Okay, guys, it’s time for some strategy. I have to admit that this election cycle has confused me more than any before. The American electorate has changed and I just don’t understand it anymore. But there’s a big question that we, the members of the SBC Voices Super PAC (we’ve contributed 0$ to 0 candidates and raised $0 so far) need to discuss. It’s about the upcoming Florida GOP primary. It is one of the first 2 winner-take-all primaries and there are about 100 delegates (perhaps 99?) at stake. The guy with the most votes gets them ALL! If Trump wins, he’s on his way to the nomination. If Rubio can pull out a win in his home state, he’s back in the game, but if he loses he’s pretty much done. Then there is Cruz. He’s been surging and is in second place. He’d pretty much given up on Florida, but now he’s opening offices and trying to make a play.
Here’s the Cruz dilemma:
- If he gains ground it will likely be by pulling support from Rubio, guaranteeing a Trump victory and helping the Donald toward the nomination. He drives Rubio out of the race but makes it less likely that he can win. If Trump wins both Ohio and Florida, you can pretty much start printing the ballots for the fall.
- If he helps Rubio win, it prevents Trump from gaining ground, but it brings Rubio back in as genuine threat and makes the idea of a brokered convention even more likely. It is generally agreed that Cruz will not emerge as the nominee from a brokered convention.
So, it would seem that Cruz has to decide if he can win the nomination outright by driving Rubio from the race. And, if he does that, he’d better succeed because the seeming cooperation between the campaigns would be over. If he throws the long bomb, tries to drive Rubio from the race and make it a two-man race (ignoring Kasich), there is much that can go wrong. Rubio could still win or Trump could win Florida (likely) and if he adds Ohio, then Cruz is finished. He has managed to ruin Rubio AND himself.
Here are the ground rules for our discussion:
1) The SBC Voices Super PAC is committed to that candidate called NeverTrump.
We are not about reviving Rubio’s flagging chances, nor are we about getting Cruz elected.
I know that is hard for some of the more passionate Cruzites, who think he is destined to align the planets, balance the force, and usher in the millennium. But we aren’t trying to figure out how to further Cruz, but about how to stop Trump.
2) Trumpites, sit this one out.
You guys can’t believe anyone doesn’t love Trump. We don’t. We want to stop him. The issue is how to do that. You can feel free to weigh in on the topic, but you can’t ridicule or bluster.
3) Candidate insults are not welcome – stick to the topic.
Don’t bash Cruz or Rubio. We aren’t even going to bash Trump – we assume he needs to be defeated! This is a limited discussion, about promoting a single candidate, NeverTrump.
The issue is simple. How do we advance our candidate “NeverTrump” in the Florida primary?
- The Cruz campaign wants to force Rubio out and make it a one-on-one with Trump, but is this best for our guy, NeverTrump?
- Rubio wants to win and get back in, but is that what is best for NeverTrump?
Here are the current delegate counts, thanks to our campaign’s statistician, “Poor Richard.”
Trump – 384 (31% of what is required for nomination)
Cruz – 300 (24%)
Rubio – 151 (12%)
Kasich – 37 (3%)
All others – 20 (1.6%)
Trump has 384 delegates and the others combined have 508. Obviously, that means that at this point, we are headed to a brokered convention. You have to win 50% of the delegates, plus 1. But if you add the Florida and Ohio delegates to Trump, he’s likely to be on his way, especially if he wins Michigan tomorrow.
Discussion Questions.
1. Is there any realistic hope that Cruz can actually WIN in Florida or Ohio? (I don’t think so)
2. Is it not true that Cruz’ involvement in Florida is almost guaranteeing a Trump victory?
3. If Trump wins Florida (driving Rubio out) is there a path to victory for Cruz in a one-to-one race?
4. Can NeverTrump win if Trump wins Florida?
5. Is a brokered convention that bad of an option?
This discussion is obviously going to be about more than Florida, so you are going to need to address one way that NeverTrump could win that you (and I) would not like . . . . which would be Trump’s defeat in the general election.
I did not say what I meant, above. Could have said it better. What I meant was, should we add a #6 point to discuss what to do if the circumstances carry us to a point that forces a choice between NeverTrump (Clinton) and NeverClinton (Trump)? If we “pledge” (mentally) to support and vote for NeverTrump, would that mean we should vote for Clinton in a general eletion where he is the only other viable choice? How should one measure their, or their party’s, relative detestability? Isn’t that what we are talking about? An election where many vote for who they are for, and just as many vote against who they are most against?
When I wrote this, it was with the assumption that the strategy was to beat Trump BEFORE the nomination.
I will not vote for Trump even in the general, but I’m just as NeverClinton as I am NeverTrump.
I’m embroiled in this controversy having just blogged about Trump’s incompetency to lead this country as its President last week. There is a practical and theological dimension to this initiative and campaign:
Practical: I do believe Cruz can give Trump a run for his money in and out of Florida (of where I pastor) due to recent momentum trends, particularly were he to receive truly conservative and evangelically based endorsements. Rubio and Carson jumping on the Cruz train would help immensely. Problem is Rubio and the timing of his departure from the race. I agree that his only shot at remaining in the race is a home state win here in FL.
Cruz and Rubio must appeal to voters with the Donald’s utter lack of policy depth, wisdom and knowledge, even more than his utter disregard for decency. Try though they may, they can’t outrank or out mock Trump. Trashing opponents is his home-court advantage.
Theological: I firmly believe America has been in a generation (at least) long season of Romans 1:18-32 judgment, God’s “wrath against ungodliness.” Should the Lord providentially wish that His church and this nation suffer more, in order to spur real repentance, the Donald or the Democratic nominee would be the perfect choice to sit in the White House from that perspective.
All political machinations and strategy aside, God is sovereign and His will of decree will determine who wins this election. Therefore, the church’s two best initiatives to undertake ASAP in my view are:
Prayer- as per Daniel 8, the church in America, must seek God’s face, broken by its sins of omission and commission and seek His mercy in this election and cry out, “Never Trump” ( I would add Hillary in that prayer as well). Church leaders must spur this initiative on. I know I will with our church.
Political Discipleship – all too many pastors and churches are timid when it comes to preaching and teaching politics, which are NOT excluded from the kingdom and the Biblical counsel of God. It should be unconscionable for a born-again disciple of Christ to even consider voting for Trump in the GOP primaries.
Christians must be told that and why in their corporate and smaller gatherings. God’s people must be educated in Biblical wisdom as to the nature of their roles and responsibilities with respect to government.
May God have mercy on us all.
“It should be unconscionable for a born-again disciple of Christ to even consider voting for Trump in the GOP primaries.”
Thankfully you won’t be Judging the Living and Dead!
It should be unconscionable that Conservatives would continue to led by the nose by the GOP Establishment and believe the lies they tell about what they will do if elected. #NeverGOPEstablishment
More info from HotAir. ”
PPP Ohio: Trump 38, Kasich 35, Cruz 15, Rubio 5
Kasich better win that.
The goid news there is that polls seem to have consistently overstated Trump’s numbers.
More polling FYI:
Monmouth poll of Florida: Trump leads Rubio by eight — but Rubio leads Trump in early vote by 25
That is much better than the “Trump by 20” polls I was seeing. I don’t know why the polls are so bad, but in general the polls show much greater support for Trump than actually exists
I’ve wondered if people just say they’re voting for trump in some big conspiracy to pump him in polls. Gotta go make my tinfoil hat now…
The polls are bad because there is no scientific sampling process in place to gauge the voting tendencies of people who previously were non-voters, but are now all in on Trump. http://articles.latimes.com/1998/nov/01/news/mn-38174 or Google ‘Dewey Defeats Truman’ Disaster Haunts Pollsters
A lot of it is the “likely voter” problem. A lot more people say they’re going to vote than actually do, and you can imagine why Trump might get a higher percentage of those votes. Especially in closed primary states like Florida.
Right now the best hope for NeverTrump is a brokered convention. For that you need Marco and Kasich to stay in as long as possible.
And for Marco to win Fla and Kasich to win Ohio.
It’s amazing so many are so blind to the GOP Establishment and their impotence, their coddling of Obama and their refusal to do what the People gave them their seats to do. And now, they don’t care at all about Cruz, they would rather have Rubio and Kasich stay in the race, get a brokered convention and then run Romney, Ryan, or Bloomberg.
Wake up. The GOP Establishment is playing many for fools! You should be #NeverGOPEstablishment They need to go the way of the Whigs.
This has to be the most ironic comment I have ever seen. I can agree with you half way on your premise; someone is definitely being played for a fool.
Mike, so you think the GOP Establishment wants Cruz to be the nominee? Or you don’t think they want a brokered Convention? Or you can’t believe they would prop up someone besides Rubio or Kasich?
Rubio can’t win but, he’s drawing enough support away from Cruz that Trump will likely win the nomination. In fact I doubt Rubio will be able to win his home state because he went back on his promise to the voters that got him elected and he co-sponsored amnesty legislation. If he would bow out now his supporters would get behind Cruz and Trump would be history. I hate the thought of a brokered convention. I would rather have the people decide.
Brokered conviction is absolutely the worst case scenario.
If Donald Trump wins the nomination out right a lot of people will vote for him in the general election – including Democrats – and he possibly – maybe – could pull it out.
A broker convention about which he gets the nomination – would so cause of revolt within the principled conservative wing of the party that he would lose very very very badly.
If the nomination is wrestled away from trump – with him having the most delegates – he will certainly run third-party – and causecomplete havoc.
Truly the only hope for a #NeverTrumpAgenda is to gather around Ted Cruz and beat him out right – it can happen but only if Rubio and Kasich are man enough to admit that they’ve lost and back out.
If Cruz can strike a deal with Kasich for vice President – and do so soon – Rubio is toast. Actually I think Rubio is already toast he’s just handing the election to Donald Trump.
Let me remind you that the point of this is NOT “how we can get Cruz elected” but how we can stop Trump.
They’re one in the same – 😉
Look, I’m not a Cruz guy. His “deport them all” immigration policy and “make the sand glow” foreign policy make him a way less than ideal candidate to me. BUT, he is clearly the best hope for the GOP to stop Trump if that is truly the goal. The problem is that the GOP establishment doesn’t want to stop only Trump. They want to stop Cruz too. He doesn’t play by their rules. I think many of the establishment guys would rather have Trump than Cruz.
Rubio and Kasich are selfishly choosing the hail mary pass of a contested convention (which is the only way either of them has a chance of getting the nomination) over simply stopping Donald Trump.
It will result in Donald Trump winning the Republican nomination and losing to the Democrat candidate in November.
I saw an interesting thing after Saturday’s primaries. It came from a Democratic operative, so I’m not sure precisely how accurate it was. He was pro-Trump, but I think part of that was because he thought Hillary would soundly pound Trump.
Anyway, his theory was that Cruz had almost no shot at the nomination. Even though he is the leading “anti-Trump” right now, he says the math is bad for Cruz.
Here’s his thinking, as I remember it.
1. Cruz has pretty much ONLY appealed to strongly evangelical populations.
2. The upcoming states skew away from strongly conservative and evangelical populations. He’s going to be moving out of his comfort zone. Unless he broadens his appeal, it’s going to be tough for him.
3. Trump will win Ohio and Florida, because of Cruz’s efforts.
4. There is absolutely NO WAY that Cruz will win at a brokered convention. He’s only slightly more popular among establishment Republicans than Trump, so if he manages to get a split, he’s toast.
So, he said, Cruz cannot win outright.
Cruz cannot win in a brokered convention.
Again, I have no idea how accurate his analysis, but some of his points made sense.
It seems to me that a brokered convention is the best best for NeverTrump. That would probably lead to the nomination of someone WONDERFUL like Romney, or perhaps Ryan.
However, if they pick Ben Sasse from Nebraska, I’ll be over the moon!
“1. Cruz has pretty much ONLY appealed to strongly evangelical populations.”
Yeah, like Maine! (Unless “ONLY” means something different than I think it does.)
Similar arguments like you just said could be said against Rubio – with all of his Electoral losses and primaries for which he didn’t even meet the threshold to get any delegates whatsoever to boot the case for Marcos departure.
