“They agreed to support the nominee:” Now, GOP party chair is pressing Republicans to back Donald Trump

[DiogenesLamp]

I think they're hunting us down with dogs or something now....

I'd be a bit more understanding of the argument if someone could explain how it might be possible for a conservative to win in 2020 after Hillary wins next month.  Between the courts and the demographics, I just don't see it as possible.  That green-blooded hobgoblin Ted Cruz apparently looked at the situation logically, and reached the same conclusion.

I am sick of listening to them.   Every single post is an example of extremely misplaced priorities.   Hillary is a Nazi.   She is  a deluded,  psychotic, corrupt,  deceitful,  vengeful ,  hate-filled old communist shrew who cannot wait to turn the entire mass of Federal power against us.   


And they want to bitch about Trump?   It is just childish. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Why?? Because for you "sanity" requires voting for a degenerate leftist like Trump??

I'd say that it's far saner to stay far away from evil than it is to embrace it .

If I may offer my two cents....

I think there are reasonable grounds for disagreement as to whether or not Trump is better than Hillary.  We all have our own opinions on that, but I think it's a reasonable debate to have.  If they are "equal evils", then there is no point in opposing one more than the other.

But that's different from arguments that those who don't vote for Trump bear no responsibility if Hillary wins.  If someone views Trump as the lesser evil, but nevertheless refuses to support him against a greater evil, then those people have some responsibility for the consequences of that decision.  And I suspect that in other contexts, most of us would reject out of hand the argument that standing by and doing nothing in the face of something bad is a morally sound choice.  Hence, the Edmund Burke quote on how/why evil can triumph.

[EasyAce]

I'd be a bit more understanding of the argument if someone could explain how it might be possible for a conservative to win in 2020 after Hillary wins next month.

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people asking the same question after Jimmy Carter a) won in 1976, and b) unfurled his
real colours early and often. The answer to that question was, of course, Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I grant you that we may never get a Republican candidate quite like Mr. Reagan in 2020, but if we must deal with
President Hilarious Rodent Clinton for four years, she's just liable to piss off enough in both major parties (reality check:
even Democrats are getting more and more discomfited by her now) to make it very possible for a rightward candidate to
win in 2020. Or, barring a solid rightward candidate (let's say, the best the GOP can do in 2020 is to hoist up another Bob Dolt
1996 type on today's terms), maybe another Republican Congressional sweep a la 1994---maybe in 2020, maybe two years
sooner. (With the hope, of course, that next time they won't be as fast to sell out their revolution, actual or alleged, as Newtie
and the Blowfish were . . . )

I'm still voting for None of These Candidates next month on the presidential line, and maybe a few others as well. But it's not
impossible for a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton to provoke another kind of rightward revival in 2020.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I am sick of listening to them.   Every single post is an example of extremely misplaced priorities.   Hillary is a Nazi.   She is  a deluded,  psychotic, corrupt,  deceitful,  vengeful ,  hate-filled old communist shrew who cannot wait to turn the entire mass of Federal power against us.   


And they want to bitch about Trump?   It is just childish.

On the day after the election, if Trump wins by some miracle, I'll keep my fingers crossed and hope that he appoints some decent judges, and doesn't do too much damage otherwise.  But at least I'll have something to hope for.

If Hillary wins...I just don't see a path out of that for the country.  The judges, immigration, institutionalization of political correctness and limitations on political speech...there's just nowhere left to go from there.  Ronald Reagan himself could rise up, and not get 45% of the vote.

[Applewood]

RNC Chair Reince Priebus: 90% of Republicans Are Now Supporting Trump, The Rest Should Get on Board

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/rnc-chairman-reince-priebus-90-republicans/

Where did Rinse get his 90% figure? 

[Leto]

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

isn't this supposed to be a republican website?

I took it as a CONSERVATIVE website not party first bootlickers.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people asking the same question after Jimmy Carter a) won in 1976, and b) unfurled his
real colours early and often. The answer to that question was, of course, Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I grant you that we may never get a Republican candidate quite like Mr. Reagan in 2020, but if we must deal with
President Hilarious Rodent Clinton for four years, she's just liable to piss off enough in both major parties (reality check:
even Democrats are getting more and more discomfited by her now) to make it very possible for a rightward candidate to
win in 2020. Or, barring a solid rightward candidate (let's say, the best the GOP can do in 2020 is to hoist up another Bob Dolt
1996 type on today's terms), maybe another Republican Congressional sweep a la 1994---maybe in 2020, maybe two years
sooner. (With the hope, of course, that next time they won't be as fast to sell out their revolution, actual or alleged, as Newtie
and the Blowfish were . . . )

I'm still voting for None of These Candidates next month on the presidential line, and maybe a few others as well. But it's not
impossible for a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton to provoke another kind of rightward revival in 2020.

