A man you can bait with a Tweet

[zoogs]

The optimistic scenario is that a large number of GOP leaders around the country join in an open revolt against their party's nominee. This could influence large number of otherwise GOP voters to take their votes away from Trump; i.e, turn a ton of maybe even red states into 40 (D) - 25 (GOP) - 20-10-5 (various) outcomes.

 

That's an open question, though. Current Johnson supporters, in addition to being not that many in number, weren't Trump voters anyway.

 

It seems quite possibly, even likely, that there are these battleground states that are more along the lines of 42.5 (D) - 42.5(GOP) - 15 (#NeverTrump). Meaning if #NeverTrump sticks with a third party, it's a toss-up that could well result in a Trump presidency they ostensibly want to avoid more than anything in the world, whereas if they organized they could push these states solidly in Hillary's direction.

 

There's a difference between not wanting Trump to become President, and just not wanting to vote for him personally.

[NM11046]

The optimistic scenario is that a large number of GOP leaders around the country join in an open revolt against their party's nominee. This could influence large number of otherwise GOP voters to take their votes away from Trump; i.e, turn a ton of maybe even red states into 40 (D) - 25 (GOP) - 20-10-5 (various) outcomes.

 

That's an open question, though. Current Johnson supporters, in addition to being not that many in number, weren't Trump voters anyway.

 

It seems quite possibly, even likely, that there are these battleground states that are more along the lines of 42.5 (D) - 42.5(GOP) - 15 (#NeverTrump). Meaning if #NeverTrump sticks with a third party, it's a toss-up that could well result in a Trump presidency they ostensibly want to avoid more than anything in the world, whereas if they organized they could push these states solidly in Hillary's direction.

 

There's a difference between not wanting Trump to become President, and just not wanting to vote for him personally.

Thanks Zoogs for explaining it better than I ever could.

[BigRedBuster]

There is no way I'm voting for either one.....period.

 

They are pathetic. I guess if the dems don't want trump, then they should have nominated someone better.

[zoogs]

Yeah, a lot of people are actually indifferent between the two. Of course, that's fine; to each their own.

[TGHusker]

 

 

 

I'm going to get on my and rant a bit. I'm thinking that there may be some Trump supporters or others who read the often negative comments about Trump in these forums and conclude that this is a Democratic Party opinion page. It is not. The fact is that many of us who are negative on Trump are far from being liberal democrats or supportive of Hillary. I'll talk specifically of myself now. I have been a long term republican - since 1976. I have voted for the the repub presidential candidate since then (occasionally vote for a dem for House, Senate and other local/state offices). I consider myself to be a constitutional conservative. So in pointing out Trump's negatives, I am in no way giving an endorsement of Hillary. I think you all know I have a strong distaste for Hillary (understatement I know - as I occasionally post knee jerk posts about her) I think many people's frustration wt Trump is knowing the republican party could have done so much better with a number of qualified candidates - the party let us down and allowed Trump to control the narrative that led to his election. The party should have had the balls to disavow Trump in the early stages and not allow Trump to define the party into his image. Most of us already know Hillary -she is a crook and also not worthy of the position. Yes, there is enough info on Hillary to fill this forum up, but we already know what we got in her. I think my frustration is that she is the worse candidate on the Dem side since at least 1988 if not since 1976 yet the Repubs blew the chance by nominating an even worse candidate on their end. We as voters deserve better. Even those of you who support Hillary, I believe, know that there should have been better candidates presented to the voters - even if you liked her policies 100% - her trustworthiness alone should tell you there are better people who could represent her policies.

So as a long term repub presidential voter, I'm left wt voting for a 3rd party candidate who will not get elected and in so doing, I may inadvertently end up helping to elect someone I cannot stomach. Fortunately for me in Oklahoma, I can take cover in knowing that our electoral votes will end up going to Trump & not Hillary as every county in our state went to Romney last time around - the 'reddest of the red states'. So, I know my vote won't push Oklahoma over to the Hillary side. But, elsewhere, voters have the real dilemma knowing that their vote for a 3rd party candidate could help to elect Hillary. I hope that the Senate and House remain Republican if that were to occur to balance her out. End of Rant

Well said TG.

 

I don't think we should underestimate the impact of those who can vote 3rd party. While it may better fit their current emotions and desire for leadership, I think that there is a gap in understanding that depending on the state one is in (or county etc) that vote may actually help Trump get into office.

 

I wish there was a way to communicate that succinctly - that essentially (as a general rule) a vote for 3rd party is a vote for Trump in many/most cases.

SaveSave

 

Interesting thought. So are you saying there may be many more frustrated Dem voters who may vote for a 3rd party candidate that could tip the scales the other way? I guess I didn't see it that way but it is indeed possible. Stein has picked up support. Berine's supporters are not Hillary lovers by any means. I wonder which states may be at that tipping point - purple states that might tip red if the 3rd party candidate takes enough votes from Hillary??

 

I do think there are some. I was a Bernie supporter and def looked at the libertarian and green parties - once I read about their stance on issues it was easy to commit to Hillary, but sadly I don't think all folks do adequate research to come to that conclusion, or think of the ramifications of splitting the vote.

 

Edit: I'd think NH, ME, VT might be purpleish states based on how they approach politics. I'd really have to think about others.

