Question for the #NeverTrump people

[Dexter]

 

[sinkspur]

Trump could pick St. Peter as his VP running mate and I still wouldn't vote for  him.

[Resp3]

What a vague question!

Rethink my position on what? To vote for Trump if Cruz endorsed him?

Or vote AGAINST him?

Please. Next time put some thought into such a vanity.

[Dexter]

What a vague question!

Rethink my position on what? To vote for Trump if Cruz endorsed him?

Or vote AGAINST him?

Please. Next time put some thought into such a vanity.

I thought the question was obvious. If your position is #NeverTrump then changing your position would make you not #NeverTrump. I'm asking if a Cruz endorsement would make you rethink boycotting Trump.

[Silver Pines]

As much as I like Ted Cruz, I don't allow politicians or anyone else to do my thinking for me.  I know what my conscience demands and I won't sell my soul by voting for Trump.

[Resp3]

I thought the question was obvious. If your position is #NeverTrump then changing your position would make you not #NeverTrump. I'm asking if a Cruz endorsement would make you rethink boycotting Trump.

But if I were a die-hard Trumpster - a Cruz selection would be an insult. A slap in the face. I guess I could accept Trump selecting Ted. Only if he backed off that endorsement a few hours later. As is his custom.

Another angle. I have no respect for Trump. Don't trust him. And if Ted Cruz aligned with that "pathological liar"? Well yeah. I might change my mind.

And vote for Hillary on General Principle.

Like I said - a vague question.

[Oceander]

No it would not.  Why should it?

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

To me it would reflect bad on both. Cruz endorses someone who makes fun of his wife's looks, "lyin' ted", etc. etc.

Trump burned his bridges with a lot of people I think.

[MACVSOG68]

Trump could pick St. Peter as his VP running mate and I still wouldn't vote for  him.

Another good reason for Trump not to consider Cruz.  At least pick someone who might add something to the ticket that might give some appeal to the millions of voters not thrilled with a Hillary presidency. 

[MACVSOG68]

To me it would reflect bad on both. Cruz endorses someone who makes fun of his wife's looks, "lyin' ted", etc. etc.

Trump burned his bridges with a lot of people I think.

Yeah, on many levels it would be a bad combo.

[washi]

My position, all along, has been that as bad as Trump is, Hillary is worse.

I'm not going to be a poutty little b!+ch because my candidate didn't get the nomination. I'll hold my nose and pull the lever from Trump, regardless of who endorses him, because Hillary is worse.

No change in position needed.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

My position, all along, has been that as bad as Trump is, Hillary is worse.

I'm not going to be a poutty little b!+ch because my candidate didn't get the nomination. I'll hold my nose and pull the lever from Trump, regardless of who endorses him, because Hillary is worse.

No change in position needed.

I'm sorta here too. As bad as Trump is, I do believe he'll pick a better USSC Justice than Hillary. I don't share the opinion with the anti-Trumpers that he'll pick someone worse. If a third party guy is running strong and I really like him, I'll go with that guy though.

[MACVSOG68]

My position, all along, has been that as bad as Trump is, Hillary is worse.

I'm not going to be a poutty little b!+ch because my candidate didn't get the nomination. I'll hold my nose and pull the lever from Trump, regardless of who endorses him, because Hillary is worse.

No change in position needed.

That's the bottom line for me, and I suspect by November, for a lot more than will admit it now.  If not, we continue with what got us the last eight glorious years. 

[Oceander]

That's the bottom line for me, and I suspect by November, for a lot more than will admit it now.  If not, we continue with what got us the last eight glorious years. 

We continue either way because Trump will be no more republican than mayor Bloomberg from NYC was republican.  Bloomberg was a republican solely for convenience and governed just like a liberal.  Trump is a NYC republican-for-convenience and will govern just as much as a liberal as Bloomberg did.  Bloomberg was not materially different from what Clinton would have been had she been mayor of NYC and therefore since Trump will be materially the same as Bloomberg, he will also be materially the same as Clinton. 

[MACVSOG68]

One of my concerns is that we're overdue for an economic downturn, and I think the policies of either Hillary or Trump will make it worse than it need be.  So I think there's a very good chance that whomever gets elected in 2016 is going to find themselves -- and their party -- trounced in 2020.

Funny but true.  Seems a Republican inherits one almost every time.  If Hillary wins, they will go back to blaming Bush.  If Trump wins, it will be his fault. 

