Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (2 Viewers)

[culdeus]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

Goes back to my questions a couple posts up. If there was ever a bug to be squashed out of the next round of GOP cuts, it's this guy and I have no idea why he isn't getting the attention that Trump's getting. He's run a brilliant campaign thus far essentially making Trump his trojan horse. I am almost certain when Trump drops out, 90+% of his supporters will flock to Cruz. Then what? Not shocking I guess, but people are missing the forest for the trees yet again.

I thought you were a jonmx alias. No? Forget to change accounts?

 

[The Commish]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

Goes back to my questions a couple posts up. If there was ever a bug to be squashed out of the next round of GOP cuts, it's this guy and I have no idea why he isn't getting the attention that Trump's getting. He's run a brilliant campaign thus far essentially making Trump his trojan horse. I am almost certain when Trump drops out, 90+% of his supporters will flock to Cruz. Then what? Not shocking I guess, but people are missing the forest for the trees yet again.

I thought you were a jonmx alias. No? Forget to change accounts?

Maybe you should let someone else do the thinking for you??

 

[3C's]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that you’ve observed, but tell you that he’s the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a person’s tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

it's like a Pavlovian response

DING!

 

[Clayton Gray]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

His freshman roommate, Craig Mazin, told Patricia Murphy of The Daily Beast: "I would rather have anybody be the president of the United States. Anyone. I would rather pick somebody from the phone book."

Another Bush 2000 alumnus said to me: "Why do people take such an instant dislike to Ted Cruz? It just saves time."

Jeez

 

[RBM]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him. Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not.

At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

 

[RBM]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

Goes back to my questions a couple posts up. If there was ever a bug to be squashed out of the next round of GOP cuts, it's this guy and I have no idea why he isn't getting the attention that Trump's getting. He's run a brilliant campaign thus far essentially making Trump his trojan horse. I am almost certain when Trump drops out, 90+% of his supporters will flock to Cruz. Then what? Not shocking I guess, but people are missing the forest for the trees yet again.

I won't vote for him but I am now predicting him to be the nominee because of this. He has lined himself up perfectly to take the Trump support.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not.

At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

He's not using it as a positive or a negative. He's using it to contradict what you said about "describing Obama in the exact same way." Whatever you think of Kerry or Kennedy or Edwards or any other former or current Senate Democrat, they liked Obama and many endorsed him. Cruz's GOP peers in the Senate absolutely hate him. That was the whole point of the article. Did you even read it? Or do you just have some sort of instinctive reaction that requires you to say something negative about Obama any time someone says something negative about a Republican?

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not.

At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

Well, this is a dumb discussion, but the linked article talks about how most of the Senate Republicans dislike Cruz and prefer Rubio to be the nominee. I was just pointing out that there was no such sentiment about Obama 8 years ago from Senate Democrats.

 

[RBM]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not. At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

He's not using it as a positive or a negative. He's using it to contradict what you said about "describing Obama in the exact same way." Whatever you think of Kerry or Kennedy or Edwards or any other former or current Senate Democrat, they liked Obama and many endorsed him. Cruz's GOP peers in the Senate absolutely hate him. That was the whole point of the article. Did you even read it? Or do you just have some sort of instinctive reaction that requires you to say something negative about Obama any time someone says something negative about a Republican?

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

And yeah it's funny he picked two of the biggest jobbers in recent memory as his example.

 

[RBM]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not. At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

Well, this is a dumb discussion, but the linked article talks about how most of the Senate Republicans dislike Cruz and prefer Rubio to be the nominee. I was just pointing out that there was no such sentiment about Obama 8 years ago from Senate Democrats.

Ok that's fine. I get that. I'm just saying it's an accurate description of Obama now. Figured that was clear in my original post.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

If Obama could run for a third term he would be overwhelmingly supported by the Democrats he has worked with.

 

[roadkill1292]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not. At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

Well, this is a dumb discussion, but the linked article talks about how most of the Senate Republicans dislike Cruz and prefer Rubio to be the nominee. I was just pointing out that there was no such sentiment about Obama 8 years ago from Senate Democrats.

Ok that's fine. I get that. I'm just saying it's an accurate description of Obama now. Figured that was clear in my original post.

It's pretty clear that you're nowhere close to being right about this.

 

[RBM]

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

If Obama could run for a third term he would be overwhelmingly supported by the Democrats he has worked with.

