "none of the above" is a matter of placing a judgement question in an incorrect category.

Well, I'll give you points for effort.  But when you have to work that hard to justify one wrong choice over another wrong choice, without acknowledging the possibility that both choices are wrong, then it suggests you've got a categorical error of your own.

[Hoodat]

Yah. It's all fun and giggles until January 20. when the #nevertrumpmania results in HRC raising her bloody right hand and placing her bloody left hand on the Bible and opening her lying mouth to swear the oath.

The difference here is that the anti-Trump people will have seen that day coming for 18 months, while the pro-Trump people will be scratching behind their deaf ears wondering how we got in this spot, trying to figure out who is to blame.

[Hoodat]

Well, I'll give you points for effort.  But when you have to work that hard to justify one wrong choice over another wrong choice, without acknowledging the possibility that both choices are wrong, then it suggests you've got a categorical error of your own.

Here's your binary choice:

1.  Vote for a NY liberal.
2.  Don't vote for a NY liberal.

I choose option 2.

[r9etb]

Here's your binary choice:

1.  Vote for a NY liberal.
2.  Don't vote for a NY liberal.

I choose option 2.

Made me chuckle.  Well stated.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Because we lost. And yes, I do mean we - people of principle. That is done. And I hate losing. I am not looking forward to losing again. HRC in WH is mega losing.

Have you read my piece that is still above the fold? Would very much welcome your thoughts on that thread.

Can you refute the mathematical fact that a not Trump vote is a boost to Hillary's margin?

I live in Idaho if my vote is on the line as a deciding factor, then Trump has lost bigly. I'd rather see 3rd parties get some traction no matter the outcome.

Here's an interesting article on the math of a wasted vote you might be interested in: http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,219362.0.html

[JustPassinThru]

True in theory, perhaps, but not in practice. 

Just look at the last at least 5 primary cycles: "Conservatism" has fallen to the point of extended bickering over which candidate is most deserving of "The Mantle of Reagan." 

Where are the debates over conservative ideas?  Where's the discussion of why conservative ideas are better than what's currently running the country?  There's little or none of that anymore -- hasn't been since, maybe, GWB's first campaign.  "Conservatism" as a movement is very sick.

And that, too, is a fallacy.  Politics is about personalities, just as much as it's about principles.  Politics is about people dealing with one another, and those who don't play well with others generally don't succeed.  Leadership, character, vision ... those are all personality things, not ideas; and in the political world they're indispensable.

Not everyone who claims to be a conservative is in fact one.

The proof of the pudding is the tasting.   And most of these "conservatives" wearing the Big C and dancing onstage in their short skirts, taste like big-government statists.  Maybe not collectivists, but certainly no friend of American principles or liberty.

[r9etb]

Not everyone who claims to be a conservative is in fact one.

The proof of the pudding is the tasting.   And most of these "conservatives" wearing the Big C and dancing onstage in their short skirts, taste like big-government statists.  Maybe not collectivists, but certainly no friend of American principles or liberty.

And not everyone who is a conservative is a good candidate. 

But more importantly, just because you, or I, or Joe Blow says the word "conservative," it doesn't mean that we could define it for ourselves; or agree upon its definition among ourselves; or present to the general electorate a reasonable definition of "conservative" as a basis for political action.

[LadyLiberty]

Well what about Diamond and Silk huh? They prove that Trump is making inroads with blacks.

Well he does have Omarosa as well.

[sinkspur]

Sink, you're sorta making my point.  DT is not going to be effective as Pres., HRC will be very effective. Horrible reason to pick one over the other, but there it is.

You think Trump will be marginalized on the biggest stage in the world?  This man who, like a crying infant, demands attention, demands that his pants be figuratively emptied in front of 10,000 screaming nursemaids, that every self-absorbed need be satisfied?  That he be on the screens of every American every minute of every day? 

You must be kidding.  The presidency is Trump's next exercise in self-aggrandizement.  He will have the power of the presidency and he will turn it into another Trump enterprise, with his family installed in the corridors of power like the college of cardinals.

I will not vote for a crazed narcissist. Under any circumstances.

[r9etb]

You think Trump will be marginalized on the biggest stage in the world?  This man who, like a crying infant, demands attention, demands that his pants be figuratively emptied in front of 10,000 screaming nursemaids, that every self-absorbed need be satisfied?  That he be on the screens of every American every minute of every day? 

I honestly believe he'd be impeached, convicted, and thrown out of office within two years -- especially if the Democrats take over the Senate, but even if the Republicans retain control.

[sinkspur]

I honestly believe he'd be impeached, convicted, and thrown out of office within two years -- especially if the Democrats take over the Senate, but even if the Republicans retain control.

And, for some here, that's a reason we ought to vote for him.  Can you imagine? 

"VOTE TRUMP.  THERE'S ALWAYS IMPEACHMENT."

[r9etb]

And, for some here, that's a reason we ought to vote for him.  Can you imagine? 

"VOTE TRUMP.  THERE'S ALWAYS IMPEACHMENT."

I have a sneaking suspicion that it won't be all that long before we're looking at a 25th Amendment situation, regardless of who wins in November.  I don't think Hillary is all that healthy, and the stress of the presidency could do her in.