[Resp3]

My position, all along, has been that as bad as Trump is, Hillary is worse.

I'm not going to be a poutty little b!+ch because my candidate didn't get the nomination. I'll hold my nose and pull the lever from Trump, regardless of who endorses him, because Hillary is worse.

No change in position needed.

Ah yes. The "hold your nose and vote" position. That's a tried and true Republican value. We've been practicing it for years. Look at McCain and Romney as an example.

Only problem is - that results in a democrat being elected. This year will be no different.

[MACVSOG68]

We continue either way because Trump will be no more republican than mayor Bloomberg from NYC was republican.  Bloomberg was a republican solely for convenience and governed just like a liberal.  Trump is a NYC republican-for-convenience and will govern just as much as a liberal as Bloomberg did.  Bloomberg was not materially different from what Clinton would have been had she been mayor of NYC and therefore since Trump will be materially the same as Bloomberg, he will also be materially the same as Clinton.

Maybe, but I'm just not that prescient.  Both have said what they'll do.  There is no question in my mind about Hillary; there's still some hope Trump will represent us as he's promised.  If it were up to me, Trump wouldn't be the nominee.  But he apparently will be.  There are only two choices for me, as I'm not going to hide behind morality, God, principles, etc. etc.  Politics is a dirty game no matter who's playing it.  First goal is to win.

[Oceander]

Maybe, but I'm just not that prescient.  Both have said what they'll do.  There is no question in my mind about Hillary; there's still some hope Trump will represent us as he's promised.  If it were up to me, Trump wouldn't be the nominee.  But he apparently will be.  There are only two choices for me, as I'm not going to hide behind morality, God, principles, etc. etc.  Politics is a dirty game no matter who's playing it.  First goal is to win.

I cannot accept just Trump's word because he is a known, admitted liar when it comes to negotiations and that is what a candidacy is, a negotiation.  That Trump is already taking up liberal positions on things like the minimum wage simply proves that he's been more or less lying so far to get what he wants, even if in his book he calls it truthful hyperbole. 

[MACVSOG68]

I cannot accept just Trump's word because he is a known, admitted liar when it comes to negotiations and that is what a candidacy is, a negotiation.  That Trump is already taking up liberal positions on things like the minimum wage simply proves that he's been more or less lying so far to get what he wants, even if in his book he calls it truthful hyperbole.

Can't argue with any of that except for what I said, and that's just for me.  This year there may be more votes against a candidate than for one.  But I can do that. 

[Oceander]

Can't argue with any of that except for what I said, and that's just for me.  This year there may be more votes against a candidate than for one.  But I can do that. 

That's fair enough.  At the end of the day it's always a judgment call. 

[truth_seeker]

Another good reason for Trump not to consider Cruz.  At least pick someone who might add something to the ticket that might give some appeal to the millions of voters not thrilled with a Hillary presidency.

Not to mention Cruz was rejected in part, because he was seen as far, far right--well away from mainstream American political opinion.

Therefore he might harm, not help Trump. Probably better to have someone seen as more close to the political mainstream, with track records of results.

Perry or Walker come to mind.

[MACVSOG68]

Not to mention Cruz was rejected in part, because he was seen as far, far right--well away from mainstream American political opinion.

Therefore he might harm, not help Trump. Probably better to have someone seen as more close to the political mainstream, with track records of results.

Perry or Walker come to mind.

I like both, but Walker for sure would have issues bringing out the center-left, and Perry can sometimes put his foot in his mouth.  I agree with you on Cruz.  That would be a bad choice.

[thackney]

if I were a die-hard Trumpster

Then you would hardly be a #NeverTrump person.  Keep that original part of the question and the vagueness goes away.

[geronl]

I do believe he'll pick a better USSC Justice than Hillary

based on what 

Remember that Trump absolutely detested Scalia because Justice Scalia did not think affirmative action was constitutional.

[geronl]

Not to mention Cruz was rejected in part, because he was seen as far, far right--well away from mainstream American political opinion.

Therefore he might harm, not help Trump. Probably better to have someone seen as more close to the political mainstream, with track records of results.

Perry or Walker come to mind.

Grown men hopping in the middle school girls shower is ssooooo MAINSTREAM!

[roamer_1]

I knew I wouldn't vote for Trump right from the get-go. A few short hours looking into his record was all I needed for him to be unpalatable. That doesn't change, regardless of any circumstance.