Thanks for the response.  What about the Justices she'll appoint, and the legalization/voting rights for illegals?  Those really weren't issues in 1980.  And demographically, we're not in 1980 any more.  In Reagan's day, there was a split between the parties, but also a large swath of undecided voters -- the potential "Reagan Democrats".  Now, those people are all part of the GOP, but the electorate otherwise has shifted.   You have far more single females, who lean heavily left, and far more minorities. Those are core Democrat constituencies that lean overwhelming left, and they also get a majority of government employees, academics, people in the arts, etc..

I just don't see a path if the illegals get the vote, and that does seem to be one issue on which Hillary and the Dems seem united.  And why not?  It basically locks them up long term.

[chae]

@Applewood

The last time I remember being told by the RNC to "fall in line" behind the Republican, it was in New York and the Republican candidate DeeDee Scozzfava, was so mad at those who wouldn't fall in line that she turned around and endorsed the Democrat.

[geronl]

Trump would not support the GOP nominee if it were not himself, but he did say he would absolutely support Hillary if she wins.

[Applewood]

@Applewood

The last time I remember being told by the RNC to "fall in line" behind the Republican, it was in New York and the Republican candidate DeeDee Scozzfava, was so mad at those who wouldn't fall in line that she turned around and endorsed the Democrat.

Downright childish, but then again, the whole party is acting like a bunch of two year olds.  I complain about Trump's childish behavior, but in that respect, he's no different from the rest of the elites. 

FWIW, I left the party in 2012, re-registered this year to vote in the primaries, then left to become an independent.  Screw the Republican Party.  Hasn't done anything for conservatives in years.  And they have the nerve to tell people who to vote for?  They can KMA and that of any other Republican who won't vote for Trump.

[geronl]

@Applewood

The last time I remember being told by the RNC to "fall in line" behind the Republican, it was in New York and the Republican candidate DeeDee Scozzfava, was so mad at those who wouldn't fall in line that she turned around and endorsed the Democrat.

Which proved that her critics were 100% correct.

[DiogenesLamp]

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people asking the same question after Jimmy Carter a) won in 1976, and b) unfurled his
real colours early and often. The answer to that question was, of course, Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I grant you that we may never get a Republican candidate quite like Mr. Reagan in 2020, but if we must deal with
President Hilarious Rodent Clinton for four years, she's just liable to piss off enough in both major parties (reality check:
even Democrats are getting more and more discomfited by her now) to make it very possible for a rightward candidate to
win in 2020. Or, barring a solid rightward candidate (let's say, the best the GOP can do in 2020 is to hoist up another Bob Dolt
1996 type on today's terms), maybe another Republican Congressional sweep a la 1994---maybe in 2020, maybe two years
sooner. (With the hope, of course, that next time they won't be as fast to sell out their revolution, actual or alleged, as Newtie
and the Blowfish were . . . )

You have a very different view of what you expect will happen than I have of what I expect will happen. 

I remember Hillary Clinton deliberately creating a false document and lying to a Federal Judge during the Watergate hearing in an effort to deny Richard Nixon the legal counsel he was due.  She was *FIRED* by her Democrat supervisor for this complete breach of ethics. 


I remember Hillary Clinton firing the entire White House travel staff so she could hand their budget over to her crony friends.   

I remember Hillary Clinton getting FBI files on Republican donors so she could target them with threats and intimidate them for political reasons. 


I believe Hillary Clinton will  create and advance a Nazi-like Federal government which will deliberately target and attack  conservatives in the manner the original Nazis targeted Jews.    I believe she will bungle in every way possible,  foreign policy  (like she has already done so far) and get us involved in conflicts and even wars.    I believe she will increase the numbers of anti-American immigrants and especially Muslim immigrants to boost her voting constituency.   


You will not win any elections in 2020 because not only will the polls be rigged,  the people who will then be allowed to vote will be voting for her anyway.   She will "immigrate"  her way to eternal victory. 


She will tax and spend,  and she will boost the taxing and the spending beyond what even Barack Obama managed.    She will also increase taxes and pay out more handouts to her "voters." 


I have not even begun to describe the utter disaster that a Hillary Rodham Presidency will constitute.  It boggles the imagination at how badly and in how many ways she will screw us over.   

