What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (4 Viewers)

I have been really impressed with their analysis/programming...except for that 8 person panel nonsense. Though they seemed to iron that out a bit lately.
I'm all in for S.E. Cupp and Amanda Carpenter.  I like the John King boards too, and sad to admit I like Van Jones.  But S.E. and Amanda are a good draw.

 
I'm all in for S.E. Cupp and Amanda Carpenter.  I like the John King boards too, and sad to admit I like Van Jones.  But S.E. and Amanda are a good draw.
Van Jones has been the most impressive to me by far. And I have never been a Van Jones fan....AT ALL.

Those two chicks...meh...good eye candy...but that seems to be all they are good for. I feel like it is a coin flip on whether or not they have something worthwhile to contribute when they open their mouths. 

 
So what some people keep saying on TV is that Trump might reach the convention without the 1200 delegates he needs. But even so, he'll still have a sizable lead on everyone else. Suppose he reached the convention a hundred short and the powers that be gave the nomination to somebody else way behind? Can you imagine? That really would destroy the GOP. 

They have to give it to Trump. On March 15 he wins Florida and Ohio unless Rubio and/or Kasich can pull a rabbit out of a hat. And then it's over, right? No more shenanigans. 

 
We have live coverage from Anchorage. 
These guys are doing a great job they are counting the ballots right here they are focused they are ignoring the fact that I'm standing right next to them being as distracting as I can possibly be who knows how many they have looks like 45 or 50 or 55 ballots now they are starting over and counting from the beginning this is so e xciting looks like it may be a while before the final tally is in.

 
So what some people keep saying on TV is that Trump might reach the convention without the 1200 delegates he needs. But even so, he'll still have a sizable lead on everyone else. Suppose he reached the convention a hundred short and the powers that be gave the nomination to somebody else way behind? Can you imagine? That really would destroy the GOP. 

They have to give it to Trump. On March 15 he wins Florida and Ohio unless Rubio and/or Kasich can pull a rabbit out of a hat. And then it's over, right? No more shenanigans. 
I think it's over.  I don't see how they take it from Trump if he's way out in front.  They talk of the party being split, but they permanently destroy the party if they nominate someone the voters didn't put in the lead.  It's better to have one bad election I'd think than to go through that.

 
These guys are doing a great job they are counting the ballots right here they are focused they are ignoring the fact that I'm standing right next to them being as distracting as I can possibly be who knows how many they have looks like 45 or 50 or 55 ballots now they are starting over and counting from the beginning this is so e xciting looks like it may be a while before the final tally is in.
:lol:  The CNN guy on that assigment is thinking "who the hell did I piss off to deserve this".

 
So what some people keep saying on TV is that Trump might reach the convention without the 1200 delegates he needs. But even so, he'll still have a sizable lead on everyone else. Suppose he reached the convention a hundred short and the powers that be gave the nomination to somebody else way behind? Can you imagine? That really would destroy the GOP. 

They have to give it to Trump. On March 15 he wins Florida and Ohio unless Rubio and/or Kasich can pull a rabbit out of a hat. And then it's over, right? No more shenanigans. 
If they don't give it to Trump, the GOP would be more fractured than if they give it to him. Trump displayed some humility and sounded more like a unifier then ever before in tonight's victory speech. If he starts to sound more presidential, he could might be able to overcome the demographic disadvantage Republicans have in the general election. In Florida, Romney lost by less than 1% in 2012.  I'm voting for Hillary, but I have to admit that his speech and Q&A tonight was very good. He reached out to women by talking about the good things done by PP.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The dirty truth and the elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is this, whites will overwhelmingly vote for Trump, minorities are going to overwhelmingly vote for Hillary.

Do with that what you will. 

 
So what some people keep saying on TV is that Trump might reach the convention without the 1200 delegates he needs. But even so, he'll still have a sizable lead on everyone else. Suppose he reached the convention a hundred short and the powers that be gave the nomination to somebody else way behind? Can you imagine? That really would destroy the GOP. 