[Bigun]

I knew I wouldn't vote for Trump right from the get-go. A few short hours looking into his record was all I needed for him to be unpalatable. That doesn't change, regardless of any circumstance.

Absolutely right!  It ain't rocket science!

#NEVERTRUMP

[geronl]

I knew I wouldn't vote for Trump right from the get-go. A few short hours looking into his record was all I needed for him to be unpalatable. That doesn't change, regardless of any circumstance.

I was familiar enough with Trump to be #NeverTrump from the start.

[roamer_1]

I was familiar enough with Trump to be #NeverTrump from the start.

I'll admit I didn't think much of him to start with - I am pretty immune to getting waltzed down the garden trail - And he looked like a boorish, narcissistic, two-bit conman (and not a very good con at that).

BUT, it is my wont to abstain from relying upon impressions alone, and give every candidate a fair shake by the record. And by the record, I found my impressions to be 100% accurate.

[DiogenesLamp]

Not to mention Cruz was rejected in part, because he was seen as far, far right--well away from mainstream American political opinion.

You think Cruz was rejected for that reason? 


I think that is probably reason number 24 on the list of why he wasn't chosen.   Probably reason number one was that many Republicans saw Donald Trump as a mean SOB who will put up a fight when people mess with him.    I think many people are simply tired of the "Kinder Gentler" P*ssyfied Republican candidates who will smile and act polite towards their Democrat opponents. 


Donald is already out there calling her "Crooked Hillary."    Like it or not,  that juvenile,  grade-school level of taunting and mockery appeals to a lot of modern Americans.   That tactic of constantly referring to Cruz as "Lying Ted"   did quite a lot of damage to Cruz in my opinion.   

Cruz tried to ignore it and "rise above it",   but that's not gonna work on someone who has that New York style of sharp elbows fighting.   


I am a Cruz supporter.   I thought Cruz was a much better choice for the leader of this Nation.   He had some problems,  but at least I was confident where he stood ideologically.    He was outclassed in the arena of Media combat by someone who has had years of practice at it,   but  he almost pulled it out anyway.   

No,  Cruz's problem wasn't that he was too far right,  it was that he couldn't  do those off-the-cuff comebacks in a game of "the dozens."   

Therefore he might harm, not help Trump. Probably better to have someone seen as more close to the political mainstream, with track records of results.

Perry or Walker come to mind.

Sorry to say it,  but at this point Cruz brings nothing to the ticket.   Trump needs someone from Ohio or possibly Florida.   Trump needs someone from a big swing state to help lock down that swing state.   


I'm actually thinking Ben Carson (Florida I think)  would be a major asset.   He would cut more deeply into the Democrat's Black voter base,   and certainly help to nail down Florida,  without which Trump can't very likely win.   


I think Trump was sort of contemplating this during the debates.   That may be one reason why he did that dramatic "wait"  for Ben Carson when the Candidates were walking out,  and Carson missed hearing his name.   


Kaisch in Ohio is boring concentrated,  and weak as water "moderate"  in the eyes of much of the base.   It might help Trump secure Ohio,  but I don't know for sure.   

[geronl]

I found my impressions to be 100% accurate.

 

[washi]

Ah yes. The "hold your nose and vote" position. That's a tried and true Republican value. We've been practicing it for years. Look at McCain and Romney as an example.

There's a big difference between the GOPe foisting a McCain or Romney upon us, and a populist, albeit ill-informed, groundswell promoting Trump.

I don't know if one is better than the other; Trump is a pig in the poke.

I know what Hillary's goals are, however, and she has to be stopped.

[EC]

Why would an endorsement by Cruz change my mind? The only thing Ted Cruz could do to alter my opinion of the situation in any way is not support the nominee. He gave his word he would. Failing to do that would make me think less of him. There is nothing that could make me think less of the proto-dictator leading the pack.

[Roscoe Proudfoot]

Nope. Cruz is a republican. And right now, the opinions of republicans don't matter very much to me.

[jmyrlefuller]

It would only signal to me that he was forced to honor that pledge from the RNC from last year.

[roamer_1]

I knew he has not my first choice very quickly  I gave him months to earn my general election support.  At this point there is no possible way I will ever vote for him.  We cannot reward his corrupt behavior if we hope to ever have a respectable conservative as our nominee.  If Trump succeeds, expect more and more of the same.  Maybe worse.