I'm still voting for None of These Candidates next month on the presidential line, and maybe a few others as well. But it's not
impossible for a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton to provoke another kind of rightward revival in 2020.

You simply do not grasp the forces at play here.  The Nation,  and indeed,  the entire world is poised on a precarious economic razor's edge,   and we have barely survived Obama.   


Hillary Clinton will be a  fatal blow for many of us.   It is incredibly naive to think the nation can withstand another President as bad or worse  (worse is my bet)  than Obama. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Thanks for the response.  What about the Justices she'll appoint, and the legalization/voting rights for illegals?  Those really weren't issues in 1980.  And demographically, we're not in 1980 any more.  In Reagan's day, there was a split between the parties, but also a large swath of undecided voters -- the potential "Reagan Democrats".  Now, those people are all part of the GOP, but the electorate otherwise has shifted.   You have far more single females, who lean heavily left, and far more minorities. Those are core Democrat constituencies that lean overwhelming left, and they also get a majority of government employees, academics, people in the arts, etc..

I just don't see a path if the illegals get the vote, and that does seem to be one issue on which Hillary and the Dems seem united.  And why not?  It basically locks them up long term.

You are far too optimistic in your assessment.   You didn't even touch on the usage of "HATE CRIMES"  enforcement which will target anyone who doesn't repeat the Liberal spiel about homosexuals or "immigrants." 


Hillary will weaponize the government against all her political enemies.   We would be entering the age of Stalin in a pants suit.

[libertybele]

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people asking the same question after Jimmy Carter a) won in 1976, and b) unfurled his
real colours early and often. The answer to that question was, of course, Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I grant you that we may never get a Republican candidate quite like Mr. Reagan in 2020, but if we must deal with
President Hilarious Rodent Clinton for four years, she's just liable to piss off enough in both major parties (reality check:
even Democrats are getting more and more discomfited by her now) to make it very possible for a rightward candidate to
win in 2020. Or, barring a solid rightward candidate (let's say, the best the GOP can do in 2020 is to hoist up another Bob Dolt
1996 type on today's terms), maybe another Republican Congressional sweep a la 1994---maybe in 2020, maybe two years
sooner. (With the hope, of course, that next time they won't be as fast to sell out their revolution, actual or alleged, as Newtie
and the Blowfish were . . . )

I'm still voting for None of These Candidates next month on the presidential line, and maybe a few others as well. But it's not
impossible for a President Hilarious Rodent Clinton to provoke another kind of rightward revival in 2020.

You are missing the point here I think.  IF Clinton gets in amnesty will be granted and millions of Muslims will be allowed into this country dramatically increasing the number of DEM voters...it doesn't really matter how many DEMS Hillary angers; the DEM electorate will grossly outnumber the GOP electorate and certainly those who were granted amnesty/refugee status aren't going to vote for the opposite party. That's not hypothetical, that's fact. 

She will undoubtedly appoint liberal justices tilting the decisions of the SCOTUS to the left; 2nd amendment rights in particular.

To compare the Carter years to the upcoming Clinton years  is like comparing a tropical storm to a Tsunami.

[Silver Pines]

@HAPPY2BME

e·lect
əˈlekt/
verb
1.
choose (someone) to hold public office or some other position by voting.
"the members who were elected to the committee"
synonyms:   vote for, vote in, return, cast one's vote for


elect
[ih-lekt]
Spell  Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
verb (used with object)
1.
to choose or select by vote, as for an office:
to elect a mayor.
Antonyms: reject.

Accordingly:

vote
vōt/Submit
noun
1.
a formal indication of a choice between two or more candidates or courses of action, expressed typically through a ballot or a show of hands or by voice.
synonyms:   ballot, poll, election, referendum, plebiscite; show of hands
"a rigged vote"
verb
1.
give or register a vote.
"they voted against the resolution"
synonyms:   go to the polls, cast one's vote, cast one's ballot
"only half of them voted"

So we see that a person must cast a vote to elect a candidate, and that voting is the act of going to the polls and casting a ballot.

Therefore, it logically follows that one cannot elect someone by "staying home." 

Your attempt to reason, and the attempt of the abject morons at "Conservative" Treehouse, is a flaming wreckage filled with fail.

[geronl]

You are missing the point here I think.

The point is that Trump is also a liberal, 3 years ago Trump was calling for a world with no borders. He will put liberals on the court too and he supports restrictions on guns too (No Fly, No Buy and stop n frisk to "take away their guns" - notice in each case no guilty verdict is required to take away guns).

[geronl]

Republicans who vote Trump

Elect Democrats

[Silver Pines]

This article is a month old.  Trump has spent the last week throwing away whatever capital he had built.  It is on him, not us.

