Am I wrong? If Trump stole the general election, did he most likely steal

[rurallib]

the primary also?

If that were true why are all Republicans simply keeping their mouths shut? Are these people so in the pockets of the wealthy that they are keeping their mouths shut because of the huge payoff to themselves and their owners?

Putin wanted Trump and Trump only as prez, not Jeb, not Marco, not Calgary Ted.

Maybe I am off on a wild goose chase. Just seems to me that somehow Putie had to get his horse through hurdle #1 before he could set his sights on the big prize.

[MFM008]

1. No

You are right.

[Mme. Defarge]

2. Very interesting idea!

[LisaM]

3. The Republican primary system (which of course includes caucuses) has no safety net.

They generally favored a winner-take-all approach over proportionate delegate allotment, they started with way too many candidates, and they did not have anything similar to super delegates (I know, much maligned here, but they could serve a purpose) that would allow long-time party loyalists to have a say in the selection of a candidate. I don't know offhand how many open primaries they had, but overall, their primary system seemed designed to let a whackadoodle get the nomination.

[leftstreet]

4. I had to Google the GOP 2016 primary

I couldn't remember who ran

It's been ALL Trump ALL the time

[marlakay]

5. The republicans are happy

they got the guy in court they wanted and close to ending Obamacare. They are stripping most all good departments and taking away birth control.

they probably hate Trump but love he is taking the heat for the very stuff they would love to do.

[lunatica]

6. Of course they picked Trump

They probably never thought they could push him past the finish line, but they disrupted everything along the way. They're goal is to destroy our government, and so far they're doing a damn good job of it!

[jmg257]

7. Yep - youre wrong. He cleaned house in the primaries. He was something new, something different

and idiots loved him.

Carried him through the GE too. He was anti-establishment in a big way.

[rurallib]

10. would Putin have left something to fate to get his horse into the big race?

Putin would not have waited to see if he could get some traction out of the other candidates after they had won. Why should he when he already had Trump leveraged to the hilt. Had both hands on Trump's balls and was squeezing hard as it were. Putin knew he would get huge concessions from Trump.

Why would he leave it to the vagares of the primary system?

They wouldn't have had to have been so blatant as they were with the Dems - just some simple vote total changing at the voting machine level.

[jmg257]

12. He disliked Hillary immensely. Once he saw trump had a good chance to win (after doing well

in the primaries), then it was worth his effort to push as hard as they did.

Vote flipping if it happened at all, wasn't needed in the primaries.

[NewJeffCT]

8. the primaries weren't very close

it's not like it was a nailbiter decided at the very last primary - Trump was in the driver's seat from nearly the beginning.

[Warpy]

9. Did you see what was sharing the stage at their debates?

None of the first stringers bothered to get up there, it was an assortment of religious lunatics plus Kasich. Orange Hindenburg didn't have to work too hard to get the nomination, just whip up crowds of racist dirtbags.

[mreilly]

11. He won the primary because Republican voters are assholes

... and they picked the biggest asshole of the bunch since they identified with him. End of Story.

[mythology]

13. Considering that there is no evidence of vote flipping in the GE

It can't be used as evidence of something else. There is still no evidence any votes were flipped. Please stop jumping to absurd conclusions based on what you want to believe.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

14. Absolutely. See my recent postings on the individual "Gary Forbes" who was ubiquitious...

...during the primary campaign spreading disinformation in favor of Trump virally over social media. Trump's opponents--especially Cruz--were heavy targets of this disinformation.

(His name was actually Gary Pasquariello, and he's a former pianist/author/motivational speaker from New York.)


https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029136431

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027708476


I can't possibly believe that Forbes/Pasquariello was paying for this massive social media operation all by himself. Either someone in the Trump campaign was helping to fund and direct this guy, or someone overseas was doing it.

Trump himself retweeted "Gary Forbes" on several occasions (So did Ann Coulter):

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

An October 2015 article from the New York Times briefly mentions "Gary Forbes" and has this to say about him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/us/politics/donald-trump-twitter-use-campaign-2016.html?_r=0

"Not all of the outpouring is spontaneous. Supporters have organized themselves into online squads that defend Mr. Trump. A man identifying himself as Gary Forbes has recruited volunteer 'operatives”'on Twitter, sending out daily emails directing them to emphasize pro-Trump messages ('Trump’s immigration plan will protect thousands of women from abuse') and target rival candidates (“What Jeb must do for Fox Billionaire Murdoch’s $$$”). A project code-named “Magic Kingdom” took aim last week at Mr. Rubio, the senator from Florida, according to an email obtained by The New York Times."

"Asked about the effort, Mr. Forbes directed questions to the Trump campaign. A Trump spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, said the campaign had no affiliation with Mr. Forbes."

Interestingly enough, when I went back to check on one of the old "Gary Forbes" websites for Trump, there had to be something placed on that crashed my computer for over a day. So I think it's possible whoever was funding this guy didn't want people getting too curious.

And I highly doubt "Gary Forbes" was a unique case. There were probably hundreds of "Gary Forbes" out there on the campaign.