RNC

[newtogolf]

45 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Would I rather see them not make pledges at all, sure. Then do you want to be the guy left out who doesn't? I don't mind those who do not support Trump based on what they think is morally right for them. 

You can see Paul Ryan trying to save this sinking ship at the RNC. He clearly is battling the need to keep the party together and the need to save his pride by tolerating Trump and not outright praising him. 

Here is a quote from his speech. 

You could insert Trump there, but he didn't

Not once did Paul Ryan mention Trump in his speech at the RNC. Here is his Transcript. 

http://www.npr.org/2012/08/29/160282031/transcript-rep-paul-ryans-convention-speech

This ^

When you have John Boehner calling Cruz Satan. I think Cruz routinely likes burn bridges. 

 

The issue is they were all asked to take a pledge in the beginning to support whichever candidate won the primary.  They only one that was hesitant signing it was Trump, the rest all signed their names without claiming any issue.  The others then used Trump's reluctance to sign the pledge against him (even in the debates), when Trump was being honest and stating that it would be difficult for him to support certain candidates.  Trump finally signed it and swore he'd support whoever won.  

Cruz was the one who spoke the loudest regarding Trump's refusal to sign the pledge and here we are six months later and who is the people not keeping their word? Cruz, Kasich, Jeb and Fiorina, all hypocrites who coerced Trump to sign a pledge and promise to uphold it yet didn't honor it themselves.  

The pledge has proven to be a worthless document / activity and unless sanctions are taken against those who violated their pledge it should never be used again, as it means nothing.  

As for Lyin' Ted, his political career is over unless he turns Democrat.  I knew a lot of Republicans that loved him before and during the election who after last night won't elect him to be a dog catcher.  Even his own delegates were upset with his refusal to endorse Trump last night, so maybe he can get an acting job as The Penguin in an upcoming Batman movie.  

[Gunther]

44 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

The issue is they were all asked to take a pledge in the beginning to support whichever candidate won the primary.  They only one that was hesitant signing it was Trump, the rest all signed their names without claiming any issue.  The others then used Trump's reluctance to sign the pledge against him (even in the debates), when Trump was being honest and stating that it would be difficult for him to support certain candidates.  Trump finally signed it and swore he'd support whoever won.  

Cruz was the one who spoke the loudest regarding Trump's refusal to sign the pledge and here we are six months later and who is the people not keeping their word? Cruz, Kasich, Jeb and Fiorina, all hypocrites who coerced Trump to sign a pledge and promise to uphold it yet didn't honor it themselves.  

The pledge has proven to be a worthless document / activity and unless sanctions are taken against those who violated their pledge it should never be used again, as it means nothing.  

As for Lyin' Ted, his political career is over unless he turns Democrat.  I knew a lot of Republicans that loved him before and during the election who after last night won't elect him to be a dog catcher.  Even his own delegates were upset with his refusal to endorse Trump last night, so maybe he can get an acting job as The Penguin in an upcoming Batman movie.  

Something I learned last night:  the pledge was not just a simple piece of paper.  In exchange for signing the pledge, the candidates were provided access to the RNC's "data", whatever that might entail.  But the point is, these candidates got something for signing the pledge, which dishonors their actions now even more.  

It's a fundamental lack of character and integrity of all of their parts.  I'll never support any one of them again, although Cruz and Carly are the only ones I'd have considered supporting before this.

Meanwhile, this RNC is unlike any other I've seen.  Pence was fantastic, didn't know anything about him but I'm with him now.

Funny how the MSM is whining and complaining about hitting Clinton too hard.  Ha, wait til next week.  What happened here will be considered polite compared to what's in store next week.  

Edited July 21, 2016 by Gunther

[Elmer]

 

10 hours ago, Chilli Dipper said:

He's either committed political suicide, or he's going to be elected president in 2020. (Note that Trump losing does not guarantee the latter.)

He is setting himself up for 2020. He still has campaign funds and by all reports has kept some staff.
Below is a decent article.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/five-takeaways-from-cruzs-convention-stunner-225938

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

 

As for Lyin' Ted, his political career is over unless he turns Democrat.  I knew a lot of Republicans that loved him before and during the election who after last night won't elect him to be a dog catcher.  Even his own delegates were upset with his refusal to endorse Trump last night, so maybe he can get an acting job as The Penguin in an upcoming Batman movie.  

I dont think Cruz has killed his political career. Those that have worked with him knew that he was slimy and only out for himself.
I think if anything he has set himself up as a "conservative" alternative to DT.
It is a gamble if DT looses, Cruz will stand on his soap box and be the beacon of light for "true" conservatives principals.

That being said I am amazed at what went down last night. The Campaign had an advanced copy of the speech and by all accounts nowhere did it mention an endorsement for DT. Yet the campaign and DT allowed him to go on. The speech was to last 10 minutes and went 23 minutes.
I thought it was a bold political move by Cruz. 
It was telling about how the DT campaign is running, by allowing this to happen.