Its mind-boggling to me that any reasonable person can look at the real numbers and actual elections and say the cruz should be the one that gets out – it’s absolutely mind-boggling.
No one said anything about Cruz getting out.
But I do remind you that this is not about your love for Cruz or your hatred for Rubio. It’s about defeating Trump. Let’s try to keep focused on that. The question is whether there is a legitimate chance for Cruz to win outright and I’m not sure there is. I serious doubt that Rubio can either.
Try to avoid making this a Cruz vs. Rubio thing. I know it’s hard, but I’m trying to keep the discussion focused on “how can NeverTrump win” not how can Tarheel see that Rubio is humiliated and Cruz wins. Save that for some other forum.
Dave, the problem with your “unbiased” analysis is the fact that you have been a Rubio supporter ever since you chose a candidate. Your dislike for Cruz is equally damaging to your ability to be unbiased. Of course Tarheel struggles to be unbiased as well, because he has been a Cruz supporter ever since Scott Walker dropped out. I reluctantly chose Cruz in the Virginia primary. I have a hard time getting excited about him. But I thought he was toast when he announced his candidacy at LU. Even until very recently I saw no possible way for him to get the nomination. But he has defied my expectations in every way. Saturday showed that he is the anti-Trump candidate of choice. I have to assume that him continuing to defy expectations is the only way to possibly avoid a contested convention with someone other than Trump as the nominee. A contested convention where the nomination is “taken from” Trump is a disaster scenario. He will run 3rd party and you can practice saying Madam President Clinton. If #neverTrump is your only goal then perhaps a contested convention is okay and your scenario works. But if #neverTrump and #neverClinton are both taken into consideration, Marco Rubio and John Kasich suspending their campaigns a week ago after the Super Tuesday votes were tallied was the best option. They have both chosen their own political aspirations over the hope of #neverTrump. I don’t hate them for doing it. I may have done the same thing were I in their shoes. But that is the reality of the situation as it now stands. It may be too late to stop Trump without a contested convention which will be a disaster.
Primaries are extremely difficult to predict even in predictable years. Delegate allocations can be convoluted and the ebb and flow of campaigns winning and losing influence later votes. I looked at the primaries going forward and tried to look at some scenarios of delegate allocations (do not ask what I did, I essentially guessed while sticking with the winner-take-all receiving everything in those primaries and assuming no one breaks the threshold for trigger winner take all). What I think I see: 1) There is a very slim chance for Cruz to win the nomination outright. Everything must line up, and he must win a few underdog races. He also most likely needs to win Florida or Ohio. Superdelegates might be able to throw him over the edge if he got close. 2) A brokered convention is a very real possibility, even if Trump wins Florida and Ohio (the momentum gained and the media’s talk of inevitability would be the harder things to overcome). Given the above scenarios, I think the NeverTrump should play for the brokered convention Although Cruz could win outright, it will be a very difficult battle, even if Kasich and Rubio dropped out (I don’t think all of their supporters will go to Trump by the way). A brokered convention is most likely if Rubio and Kasich do well and draw delegates away from Trump. This means Rubio needs to do well somewhere tomorrow or else folks will give up on him and hand Trump Florida. For a Cruz outright win he needs to win Florida or Ohio. According to the polls, he’s got a lot of ground to make up (the difference between him and Trump is HUUUUUUGE. Sorry had to throw it in.) in both states. If I had to pick one, I would choose Florida. It’s got a closed primary meaning less crossover Trumpites coming in, and I think Rubio’s star is falling. If you’re pulling for the brokered convention, I think he’s best off letting Kasich and Rubio play for those two states cause they have a much better chance and the odds are slim of him beating Trump in either one. I would focus resources on the other states voting on that day, hoping to win a few and take attention away from Trump. BTW, per Dave’s last comment (March 7, 9:11 pm), ” There is absolutely NO WAY that Cruz will… Read more »
Should say, “(even if Kasich and Rubio drop out, I don’t think all their supporters will go to Cruz.)” I think a lot of people would be surprised how many would default to the leading candidate and how many don’t like Cruz either, thus staying home or voting Trump.
I doubt it. I think most of the people are looking for an evangelical (or at least a solid conservative) alternative to Trump and they can’t decide between Rubio or Cruz so they are both getting the votes. If Rubio drops out, the vast majority of his supporters would jump on the Cruz bandwagon and Trump would be toast. It would fulfill the No-Trump objective in a decidedly patriotic American fashion; much more so than a brokered convention.
I have serious doubts about Cruz’ ability to appeal beyond tea party and evangelicals he’s appealed to so far. Can he win beyond that?
You know how us left winger/liberals think, Bill.
I do know how you left winger/liberals think. However, I have heard from a few secular conservatives that have indicated that they would vote for either Trump or Cruz. They refuse to vote for Rubio because of the amnesty thing. I think that will dog him for the remainder of his political career.
At first I thought “super” was “supper”… Now I’m hungry. :-\
Nice.
NeverTrump is not on any states ballot. This strategic premise discussion is self defeating, and only advances what you are most against. In a republic electoral election you have to stand for someone and that persons expressed principles.
“The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. … ”
— George Washington
So then, you will not feel that defeating Hillary Clinton is important? Is that hate?
Seeing someone as an enemy of democracy (clearly, Trump is) and of decency (no doubt Trump is) and of what is good in America (he is everything that is wrong) and opposing him – is that hatred?
Then I assume you will NEVER speak a negative word about Obama, about Hillary, or about anyone else? Or is it only a candidate you support that we cannot speak against?
I have no issue with someone speaking against a candidate I support. I actually welcome the civil discourse our founding father gave us the rights to have. NeverTrump is a ghost not a candidate. NeverTrump is not on any ballot. NeverTrump is a #hastag.
I went to a Ford dealership they told me never to buy a Toyota and gave me many reasons. Never told me why I should buy a Ford. I went to the Toyota dealership they said Ford makes good cars and showed me what they considered advantages of their cars.
Politics is like Consumerism. Sell a product not a ghost.
1. Rubio needs to get out now for the good of the party and for his own political future.
2. John Kasich would undoubtedly make the best president of any of the candidates…too bad the election is not about who would make a good president.
3. Trump should, if he really cares about America, on April 1st, drop out of the race and let us all know that it was just a big joke, to proove he could do it.
Somehow, this plays more like a stump speech than actual analysis or discussion.
Analysis on #1: Rubio is sliding down, and is in danger of losing florida, which would be an embarrasment for him, and would also all but guarantee trump wins Florida. If Rubio drops out before florida, Cruz can win florida.
Analysis on #2: Kasich seems to be the only one not acting and speaking like a middle schooler. However, related to #1, If he want’s to block trump, he should also drop out before Florida. Even winning Ohio will not get him the nomination. However, a Cruz/Kasich ticket would be a strong opposition to Trump.
Analysis on #3: You heard it here first: I tentatively predict on April 1st, Trump announcing that his campaign was an April Fools joke to expose the silliness of politics. He will the throw his support behind Hillary Clinton. 😉
Do you honestly believe Cruz can win Fla? I’ve not really seen anyone making that prediction.
I’m not a big fan of Cruz, but if I thot he was “the one” I’d go for it. I’m afraid the math her is against him.
If he takes down Rubio, he may take himself down in the process. He gas to do it, though, since a brokered convention is not going to be a winner for him.
The candidates are about winning, not about beating Trump. That, to me, is unfortunate. Had Rubio and Cruz made an alliance earlier they might have been able to win the nomination. But they both wanted to win, so they’ve assured mutual destruction, I’m afraid.
I’m at the point where I doubt a successful NeverTrump outcome other than a brokered convention.
I believe if trump and cruz were the only one’s left, cruz would win florida.
If Rubio & Trump were alone, Rubio MIGHT win florida.
I predict trump will win florida if all stays as it is now.
You are right that Rubio & Cruz both going for the win will result in Trump winning.
Kasich gets to sound like the “adult” up there because the other 3 know that he is irrelevant to the race at this point. He gets no tough questions* from the moderators and receives no attacks or pushback from the other candidates because they know that he is the O’Malley of the GOP race.
*I should note that Kasich did receive one tough question the other night regarding his comments on religious liberty. He totally botched it. He said the exact opposite of what he had said in the previous debate and attempted to play it off as no big deal.
“He said the exact opposite of what he had said in the previous debate and attempted to play it off as no big deal.”
Isn’t this what qualifies one to be president? 🙂
You guys are so far off base on this. We don’t have to stop Mr. Trump, President Obama will. He has no intention of leaving office. He’s already said he’s staying in D.C. – just for the kids. Yeah, right! Look for the demons of hell to be unleashed in the next ten months.
I hope you are joking.
Yes, Dave, I hope so too, however, I have always been uneasy about Obama’s real intentions. Rubio is correct when he says Obama knows exactly what he’s doing. When we consider all that Obama has done to weaken this country, the picture is scary. I fear the worst is yet to come. (Sorry for the gloom and doom.)
Below are what I see as the most likely scenarios in this election. These are not listed in order of what I want to happen. I hope I’m wrong. Again, all of these assume that Hillary will in fact be the nominee, and she will be unless something truly dramastic happens. And no, dramastic is not in the dictionary but I like it and no matter what he may claim, Trump does not “have the best words” because he doesn’t have that one.
1) Trump wins the nomination, most Republicans decide to play nice and try to support him, but he gets defeated by Clinton in the general election. This would be especially bad if enough conservatives stay home and don’t vote in the down-ballot Senate races, costing the GOP its hold in that chamber. If that happens, it would be better for Obama to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat now. A judicial nominee squeezed through this year would be bad, but maybe less disastrous than a Clinton nominee greased through a Democratic Senate.
2) Trump wins the nomination, conservatives leave to support a third option, and Clinton wins the general election. The conservatives will be blamed for splitting the vote, despite the facts that a) Trump would likely lose anyway and b) the Trumpers were the ones who insisted on voting for him in the primaries knowing full well that he’s unacceptable to the conservatives in the party.
3) Trump goes to the GOP convention with only a plurality of delegates, a brokered convention gives us another nominee, the Trumpers blame the “establishment” for ignoring the “voice of the people”, Trump runs third party or his fans stay home, and Clinton wins the general election.
4) Another GOP candidate gets hot and wins the nomination outright, Trump still runs third party and/or mad Trumpers stay home, and Clinton wins the general election.
5) Another GOP candidate wins the nomination, Trump and his supporters get on board, and Clinton is narrowly defeated in the general election.
6) Least likely of all, one of the scenarios in 1-4 happens but something so dramastic happens to Clinton (something genuinely unlikely — say, she’s caught on camera sacrificing a puppy to Kanye West or she actually gets indicted by the DOJ) that Trump wins the general election.
I think every scenario but 5 is very bad.
Except you don’t factor into #5 the same vitriol of those for Trump or Cruz (should he get bush-wacked) that the #NeverTrump crowd shows. For if we of the #NeverGOPEstablishment crowd show the same vitriol against you that you show for us, then your #5 blows up in your face.
Because Rubio, Kasich, or any other GOP Establishment candidate yet to be named has no chance of winning. See history for the examples: Dole, McCain, and Romney
Nate, scenario 5 specifically assumes that the Trump and #NeverGOPEstablishment crowd does in fact fully support the #NeverTrump nominee. It’s one of the less likely scenarios, which is why it’s so far down the list.
Kasich might be closest to Dole, McCain, and Romney, but I don’t think Rubio really fits that mold. The thing about Kasich is that he probably would govern as a level-headed conservative regarding most fiscal and foreign policy issues. I think he’s a competent executive. He just comes across as too squishy on social issues such as religious liberty. He did a better job on that topic in the last debate — better than Trump who didn’t (paraphrasing here) “have much to say about that.”
Umm, so essentially Jeff doesn’t factor into #5 that #4 might happen?
Now, to specifically answer Dave’s discussion questions:
1) No, I think it’s quite unlikely that Cruz wins in OH or FL.
2) No, I wouldn’t say Cruz’s involvement in OH and FL “guarantees” a Trump victory in those states, though it makes it more likely.