They have to give it to Trump. On March 15 he wins Florida and Ohio unless Rubio and/or Kasich can pull a rabbit out of a hat. And then it's over, right? No more shenanigans. 
It would hardly be the first time a front runner was left out in the cold after the convention.

 
Here is an article in regards to what I was talking about yesterday:

A growing number of Republicans, including freshman U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, have said in recent days that they will never vote for Trump, even if he is the party’s nominee in November.

Trump’s open admiration for tyrannical rulers in other countries, his encouragement of violence at his political rallies, his eagerness to restrict the freedom of the press, his rejection of equality under the law for minority groups, his lack of any coherent political beliefs and the many liberal positions he has adopted in the past all combine to make him anathema to many Republicans.
Yea, I get what many will say "well, that is now, if he wins the nomination they will unite behind him".. and I just don't see it myself..
This is beyond "hold your nose and vote for him" there is utter contempt for him in the upper echelon's of the GOP and it seems some of them would rather deal with Hillary then Trump.. :mellow:

 
Here is an article in regards to what I was talking about yesterday:

Yea, I get what many will say "well, that is now, if he wins the nomination they will unite behind him".. and I just don't see it myself..
This is beyond "hold your nose and vote for him" there is utter contempt for him in the upper echelon's of the GOP and it seems some of them would rather deal with Hillary then Trump.. :mellow:
At least with Hilary, you know what you're getting. We have no idea what crazy think Drumpf could come up with. Where does he stand on the major issues? No one has a clue. Hell, I don't think he does either.

 
The dirty truth and the elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is this, whites will overwhelmingly vote for Trump, minorities are going to overwhelmingly vote for Hillary.

Do with that what you will. 
You misspelled "narrowly".   Half the electorate are Democrats and/or female.   Plus Trump is about to be exposed for what he really is.   

 
So what some people keep saying on TV is that Trump might reach the convention without the 1200 delegates he needs. But even so, he'll still have a sizable lead on everyone else. Suppose he reached the convention a hundred short and the powers that be gave the nomination to somebody else way behind? Can you imagine? That really would destroy the GOP. 
No, nominating a guy like Trump would destroy the GOP.  Stopping him at the convention would demonstrate that there are still some responsible adults in that party who realize that it was a bad idea to let the kids play unsupervised with lawn darts.  

 
The dirty truth and the elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is this, whites will overwhelmingly vote for Trump, minorities are going to overwhelmingly vote for Hillary.

Do with that what you will. 
Newsflash: the majority of whites have voted Republican in every presidential election since at least 1968.

Think about that for a moment. If not for the non-white voters, Sarah Palin would be a heartbeat away from the presidency right now.

 
Your side generally has more guns, really just math. 

From what I see via Facebook where I know people's politics (and being a vet I have a lot of righty friends), it seems my establishment GOP friends and family dislike the thought of Trump more than my lefty friends.  Trump is getting the nod IMO, so I will be very curious to see what the Rubio types say when it's Hillary v Trump.  This election is just a string of :popcorn: ops. 
It will be absolutely fascinating to watch. The problem is, one of them will end up POTUS.

 
No, nominating a guy like Trump would destroy the GOP.  Stopping him at the convention would demonstrate that there are still some responsible adults in that party who realize that it was a bad idea to let the kids play unsupervised with lawn darts.  
I Don't get this at all.  So you basically go against the will of your voters and somehow they're going to come out and vote for your anointed one?

 If Trump gets to the convention with an overwhelming lead but just a little short, any attempt by the RNC to not appoint him will basically just mean the Democrats will run the table because the voter anger will trickle down into the lesser elections as well 

 
I Don't get this at all.  So you basically go against the will of your voters and somehow they're going to come out and vote for your anointed one?
When one of your kids is throwing a tantrum, you need to calmly move the kid into a quiet area and stop them from flinging stuff into your china hutch.  Give them a chance to calm down and come their senses, and then explain patiently to them how their behavior was inappropriate and not to be repeated.  

Yes, that's how I view Trump voters.  