And thus the sum of years - voting for the 'lesser evil'

[MACVSOG68]

And thus the sum of years - voting for the 'lesser evil'

The culture and makeup of the Nation as well as the number and complexity of important issues is always going to lead to that choice.  It's what we have now going into November and what a significant number of voters would see even if Cruz were the nominee. 

[roamer_1]

The culture and makeup of the Nation as well as the number and complexity of important issues is always going to lead to that choice.  It's what we have now going into November and what a significant number of voters would see even if Cruz were the nominee.

I don't see it as complex. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

[geronl]

  It's what we have now going into November...

Who is this "we"... because it ain't me. I am an independent conservative. The Republican Party literally means nothing to me. Nothing. They have chosen an extremely bad candidate. A candidate so revolting and completely unacceptable in every regard that there is no way on God's green Earth I would vote for him. Ever. It doesn't not matter who endorses him it does not change who and what he is and has been.

[geronl]

It's the Supreme Court nominations!

So back the guy who bashed Scalia over affirmative action a few months ago. No.

[MACVSOG68]

I don't see it as complex. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Well, some would see foreign policy, immigration reform, tax reform, the growth of entitlements, state/federal relationships, the 14th Amendment, powers under the Patriot Act, race relations, the place of religion in business, health care, and a host of other issues as complex in their resolution especially given the varied and opposed interests at stake. 

[MACVSOG68]

Who is this "we"... because it ain't me. I am an independent conservative. The Republican Party literally means nothing to me. Nothing. They have chosen an extremely bad candidate. A candidate so revolting and completely unacceptable in every regard that there is no way on God's green Earth I would vote for him. Ever. It doesn't not matter who endorses him it does not change who and what he is and has been.

"We" as in the American voter.  One of two candidates will win in November, and whoever votes for either will be voting for the lesser of two evils, hoping that one will win.  Others will vote for lesser party candidates either to make themselves feel better or to send some kind of message such as that sent by Perot.  Just from this forum alone, some will be voting for the Libertarian candidate, some for the Constitution Party guy, a few Hillary, a few write-ins.  An apparent minority here will vote for Trump, some because they really believe he is a good candidate, others who believe he is the pragmatic choice, even if they see him as a faulty candidate.

[roamer_1]

Well, some would see foreign policy, immigration reform, tax reform, the growth of entitlements, state/federal relationships, the 14th Amendment, powers under the Patriot Act, race relations, the place of religion in business, health care, and a host of other issues as complex in their resolution especially given the varied and opposed interests at stake.

Whatever... It always boils down to right and wrong, or the 'sweet spot' in a true compromise. Justifying otherwise is what becomes complex.

[BigHomer]

[Sanguine]

A Cruz endorsement would make me rethink my support for Cruz.  After all of the incredibly ugly and untrue stuff, DT and his minions have thrown at Cruz, Cruz would have to be some kind of masochist to turn around and support DT.  Much as it has for Christie, Carson and Perry.

[MACVSOG68]

Whatever... It always boils down to right and wrong, or the 'sweet spot' in a true compromise. Justifying otherwise is what becomes complex.

There will be many compromises to bring resolution to those issues.  They are all complex with very different roads to resolution.  Right and wrong are actually easy to say, not so easy to legislate.  Is there a right and wrong w/r to tax policy?  How about if you throw in spending, then add deficits, debt and jobs to the mix? There have been many attempts at resolving the overall immigration reform issues.  If you have simple right and wrong solutions to these and many other issues, let me know.  I'll write you in when I vote in November.   ^-^

[Silver Pines]

A Cruz endorsement would make me rethink my support for Cruz.  After all of the incredibly ugly and untrue stuff, DT and his minions have thrown at Cruz, Cruz would have to be some kind of masochist to turn around and support DT.  Much as it has for Christie, Carson and Perry.

I agree with that.

[M1078]

The only way I could want to vote for Trump even less would be if he picked Perry as his running mate.  Gov Good Hair is just another former democrat lying his way to whatever elected position he thinks he can get.  He called Trump "a cancer on the Republican party that needs to be excised" and now wants to be his VP?  What a hypocrite.

As far as Ted goes, I would think less of him if he endorses Trump.

I will never vote Trump, never vote Clinton, and never vote Bush for the rest of my life.  The biggest challenge for Texans is to get George P. Bush the hell out of our state.