Meanwhile, here's Trumpkin in full panic mode:

@sinkspur

He, and the rest of them, should have chosen more wisely.  *shrug*

[Silver Pines]

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

@Bill Martin

Oh, I did everything I could to try and make sure we would have a Constitutional conservative as our nominee.  But others had stars in their eyes over a game show host.

You haven't opened a Bible if you think Trump doesn't fit its definition of evil.

[HonestJohn]

Mr. Priebus, my reply:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkMO2gcS5ag

[aligncare]

Precisely why I keep fighting Trumpism.   We need a party that supports the Constitution and limited government.   That party has been hi-jacked this year by alt-right xenophobes who don't give a damn about the cause of human liberty.  I WANT IT BACK.   

Here's another Reagan quote:

If we love our country, we should also love our countrymen.
Ronald Reagan

Now, let's see if we can apply Reagan's wisdom to the current distorted paradigm surrounding this election, in particular as it relates to the nonstop hair-on-fire criticism of the Republican nominee and of his supporters; or how it might also relate even to your democrat co-workers, your family and friends.

This ain't your grandfather's America no mo'. Shall we delve?

[HonestJohn]

Here's another Reagan quote:

If we love our country, we should also love our countrymen.
Ronald Reagan

Now, let's see if we can apply Reagan's wisdom to the current distorted paradigm surrounding this election, in particular as it relates to the nonstop hair-on-fire criticism of the Republican nominee and of his supporters; or how it might also relate even to your democrat co-workers, your family and friends.

This ain't your grandfather's America no mo'. Shall we delve?

All our countrymen?

Your god would disapprove of that.  Immigrants aren't American.  Nor can their descendents.  His remarks on Judge Curiel are proof.

Your children are not American to Trump and his alt-right goons.

[Silver Pines]

Here's another Reagan quote:

If we love our country, we should also love our countrymen.
Ronald Reagan

Now, let's see if we can apply Reagan's wisdom to the current distorted paradigm surrounding this election, in particular as it relates to the nonstop hair-on-fire criticism of the Republican nominee and of his supporters; or how it might also relate even to your democrat co-workers, your family and friends.

This ain't your grandfather's America no mo'. Shall we delve?

@aligncare

How far down into the muck do you want to "delve?"  To Trump's appearance in a porn flick?  To his deeply inappropriate and seemingly routine remarks about his daughter ( “Yeah, she’s really something, and what a beauty, that one. If I weren’t happily married and, ya know, her father . . . ”)?

Or we can dig down deeper into the dirt to his remark about his attempts to avoid gonorrhea, syphilis, AIDS, etc.:  “I’ve been so lucky in terms of that whole world. It is a dangerous world out there. It’s scary, like Vietnam. Sort of like the Vietnam-era. It is my personal Vietnam. I feel like a great and very brave soldier.”

My father was in the military.  I was born over twenty years after he came home from war, but I know about the struggles he went through to overcome his PTSD due to his battlefield experiences. He was a brave soldier.  Donald Trump is a piece of gutter filth who isn't fit to shine my father's shoes. 

You would have to literally put a gun to my head to get me to cast a vote for that piece of human garbage.

[aligncare]

I took it as a CONSERVATIVE website not party first bootlickers.

Sir, you are incorrect, despite the nostalgic photo of Reagan. If I am not mistaken we are not specifically a conservative website. Of, course I'm always open to being corrected--a  favorite past time here.

And besides, you're also wrong about myself as a Trump supporter. Several months back I switched political affiliation to "unaffiliated." I would be supporting Donald Trump whatever party he ran in. And, to whit, in fact, it was noted during the primaries that Donald Trump seem to be running a third-party campaign within the Republican Party.

In any event, I support Donald Trump because he's got the best skills, personality and heart for the job at this moment in history. Period. I lick no one's boots.

[Norm Lenhart]

Sir, you are incorrect, despite the nostalgic photo of Reagan. If I am not mistaken we are not specifically a conservative website. Of, course I'm always open to being corrected--a  favorite past time here.

And besides, you're also wrong about myself as a Trump supporter. Several months back I switched political affiliation to "unaffiliated." I would be supporting Donald Trump whatever party he ran in. And, to whit, in fact, it was noted during the primaries that Donald Trump seem to be running a third-party campaign within the Republican Party.

In any event, I support Donald Trump because he's got the best skills, personality and heart for the job at this moment in history. Period. I lick no one's boots.

Yea you do. And you stupidly pull race cards when things arent going your way. Twofer!