 
When one of your kids is throwing a tantrum, you need to calmly move the kid into a quiet area and stop them from flinging stuff into your china hutch.  Give them a chance to calm down and come their senses, and then explain patiently to them how their behavior was inappropriate and not to be repeated.  

Yes, that's how I view Trump voters.  
You forgot to mention that in your analogy you have a special needs kid.

 
When one of your kids is throwing a tantrum, you need to calmly move the kid into a quiet area and stop them from flinging stuff into your china hutch.  Give them a chance to calm down and come their senses, and then explain patiently to them how their behavior was inappropriate and not to be repeated.  

Yes, that's how I view Trump voters.  
I'm really torn on this Ivan. I agree with you about Trump voters. I'd love nothing more than to see the Republican Party repudiate Trump. 

...But this is our system. They voted for him. Republican voters have a right to the guy most of them voted for. 

 
When one of your kids is throwing a tantrum, you need to calmly move the kid into a quiet area and stop them from flinging stuff into your china hutch.  Give them a chance to calm down and come their senses, and then explain patiently to them how their behavior was inappropriate and not to be repeated.  

Yes, that's how I view Trump voters.  


The problem with this line of thinking Ivan is that this is what has led to the base being pissed and the rise of someone like Trump.  The conservative base keeps getting promised things there is no way for the "parents" to actually deliver.  You can't keep lying to people over and over and expect them to just take it, they get pissed and want someone to blow it up...thus you get Trump.

This is not in any way an endorsement of Trump (might be the only person that would actually make me consider Hillary...didn't think anyone could do that), just my take on why this type of argument will backfire if tried by the Republican establishment.  I really wonder if the GOP elites are willing to kill the party to stop Trump, because that is what I think would happen if they pull a fast one at the convention.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed.  He really could be jeopardizing any chance to run in the future, especially if he loses big in FLA.  Bret Baer brought up a good point in that the border areas of Georgia and Alabama that share radio and TV with Florida overwhelmingly went to Trump tonight.  If Trump wins Florida handily and Cruz finishes within striking distance of Rubio, why would the GOP ever back him again?  He's young, he's a sharp guy, he's just not ready yet.  Maybe someday he will be and that ship may have sailed after what has transpired in this race. 
I want him too. He is a total tool. Can't stand him. Total phony.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The dirty truth and the elephant in the room that nobody is talking about is this, whites will overwhelmingly vote for Trump, minorities are going to overwhelmingly vote for Hillary.

Do with that what you will. 
There are far more "white people" in the country. But a lot of them will not vote for Trump IMO. He has a niche market not the general market.

Hate to say it.....but it's the parties fault for not having good candidates this election cycle (except for Kasich IMO), Clinton will be our country's next President. It's becoming quite clear.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm really torn on this Ivan. I agree with you about Trump voters. I'd love nothing more than to see the Republican Party repudiate Trump. 

...But this is our system. They voted for him. Republican voters have a right to the guy most of them voted for. 
So far though..."most" of them are not voting for him.

 
I'm really torn on this Ivan. I agree with you about Trump voters. I'd love nothing more than to see the Republican Party repudiate Trump. 

...But this is our system. They voted for him. Republican voters have a right to the guy most of them voted for. 
The count of delegates says this is far from over... . Trump - 316, Cruz - 226, Rubio - 106

Question for those that know better then I...

Let's say Rubio drops as he should after March 15th.. does he get to "give" those delegates to who he wants, or do they just stay with a none candidate??

 
The count of delegates says this is far from over... . Trump - 316, Cruz - 226, Rubio - 106

Question for those that know better then I...

Let's say Rubio drops as he should after March 15th.. does he get to "give" those delegates to who he wants, or do they just stay with a none candidate??
If you assume current voting patterns hold (ie Trump sweeps the rest of the south sans FL and monopolizes the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast and you assume he takes CA), Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich basically have to prevent him from winning 3 out of 4 of Ohio, Illinois, FL, and Missouri on the 15th.  Any combo of 3 of those basically puts Trump on a fairly assured path to 1237.  If Trump wins 0,1, or 2 of those contests, you probably end up with some type of brokered convention.  If he sweeps all 4, the nomination fight is for all intents over. 

