The anti-Trump Republicans annoy the hell out of me.

[Garrett78]

While I appreciate that some anti-Trump Republicans are attacking Trump and advocating a vote for Democrats, every single one of them (at least on MSNBC) is in denial about what the Republican Party has represented for the last 50+ years. Every single one of them suggests that the pre-Trump Republican Party was basically just fine. The only significant difference between Republicans right now and the pre-Trump Republican Party is the former uses a bullhorn and the latter typically relied on a dog whistle. But right wing ideology has always been built upon a foundation of lies and hate.

And I suspect most of the anti-Trump Republicans will be back on board with Republicans as soon as Trump is gone.

[Zoonart]

1. +1000

[dae]

2. Nicole Wallace alluded to that on her show a week or two ago. N/t

[Zambero]

18. Nicole was still GOP-lite as recently as two years ago

I now detect a complete rejection of the party on her part.

[uponit7771]

32. +1, the kidnapping of children was an emotional trigger for her

... I saw her a couple of times wanting to fight over there subject

[libdem4life]

3. They have an audience...one a traditional Democrat can't reach.

I don't think this is a time for being picky. Remember, the enemy of my enemy is a friend...even if just for an election cycle. We need all the crossover votes we can get...we won't likely win without them.

I do agree they will likely return to the Republicans...if there is a party left. That I'm not sure about. The Far Right sold their soul, and perhaps their party, to a con man. Not every Republican is a right wing fascist.

[Garrett78]

5. I'm not saying they should be put on the defensive now. But after Tuesday...

...I'd like all of them to be confronted with the fact that the pre-Trump Republican Party made Trump possible. Trump didn't rise in a vacuum.

[libdem4life]

9. Trump came in out of the far political field...he used to be a Democrat, but knew the con game well.

He came in to make money. He saw his opportunity with the insipid Tea Party crazies to glom on to the Republicans. Greedy and grifting. He never expected to win, (thanks Russia), which is why he brought in the other greedy grifters with him...they were in it to make money...not to govern.

Political or honest and thoughtful folk can't do that flip flop. Don't think there should be a litmus test.

I personally think he's the downfall of the Republican Party...however that could happen. My Dad was a lifelong Republican, I was a Republican in my college years (decades ago)...the party has gone to hell in a handbasket. All those many "normal" Republicans who ran in the beginning didn't know what hit them...and got stuck with the con man.

[Garrett78]

12. Trump was made possible by 50 years of cruel rhetoric and policy.

From the white backlash to the Civil Rights Movement and Nixon's Southern Strategy (in the '60s) to creation of the Moral Majority and the Powell Memo (in the '70s) to the intense dog whistling of Reagan (in the '80s) and every Republican since Reagan. Reagan kicked off his campaign with a speech on "states' rights" less than 10 miles from where 3 civil rights workers were murdered, but the anti-Trump Republicans think Reagan was a god. And then there's right wing media, which really got going in the '90s.

That all made the Tea Party, Trump's Birtherism and Trump's presidency possible.

[libdem4life]

34. Doesn't address the subject...although true.

Republicans supporting Democratic ideals and the crossover voting was the subject. Even if only long enough to get a Democratic House and maybe even Senate and to stop the rush toward fascism, I cherish their vote. This is 2018 and nothing like before 2016. Donald Trump is no Reagan...or Bush...or...any sane Republican.

[Garrett78]

37. That wasn't the subject. I ought to know, since I started the thread.

The point I'm making is that the Republicans who don't like Trump helped make Trump possible. I welcome their criticism, but they shouldn't act as though they weren't complicit in making Trump possible, because they were.

Trump is the inevitable result of a 50-year progression of cruelty (in rhetoric and policy). Richard Southern Strategy Nixon, Ronald Dog Whistle Reagan and every Republican since Reagan has fomented and relied upon racism and sexism. With the Tea Party and then Trump, the dog whistle was replaced by a bullhorn.

Trump is a symptom, and not a cause.

[brush]

53. Don't forget FOX and 24/7 right wing, hate radio for decades now.

[Permanut]

4. We have one of those in Oregon, running for Governor..

Knute Buehler, MD, represents himself as pro choice, but just doesn't happen to have voted that way. Oh, and he won't release his tax returns. Another groupie of Mango Mussolini, trying to put some distance between him and his Dear Leader until after the election.

Not blatantly anti-Trump, just not showing his right wing freak show for now - which of course includes high ratings by the NRA.

[RHMerriman]

7. True .... however, as Churchill said:

True .... however, as Churchill said:

If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.