3-4) Yes, Cruz has a path to victory. Even if he doesn’t secure an outright win in the primary season, he may get enough delegates on his own to force a contested convention anyway, and he may have a better shot of winning a contested convention if he finishes a close second to Trump and has forced the other guys out.
5) A contested convention is probably bad. It will incite the Trump crowd. But it’s probably NeverTrump’s best shot. The question is: what’s the best way to prevent Trump from gathering a delegate majority so we can get to a contested convention? Is it for Rubio and Kasich to win FL and OH respectively? Or is it for Cruz to continue to gather momentum and do damage in the other remaining states? Either way, nobody is likely to back off at this point. And I can’t say it’s necessarily “selfish” for them not to do so. Each candidate still has a path to the nomination, and each can make a case that he is the best shot to beat Hillary in the general election. I hope we at least avoid an outright Trump win in the primary season, and I hope the Trump supporters get behind the nominee if there is a contested convention.
“I hope the Trump supporters get behind the nominee if there is a contested convention.”
So, you think Trump or Cruz supporters should get behind the GOP Establishment hand-picking a candidate at a brokered convention when the #NeverTrump crowd is adamant about refusing to vote for him should he win the nomination out-right? The #NeverTrump crowd would rather see Hillary elected just to prove their point, but they want Trump supporters be “good soldiers” of the Establishment. Give me a break!
“The #NeverTrump crowd would rather see Hillary elected just to prove their point”
I didn’t vote for Mitt Romney. I refused to do so because I wanted to make a point. My refusal to vote for Trump has nothing to do with proving a point. It is about principle.
Adam, of course it’s your principle. Everyone’s vote (or non-vote) is their principled choice. But make no mistake, a non-vote carries just as much weight in States that could go either way. While a non-vote in Texas probably doesn’t matter as much, one in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, and a few other states matter a great deal.
When a “conservative” chooses not to vote in a State that is “Up-for-grabs” they are still voting. So if you “principles” allow for the other party’s candidate to win because of your non-vote, fair enough. Principles matter, but they still have repercussions.
I believe that Donald Trump is just as much of a disaster for this country as Hillary Clinton, just in a different way. I will never understand why I should feel obligated to vote for one of those two candidates when I feel that way. Btw, I did vote in 2012. There were quite a few candidates on the ballot.
Nate: They do see how many people vote. Not voting does get noticed.
Not that it matters what non-voting does….I will follow my convictions which is if there is a Trump vs. Hilary vote I will not vote at all.
I don’t agree that the NeverTrump crowd “would rather see Hillary elected just to prove their point.” Most NeverTrump folks that I know have genuine convictions of conscience that prevent them from supporting either Trump or Hillary.
That’s a completely fictional statement Jeff. See my response to Adam directly above your post.
What did I say that is “completely fictional”?
Make no mistake, a non-vote carries just as much weight in States that could go either way. While a non-vote in Texas probably doesn’t matter as much, one in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, and a few other states matter a great deal.
When a “conservative” chooses not to vote in a State that is “Up-for-grabs” they are still voting. So if you “principles” allow for the other party’s candidate to win because of your non-vote, fair enough. Principles matter, but they still have repercussions.
So you can’t stay home (or vote for a 3rd party who has no chance) and say you aren’t voting against Trump should he be nominated.
Let’s say you are a first-century Jew. It’s Passover, and Pilate offers to set free either a popular convicted murderer or a less-popular convicted rapist. There is a minority group of citizens who are petitioning Pilate to set free an innocent rabbi who was arrested for political reasons. (For theological simplicity, let’s assume it’s not Jesus this year.) This group refuses to vote for either criminal, their petition is unsuccessful, the murderer wins the vote, and he goes on to murder other people. The Jews who voted for the rapist blame the murder of these people on the petitioners who abstained from voting. Is their accusation just?
You seem to imply that by not voting nobody will be set free. Someone will win the election, your vote or non-vote in a state that is “up-for-grabs” will have an impact. Period!
“So you can’t stay home (or vote for a 3rd party who has no chance) and say you aren’t voting against Trump should he be nominated.”
Who said they wouldn’t be voting against Trump by voting for a 3rd party? If the Democrat choice is Hillary and the Republican choice is Trump, I will vote against both by voting 3rd party. And I will do so based on principle, and with a clear conscience.
Ok, let me add to the hypothetical just to make it clearer. Someone will be set free. And let’s say that if a majority of Jews could be persuaded to join the petition, Pilate would actually release the innocent rabbi. However, the rabbi is even less popular than either the rapist or murderer. There is precious little chance that the petition will succeed. If these petitioners were to cast their votes for the rapist, however, they would tip the balance in his favor. Are the petitioners at fault for maintaining their principled stand?
I believe that a Hillary Clinton presidency would be horrific so as to outstrip the phantasms of our most troubling nightmares. She would set back the pro-life cause terribly. She would set back the cause of religious liberty terribly. She would advance socialism. We have every reason to believe that her foreign policy would be as disastrous as President Obama’s, since she was his Secretary of State and developed much of his foreign policy. Every bad thing you imagine that she would do, she would do. Now, Nate, having said all of that, and believing every word of it, I think that it should say something to you when I tell you that my refusal to vote for Trump does not amount to my trying to “make a point.” No, rather, it’s that as bad as I absolutely know a Hillary Clinton presidency would be, I can’t see that a Trump presidency would be one iota better. Indeed, I can imagine ways that it could be worse. Trump is not pro-life. He absolutely would not enact pro-life laws or appoint pro-life justices. He supports Planned Parenthood, and even says that while running for the GOP nomination! What will his view on life be when he runs in the general? When he takes office? Trump is not pro-religious-liberty. He’s prepared to impose religious tests for immigration and to force people to register their religious affiliation with the government. He said that Christian missionaries to West Africa should have to “suffer the consequences” of having been serving over there when Ebola broke out be being denied permission to return to the United States. “Suffer the consequences” of being a missionary!?? As though that’s some sort of misdeed!? Trump is a boorish, misogynistic, xenophobic, plutocratic bully who has built an entire campaign around boorishness, misogyny, xenophobia, and plutocracy. He would advance cronyism as an economic system and “I’m rubber; you’re glue” as diplomacy. I cannot think of a single weakness Hillary Clinton has that Donald Trump does not share equally. And he amazingly is able to find ways to be a horrible choice for the presidency that Hillary Clinton hasn’t even imagined yet. Who knew this was possible? So no, I’m not voting for Donald Trump. Trying to keep Hillary Clinton out of the presidency is a noble goal, unless one is electing Vladimir Putin as the alternative. Sometimes the cure is worse… Read more »
You should consider becoming a blogger, Bart.
I did not vote for Trump in the primary, but I can see some differences between him and Mrs. Clinton that would cause me to vote for Trump. 1. The President, as head of the executive branch, has great power over executive agencies. That is where most “law” is made now. I believe Trump is likely to pull back on job-killing actions of the EPA, the education grab by the Education Department, be less likely to promote Department of Labor regulations that have the effect of stifling religious expression in the workplace. I have only touched on a couple of the agencies. But there are many others, and I believe that Trump would run the executive branch in a less ideological way and more toward common sense economic interests. 2. Foreign policy. The current status of Russia in the world is completely due to the “reset” button that Obama and Hillary pushed with Putin. The annexation of the Crimea, the trouble in Ukraine and other actions all stem from Putin’s correct assessment of Obama and Clinton as weak. Russia is the only one mentioned here, but Clinton can be counted on to continue Obama’s foreign policy, since it was hers also. 3. Executive Orders. Need I say more? I believe that Trump would be likely to sift through Obama’s overreach, and rescind many of his executive orders. I do not believe that Hillary will do so. 4. The enforcement of current immigration law. We have laws on the books now that the people’s representatives passed, and were signed into law. They are being ignored. Forget the “wall”. I have no comfort that Mrs. Clinton will faithfully execute the law in this area. I believe that Trump would at least begin to enforce existing immigration laws and at least return us to being law abiding. 5. Defense of U.S. interests. I believe that Trump will engage in a more robust defense of U.S. interests abroad. It’s hard to know where this will lead as all of the challenges are not in front of us. “Leading from behind” will not be a standard for Trump. I also do not believe that he will follow through on the Iran deal, to the extent possible. 6. Defense at home. I believe that Trump is less likely to pander to movements that are anti-police, especially if they arise out of hoaxes. I do not believe… Read more »
Good stuff, Bart.
Louis,
“I did not vote for Trump in the primary, but I can see some differences between him and Mrs. Clinton that would cause me to vote for Trump.”
My primary is next week, so I haven’t voted yet. Most likely Cruz. The rest of what you wrote here makes good sense. If Trump is the eventual nominee, I plan to vote for him. I cannot see how he could be worse than what we’ve endured for 7 plus years nor what we would get from Hillary. She is a very known quantity on any and every issue. Trump not so much, but his talk is at least better than O or H.
There are plausible if not compelling arguments to be made on both sides of the Hillary vs Donald general election choice- a truly horrible prospect.
This is why thinking Christians who happen to be registered Republicans voting in primaries, must say “Never Trump” with their votes and pray much for Gods mercy on this nation.
1. Yes, Trump would be likely to use executive overreach to reward business rather than penalize it. I think that’s a good thing.
2. Putin: Trump said that Obama’s foreign policy was TOO TOUGH on Putin, and that we should be more accommodating of Putin. “What do we need trouble for?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjo4u88no7U
3. Executive Orders: I do not believe that Trump, accustomed to executive government by fiat in his corporate endeavors, will suddenly abandon executive government by fiat upon entering elective office. What did he say about military officers who would refuse to carry out his immoral and illegal orders to commit war crimes? “I’ll force them to do it.” This is someone more apt to exercise restraint in his use of executive power????
4. Yes, I think it is more likely that Trump will deport people. Would you count it as a plus if he enforced all of the present immigration laws and then further denied missionaries permission to return to the country and then barred people from the country whose religion didn’t meet his personal approbation?
5 & 6. National Defense. A guy who blames 9-11 on George W. Bush knows how to defend the country???
7. The Debt: Here’s Donald Trump (not) getting specific about what he would do to reduce the national debt.
8. Socialism: Agreed.
9. Trade: What Trump has said and what he has done are two different things.
10. Supreme Court: Trump supports Planned Parenthood, has contributed to pro-abortion causes all of his life, and has had a sudden “conversion” to conservative jurisprudence right about the time that he decided to run for president through the GOP.
I’m not trying to fight; I’m just trying to explain why I’m not at all convinced.
Very good Bart.
Forrest and I have one thing in common, we are not smart men, well two, we like chocolate, but I fail to see how if Cruz helps Rubio in Florida and Rubio can win that the reciprocal would not be true. CBS has the polls at 38% Trump, 30% Rubio and 17% Cruz. I have read millions of times, it seems, that none of the support of Cruz, Rubio, Kasich would go to Trump if one of these guys dropped out. If 30 + 17 is more than 38 then 17 + 30 is more than 38. The best strategy for a NeverTrump win is for Rubio to stand on the stage tonight in Dade County, Florida and say I am pulling out and ask you to support Ted Cruz for president.
This is not the best strategy for a NeverTrumpbutIreallywantRubio win.
Bingo.
Are you bingoing I am not a smart man?
I agree with everything you said. 🙂
Exactly! Dean.
Sorry, guys, if my word isn’t good enough, it isn’t good enough, but the fact that I supported Rubio isn’t the issue now. This is not about finding a path for Rubio to the nomination.
I’ve pretty much abandoned hope of a Rubio win. I don’t think either Cruz or Rubio are going to head the ticket this time. If Rubio won Florida and there was some sort of amazing bounce from that, but I don’t see it happening.
I don’t like Cruz much, but I was ready to hold my nose and put a sign in my yard until I became convinced that there may not be a legitimate path to victory for him either. Had he and Rubio formed a rebel alliance a week or two ago, perhaps, but now, it’s too late.
The best hope now for NeverTrump is to keep him from the 166 delegates in Ohio and Florida by Kasich and Rubio wins. Of course, that gives a boost to both of those guys, who probably should have dropped out the day after SuperTuesday. But if they win, they are in it for the long haul.
Cruzites seem convinced he can win Fla – I’ve heard no one but partisans suggest that. I don’t believe it. The question is whether Rubio or Trump wins it. Yes, I’d rather have Rubio win it.