From Twitter:
Trump Jr.: We knew Cruz endorsement wasn't coming @realDonaldTrump was the bigger man http://on.msnbc.com/29VDgwg  via msnbc

Ted Cruz on Trump: "I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and who attack my father."

 

Donald J. Trump 

 

✔@realDonaldTrump

Wow, Ted Cruz got booed off the stage, didn't honor the pledge! I saw his speech two hours early but let him speak anyway. No big deal!
 

Now the question is, will DT fire back at Cruz in his acceptance speech tonight?

Fun interactive map for the election, DT has some ground to make up to reach 270!
http://www.cnn.com/election/interactive-electoral-college-map/

Edited July 21, 2016 by Elmer

[Chilli Dipper]

Ted Cruz doesn't care if everyone hates him, if he can advance his career in the process. He's playing the long game: he'll position himself as the only Republican who stood up to Trump, and primary voters in four years will have no choice but to pick him.

As for tonight, I wouldn't be surprised if Donald Trump's speech consists entirely of Cruz insults.

[Braivo]

36 minutes ago, Elmer said:

That being said I am amazed at what went down last night. The Campaign had an advanced copy of the speech and by all accounts nowhere did it mention an endorsement for DT. Yet the campaign and DT allowed him to go on. The speech was to last 10 minutes and went 23 minutes.
I thought it was a bold political move by Cruz. 
It was telling about how the DT campaign is running, by allowing this to happen.

Trump gave him the rope and let him do the rest of the work. Letting Cruz speak resulted in more solidification of Trump's support, very smart. Also, it has people talking, which is exactly what the Trump team has mastered. It also changed the subject from Melania's speech. Trump is playing chess, gentlemen. 

[mcanadiens]

18 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Ted Cruz doesn't care if everyone hates him, if he can advance his career in the process. He's playing the long game: he'll position himself as the only Republican who stood up to Trump, and primary voters in four years will have no choice but to pick him.

As for tonight, I wouldn't be surprised if Donald Trump's speech consists entirely of Cruz insults.

Not the only one. JK's absence has been noticed.

[Elmer]

I compleltly missed this



http://boingboing.net/2016/07/21/funny-gif-of-laura-ingraham-re.html 

[Chilli Dipper]

5 minutes ago, Elmer said:

I compleltly missed this



http://boingboing.net/2016/07/21/funny-gif-of-laura-ingraham-re.html 

I don't think that was a Nazi salute; I think she just has no concept of how to wave.

[Dave2512]

1 hour ago, Braivo said:

Trump gave him the rope and let him do the rest of the work. Letting Cruz speak resulted in more solidification of Trump's support, very smart. Also, it has people talking, which is exactly what the Trump team has mastered. It also changed the subject from Melania's speech. Trump is playing chess, gentlemen. 

I don't see this as a master plan, the faces of Trump's kids when Cruz was speaking wasn't that of joy they were rattled. Manafort looked gassed this AM, had the look of someone that didn't sleep much last night. What worked to keep DT in headlines during the primaries doesn't have the same tone now. The RNC has been 3 days of distraction when the campaign should be pivoting towards the GE. I don't see a team playing offense everything is defense at this point and it's taking them off message. Much of it fallout from DT's own previous words and actions. The news this AM was pretty much split 50/50 whether Cruz hurt or helped Trump. And I don't mean opinions I saw GOP insiders arguing with each other about it.

 

 

[Elmer]

4 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

I don't think that was a Nazi salute; I think she just has no concept of how to wave.

"Never go full...."

Edited July 21, 2016 by Elmer

[boogielicious]

13 minutes ago, Elmer said:

"Never go full...."

OT but, love that movie!

[rehmwa]

1 hour ago, Elmer said:

I compleltly missed this



http://boingboing.net/2016/07/21/funny-gif-of-laura-ingraham-re.html 

I'd take anti-Trump people more seriously except for:

1 - complaining about a wave and point

2 - complaining about a few common sentences lifted from generic speeches

3 - making fun of Melania for her accent

4 - calling women trashy whores just because they are attractive (his wife and daughters and daughter in laws are pretty and they can't help it nor should apologize, this is really low class and I see it a lot) - making fun of governors because they are fat - etc etc etc purely cosmetic stuff from a party that "claims" to be sensitive to differences.  Weird how in the world of 'acceptance' fit-shaming and thin-shaming and telling people they are terrible if they look good is overtly accepted and encouraged and band-wagonned.

5 - making up stuff just for the sake of memes

ad nauseum

now that I think about it, I'd take the anti-Hillary people more seriously for the exact same stuff

Is there any way to get out of the 2nd grade here?

there's plenty of policy material to debate, but that never makes it to the news sites, does it?