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/third-party-candidates-hillary-polls/2016/08/05/id/742344/

This supports your thoughts about a 3rd party candidate - Johnson - actually hurting Hillary. Newsmax quote Politico story noting that when Johnson is in the polls, Hillary losses 1-2 pts of her lead over Trump.

[TGHusker]

 

I'm going to get on my and rant a bit. I'm thinking that there may be some Trump supporters or others who read the often negative comments about Trump in these forums and conclude that this is a Democratic Party opinion page. It is not. The fact is that many of us who are negative on Trump are far from being liberal democrats or supportive of Hillary. I'll talk specifically of myself now. I have been a long term republican - since 1976. I have voted for the the repub presidential candidate since then (occasionally vote for a dem for House, Senate and other local/state offices). I consider myself to be a constitutional conservative. So in pointing out Trump's negatives, I am in no way giving an endorsement of Hillary. I think you all know I have a strong distaste for Hillary (understatement I know - as I occasionally post knee jerk posts about her) I think many people's frustration wt Trump is knowing the republican party could have done so much better with a number of qualified candidates - the party let us down and allowed Trump to control the narrative that led to his election. The party should have had the balls to disavow Trump in the early stages and not allow Trump to define the party into his image. Most of us already know Hillary -she is a crook and also not worthy of the position. Yes, there is enough info on Hillary to fill this forum up, but we already know what we got in her. I think my frustration is that she is the worse candidate on the Dem side since at least 1988 if not since 1976 yet the Repubs blew the chance by nominating an even worse candidate on their end. We as voters deserve better. Even those of you who support Hillary, I believe, know that there should have been better candidates presented to the voters - even if you liked her policies 100% - her trustworthiness alone should tell you there are better people who could represent her policies.

So as a long term repub presidential voter, I'm left wt voting for a 3rd party candidate who will not get elected and in so doing, I may inadvertently end up helping to elect someone I cannot stomach. Fortunately for me in Oklahoma, I can take cover in knowing that our electoral votes will end up going to Trump & not Hillary as every county in our state went to Romney last time around - the 'reddest of the red states'. So, I know my vote won't push Oklahoma over to the Hillary side. But, elsewhere, voters have the real dilemma knowing that their vote for a 3rd party candidate could help to elect Hillary. I hope that the Senate and House remain Republican if that were to occur to balance her out. End of Rant

TG...all of what you said is basically why I'm so pissed off this election.

 

I have a different view with one part though. I don't necessarily blame the party. I seriously blame the voters who voted this idiot to be the nomination. I'm talking about the ones who voted for him in the first half of the primaries. What a bunch of lazy illogical voters. Because of their love of watching him act like a 2 year old in debates, the rest of the Republican voters really had no choice in the matter. Those voters are the ones that turned this election into the crap pile it is.

 

One of the things that really fries my cookie is when I say I'm not voting for Trump and the first reaction is...."How can you support Hillary?" I have made it clear here that I have absolutely no desire for her to be in office. But, the Republicans then need to nominate someone better. Epic FAIL!!!!!

 

Quite frankly, even if I were in a swing state, there is absolutely no way in hell I could vote for Trump. Pull your heads out of your asses if you want me to vote for your nominee.

 

 

PS.....glad I'm not as old as you. I've only been a Republican since 1985.

 

The Bold - fetch my cane, you youngster!!

[NM11046]

Speaking at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, the Republican nominee said incorrectly his general election opponent wants to "abolish, essentially, the Second Amendment." "By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

 

Should create a nice little s*#tstorm tonight on twitter.

[Danny Bateman]

 

As much as I hate to be a smartass, I think Donald may have short-circuited today.

[BigRedBuster]

With that tweet, he basically gave the best reason to run as far away from him as possible.

[NM11046]

And here's the beginning of the "woe is me, the liberal media is twisting everything I say into a big issue. My (sarcasm/joking/I didn't actually say that) is misunderstood"

 

 

What I actually said: "By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

[NM11046]

[Danny Bateman]

And here's the beginning of the "woe is me, the liberal media is twisting everything I say into a big issue. My (sarcasm/joking/I didn't actually say that) is misunderstood"

 

 

What I actually said: "By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

 

It's humorous to me that Trump is billed as such a "straight shooter" who "just tells it like it is" without resorting to "politically correct speech."

 

But as soon as he is "misinterpreted" on this, as has been the case numerous times, his underlings rush out to explain how it was a statement full of nuance and metaphor and here's what he really means...

 

Flipping back between the two modes is about as regular politician as you can get.

[Moiraine]

Gonna look at one line of the statement one more time then move on:

 

"Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

 

If Trump was telling gun rights advocates to get out and go vote, how would he word it? Would he say "Maybe there's something you can do about it. I don't know." ?


No, that's not what he'd say. He'd say "Vote for Trump to stop that from happening."

 

He was, at the very least, joking about people shooting Clinton.

[huskerfan2000]

Gotta say, some of you are hilarious. Trump is stupid and says stupid things (which this was) but he wasn't saying kill Hillary... dang, you people will grab on to anything.

[Moiraine]

Gotta say, some of you are hilarious. Trump is stupid and says stupid things (which this was) but he wasn't saying kill Hillary... dang, you people will grab on to anything.

 

Ditto that.