Of course, if he wins it, he’s not dropping out then, he’s crowing about his Marcomentum again.
Trump got lucky this year – the 16 candidates split votes long enough for him to keep his “frontrunner” status and the aura of invincibility while polling between 25% and 35%.
And I certainly agree that Dean isn’t that smart.
Dave, somewhere in this menagerie of blogs is one where you said the loser of Rubio/Cruz on Super Tuedsay should withdraw, unite with the winner and defeat Trump.
Your powers of influence convinced me you were correct; Rubio should withdraw and call on his support to vote for Cruz. Your insight is brilliant.
No, you are right. I put that up as a post.
It didn’t happen.
I also read/listened to some OP that said that was a horrible idea. They convinced me that the best anti-Trump strategy is to keep all the guys in the race, at least until after March 15. If Cruz does well today, then Kasich and Rubio win next Tuesday, the Trump nightmare may be over, then those guys can slug it out.
Can you believe that presidential candidates didn’t follow my advice?
Dave, I am missing something.
You agree that if Rubio and Cruz had combined forces a couple of weeks ago, it would have had a chance of stopping Trump. (btw – I believe I advocated a couple of weeks ago that Rubio should get out and support Cruz, but I did not see any takers)
But now you don’t believe that Rubio and Cruz should combine forces because it won’t work now.
What has happened to change the calculation in the last 2 weeks?
If it would have been a good idea 2 weeks ago, why did you and others not bite on it then.
I am not fussing at you, but really trying to understand.
Timing is everything. Too many delegates have gone out now.
Plus, I think it’s too late for Cruz to get it together and win Florida. Florida really seems key to me. 100 delegates (or 99 – I’ve seen both #) winner-take-all.
If NeverTrump is going to win, Florida needs to be a firewall. Had they joined forces 2 weeks ago, it might have been possible. Now, it’s likely too late.
All of this is conjecture, feeling. I did a pretty good job of calling and predicting the IOWA thing. I know Iowa pretty well. But the rest of this has been a mystery to me. Mind-boggling.
I keep thinking, people are going to realize what a buffoon Trump is, and they don’t. I thought Rubio would surge, he faded. So, I’m not putting any money on my predictions.
I read some people who said the Rubio/Cruz or Cruz/Rubio alliance would NEVER have worked. I don’t know. But it seems now that the best way to beat Trump is to hold the line in Florida and Ohio, and having Rubio and Kasich IN is better for that.
Would I rather be able to vote Rubio against Hillary in November? Of course.
I’d be happy, at this point, to vote for Cruz against Hillary, as little as I like Cruz.
But I’d be willing to vote for Ryan if I had to, or maybe they resurrect Scott Walker, or glory be, maybe Ben Sasse (not likely). Romney? Yuk. But better than Trump.
Shoot, I’d rather see Mitch McConnell on the ballot than Donald Trump!
What happened is Super Tuesday happened, followed by the primaries on Saturday. Although Cruz did well in the primaries to show that he is the definitive second place candidate, he did not win enough delegates to put him on a recognizable path to winning the nomination outright. Also he and Rubio did not do well enough to blunt Trump’s momentum such that at this juncture there is indication of him winning enough primaries to get the nomination (this is more Rubio’s failure as he needed to win a couple of primaries and steal away more delegates). After today’s primary results are in I might change my tune (I will not speak for Dave) and after next week it might change again. We have to respond to the situation as it is today, not where it was two weeks ago or where we want it to be next week.
Dave, I don’t think anyone is questioning your integrity (at least I’m not), but the nature of having a bias is that it is often not as evident to the one with the bias as those around them. The same can be said about Tarheel. He is biased toward Cruz. You have accurately pointed that out. He’s not much willing to acknowledge the bias. But your bias toward Rubio and against Cruz is equally clear.
You keep saying that no one is talking about Cruz being able to win Florida. That is because we have a 4 man race and he is in third according to the polls. Yes, Rubio has a chance of winning Florida even with 4 people in the race. Cruz does not. But if it were just Trump and Cruz, I believe Cruz would win Florida. If Rubio and Kasich dropped out a week ago (as they should have) I think Cruz would have a good chance in both Florida and Ohio. Cruz kicked butt on Saturday. He has gained momentum despite there being still 4 people in the race. If Rubio and Kasich were gone, that momentum would only increase.
Let’s all admit we cannot predict the future. We can, however “predict the past”. Surprise happens. Consider this about Rubio. Just one week ago EVERYONE was saying he could not win Florida because he was 20 points behind Trump. Now he is 8 points behind . . . in the polls, and the polls have been way off. Also, I notice that Cruz is now adjusting his schedule to include Florida events. Cruz is shrewd. He would not waste his time. If he was certain Rubio was going to lose Florida, he would not be going to Florida. Also, we have just learned that the early voting went to Rubio in a landslide. That is not indicative of widespread revulsion due to amnesty. Also, Puerto Rico went for Rubio big time. You might say “Of course they did – no one else went there. No one else speaks Spanish as well. Puerto Rico is small potatoes and doesn’t matter.” etc. But do not overlook the fact that most Puerto Ricans have very close relatives in Florida, and they talk often. Finally, do not discount the fact that the same is true about Miami Dade residents. They too have friends all over the state, and Miami Dade is going for Rubio lock, stock and barrel. There is also the Florida/Texas connection. While they think alike, there is also a rivalry. How that plays out between Cruz/Rubio support is anyone’s guess. My point is not about why anyone should vote for Rubio. I am not touting Rubio. My point is that common sense does not rule the day. There is manifold evidence of that, especially this cycle. Things are going to happen that we did not see coming. Malcolm Gladwell’s next head-slapping book might well be about this election, and how things happened no one predicted. One of those things could be that Rubio wins Florida. If he does, things change, and maybe in a big way. We will see. Finally, since I have seen a Washington quote above, I will add another about predicaments such as the one we face in this cycle, and for which the Republican party is being blamed. Winston Churchill said: “When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have effected a cure. There is nothing new in the… Read more »
Of course Puerto Rico went for Rubio.
That’s Rubio’s problem!!!
He is seen as wanting the entire Southern Hemisphere to move to the U.S.
His Gang of 8 bill is what killed him.
Puerto Rico only proves they liked the Gang of 8 bill. That will actually hurt him in other states, I believe.
Tarheel and others are right.
Rubio is the one who should get out. His performance is not improving, but getting worse.
Cruz is a flawed nominee for a Nevertrump perspective because his appeal is limited.
But with Rubio out, the Nevertrump people will have to vote for Cruz. So as unpopular as Cruz is with the establishment and the Nevertrumps, if Nevertrump is the real goal, that is easily achievable with Rubio out. The anti trump forces would coalesce, vote for Cruz and beat Trump.
But that is not acceptable to many anti trump people. That is because as much as they don’t like Trump and that motivates them greatly, they are, in my opinion, equally or more motivated by other goals than Nevertrump.
They have another goal that conflicts with Nevertrump. It is to also see that their guy or someone they think will do better in the general election gets the nomination.
This goal does not harmonize well with Nevertrump. Nevertrump can be achieved with 2 major candidates going head to head.
The Nevertrumps are taking a big risk of not coalescing around 1 anti trump candidate now because they hope that will produce s brokered convention where their guy or some guy other than Cruz can get the nomination.
So, if you want to stop Trump, the safest and best bet is to get Rubio out now, get behind Cruz and increase the chances of denying Trump victories in FL or OH.
Gambling on some other tactic makes a Trump win more likely.
Yep.
I don’t know. I’ve come to believe the best hope for NeverTrump is a brokered convention.
I see here again statements to the effect of real (or good) Christians cannot vote for Trump.
That is so contrary to the teaching of the Gospel it is hard to believe that people say such things.
Any church that would permit its pastor or other teachers to say such things in church during the time for the preaching and teaching of God’s word is missing the boat.
My pastor has a higher calling than that and would not take the time to do something like that.
It’s fine and right for the church to speak about principles and truth from the scriptures that may have political implication. But it’s easy to veer off that.
Think of all the churches that read the Sermon on the Mount and conclude, and teach in their pulpits, that socialism, progressivism, or liberalism is mandated by Christ.
We rightfully condemn churches that do that.
Well, why should we then “add” to the Gospel and Christian living by saying that true disciples will only vote for this or that candidate, or vote against this or that candidate?
This kind of thinking is a poison that is being injected into the life blood of many churches and ministries right now, much to their own detriment and to the dishonor of the Lord.
Saying, “I will not vote for candidate ‘A’ because of my Christian faith,” is not the same as saying, “You cannot be a Christian if you vote for candidate ‘A’.” I have not seen where anyone here said the latter.
I am sorry to jump in at this point. I do not intend to be argumentative; it’s simply that the logic didn’t follow. It is like saying all squares are rectangles therefore all rectangles are squares.
I offer this as a comparison: I am a Christian. I cannot eat pork or shellfish as a matter of conscience. In no way does it follow that all Christians must abstain or they are not Christians (that would wipe out almost the entire population of believing Americans. Lol!). My conscience dictates what I can do *in faith*. For me, it would be sin; I cannot eat in good conscience, but someone else may not have that hindrance.
Perhaps my voice is entirely unnecessary; nonetheless, I want to urge everyone to have compassion towards each other’s consequence. Please, let us show love to our weaker brothers. We are going to be known by our love for each other and it will be as a light in the darkness. I think God will honour what we week do in faith and in good conscience. We ought not be a stumbling block to our brothers.
I have to admit, Louis, that I wonder about the spiritual judgment and discernment of someone who supports Trump.
That may be wrong, but when a candidate is a vile as he is, as anti-Christian in just about every way, I shake my head and wonder how any Christian person could even consider supporting him.
So, while I agree in theory that we shouldn’t consign people to hell or question their salvation for how they vote, I have to admit that I question the discernment and biblical wisdom of people who look at this man and think, “He should lead our country.”
Dave, you wouldn’t be human if you did not think that way.
We all make judgments about things we think are good and things we think are bad.
In politics, these judgments are all weighed against other candidates and other interests.
I really can’t say it any better than Jonathan Leeman said it. I know I have linked to this before, but with your permission, I will do so again.
http://9marks.org/mailbag/32/
This really is worth a read.
Louis: To my knowledge we have never had anyone so vile as Donald Trump run for office except David Duke who was quickly dismissed, so not even a consideration. I too have a huge problem with those who want to vote Trump in office. I question who they really are inside.
And I don’t apologize for speaking out and am glad some in the church leadership are speaking out. I think it is honoring to Christ to do so. We are to stand against such things.
Hillary is every bit as evil as Trump and you don’t seem to feel led to say anything about her.
Debbie,
You’ve never seen a POLITICIAN as vile and wicked as Trump? Really? Have you checked out the Clinton’s past? I’ve known of many Politicians, who were living wicked, vile lives, and who believed wicked and vile things. You must live a very sheltered life, or else you’re exaggerating.
BTW, I did NOT vote for Trump. I am not a fan of Trump.
David
I should clarify since of course Dems are being put in my statement. In the Republican party.
We all have a tendency to exaggerate, to see the now as “the best ever” or “the worst ever.”
When you see people talking about today’s negative campaigning as if it is the worst ever, that’s just ignorant of history. The stuff today is lightweight compared to what went on in campaigns in the past. And Trump as the “most vile ever.”
Well, I’m no Trump fan (I think I’ve proven that) and I will never vote for him for anything. But he’s probably not the worst ever. There’ve been a few stinkers in the USA family tree.
Trump is unfit for leadership. Worst person ever? Maybe not.
And you and others do have a point Dave. I know I know, but it’s true.
George Wallace ran for President, and before Civil and women’s rights movement, Presidents that were pro-KKK etc. so yes, even in my lifetime there were some pretty bad people who went pretty far in the polls and were almost on the ballot.
I should be in bed. I am not feeling well tonight, just woke up and did make that comment without remembering.
I’m sorry to hear that you aren’t feeling well. I know that we have had our differences, but I sincerely pray that you will feel better soon.
Adam:
I agree, as you have stated it.
But what is being stated is directed toward the sincerity and maturity of the faith of others.