[ansible]

6. They're irrelevant now, the tea party movement completely changed the GOP forever

[Garrett78]

14. The Tea Party, Trump's Birtherism and Trump's presidency were made possible by the GOP.

Those things didn't spontaneously arise within a vacuum. 50+ years of cruel rhetoric and policy (and GOP-run right wing media) made those things possible.

[renate]

8. Not me

I can respect opinions I don’t agree with if they’re carefully considered and based on experience or thought. I’m pro choice but I can see how others sincerely wouldn’t feel that way; I’m pro gun control but I’ll admit that the only time I’ve ever seen a gun was when I was held up at gunpoint, and if I’d come from a family of hunters I’d feel differently; I’m in favor of the wealthy paying more and not less than their fair share, but I might feel differently if I’d grown a successful company from nothing.

I hope someday we can listen to and learn from each other instead of reflexively rejecting opinions that we don’t share. And I enthusiastically welcome former Republicans to our side. We need them.

[libdem4life]

10. Agree...the Democrats have a Big Tent. n/t

[elocs]

44. Really? The Democrats once had a big tent except now we have those from the far Left

who want a purity test to purge all of those who are not sufficiently traditional Democrats for them, inviting them to get out of the tent by putting them down and disparaging them as DINOs or Republican-Lite. These may be people who have voted Democratic for decades so where would they go?
The Democrats NEED to have a big tent in order to defeat Republicans.

[Garrett78]

15. They weren't bothered by the Southern Strategy, dog whistling, Tea Party, right wing media...

...and everything that made Trump possible. I'm glad they are bothered by Trump, but they are in denial about who they were and what the Republican Party represented pre-Trump.

Steve Schmidt likes to talk about the pre-Trump Republican Party that he was part of being the party of anti-slavery Whigs and the party of Lincoln (who was no abolitionist, by the way). And that's bullshit. The pre-Trump Republican Party was no more the party of Lincoln than the Democratic Party of today is the party of pre-1964 Strom Thurmond.

After Trump is gone, many of those anti-Trump Republicans will be pushing a narrative that says all is well, that the Democrats have moved way too far to the left and that the Republican Party is back to "normal." Guarantee it.

[uponit7771]

33. +1, they don't like Red Don's form .. they like his policies enough

[Hortensis]

51. Agree. People need to admit and accept that the Nicolle Wallaces have

principles and ideology they believe in also. Liberal and conservative aren't different styles of clothes people can just adopt -- we often think and feel differently and come to different conclusions.

We see moral issues differently, with conservatives placing more importance on what is good for the community and liberals as humanists emphasizing the rights and freedoms of the individual. We see our worlds and our places in it differently. This has a genetic basis, as well as environmental. We even process information in different orders and use parts of our brains to different degrees. Something like half the nation is conservative by nature.

These people pretending it all started with Trump are being very dishonest, but they believe what good conservatives offer the nation is very important and valuable and are focused on trying to protect what's left of it in public life so it can grow again.

And we all need them to. Now that our working center is broken, we see its immense, irreplaceable importance to us all. Conservatives will always be a big part of us, and that means that getting rid of their bad leaders and returning responsible, traditional mainstream conservatives to power is critical to the continuation of our republic.

United we stood, divided we are in huge trouble.

[VOX]

11. I'll take 'em, warts and all. This is now a civil war.

What’s happening now is beyond politics. We’re engaged in an existential battle for the United States as an idea, and for the naming-rights to reality.

Just as Ike and Churchill needed Stalin, we need to check our purity at the door. The strongest attacks on 45 have come from ex-Repugs: Steve Schmidt, David Frum, Jennifer Rubin, etc.

Civility and tolerance will not work, since the fight is now against individuals who possess no conscience. Fascism is taking root around the globe (Brazil is the latest addition), and I do NOT want the U.S. to be part of a white-nationalist gangster network with Trump and Putin as the kingpins.

Ex-Republicans trashing Trump? LET THEM!

[Garrett78]

13. I'm not saying they shouldn't trash Trump, and I'm not saying we should turn them away.

That's not the point.

But I guarantee you that the narrative that will be pushed post-Trump is that all is well now, that the pre-Trump Republican Party is back in charge. As if that party didn't make Trump possible. As if Trump just spontaneously arose within a vacuum. As if 50 years of cruel rhetoric and policy and dog whistling didn't lead directly to the rise of Trump.