Lol go thru the list of things it says about Cruz, and you can check them all for Obama. That's all I'm saying. Thirst for spotlight...check

Arrogance....check

Pride in being abrasive....check

These all may be things you like about Obama. Who knows. But he definitely qualifies.

 

[The Commish]

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

If Obama could run for a third term he would be overwhelmingly supported by the Democrats he has worked with.

Lol go thru the list of things it says about Cruz, and you can check them all for Obama. That's all I'm saying.Thirst for spotlight...check

Arrogance....check

Pride in being abrasive....check

These all may be things you like about Obama. Who knows. But he definitely qualifies.

and everyone else was talking about his relationship with his peers....that's what they've been telling you

 

[RBM]

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

If Obama could run for a third term he would be overwhelmingly supported by the Democrats he has worked with.

Lol go thru the list of things it says about Cruz, and you can check them all for Obama. That's all I'm saying.Thirst for spotlight...check

Arrogance....check

Pride in being abrasive....check

These all may be things you like about Obama. Who knows. But he definitely qualifies.

and everyone else was talking about his relationship with his peers....that's what they've been telling you

I know but I only quoted that one bit. It wasn't a comment about the whole premise of the article.

I'm aware of Obamas popularity by his fellow loons.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not. At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

He's not using it as a positive or a negative. He's using it to contradict what you said about "describing Obama in the exact same way." Whatever you think of Kerry or Kennedy or Edwards or any other former or current Senate Democrat, they liked Obama and many endorsed him. Cruz's GOP peers in the Senate absolutely hate him. That was the whole point of the article. Did you even read it? Or do you just have some sort of instinctive reaction that requires you to say something negative about Obama any time someone says something negative about a Republican?

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

And yeah it's funny he picked two of the biggest jobbers in recent memory as his example.

Yeah, I'm the dense one here. Keep talking. You're definitely not making a complete fool of yourself.

 

[RBM]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

They grant him all of the virtues that youve observed, but tell you that hes the antithesis of a team player. His thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. His arrogance is unalloyed. He actually takes pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness

Really can describe Obama the same exact way.

Obama was also a first-term Senator when he ran for President, and it seems that he was pretty well-liked by his colleagues. He got critical endorsements from Ted Kennedy and John Kerry over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (both of whom were current or former Senators). I don't think your comparison is a good one.

It's actually a 100% accurate description of him.Only reason he was well liked when he first ran is because nobody knew enough about him and he sold himself as somebody he really was not. At using Kerry and Kennedys endorsement as a positive.

He's not using it as a positive or a negative. He's using it to contradict what you said about "describing Obama in the exact same way." Whatever you think of Kerry or Kennedy or Edwards or any other former or current Senate Democrat, they liked Obama and many endorsed him. Cruz's GOP peers in the Senate absolutely hate him. That was the whole point of the article. Did you even read it? Or do you just have some sort of instinctive reaction that requires you to say something negative about Obama any time someone says something negative about a Republican?

Are you dense? I'm saying it's an accurate description of the Obama we now know. I don't care how people felt about him 8 years ago.

And yeah it's funny he picked two of the biggest jobbers in recent memory as his example.

Yeah, I'm the dense one here. Keep talking. You're definitely not making a complete fool of yourself.

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

 

[CBusAlex]

Me: "Ted Cruz is too short to be president"

RBM: "Yeah, well, Obama is actually a midget wearing stilts, so there"

 

[TobiasFunke]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

"People like me" aren't the only ones pointing out your obvious and amusing mistake.

 

[RBM]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

Serious question....You have anything going on in life besides this board?

 

[RBM]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

"People like me" aren't the only ones pointing out your obvious and amusing mistake.

You don't agree that Obama qualifies for those things I quoted? Just the part I quoted.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

Serious question....You have anything going on in life besides this board?

I have an internet werewolf game about to start on another board.

 

[RBM]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

Serious question....You have anything going on in life besides this board?

I have an internet werewolf game about to start on another board.

Makes me feel better. Good luck...

 

[QuizGuy66]

I couldn't find an Official Ted Cruz thread, but this is kind of unflattering.

Goes back to my questions a couple posts up. If there was ever a bug to be squashed out of the next round of GOP cuts, it's this guy and I have no idea why he isn't getting the attention that Trump's getting. He's run a brilliant campaign thus far essentially making Trump his trojan horse. I am almost certain when Trump drops out, 90+% of his supporters will flock to Cruz. Then what? Not shocking I guess, but people are missing the forest for the trees yet again.

Very interesting take. Hard to disagree with you.