Here is a comment from this very blog post:
“It should be unconscionable for a born-again disciple of Christ to even consider voting for Trump in the GOP primaries.”
Tell me what you think of that.
This is just today. All you have to do is peruse the internet for 5 minutes or check your own FB page and you will see this replicated many times over.
Let me clarify the post and comments I stand by in declaring support or a vote for Trump in the GOP primaries as unconscionable.
Though unconscionable may be a strong word, let me ask; can a Christian sin by being consciously unwise or undiscerning (Pro. 1)? if so, then how do we explain a biblically-based Christian voting for Trump, considering Trump’s history as prologue to his present?
Has Trump (as recent a convert to “conservatism” as has ever existed) demonstrated any sort of track record as to espousing policies that jive at all with scriptural principles? Have his recorded beliefs and behaviors ever corresponded to his populist, arrogant and crude rhetoric?
I would love to dialogue with a Christian who has sought the scriptures and wisdom prayerfully, to justify their vote for Trump. Perhaps I may learn something along the way.
I am not a trump supporter, but I can imagine someone who truly believes another abortion-supporting Clinton in the white house would be terrible, and who also believes trump has the best shot of beating her. As such, that person may decide to vote for Trump in the primary. Many more would vote for trump in the general election for the same reason.
I see no reason to question the devotion to Christ of a Christian who makes either of those determinations.
Okay, honesty here.
I will never vote for Trump. EVER. For anything.
But if someone decides to vote for Trump against Hillary, I can at least process that. Fine. It’s a choice.
What I do not understand is people who look at the field of candidates we had in the GOP and say, “This degenerate is the best we’ve got.” I just don’t get that.
That’s what I’m getting at…
I don’t either at this point Andy in terms of a general election. That is a whole other controversy and issue.
My comment and contention is with
conscious Christians voting in the GOP primary for Trump over the more biblically based candidates. I have blogged on this more extensively on my blog, Deadpool for Presidesent at my captivethought.word press.com
My own Facebook page? I’m not sure what you are referring to.
Not you, Adam.
Another commenter posted what I wrote.
Okay, here’s the Millereality: 1. There is a minority of Trumpites – passionate and unwilling to consider anyone but Trump. They are absolutist in their support of him. He wasn’t kidding when he said he could shoot someone on 7th Avenue and they’d still support him – see Steve’s comments here. This number hasn’t changed too much since about September. It’s dipped from time to time (giving this old codger hope) and swelled (sending fear surging through me) but seems to correct to the norm – somewhere in the 35% range. 2. The NON-Trump vote has coalesced around 3 guys now. The major vote-getter is Cruz, then Rubio, with Kasich lagging way behind. The NON-Trump candidates together are way ahead of Trump in delegate count. They have over 500, he’s in the 380s. 3. There are three or four more proportional primaries today – the delegate counts likely won’t change dramatically unless something stunning happens at the polls. The big thing is next Tuesday when Ohio and Florida primaries are contested, which are winner-take-all. 4. If Cruz could win Florida, he’d have a path to the nomination. I’ve not heard anyone but Cruz partisans say that’s a possibility. 5. Rubio, though trailing badly in polls, is actually leading by a huge margin in early voting in Florida, which pretty much takes away any incentive he has to get out. If he wins, he is back up close to Cruz (still in third, but the margin would be a lot less). He is throwing a Hail Mary pass. 6. If Trump wins BOTH Ohio and Florida, he’s likely to win the 1237 delegates he needs to get the nomination. If he loses both, he’s probably not. If he splits them (especially if it’s the 100 delegates of Florida he loses) it’s probably a wash. 7. Cruz is in a vice here and though he leads the NON-Trump delegate count, he’s also throwing a bit of a Hail Mary (perhaps from only 35 yards out, not 50 like Rubio). He’s trying to drive Rubio from the race to set up a 1 on 1 with Trump. But in driving out Rubio he risks giving the Donald a stranglehold on the nomination, essentially cutting off his nose to spite his face. 8) I’m regularly being accused of bias – and I have one. NeverTrump. The idea of having to choose between Trump and… Read more »
NeverClinton. NeverSanders. NeverStayHome. NeverWriteIn.
I just wanted to see if that was any fun to type. Turns out, it is!
How about NoTrump? Of course, some of the crusty characters supporting Donald would read that as Not Rump and wonder what that meant. My favorite bumper sticker from the last election was NOBAMA, but hundreds of those on cars and signs in my area didn’t seem to have any effect on election day. I may write in my wife’s name this go around – she’s got more sense than any of those running … plus, I tell her all the time that she in one of the most godly men I know and ought to run for something!
What we are likely facing, if current trends hold and I hope they don’t, is a general election choice between wicked queen Jezebel on the one hand and crazy King Nebuchadnezzar on the other. Some choice. There doesn’t seem to me to be any realistic way to avoid this unless there are providential circumstances that intervene. But perhaps God will somehow give us the president we need rather than the one we deserve.
Nebuchadnezzar was restored to his kingdom fully sane and repentant. Even before his great sin (in which his insanity was a consequence) he was much beloved by Daniel, “may this happen to your enemies rather than you!” Jezebel was out thrown head first from a balcony and killed; her blood was licked up by dogs – she was beloved by no one.
If you go by your analogy then, there is hope for Nebuchadnezzar.
Rob
“Rubio, though trailing badly in polls, is actually leading by a huge margin in early voting in Florida…”
I’m curious, have they actually counted the early votes in Florida, or are you talking about data based on exit polls?
Thanks.
This is where the “early voting going to Rubio” statements come from:
http://www.redstate.com/jaycaruso/2016/03/07/rubio-leads-trump-big-in-early-florida-voting/
So, as I understand that:
The polls say:
1. the 20% of voters who have ALREADY voted say they voted Rubio by a 48 to 23 margin.
2. The others claim to favor Trump by a 42 to 26 margin.
And, the factor in that is that Trump’s polling has been consistently OVER-reported in almost every state. He regularly finishes under what his polls say he is going to get. Polls had him up by 20 points or so in all the states Saturday and he won two of them narrowly and lost to Cruz by wide margins in the other 2.
So, it would seem that Rubio has every reason to be encouraged by this poll. (And, as one who likes Rubio and loves NeverTrump I also find this encouraging).
If the early voting went the other way, I’m guessing the talk about Rubio getting out might have grown wings,.
Thanks. My question was a curiosity about how Florida counts early votes. Here in Texas, early votes are not counted until election day, and I assumed that would be true of most states. It’s not odd that folks like us might speak in these terms, but it does seem that journalists reporting on the election would be more clear that they are talking about polling data, rather than headlining in a way that implies early votes have already been counted. Then again, maybe I’m a lot too literal in my reading.
I was confused too.
I don’t’ think it is the COUNTING of early votes, but a poll.
In the poll, those who said they’d actually voted – 20% – said they’d gone for Rubio by 25% majority. The rest said they preferred Trump 42-26. I’m guessing Cruz was still down around 10 or 12%?
It is also significant that Florida is a closed primary. That tends to work in the favor of the non-Trump candidate (Cruz in some states, Rubio here).
On the other hand, in Iowa, people could register at the polls. Many did. There were a lot of Trump supporters who were signing up at the polls.
I will add that Trump seems to be losing some steam. I am not sure why that is. I suspect it may be because he has backed off some of his earlier statements.
We’ll see.
Maybe it’s because of the righteous opposition to him?
Bart:
Some good responses. I am on my phone so it’s hard to go back point by point.
What i was comparing is not Trump to other Republicans but to Clinton. You have pointed to Trump’s weaknesses and inconsistencies in a valid way, but on a continuum, it’s hard to argue that Hillary would be more mild on any of these points.
For me, on the socialism point alone, economic freedom, that a Trump Presidency would be superior to Mrs. Clinton.
I think that Ben Carson made a good point at NRB last week.
He said that he would support Trump over Clinton. He said that Clinton is a known negative. Trump is a question mark.
That’s how he phrased it and why he will support Trump if it’s Trump/Hillary.
It will also be interesting if the outspoken Protestants in the race, Huckaby, Carson, and Cruz, all support Trump if Trump gets the most delegates.
I’m not sure Trump’s near-fascism is any better than Clinton’s socialism.
Well, I guess there’s a whole lot of sinning going on in Mississippi. Trump is apparently routing on the evangelical vote.
They’re projecting Trump to win Michigan, as well.
Also, it looks like Rubio is coming in dead last
Yep, he won it. Now he is piece by piece refuting, very calmly BTW, Michigan’s own Romney. Trump water, steaks, magazine.
Talk about backfiring on the establishment.
And Rubio is done. Stick a fork in him.
Hold on a minute boys, Rubio is putting the wood to Dr Carson in MS by a 2 to 1 margin.
Wide is the road that leads to destruction.
Trump’s popularity is not proof of his righteousness.
It us amazing that Christians would imply that argument.
Dave,
“Trump’s popularity is not proof of his righteousness.
It us amazing that Christians would imply that argument.”
If you are referring to my comment, please know that that was not my intent or implication. My point is really that no matter what, evangelicals are supporting him in some significant numbers…and noting the sometimes inferences or outright statements questioning the Christian walk of Trump voters. I am not one who is supporting Trump, I repeat.
It looks like Rubio is in single digits in Michigan and Mississippi dropping support greatly from polls taken just a week ago. If he can’t win his home state then he will just be another ego driven politician you never hear from again. Sad, Rubio has many good qualities that could have benefited our country.
Then Trump comes on the TV and lets us know how great he is. I don’t think there is a word yet that describes the level of Trumps EGO.
After careful consideration, I’ve officially decided to vote for whichever candidate cares more about stopping ISIS than Hobby Lobby.
-Not Kenny Rogers
Hey, NeverTrump won Michigan!
From what I see, NeverTrump picked up 27 delegates to 21 for Der Trumper.
And not to be outdone in the polemics category, and just in time to convince Christians, comes this post.
http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2009/10/29/understanding-the-german-mindset-during-world-war-ii-2/
Just another ineffective piece that persuades no one.
If Trump goes on to win, I wonder what lessons people will learn when it comes to persuasion.
Truth is not judged by how many it persuades but by how faithful it is.
Bonhoeffer died opposing Hitler, but that didn’t make his opposition ineffective.
I don’t like Trump either. But the continual (if not outright) sly innuendos to the Nazis, Hitler and the Third Reich is unbecoming. Nazis killed their adversaries dead (“The Night of the Long Knives” – “The Night of Broken Crystal”, concentration camps, “The Peoples Court”, “White Rose”, etc., etc, ad nauseum). Nazis killed those they considered “sub-species” such as Jews, Gypsies and Slavs. Nazis eliminated those who stood up against the party politic in non-violent and violent ways (Bonhoeffer, July 20th “Valkyrie”). Hitler said what he would do in his autobiography and he went about doing it. Call Trump bombastic, egotistical, narcissistic, corrupt, crude, two-faced or anything else you wish. But to compare him to Nazis demeans the real victims of the Nazi regime = it is unbecoming = and is un-Christlike in any way that you can imagine (Der-Trump anyone?). Do you have evidence that Trump has killed millions, or seeks to kill millions and has said so publicly (the key word here is “kill”!). My uncle helped liberate a concentration camp as a teenager in World War 2. He saw with his own eyes the depravity of the Nazis. He was haunted for the rest of his life with the images that were in his dreams. He died an alcoholic because of it. Trump is no where near what the Nazis were = and for anybody to say so is also living in his world of delusion.
It seems to me this thread and other posts like it on the internet these days have so much hate and vitriol against Trump that grace and mercy have found another place to live. It seems to me by my reckoning that those who despise Trump have now become what they despise. That is the really true sad travesty of this little tale.
Grace and Peace.
Rob
Exactly Dave.
Correct. Truth is not judged that way.
But leadership is.
And not to be outdone in the polemics category, and just in time to convince Christians, comes this post.
http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2009/10/29/understanding-the-german-mindset-during-world-war-ii-2/
Just another ineffective piece that persuades no one.
http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2009/10/29/understanding-the-german-mindset-during-world-war-ii-2/
If Trump goes on to win, I wonder what lessons people will learn when it comes to persuasion.
