2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWow ... This here ...
http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/07/nomination_of_trump_the_bigot.htmlBrent Larkin leans about as far to the right as a person can, and still remain up-right. Here's his take on trump:
There are precious few Republicans Hillary Clinton can beat Nov. 8.
Truth is, there may be only one: the mean-spirited bigot the party of Lincoln is about to nominate for president.
As bad a candidate as Clinton is — and the political baggage weighing on her candidacy is enormous — Donald Trump is immeasurably worse.
I get the stuff about voter anger and frustration, but fascism isn't the answer.
And, it get worse from there.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
sheshe2
(83,758 posts)Larkin, shredded Trump!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)sheshe2
(83,758 posts)They all seem to want to dump trump.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)by days end, the comment section will look like a trump rally.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)You even had Southern "good old boys" supporting that Wall Street used car salesman.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)that there are some fairly prominent right wing people, or at least clearly conservative people, who have rejected Trump for his bigotry. I tend to associate conservatives and the right wing with bigotry.
The past few years have taught me that there's a lot of bigotry among self-described progressives and / or self-described leftists as well.
I'm not planning on voting for any republicans any time soon, but it's just kind of fascinating. There's blatant bigotry coming from Trump, going back many years. Good that some republicans are rejecting it publicly.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Indeed, Cleveland is very diverse.
Response to lovemydog (Reply #3)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Wounded Bear
(58,653 posts)It's not really that they are rejecting him because of his bigotry, they are rejecting him because he is exposing and expressing the latent bigotry the party has been suffering from since Nixon and his Southern Strategy. They just like to hide it better.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)is that when the smoke clears, a lot of the GOP will be force to admit that their principles were cheap, cheap enough for trump to buy. Those that did not, will never ever be able to work well with those that did. In other words, the elephant, even if he gets up from this, will always have a limp.
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Blanks
(4,835 posts)
She has too much baggage or perceived baggage. I'm afraid that a number of the candidates could have beaten Clinton, which is why I hope Trump is the nominee. I'm not bashing Hillary, but living in a red state, I realize how deeply people dislike her which is still no excuse to risk our country with someone like Trump.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)are in the uholy alliance between anti-statist, wealth-serving economic extremists and social and religious extremists. They are so far out there that even their own extremist base is rebelling against what it supported, and they've repelled large numbers of previous long-time supporters.
Looking at the GOP leadership and candidates, extremism seems to have a great deal of overlap with clinical mental disorders. Trump is the most dysfunctional, but he is not the only one of the candidates who is diagnosable. And for those who aren't bad enough to fit criteria for formal diagnosis, clinicians see serious problems with people who exhibit strong "traits of" disorders.
In any case, just the extreme ideologies and records of most, a true reflection of how extremely far right the Republican Party leadership has moved, were also gifts to the Democrats.
Don't forget that our wonderful President Obama actually barely managed to win the Democratic primary, in spite of running against an opponent severely handicapped by being the first seriously threatening woman candidate for president, but then he went on to win the presidency against Romney very handily.
In spite of the tendency of conservatives to gather behind their eventual candidate, no matter how seemingly undesirable, Obama was greatly advantaged by rejection of what the Republican Party had become and campaigned on, and so will Hillary be.
AntiBank
(1,339 posts)but luckily, the GOP base is too looney tunes to allow that to happen
Blanks
(4,835 posts)The republicans haven't won with a candidate lacking executive branch experience - like ever.
Still, the democrats (including the president) are going to rally behind their candidate, any democratic candidate was going to be tough to beat.
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Trump is exposing them in blunt terms which some GOP are angry about
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)he, like most "big city" conservatives (read: conservatives living/operating in a highly diverse environment), is not accepting of overtly racist, or even dog whistled, stuff. He wouldn't last long in that kind of environment, especially in journalism, if the He did.
He is, however, likely to overlook the racist effect of the facially neutral policy he supported and wrote about.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)a salesman, and he has a political party buying his pitch.
They just don't like being identified for who they are.
Let's hope they don't like what they see in the mirror.
However, I'm in Alabama. I haven't heard any complaints. 
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Assuming that a President with an approval rate at ~56% will be able to "hand off" the office to a well funded candidate from the same party....
It may be their plan to basically throw this one in order to destroy their Tea Party uprising once and for all, then have surge elections in 2018 and 2020. Keeping in mind how important the 2020 census and Gerrymandering is for them to keep control of The House. Holding the Presidency for a 4th consecutive term could be tough. Tougher than this year appears to be shaping up.
I know it sounds nuts, but we are talking about Conservatives here. The one fly in that ointment is the Supreme Court nomination(s). Our winning the White House in 2016 will help swing the court for a long time to come. Maybe they were not planning on Fat Tony kicking the bucket and now are simply to far along to change course.
OnDoutside
(19,956 posts)getting it in the neck.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)2% more of the electorate will be Latino in 2020 and 1% more AA/Asian/LGBT .... the share of angry whites will reduce by the same percentage.
Unless the republican party makes some fundamental changes, they are doomed till as far as the eye can see.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)He's more predictable.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Cruz is more coherent and is a Harvard law graduate. Republicans would not have had nausea or vertigo in rallying around him. He can put eloquent sentences together, is dynamic and charismatic. Cruz was the one I worried about the most.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)He is the governor of Ohio, a diverse and not particularly ultra-conservative state, for a reason ... he knows how to speak to large segments of the population. He knows how to say "yes" to conservatives, without causing minority unrest, because he knows how to say "No" to conservatives, and visa-versa.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Kasich doesn't inspire the base with bigotry and xenophobia to come out in large numbers and vote for him. Trump and Cruz were dangerous in that regard.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)that he will be begging for a coma
Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)It's swell that a few repubs, like all sentient beings with whom I can relate in any way, will admit Trump's not fit to be president. Still an always, they are blind to anything but their own party's concerted smears of her.
pscot
(21,024 posts)It's a deep, self-inflicted wound. It raises serious questions in voters minds about our candidate's judgement.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)pscot
(21,024 posts)Given the Clinton's history with the press and the Republican attack machine, setting up that private server was not very smart. We're lucky the Republicans are nominating Trump. If they'd settled on Rubio or Kasich I think we'd be in real trouble in November. As it is, the polls are disturbingly close.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)I find fault with going on the defensive about it.
If Hillary had gone on the offensive, it would have sold better.
In her shoes, I'd have said, "The state department's archaic system was insecure and inefficient, resulting in the use of a private email by my two predecessors. It was more reliable and secure than the state department infrastructure by a few multiples. It was done to advance the business of the American people with greater efficiency. Some may say it was the wrong thing to do in hindsight but at the time, it was the right thing to do for the American people's business around the world."
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)work harder being critical of Democrats than working to defeat republicans.
ETA: And, I don't mind saying so.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)A deep, self inflicted wound is having someone murdered who opposes you. Or engaging in a ponzi scheme or doing something else to swindle lots of people out of lots of money, i.e. Trump University.
Having your own email server? On a scale of 1-10 that is a 1 or 2.
randome
(34,845 posts)And there you have exactly what is wrong with the GOP: willful blindness. Even though Larkin is correct to sound the alarm about Trump, he is as blind as the rest of them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]