Some of us were ahead of the curve on the campaign Cruz is running.

And yeah - he's basically the candidate from Stephen King's "The Dead Zone" - can't really do worse than him.

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

Serious question....You have anything going on in life besides this board?

I have an internet werewolf game about to start on another board.

Really think somebody should have put together a Republican Primary themed game of werewolf on here

-QG

 

[Fennis]

I like the latest narrative that somehow Cruz is going to get Trump voters. Trump is getting Trump voters.

 

[CBusAlex]

Really think somebody should have put together a Republican Primary themed game of werewolf on here

-QG

It'll be good fun when Donald Trump turns indy and hands over the entire GOP team.

 

[The Commish]

I like the latest narrative that somehow Cruz is going to get Trump voters. Trump is getting Trump voters.

Not sure if it's the "latest" or not....has seemed kind of obvious to me for a while, but at some point he's either going to lose interest, go independent or do something stupid (even by his standards). Cruz has positioned himself nicely to pick up the pieces, yet no one seems to be focused on him hardly at all. Seems shortsighted to me

 

[QuizGuy66]

I like the latest narrative that somehow Cruz is going to get Trump voters. Trump is getting Trump voters.

it's not the latest narrative - it's basically the strategy Cruz has laid out the whole time and is his best chance. That Cruz has a plausible path to the nomination is an achievement in and of itself. Whether or not his plan succeeds is a different question - but it's a sound plan and he is the most realistic option if Trumo voters turn away from the Donald or if opts to go Perot and drop out.

-QG

 

[culdeus]

Why would he go independent unless somehow GOP brokers?

 

[The Commish]

Why would he go independent unless somehow GOP brokers?

I have no answer other than "Because he Trump"

 

[culdeus]

If he does go independent I would hope that both parties seriously consider shortening the campaign time. There's no reason to draw this out for 18 months or more other than to benefit the caterers in Iowa and New Hampshire. All of us are dumber for even thinking about this race at this point a full year away from concluding.

 

[B-Deep]

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.

A pair of Democratic measures - one to close background check loopholes to make it harder for felons and the mentally ill from buying guns, another to ban those on the terror watch list from buying guns - both went down in flames against near-unanimous GOP opposition.

 

[B-Deep]

ok, lets forget about the felons and mentally ill. The idea that somehow it is ok for people on the terrorist watch list to buy guns is crazy

 

[B-Deep]

"Membership in a terrorist organization does not prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives under current federal law," the Government Accountability Office also reported in 2010. The GAO said it did not have data on how many firearms purchases were completed because dealers are not required to submit that information to the FBI.

 

[B-Deep]

so, you can get on a terrorist watch list and they won't let you fly to Bismark. But you can walk down the street and legally buy all the guns and ammo as you'd like

makes perfect sense

 

[The Commish]

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.

A pair of Democratic measures - one to close background check loopholes to make it harder for felons and the mentally ill from buying guns, another to ban those on the terror watch list from buying guns - both went down in flames against near-unanimous GOP opposition.

And you'll have some hillbilly from Texas complaining about taking refugees because it's too easy to get guns in this country....can't make this #### up

 

[B-Deep]

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.

A pair of Democratic measures - one to close background check loopholes to make it harder for felons and the mentally ill from buying guns, another to ban those on the terror watch list from buying guns - both went down in flames against near-unanimous GOP opposition.

And you'll have some hillbilly from Texas complaining about taking refugees because it's too easy to get guns in this country....can't make this #### up

they can tell someone on that watch list they cannot fly.

hell they can throw them in gitmo without so much as levying an actual charge against them

but dear lord don't keep them from buying guns

 

[The Commish]

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.

A pair of Democratic measures - one to close background check loopholes to make it harder for felons and the mentally ill from buying guns, another to ban those on the terror watch list from buying guns - both went down in flames against near-unanimous GOP opposition.

And you'll have some hillbilly from Texas complaining about taking refugees because it's too easy to get guns in this country....can't make this #### up

they can tell someone on that watch list they cannot fly.

hell they can throw them in gitmo without so much as levying an actual charge against them

but dear lord don't keep them from buying guns

So true....

 

[RBM]

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.

A pair of Democratic measures - one to close background check loopholes to make it harder for felons and the mentally ill from buying guns, another to ban those on the terror watch list from buying guns - both went down in flames against near-unanimous GOP opposition.

####in disgraceful.