“If Trump goes on to win, I wonder what lessons people will learn when it comes to persuasion”
If Trump wins I wonder what lesson people will learn after the first 4 years about not voting for people like Trump and possibly listen to those who tried to warn them.
Well, that may be said of any of the candidates, as they all may bring their share of misery.
The Trumpsters, if they lose due to people staying home, will always say “Hillary is awful. We should have united to vote and defeat her, etc.
Sorry for the multiple posts.
A brokered convention will destroy the Republican party forever. I for one agree with Ted Cruz, I will support whomever gets the Republican nomination. Further, the very idea that Hilary Clinton wouldn’t be worse than Donald Trump is just not a serious consideration.
My analysis for the night for the NeverTrump campaign. 1) Hope that Cruz holds on in Mississippi, keeping Trump from the magic 50% number, at this point I think Trump will be denied a majority. If Trump reaches 50% he gets all the delegates, as it is Cruz stands to gain a few thus helping him in the possibility of an outright win and denying Trump delegates. 2) Michigan was a threeway split, Trump, Kasich, and Cruz. Kasich has now set himself as the number three candidate. Unless Rubio does well in Hawaii or Idaho, he is done. In spite of my previous comments, he might as well drop out. I don’t think he can win Florida anymore as his star has fallen. 3) Note that Trump does well in a primarily 2 man race in Mississippi (Rubio and Kasich are in single digits). Give Cruz all of one the other candidates votes, and he still comes in second to Trump. I predict if they were not in the race, then Trump would have reached his 50% threshold. On the other hand, in a 3 man race in Michigan, NeverTrump wins as the vote was split between Kasich, Trump, and Cruz. 4) The NeverTrump candidacy may be looking up. Trump has outperformed in the SEC states and near his home base bordering NY. Cruz’s win’s have come from the plains states (is there a possibility that can transfer to the Mid-West, or more likely a strong showing in Michigan boosts Kasich in the Mid-West). The SEC states are done except for Florida (which does not vote like the rest of the SEC) and non SEC North Carolina (Virginia indicates ACC may vote the same way). 5) Recent polling shows Rubio down in Florida. It is unclear whether Cruz can make a play. Rubio’s decline does not necessarily mean Cruz can gain enough to win the winner take all. Prediction: Kasich wins Ohio, Trump wins Florida. North Carolina goes to Trump, though Cruz does well and Kasich gets a some delegates. Illinois goes to Trump with Kasich showing a strong second. Cruz pulls out a close win in Missouri if he makes a play for it, otherwise Trump wins with Cruz coming in second. My strategy for NeverTrump: I change my tune. It’s time for Rubio to drop out and release his delegates (perhaps his delegates can push Cruz over the… Read more »
No doubt Rubio isn’t getting the nomination, but I’m still seeing reports that polls show him with a very good chance to win Florida.
If he can win Florida, even if he gets NOTHING else, he makes a solid contribution to NeverTrump.
It’s possible that Rubio’s poor showing tonight hurts his chances next week in Fla, of course. The other possibility is that it changes Cruz’s calculations. Maybe he doesn’t see Rubio as a threat anymore and stops going after him in Florida? I don’t know.
Rubio isn’t going anywhere, but man, if he could take the 100 delegates in Florida from Trump, it would be GREAT!
I agree with your analysis. I’m just not as optimistic as you. Rubio winning Florida would definitely boost never Trump. I just don’t see it happening. He was behind in the polls before tonight (although the polls have been off). I can only see his momentum going down.
For the Cruzers (of which I am not one), they need Rubio to drop out to have any chance in Florida. Even then I predict a Trump win.
For the NeverTrump, I don’t see Rubio winning Florida, but he might as well stay as he’s got the better chance. I think Rubio put all his eggs in one basket, and it was a losing strategy. Going forward there will come a point that it will be best for a three man race so that the third person can meet the threshold to draw delegates. The question is whether that should be Kasich or Rubio. Based on last night, it needs to be Kasich.
Something else that people need to take note of….record crowds are turning out to vote in the Republican Primary. I mean, people are so fed up and angry that they’re showing up to vote for Trump. I think a lot of us may have underestimated the anger and frustration of a whole lot of Americans, out here, who are just sick of all the PC, liberal views and agendas that have been shoved down their throats during the Obama years. And now, they’re fired up, and they’re voting.
David
:Don’t listen to the Trumpeters at Fox!
This is shaping up to be a pretty good night for “NeverTrump.”
NeverTrump won Michigan 27 delegates to 21 (Kasich and Cruz combined).
It looks like Mississippi is going to keep Der Trumper under 50% and Cruz will get some delegates there, denying him a sweep.
Right now, Cruz is WAY ahead in Idaho.
What’s gonna happen in Hawaii? Who on earth knows?
I didn’t know that Hawaii even had Republicans!!
It’s possible that by the end of the day NeverTrump might end up with just about as many delegates and the Donald. Der Trumper will be crowing about his wins, but it’s delegates that matter, and he’s not getting there.
If my math is correct, the delegate count right now is about even between Trump and NeverTrump.
Hawaii will decide things for the night.
Trump won Hawaii.
I’ll focus on the here and now world. The fact is no one can assume just because in the Primaries someone did not vote for Trump does not mean they won’t vote for Trump in the General election. So this talk of NeverTrump winning is just plain foolish logic.
If you don’t support Cruz NOW you are supporting Trump. It’s time to stop living with this fantasy candidate NeverTrump. Put real effort in a real candidate. It is time to call your family and friends that have not voted and garner support for a real canidate. It is time you volunteer for phone banks and support a “Real Person” running for President.
If you don’t start supporting a real candidate NOW, you are just another Trump supporter fooling himself.
Just because Cruz is smarter than you, Just because Cruz is uglier than you, Just because you are more funny than Cruz, does not mean Cruz would not make a good President.
Are there things about Cruz to dislike, sure. Look at yourself in the mirror. Cruz would probably make a better President than YOU would, unless you have a Trump EGO.
It is largely comments like that which turned me off to Cruz. The messianic nature of some Cruz support was off-putting.
I’m not impressed with Cruz. I’m not required to be.
I’m very unimpressed with Trump.
So if it’s all the same to you, I’ll follow my conscience and not be bullied by your commands.
For now, I’m more concerned that Trump not be the candidate than that Cruz be it. If Cruz steps up, fine. But he has to earn it.
The “messianic nature” is your reading. I said Cruz is flawed. Christ is not flawed. Continue to support vaporware, in NeverTrump.
What happened to the man that 8 days ago posted and said: March 1st
“There’s no more time to dither on this. The Trumpmare has to end! It’s time for Marco and Ted to stop fighting each other and join forces to fight for a nation that needs a break.”
I support this statement, even if you don’t anymore. You have a right to be flexible.
You say you dislike Cruz because some Cruz support was off-putting. If I am off-putting so be it, What does that have anything to do with Cruz? He does not know me. You know I am a jerk, heck you put me in moderation for months and probably will again. Just because I am off-putting, does not mean I do not have valid points. Who of us has not made comments not viewed by some as off-putting.
Yet I still support you and enjoy being challenged by your writings. Makes me think, maybe Dave has some valid points that need to be examined. You have opened my mind at times, Thanks Dave.
It’s strange how that idea about Cruz and Rubio joining forces to stop Trump ended up not being such a good idea after Rubio failed to perform on Super Tuesday.
FoxNews Exit polls:
Mississippi actual votes: Trump-47.3%, Cruz-36.3%, Kasich-8.8%, Rubio-5.1%, Other-2.5% (Kasich+Rubio=13.9%)
“If these had been the only candidates on the ballot today, would you have voted for:” Trump-50%, Cruz-44%, Would not have voted-5%”
Cruz would have only picked up slightly more than half (~56%) of Kasich and Rubio’s voters. Trump would have picked 1/5 of them and 1/3 would have stayed home. Trump wins 53% of the vote to Cruz 47% (Accounting for lower voter turnout)
Michigan actual vote: Trump-36.5%, Cruz-24.9%, Kasich-24.3%, Rubio-9.3%, Other-5%. (Kasich+Rubio=33.6).
“If these had been the only candidates on the ballot today, would you have voted for:” Trump-39%, Cruz-44%, Would not have voted-12%”
Cruz would have only picked up slightly more than half (~56%) of Kasich and Rubio’s voters. Trump would have picked up 2.5% of their voters. Approximately 1/3 would stay home. Cruz would have won 53% to Trumps 47%.
I do not see similar exit poll data for Idaho or Hawaii.
Analyses: To the Cruzers favor had it been a two man race, Trump would have won Mississippi (sweeping the delegates) and Hawaii, whereas Cruz would have won Michigan (sweeping the delegates) and Idaho. To the NeverTrump credit, I stand by what I said (March 7, 9:20 pm), “Even if Kasich and Rubio drop out, I don’t think all their supporters will go to Cruz. I think a lot of people would be surprised how many would default to the leading candidate and how many don’t like Cruz either, thus staying home or voting Trump.” This analysis shows around 56% jump to Cruz and 1/3 stay with others doing who knows what.
From what I see, Trump needs to win 60% of the remaining delegates to get the nomination outright. Cruz needs to win 68% of what’s left to win outright. Rubio would need 85% and Kasich 92% (both are pretty much unrealistic).
For Cruzers, your target going forward is to get 68% of the delegates (anything less and you have to fight for brokered convention). Something you guys need to ask is not whether Rubio and Kasich’s dropping out gives support to give Cruz a majority, but whether it gets him to the 68% of remaining delegates threshold. Again, laying dreams and fantasies to the side, exit polls last night indicate he picks up 56% of Rubio and Kasich’s voters. (This does not account for unbound delegates who might swing for Cruz if its close in order to deny Trump cutting a deal somewhere.)
For the NeverTrump crowd, your target is 41% of the remaining delegates. Reach that and its a brokered convention. However, you really need to do much better than that to remove the Trumpeters’ argument that he comes close to a majority. A likely scenario you need to consider is that Trump and Cruz are pretty even going into the convention and one of the two convinces another candidates delegates to swing for him.
As you stated if Cruz got your 53% Michigan votes he would have received 100% of the delegates. Along with 100% Idaho delegates in a 2 man race. More total delegates awarded in Idaho than Iowa.
The most interesting stat I heard last night on the news was that Cruz only spent around $1,000 on Michigan campaign. So it looks to me like Rubio, Kasich, and NeverTrump people are working for Trump to be the nominee reading your analysis. Interesting strategy.
I’ll continue to work for a real person Cruz to be the nominee till the last delegate is counted at the convention on the last go around count. I won’t support a last minute substitute at the convention, nor will I support Trump.
Although the Rules Committee for the RNC is meeting in April and can change the whole game of rules regulating the National Convention. Rule 40 stands currently regarding delegates. And Rule 40 is worth a read.
Rule 40 in the RNC handbook and it states that any candidate for president “shall demonstrate the support of a majority of the delegates from each of eight (8) or more states” before their name is presented for nomination at the national convention.
But not Curly Haugland, the 14-year committeeman from North Dakota. A staunch traditional conservative, Haugland knows the rule book better than many of his colleagues and is poised to use it to his advantage to empower delegates over primary voters in the next nominating process.
“Every primary, every caucus, will essentially be a beauty contest,” Haugland says of 2016. “Now, those results will be persuasive to delegates that go to the convention. But the delegates to the Republican convention are going to choose the next presidential nominee. Nobody will have the majority of delegates from eight states before the convention.”
So if you think your analysis or strategy is going to win, think again. These folks have been playing the game for years and they make up the rules.
A good read today is:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/03/11/a-brokered-gop-convention-in-2016
A brokered convention for 2016 may have been the goal years ago.
Good Lord … Trump swept another 3 states yesterday!
Remember the “Reagan Democrats”? If Trump gets the nomination, we may very well see “Clinton Republicans” emerge … God forbid!
NeverTrump is doomed unless the opposition candidates unite. Common sense calls for this. As long as opposition to him is divided he will walk to 1237 – the nomination – and get his posterior kicked by Hillary Clinton.