Rubio's sole path seems to be winning FL and IL and then riding that momentum into the rest of the Midwest and Western states.  Cruz's only real path seems to be a 1v1 versus Trump after March 15th where he somehow flips the narrative an can win upper Mid-West, Mountain, and California.  Kasich doesn't have a real path unless he wins OH and Trump sweeps the rest and Cruz/Rubio drop out setting up a 1v1 situation (but Cruz isn't dropping out so this is pipedream).  Kasich is drawing dead, but the establishment needs he to beat Trump on OH. 

 
If Rubio formally endorses another candidate, then his delegates would be obligated to vote for that candidate. Otherwise, the delegates would be considered "uncommitted".

Let's say Rubio drops as he should after March 15th.. does he get to "give" those delegates to who he wants, or do they just stay with a none candidate??
 
Leeroy Jenkins said:
With Trump not sweeping and his wins only having 35%, at most seemingly, of the vote this thing has a real chance of being a brokered convention. 
I'd bet on it.

I don't see anyway around that now. I don't think Trump will get the number of delegates needed to secure the nom.

Rubio and Cruz aren't going anywhere and that will lead to a brokered convention

 
If Rubio formally endorses another candidate, then his delegates would be obligated to vote for that candidate. Otherwise, the delegates would be considered "uncommitted".

Quote
Let's say Rubio drops as he should after March 15th.. does he get to "give" those delegates to who he wants, or do they just stay with a none candidate??
:thanks: short of a miracle win by Rubio, he drops on March 16th and his current 106 delegates would probably go to Cruz as no way is he endorsing Trump..

IF he dropped today.. Cruz would actually have more delegates then Trump.. :mellow:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When one of your kids is throwing a tantrum, you need to calmly move the kid into a quiet area and stop them from flinging stuff into your china hutch.  Give them a chance to calm down and come their senses, and then explain patiently to them how their behavior was inappropriate and not to be repeated.  

Yes, that's how I view Trump voters.  
And this mentality is why the GOP deserves to die. 

What is inappropriate is making promises and commitments to your "child" and then when they call you out on it and hold you accountable, you do the "Do as I say, no as I do - Because I said so!" routine.

GTFO.

 

 
The count of delegates says this is far from over... . Trump - 316, Cruz - 226, Rubio - 106

Question for those that know better then I...

Let's say Rubio drops as he should after March 15th.. does he get to "give" those delegates to who he wants, or do they just stay with a none candidate??
In simple terms...delegates are locked to each candidate until after the first round of balloting at the convention (assuming nobody has the 50%). Then they can be released.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/02/16/everything-you-need-to-know-about-delegate-math-in-the-presidential-primary/

 

How could that matter at the Republican convention?

On the first ballot (or in a handful of states beyond that), bound delegates will have to vote for the candidate they are bound to. But if no candidate gets a majority on the first vote, then it gets interesting. Delegates bound to one candidate but aligned with another could then be crucial.

But we’re still talking about a long-shot scenario, right?

Sure, but it’s not as long of a shot as it perhaps once was.

Nevertheless, the system of delegate allocation in both parties is designed to convert the chaos of the invisible primary — if there is any left over — into order and typically before the end of primary season.

If 2016 proves any different, it will be because of the changes I’ve described here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm really torn on this Ivan. I agree with you about Trump voters. I'd love nothing more than to see the Republican Party repudiate Trump. 

...But this is our system. They voted for him. Republican voters have a right to the guy most of them voted for. 
I disagree with the second line, but this is another one of those issues where I know I'm in the minority.  Direct democracy is a terrible idea, and our system contains lots of little anti-democratic snags for a reason.  Back in the day, nominations were sorted out in a smoke-filled room by party elders, not by the common rabble.  Say what you will about "party elders," but they never would have seriously entertained the notion on nominating somebody like Donald Trump.  In fact, I'm kind of inclined to go a little further and use Trump as Exhibit A for why the modern primary system is inferior to the smoke-filled room.  But again, that's just me, and I'm very open about not being a big fan of democracy to start with.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top