Republican friendships shatter over Trump

[Cripplecreek]

So you expected the party leadership to NOT support and he party's nominee?

All 3 were supporting Trump before the nominee. In fact one of Trump's attacks on Cruz was a defense of McConnell over Ted Cruz rightfully calling him a liar. Trump and the GOPe have been in each others panties since the GOPe figured out that their preferred candidates wouldn't win.

Awful funny how the GOP couldn't stomp out Obama birtherism for years but when it came to Ted Cruz birthers, not a peep from the GOP. When Trump accused Rafael Cruz of being involved in JFK's assasination, again, not a peep out of the GOP.

Trump is a lying degenerate bottom feeding piece of trash who will never EVER get my vote.

[Luis Gonzalez]

McConnell is on the side of Trump, John Boehner supports Trump and Preibus is threatening those who don't support Trump.

Seems pretty clear cut to me.

Not being afflicted with political short (or long) memory loss, I distinctly recall this (and other) sites gleefully rejoicing about Trump's demolition of the GOPe's "anointed" candidates (Jeb et al) and about how Trump was an "outsider" and tyhe bane of everything GOPe.

Now, all I read about is how Trump IS the GOPe, and how the GOPe has taken this election from some outsider rebel (Cruz) and the conservatives, while other people proudly proclaim Trump as the Lord and Savior of conservatism.

You're all full of s#it.

They're just people.

Even less than that, they're politicians.

None of them can "save" anything.

Not a tree, not a job, not a dime, not a life.

In fact, the only thing that they're really good at is cutting down trees, losing jobs, spending money, and putting our lives in danger.

One day you will all wake up to THE FACT that no politician holds the solution to anything.

They just create new problems to obscure the old ones, because without problems, they have no platform to run for re-election on.

I swear to God that I will send money to the first sonofabitch politician who stands on a soap box and says that they will do absolutely nothing about everything (other than national security and the mail) and see how things work themselves out without the help of the Federal government.

[Luis Gonzalez]

All 3 were supporting Trump before the nominee. In fact one of Trump's attacks on Cruz was a defense of McConnell over Ted Cruz rightfully calling him a liar. Trump and the GOPe have been in each others panties since the GOPe figured out that their preferred candidates wouldn't win.

Awful funny how the GOP couldn't stomp out Obama birtherism for years but when it came to Ted Cruz birthers, not a peep from the GOP. When Trump accused Rafael Cruz of being involved in JFK's assasination, again, not a peep out of the GOP.

Trump is a lying degenerate bottom feeding piece of trash who will never EVER get my vote.

Trump will never get my vote either, but Cruz was an absolute dumbass if he thought that he could go to Congress, lob grenades at the GOP leadership, then get their support in the primaries.

[debrawiest]

Ivanka Trump is looking forward to being the First Lady

@geronl


   Her first EXECUTIVE ORDER will be the 'deportation' of her Step-Mom   

Which one? There are several.

[Cripplecreek]

Trump will never get my vote either, but Cruz was an absolute dumbass if he thought that he could go to Congress, lob grenades at the GOP leadership, then get their support in the primaries.

Ahh

A good old go along to get along RINO is your preference.

Never mind.

[skeeter]

Trump will never get my vote either, but Cruz was an absolute dumbass if he thought that he could go to Congress, lob grenades at the GOP leadership, then get their support in the primaries.

Hindsight is 20/20...

With a half dozen GOPe stalwarts, Yeb, Linda, Marco, Kasich, others, in the running I seriously doubt Cruz expected he'd ever have, or need, support from those three clowns.

Trump really upset the apple cart.

[Smokin Joe]

Hindsight is 20/20...

With a half dozen GOPe stalwarts, Yeb, Linda, Marco, Kasich, others, in the running I seriously doubt Cruz expected he'd ever have, or need, support from those three clowns.

Trump really upset the apple cart.

I seriously believe if Trump hadn't have been in the picture or so aggressively lying about Cruz, that Cruz would have had the nomination. While he still would have lacked anything but token support from the GOPe, I believe he would have won the election. That might make an interesting 'alternative history' plot, but it isn't where we are.