We have candidates in the race who are having varying degrees of moderate success in some states and pitiful outcomes in others – we have two candidates who quite often do not even get enough votes to gain a single delegate in proportional states. The varying (however slight) degrees of success that they are having or taking away enough support from the one candidate who seems poised to take Trump down.
I want to let everyone know that I am sincerely sorry if my comments throughout the course of this thread offended anyone personally. Politics is a passionate subject and it is quite likely that my passion exceeded the boundaries of decorum. Please know that I didn’t mean to imply anything personally, I was merely “campaigning” against the politicians I personally dislike.
This is a good reminder that politics, sports, and calvinism are probably not the best things to get passionate about on voices. So I won’t start talking about my St. Louis Cardinals because I know Dave will only “trump” me with his Yankees, and how they have more world series than the Cards do. 🙂
If you like visual snapshots or appreciate concise summaries, you might like this site. Unfortunately, it does not (yet) include Kasich. It charts delegate acquisition against a timeline and toward the 1237 goal. Pretty interesting.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/
I think the ONE workable solution is an alliance between Cruz and Rubio. It would have to be secret, I guess. Cruz agrees to back off to help Rubio win Florida and secretly encourage his people to support him.
After Rubio wins, they join forces as the Cruz/Rubio campaign.
If Trump wins Florida and Ohio, it’s time to start forming a new party and let the Der Trumper have the skeletal remains of the GOP.
That was evidently worth saying twice?
What ever happened to the original deal where whoever (between Cruz and Rubio) got the least number of delegates on Super Tuesday would step down and agree to be the winners Vice President? Was that only a good idea when you thought that your candidate (Rubio) was going to perform? If Rubio had performed on Super Tuesday, you would have been writing blogs every day calling for Cruz to step down because it was the only way to beat Trump. Since your candidate did not perform on Super Tuesday you instead came up with this ridiculous NeverTrump strategy. Your thought process seems to be somewhat liberal-leaning Dave. A conservative would not have flip-flopped so easily. Not a criticism but merely and observation. I can see why you support Rubio, he also flip-flopped on his promise to oppose amnesty.
I do not know how else to say this. So here goes….I must question the sincerity of “NeverTrump” as delineated in this post.
Supporting an imaginary conservative ghost named “nevertrump” while actively rejecting the only actual and living conservative candidate who is actually and consistently competing against him (Ted Cruz) seems irrational.
Maybe it should be called NeverTrump(orCruz).
I am not saying that are being dishonest, Dave – but I am saying that it seems that your “NeverTrump lets find an alternative” motif has a clear and unambiguous contingency attached….that being “so long as the alternative is not Cruz”.
That is irrational because, as we have seen, there is no one else who can and has beaten Trump.
That’s because you assume Cruz can win. I don’t. And questioning my sincerity while saying your aren’t questioning my honesty is a distinction without a difference. I’m fairly used to you questioning my integrity, Dave. It’s nothing new. I have serious doubts as to whether Cruz can win. I think if he drives out Rubio and gives Florida to Trump, he’s pretty much handed him the nomination on a platter. If you’d stop questioning my integrity and listen to what I’m saying, it might make a little sense. Cruz is up nearly 200 on Rubio. Let’s say Cruz tells his people (secretly), “go to the polls in Fla and vote Rubio.” Rubio wins. He gets the 99 delegates and Trump doesn’t. Kasich gets Ohio. Trump doesn’t. I don’t know who gets Illinois. But Cruz is still WAY ahead in delegates and Trump is NOT cruising to the nomination. Rubio and Kasich are probably staying in a while, but Cruz, if he’s really the steamroller you think he is, can get rid of them. Since I don’t care whether Cruz wins as much as care that Trump doesn’t, since I’m willing to see a brokered convention if it stops Trump from getting the nomination, it seems to me that Kasich winning Ohio and Rubio winning Florida – since Cruz isn’t a serious player in either – is the best strategy for NeverTrump. So, you keep questioning my integrity all you want. But that is my honest analysis. Would I love to see Rubio suddenly have a miraculous comeback, win every remaining primary and/or caucus and win the nomination going away? Sure. I’d also like to see the Yankees go 162-0, the Patriots go 0-16, Brady and Belichick get permanently banned from the NFL, and Peyton Manning come out of retirement to lead the Broncos to another Super Bowl. None of that is going to happen. You can think what you want. You can think of me what you want. I have no ulterior motives. I have EXTERIOR motives. I want Trump stopped. If I thought Cruz could win the nomination I’d put a sign in my yard. If I thought he could win Florida, I’d join the calls for Rubio to get out. Rubio gets out, Trump wins Florida and probably the nomination. I think your Cruz-love has caused a blindness to reality. You want him to win so badly you… Read more »
Dave Miller,
To be absolutely and 100% unequivocally clear – I did not intend to convey – nor do I believe it to be true – that you were being dishonest. As I’ve told you in private conversations – I will repeat here – I believe you to be an honest person – I have never mean to imply otherwise.
I apologize for my poor wording in the post above – what I was intending to convey is that the whole idea of “nevertrump” – which BTW did not originate with you – seems insincere – because without an actual candidate to rally around – one that has already demonstrated he can win primaries and gain delegates – is nonsensical as it doesn’t really convey an actual plan to beat him. NeverTrump is not a winning strategy – in fact I fail to see how it’s a strategy at all. Sure, it’s catchy – but what does it really mean if there’s not an actual real candidate alternative rallied around?
You pretty much are giving us the Cruz campaign talking points, Dave. I don’t buy them.
I think the ONE workable solution is an alliance between Cruz and Rubio. It would have to be secret, I guess. Cruz agrees to back off to help Rubio win Florida and secretly encourage his people to support him.
After Rubio wins, they join forces as the Cruz/Rubio campaign.
I think that is actually MORE likely after last night. Rubio stunk it up pretty badly and has to realize he’s on life support. The #2 spot may be looking better to him than it was a couple weeks ago.
I don’t think that’s gonna happen. But if you look at Poor Richard’s post above about delegate progress, if Trump wins Florida (which he will if Cruz dynamites Rubio) it’s time to pass in the songbooks and start talking about forming a new conservative party.
The strategy that I would expect from all 4 remaining candidate is to run to WIN the states they are competing in. The tactic I would expect of the candidates is to use all available resources to win in a Legitimate method . Being disingenuous and having a secret agenda to me is tantamount to lying. It would be stealing supporters money and volunteers time. Something that would cause me to drop my support if the secret leaked out from the 500,000 conspirators.
It also turns out a secret agenda between 2 candidates running for the same office would likely violate Federal Election Law 30124. And we know the media would be nonstop for days skewering the candidates to the point that their political carriers would be toast forever.
§ 30124.
Fraudulent misrepresentation of campaign authority
(a)In general
. No person who is a candidate for Federal office
or an employee or agent of such a candidate shall—
(1)fraudulently misrepresent himself or any committee
or organization under his control as speaking or writing or otherwise acting for or on behalf of any other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof on a matter which is damaging to such other candidate or political party or employee or agent
thereof; or
(2) willfully and knowingly participate in or conspire to
participate in any plan, scheme, or design to violate paragraph
(1).
OK, Tarheel, Cruz is my guy. I voted for Marco here in Georgia but now he is toast…don’t think there is post/ergo hoc thing working there.
Fiorina’s absolutely scintillating endorsement speech was, as I and others say, the best speech of the entire 2016 campaign.
…still wish little pouting Teddy would smile occasionally.
Welcome, William. LOL
It almost seems he’s self-conscious about his smile – and if you’ve ever really seen him smile you know why. LOL
Beauty contests he will not win….I guess his mama and Heidi think so though.
Electability and the polls – I am aware there are better places to obtain the following information than at the end of a mile-long string of comments on SBC Voices, but for whatever it is worth . . .
The most recent NBC/WSJ poll STILL shows that only Rubio has a shot at beating any Democrat in the general election. Of course, he has to win the nomination, which appears to be unlikely.
Clinton v. Trump – Clinton wins by 13 pts
Clinton v. Cruz – Clinton wins by 2 pts
Clinton v Rubio – Tie
Sanders v Trump – Sanders by 18 pts
Between now and Tuesday, Rubio ought to beat this drum loudly.
Also, interesting to note that Rubio is confessing and regretting sinking to Trump’s level. Last night he told Megyn Kelly he thought what he did was a poor example for his daughters and a poor reflection on his faith and Savior (or something close to that). Pretty impolitic, but also pretty Christian. Encouraging. Wish he was doing better.
I would think a 2 point difference in Clinton vs Cruz would be consider the margin of error in any poll, thus considered a tie. Sanders vs Trump at +18 is to me incredible that a socialist could win against a capitalist in America. Makes me wonder how this poll was slanted in the sampling. Which is known to happen frequently in polling. Scary thought, Bern vs Ego in the General election. I think I would have to leave this country if that turned out to be the General election, and move to Idaho.
Then again these type of polls showed Regan losing to everyone, Democrat and Republican, and dog catcher at this point. And as we know Regan won 49 states in the General election, so I may be safe in North Dakota for awhile.
It is sad that Rubio only had a couple hundred people show up at his rally yesterday when he booked it in a Football stadium. Real bad media imagery. Rubio is a good man I truly hope he finds a path he can serve this country, we really need him. Rubio VP 2016, President Rubio 2024. No Trump on either of the tickets.
Serious question: What are we gonna call the new party when Trump is the nominee?
Seriously, that guy has NO decent ideas, promotes violence at his rallies, has absolutely nothing but hubris to offer America, and people are swallowing his swill like it’s fine wine (er…Welches).
I’m at the point of despair – maybe that has something to do with the fact that I’ve had both regular migraines and cluster headaches every day for the last 5 weeks. Maybe I’m in a migraine and medication-induced coma of depression.
But if America is buying what this guy is selling – IT”S OVER.
If American Christians are voting for this guy, we are doomed!
A new party has pretty much no chance of success, but I’m not gonna be part of a party that would nominate Donald Trump.
I guess I should wait until after next Tuesday before I give up completely, but I’m ready to throw in the towel! What on earth is wrong with a nation that would CHOOSE a man like that. Some nations have guys like that take over and rule them – they have no choice. But to CHOOSE Trump. Wow.
Revival Party
noun
1. restoration to life, consciousness, vigor, strength, etc.
2. restoration to use, acceptance.
We disagree on Strategy and Tactics but not on Substance. I cannot imagine Burn, Screech, or Ego running this country.
I share your pain with headaches, the worst I have had in my life and longest lasting day after day. One day of headaches rolls into the next. Yes I truly feel your pain.
Look up Winston Churchill quotes and put them up around your computer.
If you’re going through hell, keep going. Winston Churchill
Attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference. Winston Churchill
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. Winston Churchill
Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts. Winston Churchill
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm. Winston Churchill
What party is this Winston Churchill fella running in?
The “Return MY BUST to the White House” Party.
I’m reading that Carson will endorse Trump, the guy that all but called him a pedophile, erasing any lingering respect I had for the man. If anyone had any doubts about the reality of total depravity, they haven’t been watching this election cycle.
Hard to believe, but I think maybe he’s not forgiving Cruz for the stuff that happened up here. Just a thought.
Not forgiving Cruz is understandable. But endorsing Trump is just moon-bat crazy. Remember when I said I trusted him to do surgery? Retracted.
Bill, You do not have to worry, Dr. Carson does brain surgery=======hey it is a joke just a joke , not serious
That whole “stuff that happened up here” narrative has been fueled by Trump. Trump has apparently made Carson believe that Cruz only won in Iowa because votes were stolen from him. The reality is that Carson received about the same percentage of the vote that he was polling at. His campaign peaked very early, went back down, and never recovered. He actually did a little better in Iowa than I thought he was going to do. I understand the tweet thing and why Carson was upset about it, but Ted Cruz himself had nothing to do with it. It was a CNN tweet that I saw on twitter myself as the caucuses were beginning. They were talking about it on television as well. If Carson didn’t want people to think he was dropping out, he should have made plans to go back home after the very first contest to “get some fresh clothes.” Carson himself is much more responsible for that fiasco than Ted Cruz himself ever was.
I think Carson had a real sense of being God’s man or something, and the loss in Iowa really shook him up.