[VOX]

22. I hear you. It may depend on how nationalistic the post-Repubs wish to remain.

And how much traction the Democratic Party can gain before and after Trump. It’s pretty clear that Republicans will remain as they were pre-Trump.

However, as for those Republicans who’ve spoken out vehemently against Trump— if the party carries on with its anti-POC, anti-women’s rights, anti-healthcare, anti-science, anti-education, anti-regulation, anti-immigration, anti-human rights, anti-climate change, etc., etc., then those anti-Trumpers will have to completely abandon everything they said was wrong with Trump. I have no idea ow that would shake out. You may be right.

Time (and the law, and elections) will tell.

[Garrett78]

23. And that's just it, the GOP was anti-all of those things long before Trump.

Trump's just more overt in his hostility.

I wish I could believe the Republican Party will be destroyed by Trump, as some believe, but memories and attention spans are short. The reason we see power shift back and forth is because most people don't really follow politics very closely and are always wanting change. "Change" is the most abused word in politics. A party is in power and then people want change. The other party gains power and then people want change. Back and forth, back and forth. I keep touting an article that Democrats need to take to heart: https://www.vox.com/2018/5/1/17258866/democratic-party-supreme-court-republicans-trump-election.

Sean Illing
I definitely want to get into some of these structural barriers, but let’s be clear about this point you’re making. A lot of people still think there’s some meaningful connection between policy outcomes and voter decisions, but there’s a good bit of political science research to suggest that’s just a fantasy.

David Faris
Right. People just don’t seem to make the connection between policies and the party in power.

So, for example, the Democrats passed Obamacare and gave millions of people heath care, and yet tons of people who benefited from it have no idea what it is or how they benefited. And it’s like that with a lot of policies — voters simply don’t connect the dots, and so they reward or punish the wrong party.

I think the idea that we’re going to deliver these benefits to people and they’re going to be like, “Thank you Jesus, thank you for everything that you’ve done, let me return you with a larger majority next time,” is just nonsense. It’s the wrong way to think about politics.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do things for people, but we’ve got to be serious about how elections are won. And they’re not being won on the basis of policy proposals or policy wins.

Sean Illing
In the book, you say that Democrats are engaged in “policy fights” and Republicans are waging a “procedural war.” What does that mean?

David Faris
The Constitution is a shockingly short document, and it turns out that it’s extremely vague on some key procedures that we rely on to help government function at a basic level. For the government to work, cooperation between parties is needed. But when that cooperation is withdrawn, it creates chaos.

Since the ’90s, when Newt Gingrich took over Congress, we’ve seen a one-sided escalation in which Republicans exploit the vagueness or lack of clarity in the Constitution in order to press their advantage in a variety of arenas — from voter ID laws to gerrymandering to behavioral norms in the Congress and Senate.

Sean Illing
What the Republicans did to Merrick Garland was one of the most egregious examples I’ve ever seen.

David Faris
Right. They essentially stole a seat on the Supreme Court — a swing seat, no less. But they correctly argued that they had no clear constitutional obligation to consider the president’s nominee for the seat. They didn’t violate the Constitution. They violated the spirit of the Constitution. They violated the norms that have allowed these institutions to function normally for years and years.

This is the sort of maneuvering and procedural warfare I’m talking about, and the Republicans have been escalating it for two decades. And they’ve managed to entrench their power through these dubious procedures.

The result is that the structural environment is biased against Democrats and the Republicans have engineered it that way.

[Ferrets are Cool]

16. K and big farking R

[empedocles]

17. Suspect that the 'annoy' factor among too many Dems has resulted in fewer

'Never Trump' republicans being more helpful in their anti trump efforts. [In WWII we needed all sorts of allies - to help win].

[EleanorR]

19. With so much on the line right now, it's those who criticize trump that annoy you?

My list is a bit different.

[Garrett78]

21. Obviously those who praise Trump annoy me far more. And it's not the criticism that bugs me.

It's the fact that none of them seem to realize that they helped make Trump possible.

[Hamlette]

20. what bugs me is when they say "the dems have to fix it at the mid terms"

And they imply if we don't win this year, its because dems suck.

It makes me sick that they expect us to clean up their messes. Then they complain we are not cleaning it up fast enough (through out Obamas 8 years they said "weak recovery" etc.)

The best 2 of the bunch, IMHO are Steve Schmidt and Max Boot. I've never heard either of them trash the dems (since they've become anti Trump, I didn't pay much attention to either of them before 2016. And I like Jennifer Rubin. I've heard all three of them talk about Trump being a natural outcome of what the GOP has become and it has been happening with the party for years.