The GOPe types piped up early on to say they could 'make deals' with Trump, but Cruz was likely to stand on principle. Maybe Trumps concerted assault against Cruz was paid off by keeping Kasich in to split the no-Trump vote long after it was obvious Kasich wasn't going anywhere, and that was the GOPe 'deal'.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Ahh

A good old go along to get along RINO is your preference.

Never mind.

No, you don't have to "go along to get along".  But you also don't have to lob gratuitous insults at everyone who crosses you.  Reagan did this very well -- he could disagree with you, but do it without rancor.  The "there you go again" line is the way to do something like that without alienating other people.

Ted acts like his goal is to defeat everyone who does not agree with them.  The idea of convincing some of them seems not to have occurred to him.

[Suppressed]

I don't mean to be heartless, but people about to commit suicide don't write political letters to the editor bursting with pride over the thing they claim is driving them to the brink.

Suicide is a complex issue in that there are many personal variations.

In fact, I know someone who did exactly as you say, albeit for issues other than homosexuality.  After being called on it, she wrote one last letter to the editor (not published by the newspaper, of course), in which she thanked the person who taunted her for giving her the push she needed to take the final plunge.

As always, I was on the cc: list, and that was how I found out she was gone.  And, happily, those issues will never again bother her! 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Trump will never get my vote either, but Cruz was an absolute dumbass if he thought that he could go to Congress, lob grenades at the GOP leadership, then get their support in the primaries.

I don't think he even wanted their support.  At least, not initially.  I think he preferred the role of the outsider, and wanted to win the nomination by running against both them and the Democrats.

I think he overestimated his own appeal.

[Sanguine]

No, you don't have to "go along to get along".  But you also don't have to lob gratuitous insults at everyone who crosses you.  Reagan did this very well -- he could disagree with you, but do it without rancor.  The "there you go again" line is the way to do something like that without alienating other people.

Ted acts like his goal is to defeat everyone who does not agree with them.  The idea of convincing some of them seems not to have occurred to him.

We have very, very different perceptions of the man and his actions.  But, I don't see any point in continuing to argue about it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

The fact that JR at TOS threatens to ban anyone who posts links to any of his comments about Trump from a couple years ago tells me that he knows he's swimming in a sewer.

I haven't looked there for awhile, but it's hardly surprising.  One of the least appealing things about Trump is the mindset/demeanor of many of his supporters.  There are those of us who are voting for him only because of the alternative, and then there are those who support him because they actually think he's wonderful.  And that latter group has been incredibly nasty towards anyone who didn't see things their way.

[Smokin Joe]

No, you don't have to "go along to get along".  But you also don't have to lob gratuitous insults at everyone who crosses you.  Reagan did this very well -- he could disagree with you, but do it without rancor.  The "there you go again" line is the way to do something like that without alienating other people.

Ted acts like his goal is to defeat everyone who does not agree with them.  The idea of convincing some of them seems not to have occurred to him.

Reagan (God Bless Him) was an actor, too, and well versed in diplomatic disagreement. Cruz's background as an attorney has been in far more adversarial situations, and instances of  defending self, reputation, wife, and family against the bombardment of smears would be circumstances which would justify the need to defeat the allegations and the ones throwing them.

As for adversarial relations in the Senate, yes. When the TEA party  was backing candidates, that was what we wanted. After all it was the defeat of the GOPe go along to get along (with Obama) attitude that the voters craved.

That was the whole thing about an "outsider" (only we had one on the 'inside', already fighting), while the alleged "outsider" business guy was busy making deals with TPTB. His supporters got sold out even while they were writing songs about the Orange Glorious and some still don't get it.

[beandog]

Your kind gave us Obama, the Primaries are over.

Post shows the usual "Trump Hate", "orange one" and so on, If the Cruz campaign never did any wrong, then, why did they apologize a number of times? Why did Cruz ask for a meeting with Carson, that's in the news.