[Dave2512]

Doesn't help that the candidates are stuck there too. We just endured a primary season of name calling.

[Elmer]

22 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I'd take anti-Trump people more seriously except for:

1 - complaining about a wave and point

2 - complaining about a few common sentences lifted from generic speeches

3 - making fun of Melania for her accent

4 - calling women trashy whores just because they are attractive (his wife and daughters and daughter in laws are pretty and they can't help it nor should apologize, this is really low class and I see it a lot) - making fun of governors because they are fat - etc etc etc purely cosmetic stuff from a party that "claims" to be sensitive to differences.  Weird how in the world of 'acceptance' fit-shaming and thin-shaming and telling people they are terrible if they look good is overtly accepted and encouraged and band-wagonned.

5 - making up stuff just for the sake of memes

ad nauseum

now that I think about it, I'd take the anti-Hillary people more seriously for the exact same stuff

Is there any way to get out of the 2nd grade here?

there's plenty of policy material to debate, but that never makes it to the news sites, does it?

1-This is a wave

2-more than just a "few common sentences" it was nearly 2 paragraphs worth.
If she was a writer or journalist she would be fired for such a thing. If my kid turned in a term paper with the same "common sentences" he would get an "F". But I guess like the Clinton's on one side, The Trumps live by a different sent of rules.

3- I have never made fun of her accent and anyone who does is a douche!
4- see # 3,
However I do recall when this was ok:

But you are right, policy!!!
We can name call back and forth and back and forth again, until Ted Cruz becomes less slimy!
We have had 3 days of speeches about how great a father he is, how great he is in business, etc...etc...

I have to go to any of the newspapers to find out about his plans for Nato and how this could affect Russia and the baltics!
I am hoping he gives a 2 hour policy speech tonight, with no mention of a "wall".
I want to hear Supreme court cases, economic trade jargon!!!

 

[rehmwa]

I like your answers to that one, Elmer - even If I personally think 1 and 2 are complete distractions and pointless and childish for the press and anti-trumpers to try and make hay out of  (trump mocking the reporter - I think he's done a TON of childish campaigning right in line with what I'm talking about. it's sad strategy even if it worked and the main reason I'm also not on his side.  Just as sad to see Hillary trying to cash in in the same fashion.  Listen to the Johnson ticket ads and interviews, that's my choice right now)

[drmevo]

23 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I'd take anti-Trump people more seriously except for:

1 - complaining about a wave and point

2 - complaining about a few common sentences lifted from generic speeches

3 - making fun of Melania for her accent

4 - calling women trashy whores just because they are attractive (his wife and daughters and daughter in laws are pretty and they can't help it nor should apologize, this is really low class and I see it a lot) - making fun of governors because they are fat - etc etc etc purely cosmetic stuff from a party that "claims" to be sensitive to differences.  Weird how in the world of 'acceptance' fit-shaming and thin-shaming and telling people they are terrible if they look good is overtly accepted and encouraged and band-wagonned.

5 - making up stuff just for the sake of memes

ad nauseum

now that I think about it, I'd take the anti-Hillary people more seriously for the exact same stuff

Is there any way to get out of the 2nd grade here?

there's plenty of policy material to debate, but that never makes it to the news sites, does it?

Agreed for the most part. I'm sure someone else has already said it in one of these threads, but the we are getting closer and closer to the movie Idiocracy becoming our reality. Thoughtfulness is viewed ever more as a weakness by many, as is humility.  I do think one candidate contributes to this more than the other, however. I'm sure everyone can guess who 

[rehmwa]

1 minute ago, drmevo said:

I do think one candidate contributes to this more than the other,

Two candidates contribute to this much more than any other.  And their followers eat it up, and the press encourages it and cashes in on it.

[saevel25]

2 hours ago, Dave2512 said:

I don't see this as a master plan, the faces of Trump's kids when Cruz was speaking wasn't that of joy they were rattled. Manafort looked gassed this AM, had the look of someone that didn't sleep much last night. What worked to keep DT in headlines during the primaries doesn't have the same tone now. The RNC has been 3 days of distraction when the campaign should be pivoting towards the GE. I don't see a team playing offense everything is defense at this point and it's taking them off message. Much of it fallout from DT's own previous words and actions. The news this AM was pretty much split 50/50 whether Cruz hurt or helped Trump. And I don't mean opinions I saw GOP insiders arguing with each other about it.

Pretty much. When Paul Ryan doesn't mention Trump by name in his speech, but talks about the strength of the GOP in congress. He's trying to secure the legislature for either case of a unpredictable Trump or Hillary. 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trumps-convention-is-flirting-with-disaster/

There has been no big bounce in the polls for Trump so far with the convention. Even though Trump has gained 1.5% since Monday. Hillary hasn't dropped. Even with all the speeches trying to bash Hillary and praise Trump it's not making a dent in the polls.