When the Cruz campaign (not Cruz himself, his operatives) did what they did, he latched on to that.
Trump, the dishonest opportunist, really seized on it. “Cruz cheated me out of the win.” The scope was small – maybe a % or 2. Limited to certain areas.
A) I think it hurt Carson’s feelings, became an excuse, and led to this insanity today.
B) I wish I could revoke my prayer of blessing at the Carson rally
“I wish I could revoke my prayer of blessing at the Carson rally.”
That’s what you get for playing kissy face with a politician.
Bill Mac,
I only know you through blogging, and I can say that through that interaction I respect you. One thing I don’t understand is how can you lose all respect for someone who simply disagrees with you politically? Further, with all due respect to you and Dave, there is no way that you guys can know whether or not Dr. Carson has forgiven Senator Cruz or not. It may be that he simply sees the hand writing on the wall and wants to get behind his party’s nominee. Further, Senator Cruz himself said that he will support whomever gets the nomination.
You are expressing my feelings exactly Dave, and those who I would have thought would see the above things in Trump, people I have personally spoken to, are ready to vote for him if he wins the nomination. I was shocked to say the least. It seems he is seen as taking the White house back for the people and nothing else matters. See no evil hear no evil is alive and well.
And I’m not even sure now that Hilary could beat him the movement is so big. It seems he has a very good chance of winning the Presidency.
“It seems he has a very good chance of winning the Presidency.”
Debbie, I think this hits on his great appeal to a lot of people — that he is the candidate who can actually beat Hillary.
Here’s a couple of quotes that Yahoo News gives from Carson’s new conference/announcement in Palm Beach.
“I’ve come to know Donald Trump over the last few years. He is actually a very intelligent man who cares deeply about America. There are two different Donald Trumps. There’s the one you see on the stage and there’s the one who’s very cerebral.”
“I prayed about it a lot. I got a lot of indications — people calling me that I hadn’t talked to in a long time saying, ‘I had this dream about you and Donald Trump.’”
lol…wow
“I prayed a lot etc.”
It amazes me how God also gave us eyes and a brain, yet I prayed a lot seems to be the mantra as well.
I had a dream about Trump….
…it was a nighmare! 🙂
nighmare (sic) …nightmare
Nice.
If Trump is a lost man, then I wonder what he thinks about Christianity after reading blog posts and comments and Tweets made by Christians? And, of course, everything points to him not knowing Christ. I really doubt that all the hateful, mean, nasty things being said about him by hristians and Christian leaders would draw him to our Lord.
And again, I am not a Trump supporter.
BTW, Carson endorsed Trump rhis morning.
Carson is a good man, no matter how harsh and judgmental some of y’all want to be. Why he is endorsing Trump is a mystery. But, he is. He has his reasons.
Yes, he has his reasons. His friends had dreams with him and Trump.
Oh, and the Trump we see on the stage is not the real Trump. I guess being two-faced is now an admirable character trait.
David, I also think Carson is a good man, and that his endorsing Trump is a mystery (especially at this point in the race). It is a mystery that may be revealed sooner or later. The reasons that the news I read alluded to were not, in my opinion, good reasons — either Trump having a dual personality or folks having dreams about Carson and Trump. (Don’t know the context, but that sounds like a P-VP ticket to me.) But I’m sure more, and possibly less skewed, will continue to come out on why Carson endorsed Trump. While I am not a Trump supporter and don’t intend to vote for him under any circumstances, I am able to understand (and even appreciate to some extent) the fact that many voters believe he is the only chance to beat Hillary Clinton.
“Why he is endorsing Trump is a mystery.”
Carson says Trump has “very cerebral” side.
Good Lord! If we get any more open-minded about a Trump presidency, our brains will fall out!
David: Do you read yourself? Do you actually believe what you are writing here?
Look, I’m not a Trump supporter. I plan to vote Tuesday here in MO for Cruz. But I think David has a point.
I don’t know why, but I don’t even remember seeing this much vitriol for abortion supporting President Obama. Nor for abortion supporting Hillary. Not just here, but my Facebook feed is filled each day with Christians saying some pretty awful things about Trump. Whether he is a Christian or not, is this the best way to present ourselves? And then there’s the vitriol for Christians who dare say they may actually vote for him in the primary or general.
I direct this to no one in particular, but the way Christians are so exercised and obsessing over a possible Trump nomination or “oh my” a Trump presidency, make me wonder where we are putting our trust. I am reminded of my own pastor’s words from last week:
“When men see that a Christian minister’s hopes and fears are invested in this world just like other men, then they [his parishoners] naturally assume that he is no more invested in the world to come than they themselves are. How can such a man lead other men to Christ’s spiritual Kingdom when the kings of this earth draw his interest and attention more than the King whom he professes to serve?”
Also, this goes the other way too of course. Trump supporters who are Christians may very well be trusting in kings and princes more than trusting in the Lord, seeing Trump as a salvation for our nation. And some of them can be pretty unChristian in their words and actions.
I would argue that there is a difference in approaching the wolf (President Obama, Sec Clinton, ect), and approaching a wolf trying to pretend it is a sheep (Mr Trump). I would argue that different approaches do need to be taken. In the first case, “most” sheep know it is a wolf and don’t need to be reminded. In the other, some of the “low information sheep” actually think the wolf IS a sheep. You can’t just get rid of the wolf-sheep, you have to prove it is a wolf. And even then, these sheep still are likely to follow the wolf-sheep because they are tired of the shepherd who they think doesn’t really care for them. Gee sounds a lot like Satan, false prophets, and people being led astray. Interesting that similarity there…Makes you think doesn’t it.
I don’t know SVMuschany. Do you think that most self described evangelicals who support Trump think he is really of the sheepfold? Or, that they know he’s probably not but it doesn’t matter?
I do not know what is worse…Thinking Trump is a sheep or knowing he is a wolf and not caring.
But even still, why such vitriol as some try to point out inconsistencies…and name calling?
So what happens if he is elected Prez? End of life as we know it? Less religious freedom? etc. etc.? Does the US experience an apocalypse?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
If you spell out Donald Trump in Hebrew then transliterate into French, then asign each letter a hexadecimal value and add the result you get 666.
(sorry. Couldn’t resist)
“Some trust in chariots and some in horses,
but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.”
God’s people should not despair, even if Trump is elected.
Sorry gentlemen. I am really not trying to be preachy. You all are likely more godly ministers of the gospel that I ever could be (except Debbie, not a pastor). I’m needing to be reminded of these things as well. Times will likely get even worse for Christians in the US before they get better. How we respond is critical.
“Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? And
“If the righteous is scarcely saved,
what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”
Therefore let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good.”
My concern over the Trump ascendancy is twofold.
1. Concern for our country, in terms of the kind of president Trump would be.
2. Concern for our country, in terms of what Trump’s ascendancy reveals about us. We are a far darker nation than what I would have hoped.
Bill Mac,
“1. Concern for our country, in terms of the kind of president Trump would be.”
Ok. Concern. Could be better or worse than previous presidents. Presidents come and go.
“2. Concern for our country, in terms of what Trump’s ascendancy reveals about us. We are a far darker nation than what I would have hoped.”
I don’t think so. We already for the last quarter century, pre Trump, have seen an absolutely incredible moral decline. We’re already far worse off than one man could make our lives. To borrow Bork’s title, we have already slouched toward Gomorrah.
Yes Les, it shows we have slouched toward Gomorrah when Christians support Trump.
We have also come a long way. We helped refugees in this country, we allowed Muslims in this country, we were closer to treating humans better, even if their skin color or nationality was different than ours.
Now school children are telling Mexicans, Muslim children that Trump will have them deported if they don’t do what he wants them to.
How many times does this have to be explained Les? David? I really don’t understand your questioning the speaking out of all things Trump.
Evangelizing Trump seems a very spiritual reason not to speak against him , but it’s not. It seems now Franklin Graham is now uncomfortable with Trump based on what he has written lately and Max Lucado….well he’s just hit it out of the park several times.
BTW: Trump should have been evangelized with Falwell Jr. and Liberty University surrounding him. Come on fellas.
Debbie, I do not think it is wrong to speak about Trump, Cruz, Hillary of whoever in defense of policies etc. But in my view the hate filled name calling and open loathing of Trump especially is unbecoming of a believer, IMHO.
Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.
Les: In the context of this verse I haven’t seen any name calling.
Now if you are talking about the words xenophobic, racist, misogyny. These speak to his character and it should be named.
Really Les. And keeping Donald Trump out of office is the first and foremost thought on my mind. I doubt that will happen, but I am going to continue to be brutally honest on all things Trump.
The Bible also talks on how God feels about evil and what we as Christians are to do about it. I don’t think anyone speaking out against Trump has to worry about going against the Bible or disobeying God.
Debbie,
“In the context of this verse I haven’t seen any name calling.”
You do not surprise me.
After reading some nasty comments in other places this morning, I made the comment that what some believe to be prophetic voice more resembles worldly behavior.
It’s tough.
I’m convinced that Trump is following the fascist playbook in rising to power (I don’t think he’s consistent enough to actually have fascist ideology, but he’s following the playbook) and he will follow the Obama tendencies toward imperial presidency (begun perhaps by Bush, expanded by Obama) to the point where our nation’s constitutional freedoms will cease to be ours.
It’s not that I think Hillary or Bernie are improvements or that I would vote for them, but that Trump is hijacking the party I’ve been part of for all my life.
There are some good candidates that could do some good things and America is choosing Trump. It frustrates, angers, and horrifies me.
I cannot stand it.
The fascist playbook: take advantage of general chaos (much of which you start yourself) in order for the people to embrace a strong leader. Take out your political foes (executions) and set up a dictatorship. Communist playbook, fascist playbook yada yada same thing same outcome. I guess the question should be “Why is America choosing Trump?” The answer may surprise you. If you fail to see the answer, then you will continue as you have. If you don’t want to accept the answer, ditto. If you accept the answer, then what are you willing to work too seeing that God is glorified and the Kingdom of God is advanced?
Another question Dave – where you this vitriolic when America chose Obama? What differences or similarities do these two men have?
Rob
I wasn’t happy when America chose Obama. But when MY party chooses Trump, I realize how far the decay has gone.
Did you ever “own” the Republican party to call it “mine”? The decay has been ever apparent way before Trump arrived on the scene. Where have you been? This is a problem with American Christianity. We have been lulled into complacency thinking that whatever politician we elect will save or harm us = forgetting that God is in control of everything regardless if we are “saved” or “harmed” by them. We have been told not to have vitriol, hatred, or bitterness but to Rejoice! (Philippians 4:9). He has called us to be faithful with what we have and He takes care of the rest.
Not more than a few weeks ago many were being lambasted on this forum about having concerns surrounding Syrian refugees. Remember that Dave? Those who had concerns (besides being called racist, xenophobe, and other ad hominems) were told to have Faith! Well whatever is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Love you brother – I miss the days of Impact.
Rob
I think it’s fairly obvious that when I said, “my party” I did not mean that I owned it.
I also think that your response to that shows the likelihood of this conversation producing a positive result, so I will bow out.
No it was not fairly obvious = why the vitriol if you have no ownership? It is logical that those ideas or objects or organizations we embrace or self-identify as are those things we value. When humans express words like (in example) “my church” “my home” they are expressing identity with as well as ownership. It’s okay Dave – we all do it.
I am glad our conversation is producing a positive result. I would not want it to be any other way :-).
Rob
Again, since you are determined in your misrepresentation, I see no reason to continue.
Rob: At the risk of “I wish I hadn’t answered”, I have to, it’s jumping out of me as it’s so obvious even to you I am sure.
It has nothing to do with ownership. My church, my family, my convention, my party, indicates belonging to. Period. So your argument has no merit, and frankly I don’t get what your argument is anyhow. Ownership? What has that got to do with Trump?
Dave – I really do not know what is going with you. You are short = brief = and angry. You did not use to be like this. I do not know what I have done to merit such dismissive retorts from you (if I get any at all = I guess I should be happy you are replying to me after many posts on multiple topics over the last few years = it has not gone unnoticed). Which part have I misrepresented? The part that you are angry? The part you have ownership in something you deny? Which?
Rob