If Cruz is better than Trump in every way, Perry, Walker, Kasich are all better men than cheating Cruz in every way.

If one wants to deny the truth of the Cruz campaign issuing apologies, have at it.

You are so full of it that I don't know how you can stand to look at yourself in a mirror.  Nobody believes you actually ever supported Sen.  Cruz.  It is your candidate who made things up about people and still does, just like his supporters.  The difference is when Sen. Cruz's campaign made a mistake they apologized for it, the Donald just continued to lie.  He is a liar, just like his supporters.

[Smokin Joe]

I don't think he even wanted their support.  At least, not initially.  I think he preferred the role of the outsider, and wanted to win the nomination by running against both them and the Democrats.

I think he overestimated his own appeal.

I think he underestimated how far Trump would go to damage the reputations of him and his family, and how able he would be in the media to rebut the wild eyed allegations coming from the Trump camp and cronies.

[goatprairie]

Any 'fallout' Trump supporters receive is a singular result of their candidate acting like a greasy richard.

The fact that many emulated him also is a factor.

If he'd campaigned like a decent human being the lunch invites would still be there.

Yes, and after reading the comments of his supporters on sites like TOS  who regularly and venomously trash anti-Trumpers, I don't care about their problems.
I don't think pro-Trumpers are evil or unAmerican....I simply question their wisdom in backing a person with such objectionable personal traits and such limited conservative bona fides as Trump.
It's like they tried to choose the biggest a-hole with the least qualifications possible to be the Pubbie standard bearer.
But I wouldn't disown somebody for voting for Trump. I'm just disappointed in many people I trusted  for kowtowing to the Orange Toad.

[Norm Lenhart]

The fact that JR at TOS threatens to ban anyone who posts links to any of his comments about Trump from a couple years ago tells me that he knows he's swimming in a sewer.

I was wondering how long he'd take to get around to that. Someone name me an actual conservative that tries to 'Ministry of Truth" his past statements away. Anyone? Didn't think so.

As to the thread topic itself...

Just how devolved do ones morals have to be to WANT continued friendship with someone that supports a liberal? There's that whole action and consequence thing. Liberals corrupt and destroy everything they touch. So with a liberal around, any actual American (that actually believes in their country) immediately places their family in danger allowing degenerates near them.

For that to be untrue, one would have to believe liberals are not degenerates and that supporting a liberal does not make one a degenerate themselves. Anyone wanna make THAT argument?

Edit: Before the wailing and gnashing of teeth begins...

"Degenerate"
 adjective
6.
having fallen below a normal or desirable level, especially in physical or moral qualities; deteriorated; degraded:
a degenerate king.

[Smokin Joe]

I was wondering how long he'd take to get around to that. Someone name me an actual conservative that tries to 'Ministry of Truth" his past statements away. Anyone? Didn't think so.

As to the thread topic itself...

Just how devolved do ones morals have to be to WANT continued friendship with someone that supports a liberal? There's that whole action and consequence thing. Liberals corrupt and destroy everything they touch. So with a liberal around, any actual American (that actually believes in their country) immediately places their family in danger allowing degenerates near them.

For that to be untrue, one would have to believe liberals are not degenerates and that supporting a liberal does not make one a degenerate themselves. Anyone wanna make THAT argument?

Edit: Before the wailing and gnashing of theeth begins...

"Degenerate"
 adjective
6.
having fallen below a normal or desirable level, especially in physical or moral qualities; deteriorated; degraded:
a degenerate king.

There's a litmus test there, for sure. The range goes from good to acceptable to unacceptable. It should be applied to primary support, when the 'true believers' latched on.

[skeeter]

I don't think he even wanted their support.  At least, not initially.  I think he preferred the role of the outsider, and wanted to win the nomination by running against both them and the Democrats.

I think he overestimated his own appeal.

I think Cruz would've done just fine had not someone with gargantuan name recognition and TV presence saying things most primary voters wanted to hear come along. In fact I think its pretty clear he would have won the nomination.

We'd have a constitutional conservative running against an very beatable Hillary Clinton instead of a newly minted liberal republican.