It will be interesting to see what they do/say when Trump leaves office or if we take the house and start investigations.

BTW, I hate Joe Scarborough the worst. His pulling away from the party seems fake to me.

[grantcart]

24. Not me. We cannot impeach Trump without them.

[Garrett78]

25. We can impeach Trump by having a majority in the House. But we can't convict...

...without 67 Senate votes, and that isn't going to happen. That has nothing to do, though, with what I'm talking about. There are very, very few anti-Trump Republicans in Congress. I'm talking about the people who appear on MSNBC and fail to acknowledge that they helped make Trump possible. 50 years of extremely cruel rhetoric and policy led directly to the rise of Trump.

I'm glad they are critical of Trump, as I made clear in the OP. But they are in a severe state of denial, and I don't trust any of them to continue bashing the Republican Party after Trump is gone.

[grantcart]

28. Yes I know that 67 votes is need for conviction

They said the same thing about both Nixon and Agnew months before they were both dispatched.


Removal is not a legal action it is a political action and it requires a broad consensus that is entirely possible but requires two things: a major political loss by the Republicans in 72 hours so that Trump is perceived as wounded and not invincible and a careful detailing of specific high crimes and misdemeanors that creates a legal quagmire that will split the confidence of Republican Senators who are facing the electorate.

Trump barely won the election while Nixon won in a historic landslide taking every state but Mass. and yet the Republican Party had to abandon him when the evidence was clear and overwhelming.

If you want to go through the self gratification of the last 50 years you can do it but don't expect the elected Democratic representatives or others to pay it much attention because it not only doesn't advance the actual agenda, it undermines it. We are in the ally building phase.

If you don't like something on MSNBC then do as I often do and use the mute button. I would much prefer to listen to Steve Schmidt, Wilson or the other dozen or so Never Trumpers (including Kristol) than the idiot presenters who feel compelled to say "well the supporters of the President say . . .".

We actually have a very clear historical record on how to defeat fascists, make allies with everyone you can. In WWII we had to kiss and make nice with Stalin. We are in a historic battle with manic nationalism and once that fire is lit it is very difficult to put out.

You can't have it both ways. Either you are "glad they are critical of Trump" or you are upset that they aren't acknowledging that they were hand maidens for Trump. Its one or the other, accept them as the allies that they have proven themselves to be or re litigate the past 50 years.

Here is the bottom line. We have been damned lucky over the last 2 years that Trump is still in the minor leagues when it comes to igniting actual destruction and death. If he continues as President he will keep doubling down on tribalism and victimhood until he launches a military action to get us to stop thinking about all the other things that are coming down the pike. There is only one policy agenda now, get Trump out or tie him up so that he cannot strike out. Every sincere ally is welcome.

[Garrett78]

30. I'm not trying to have it both ways. You're presenting a false choice.

I can be glad they are critical of Trump while also wishing they would acknowledge their complicity in Trump's rise. There's absolutely no contradiction there.

While I shouldn't completely rule out the possibility that Trump will be forced to resign as Nixon was, I'm not holding my breath. Trump has a cultish following, and it's clear that Republicans in office or those seeking office don't dare speak out against Trump (with rare exceptions). If they do, they get primaried and lose.

[Doreen]

26. If you are a republican who voted in Reagan then

you helped pave the way for trump. Do not go crying how much better you were then than now. You reap what you sow and now you have to eat it.

[Garrett78]

27. Yep. The anti-Trump Republicans think Ronald Dog Whistle Reagan was a god.

The pre-Trump Republican Party is Dr. Frankenstein, and it created a monster.

[quickesst]

29. A few of them...

.... Are better spokespersons for the Democratic party than some democratic spokespersons are. They may have annoyed me in the past, but they're not annoying me now, and right now I'll welcome all the help we can get.

[Garrett78]

31. Again, it's not the criticism that annoys me. I welcome that.

But at some point they need to acknowledge their own complicity in Trump's rise, or else they will be right back on board with the Republican Party after Trump is gone. You can't bash Trump but praise the pre-Trump Republican Party that made Trump possible. Well, you can, but it makes you look pretty damn ignorant.

[quickesst]

35. One of those former Republicans....

.... is one of those who I believe is a better spokesperson for the Democratic Party then many Democratic Party spokesersons. That person would be Steve Schmidt. I don't believe he owes anyone an apology or an acknowledgement of any complicity in the rise of Donald Trump. He was and is a never Trumper. I don't need anything from people like Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace except for what they are doing now to undo the cesspool in the White House. Some people may fall under the description you have put forth, but some do not. Suffice it to say, being from the south, I have some disdain for broad blankets, and "they" seems pretty broad.