 

[Amused to Death]

so, you can get on a terrorist watch list and they won't let you fly to Bismark. But you can walk down the street and legally buy all the guns and ammo as you'd like

makes perfect sense

I've been down this road more than once. Second Amendment. There is no room for common sense.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Lol the next time I'm concerned with how I come off to people like you will be the first. You better run over to the Trump thread and post some more of your classic over dramatic tantrums about his supporters.

Your thirst for the spotlight is unquenchable. It seems you actually take pride in being abrasive, as if a persons tally of detractors measures his fearlessness, not his obnoxiousness.

Serious question....You have anything going on in life besides this board?

I have an internet werewolf game about to start on another board.

Makes me feel better. Good luck...

This exchange.

 

[SameSongNDance]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

 

[Ghost Rider]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

They are too preoccupied with throwing red meat to their ever-shrinking base, with little realization that their stances make it more difficult to win over independents, who ultimately decide general elections.

I have major problems with both sides, mind you.

 

[RBM]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

Will Hillary bring out the two main groups that led Obama to win twice, the inner city African Americans and the idiot college kids? I don't see it.

Republicans need to somehow get behind whoever the nominee is which unfortunately I also don't see happening. I don't see Rubio or Trump getting universal support and it will be another Romney situation where many stay home.

 

[MaxThreshold]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

Will Hillary bring out the two main groups that led Obama to win twice, the inner city African Americans and the idiot college kids? I don't see it.

Republicans need to somehow get behind whoever the nominee is which unfortunately I also don't see happening. I don't see Rubio or Trump getting universal support and it will be another Romney situation where many stay home.

I think Rubio is the best bet for the GOP and I think he is the only one that can rally everyone on the conservative side.

 

[SameSongNDance]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

They are too preoccupied with throwing red meat to their ever-shrinking base, with little realization that their stances make it more difficult to win over independents, who ultimately decide general elections.

I have major problems with both sides, mind you.

Absolutely. My post doesn't imply that the GOP is objectively wrong on every stance (or that the Dems are absolutely correct) but the GOP's overarching strategy is a losing one regardless.

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

Will Hillary bring out the two main groups that led Obama to win twice, the inner city African Americans and the idiot college kids? I don't see it.

Republicans need to somehow get behind whoever the nominee is which unfortunately I also don't see happening. I don't see Rubio or Trump getting universal support and it will be another Romney situation where many stay home.

She will and she doesn't even need to mobilize the same number that Obama did due to her stranglehold on the two fastest growing demos, Asians and Hispanics. The GOP platform is still hyper-focused on older white males without college degrees, the demo that's shrinking most rapidly. They are just far too exclusive and their exclusivity appeals to the wrong demo. From a strategy perspective, again it makes zero sense.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

They are too preoccupied with throwing red meat to their ever-shrinking base, with little realization that their stances make it more difficult to win over independents, who ultimately decide general elections.

I have major problems with both sides, mind you.

Absolutely. My post doesn't imply that the GOP is objectively wrong on every stance (or that the Dems are absolutely correct) but the GOP's overarching strategy is a losing one regardless.

How in the hell is the GOP going to overcome the changing demographics of this country moving forward? Just looking at pew research center data, I get the feeling that the only way they can win the general is if Dems don't mobilize when it comes time to vote. It's akin to Coca-Cola realizing their consumers are becoming more and more health conscious, completely ignoring it and and introducing a new carbonated Coke product with twice the sugar/calories. Their strategy is just utterly baffling.

Will Hillary bring out the two main groups that led Obama to win twice, the inner city African Americans and the idiot college kids? I don't see it.

Republicans need to somehow get behind whoever the nominee is which unfortunately I also don't see happening. I don't see Rubio or Trump getting universal support and it will be another Romney situation where many stay home.

She will and she doesn't even need to mobilize the same number that Obama did due to her stranglehold on the two fastest growing demos, Asians and Hispanics. The GOP platform is still hyper-focused on older white males without college degrees, the demo that's shrinking most rapidly. They are just far too exclusive and their exclusivity appeals to the wrong demo. From a strategy perspective, again it makes zero sense.

Well I think part of the GOP strategy was to reach out to Latinos this time around. It seems like with what happened to Cantor on immigration and with Trump striking a chord with the base, they've not only stopped going down that path, but are racing in the opposite direction. The problem with taking a no-compromise stance as it applies to the Dems, and using that same approach in-house is that you end up with everyone running away from positions that are important to the group you're trying to include. It doesn't help that it's an establishment strategy in an anti-establishment year.

 

[Todd Andrews]

KooK terds