[Silver Pines]

I noted that too.

I guess believing in the Constitution is now considered "worship"............. and I'm sure, considering that the guy using the term is a Democrat, he looks at Cruz as an idolater.

It really didn't take long for the mask to be ripped off that one, did it?

@musiclady

No, it didn't.  That isn't the first time the phrase has been used here, either.

[Cripplecreek]

I was wondering how long he'd take to get around to that. Someone name me an actual conservative that tries to 'Ministry of Truth" his past statements away. Anyone? Didn't think so.

As to the thread topic itself...

Just how devolved do ones morals have to be to WANT continued friendship with someone that supports a liberal? There's that whole action and consequence thing. Liberals corrupt and destroy everything they touch. So with a liberal around, any actual American (that actually believes in their country) immediately places their family in danger allowing degenerates near them.

For that to be untrue, one would have to believe liberals are not degenerates and that supporting a liberal does not make one a degenerate themselves. Anyone wanna make THAT argument?

I've been spending a lot of time with my liberal sister lately because she's the executor of my mom's estate so I bite my tongue about a lot of things but one thing we agree on is our disgust with Trump. Yesterday I had lunch with she and her boss. Her boss is an Oakland county Chaldean who says she's been voting republican since Reagan but Donald Trump has ended that run. She says the old reasonable suspicions about a middle easterners have become nasty, personal and threatening within the past year.

Until the GOP comes to its senses, she'll be voting libertarian or something.

[Norm Lenhart]

There's a litmus test there, for sure. The range goes from good to acceptable to unacceptable. It should be applied to primary support, when the 'true believers' latched on.

But they didn't latch on then. Thats the people they always were. Trump just gave voice to their liberalism.

I used to argue with people on TOS about supporting liberals and the truth still holds. For someone to embrace and empower a leftist, one had that leftism in them to begin with. If a pro lifer starts donating to Planned Parenthood, how pro life are they? Were they before donating? That donation manifested from something, some belief they had all along.

It's the same for any sudden conversion of magnitude. People don't simply 'change' their core being. Look how many converts to christianity burst out with the levels of a zealot, only to regress a short time later and go back to the people 'they actually are'.

Same for politics. Anyone that can straight up vote for a liberal, believes that liberalism is the best option. If they did not, they would fight for what they believe in. When they empower liberals with their vote, they arent 'compromising their beliefs'. They are ENACTING the beliefs they actually hold.

People ask why some gay men marry women. It's cover. They fear the consequences of 'coming out' to friends/family/employers. The same reasons hold true for why some liberals swear they are conservatives. It's a beard. Cover.

But Trump made it acceptable to come out of the political closet for them. They can embrace being a 'Trump Conservative'. Even when Trump himself is a raging liberal as history has thoroughly documented. They simply rewrote the meaning of the word, Orwell style, to arrange personal reality to their view.

[EasyAce]

And Trump was governor of what? He doesn't even know how a bill is put in the hopper, he just paid people to take care of that.

Of course he knows how bills are put in the hopper . . .

I have a sister who's a brilliant... judge. [Cruz]'s been criticizing -- he's been criticizing my sister for
signing a certain bill. You know who else signed that bill? Justice Samuel Alito, a very conservative
member of the Supreme Court, with my sister, signed that bill.
---Donaldus Minimus, during the 25 February Republican candidates' debate.

See?

 

[musiclady]

@musiclady

No, it didn't.  That isn't the first time the phrase has been used here, either.

It's almost as if they're so ignorant of all things Conservative that they don't even know what the Constitution means to the founding and sustaining of this nation.

Oh, wait............... there's no "almost" about it.

These trolls are clueless about the greatness of this country.  That's why they consider the rest of us "worshippers" of the document that actually made us great.

The surprising thing is that they're not even trying to hide their hard core liberalism any more.  They just put it all out there for all to see.

Incredible hubris and stupidity combined.....

[Norm Lenhart]

Incredible hubris and stupidity combined.....

Textbook liberalism in the 21st century.