[Garrett78]

38. I welcome much of what Schmidt has been saying, but he's in denial.

Schmidt and many others have long used the ridiculous "party of Lincoln" talking point. And Schmidt has implied that the pre-Trump Republican Party (of Bush, Reagan, Nixon, etc.) was the party of anti-slavery Whigs. Sorry, Steve, but even John McCain had horrible, dehumanizing policy positions. Schmidt should be enough of a student of history to know that the modern GOP is no more the party of Lincoln than today's Democratic Party is the party of pre-1964 Strom Thurmond.

Or, as I wrote back when Schmidt announced that he was no longer a registered Republican:

Various Republicans, including members of the media and retiring Congresspersons, have been critical of Trump. Steve Schmidt, Republican Party strategist turned TV pundit and Trump critic, has even renounced his Republican Party membership. Schmidt tweeted, "29 years and nine months ago I registered to vote and became a member of The Republican Party which was founded in 1854 to oppose slavery and stand for the dignity of human life. Today I renounce my membership in the Republican Party. It is fully the party of Trump."

Now, let me preface what I'm about to write by saying the more people that recognize the horrors of the Trump Administration the better. But let's be clear about a few things. Trump and his base of support is a monster of the Republican Party's making, a monster who was 50 years in the making. The Southern Strategy and racist dog whistling has been modus operandi for the GOP for longer than Steve Schmidt has been alive. Schmidt turned eighteen as Ronald Reagan's administration was coming to an end. I imagine Reagan inspired Schmidt to register as a Republican. Reagan, the man who basically kicked off his 1980 presidential campaign by giving a speech about "states' rights" less than ten miles from Philadelphia, MS, where three civil rights workers were murdered. Every other Republican presidential candidate, from Nixon to Bush to McCain to Romney, has also engaged in dog whistling.

In addition, the Republican Party has engaged in race-based gerrymandering and race-based voter suppression. The Republican Party has also fomented and exploited sexism, misogyny, xenophobia, jingoism and hatred of LGBTQ persons. The Republican Party has undermined trust in government by infusing government with incompetence and corruption. The Republican Party has also fostered the "liberal media" myth, which has contributed to a highly irresponsible infotainment industry that promotes false equivalencies and seems unwilling to label facts as facts and lies as lies (out, I suppose, of some twisted sense of what constitutes fairness or balance).

All of the above made the rise of Trump or someone like him almost inevitable. So, all I can suggest to Republicans who are critical of Trump is that you keep scrubbing those hands. The blood won't come out easily, but you gotta keep scrubbing.

Let me make one more point before closing. Unless one is genuinely ignorant of history, it is utterly disingenuous to suggest that the Republican Party of today (or pre-Trump) is anything like the Republican Party that was started by anti-slavery Whigs. Nor is today's GOP the "party of Lincoln," as some like to claim (Lincoln, by the way, was no abolitionist). Mr. Schmidt, the pre-Trump Republican Party is no more the Republican Party of 1854 than today's Democratic Party is the Democratic Party of pre-1964 Strom Thurmond.

Why call out Republicans who are critical of Trump, one might ask. The reason is simple. Republicans need to take ownership. We need to be clear about who Republicans have been for half a century now. All persons of conscience must guard against this notion that all will be well or "normal" if we simply rid this nation of Donald J. Trump. All is not well. Republicans have very deliberately created a monster, which was born before Trump moved into the White House and will undoubtedly survive long after Trump is gone. Own it, Republicans. Own it.

Lastly, to all those persons of conscience, vote for Democrats in November. The party may not be perfect, but it's the only thing standing in the way of authoritarianism, the only thing standing in the way of fascism. If you've never voted before, 2018 would be a good time to start. Your Social Security, your health insurance or your child's health insurance, and your very life may depend on it. Please vote.

[quickesst]

40. I'm 66 years old....

.... And yes, I've always voted, and always Democrat. I plan on voting on the 6th because I feel like it's important for me to walk into the polling place, repukes and all, and letting whoever is within earshot that I am doing my small part in saving our country from a dictatorship. Makes it even better because I'm in Louisiana. Suffice it to say, I ain't skeered!

As for the rest of it, short of signing an oath of loyalty, I don't know what else Steve Schmidt can do to assuage your assumption of him returning to his old ways. He is no longer a Republican, and I actually believe his views on many things have changed. I'll simply have to wait and see if I am right or not. If I'm wrong we can go back to smacking him around, but at least it won't be under a trump presidency.

[Garrett78]

41. See, that's just it, Schmidt doesn't have issue with his old ways.

He seems to think the rise of Trump happened in a vacuum, that the pre-Trump Republican Party was just groovy. In other words, his "old ways" were perfectly fine. That's what I mean about him being in denial. Schmidt and every other Republican helped make Trump and his base possible.

As Obama said of the GOP back in 2015 or 2016, "They’ve been feeding their base all kinds of crazy for years."

[quickesst]

46. Ok...

I'll give this one more shot. You believe that once Trump is gone that Steve Schmidt will return to exactly what he was prior to Trump. I happen to disagree, and believe we will see a more moderate person post Trump. I don't expect a radical change, and would be happy with either center-left or center-right. Until he proves me wrong I will welcome his pro Democrat anti Trump rhetoric. I don't have to have a pound of flesh for the privilege of speaking in favor of the Democratic Party. I'm just going to leave it at that.

[Garrett78]

47. What Schmidt may or may not do after Trump is gone is irrelevant to the main point I'm making.

[quickesst]

48. I get your point

It's just not that big of a deal to me since I don't have a time machine to go back and change anything. The future is where it's at, and I'll accept any help we can get to insure that it is a good future. Good luck in your endeavor to obtain whatever it is you desire.

[andym]

36. Perhaps the biggest danger of a Trump is he sets the stage for a smart powerful fascist in the USA

down the line. I think the anti-Trump Republicans understand this danger. The thing about Trump is he is undisciplined and is in love with self-adulation. His blustering is actually helping to engender serious opposition, which should translate into more political power for Democrats in the near term. Fortunately the GOP did not manage to take apart the federal safety net. The biggest downside besides the Supreme Court, and some damage to the US government infrastructure, is that a smooth, smart, disciplined fascist now has a road map to power in the USA and then we will really be in trouble. Clearly, a fascist's road map includes using the GOP for his/her purposes.

[Garrett78]

39. That's very much a valid concern. Especially since attention spans and memories are so short.

Trump is not the death of the Republican Party, as some wish to believe. Nor did Trump occur in a vacuum. Trump is a symptom; the inevitable result of 50 years of increasingly cruel rhetoric and policy. And Trump has done pretty severe damage to numerous institutions, most notably the federal court system with his many lifetime appointments.

But, as you suggest, he's stupid and incompetent (though media-savvy), even if not everyone around him is.

An intelligent, charismatic fascistic bigot could potentially rise to the presidency in this very sick and ignorant society.

[Blue_true]

42. They embraced racist, mysogonistic voters and looked the other way.

They knowingly made allies with people that they would NEVER invite over for dinner. They made those allies to win, they didn't care about the damage that was being done to the foundation of the country.

[Garrett78]

43. Yep. And Trump (or, more importantly, his base) was the inevitable result.

You can't "feed the base all kinds of crazy" (Obama's words) for 50 years and not expect someone like Trump to rise to power.

[Kaleva]

45. Freepers are also very annoyed with them, the GOPe. Why stand with the Freepers?

The Trumpers despise Repubs like McConnell, Ryan, Romney, the Bush family, McCain and others. They consider them to be sellouts to the conservative cause, are more for the establishment and lack true conservative principles.

It's kind of like how the JPR crowd thinks of us DUers.

[Garrett78]

50. All of us should despise those Republicans, too. Just for different reasons.

For one thing, they all helped make Trump possible.

Anyway, I guarantee you many Trumpers will be voting for Romney on Tuesday and that many will vote for McConnell in 2020. And many would vote for Ryan if he were running again.

Trump didn't happen in a vacuum. The pre-Trump GOP created this monster. I welcome criticism of Trump, but all Republicans need to own the fact that they helped make Trump possible. Trump is the inevitable result of 50+ years of increasingly cruel rhetoric and policy on the part of the GOP.

When Trump is gone, watch for this narrative from most of the anti-Trump Republicans: all is well now, everything is back to "normal," the Dems have moved too far left and I'm really glad to have my party back (the very party that made Trump possible in the first place).

[Raine]

49. Me too, they're nothing but Trump haters

who are mad and resentful that they've been shoved aside. They wanted Jeb or someone like that so they could be hanging out at the Whitehouse as insiders. As soon as Trump is out they'll be right back on the repug train worming their way back into the inner circle.

[Kurt V.]

52. agree 1000%

40+ years of a culture of cruelty.