Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which of these bozos do you feel looks like a 'saint?'
Anyone she stands next to will also look extremely inexperienced, and once they get into foreign policy, she will bury her opponent. She simply has way more experience and knowledge than any of her opponents. She might actually bury them with domestic policy as well. She's very experienced and very smart, and they may be smart, but they are not experienced.
This is going to be evident. Rubio knows a lot about foreign policy, but is too hawkish--he sounds harsh. Cruz is in lala land carpet bombing god knows where, and Trump is hoping Putin will deal with Assad, so he only has to put 'boots on the ground' and steal oil from assorted Mideast countries. He hopes he doesn't have to deal with the nuclear triad until he figures out what it is.
The fact is we need a good foreign policy president who also has a grasp of domestic policy. The only one who fits the bill in all seriousness is Clinton--she's got more experience than any of them--whether you hate her guts or not.
She also knows how to work with Congress and get things done. Trump does not have a clue how to deal with that animal, and thinks the House GOP is like doing one of his hotel deals. He did have a lot of business failures where the deal did not get done--couldn't get into Vegas casinos, failed in AC casinos, vodka, airlines or universities.
VP could be Julian Castro (face of the future). Sarah Palin will return to obscurity as tea queen and Christie--will mercifully go back to NJ.
Sorry, Hillary's record as Secretary of State was a dismal one. She opened the way for ISIS. I will not vote for an interventionist and I will not vote for Bernie. Libertarian Party again are write in Ron Paul.
OP you're wrong and way off base. If the Republican party wants the White House they need Trump. Without Trump the next President will be a Democrat, (most likely Hillary),. If and its a big IF, the Republican party is smart they will back Trump. Rubio and Cruz cannot be Hillary or even Sanders. Here's the major flaw with the Republican party. They have failed to evolve. I say all the time that as time goes on we have to change and we have to evolve. Its like the old man that goes to the store and counts out change to the cashier and holds up the line while everyone behind him is waiting to pay by swiping plastic. For the most part, change and evolution are good things. The Republican party, at least many of them, are still stuck in the pre-1970 days of a white-Christian-male-country club dominated society. Those days are over!!! While that mind set might work in some parts of the country, (particularly rural parts), its not mainstream. America is no longer a white country. I agree with Obama when he said that we are not a Christian nation. The USA has become and is becoming more of a melting pot. The far right ideas preached by wack-a-doos like Rick Santorum, Ted Cruz and Rush Limbaugh are out of touch with the mainstream. While Trump doesn't have a lot of support among black voters, I predict that he will get some of Bernie's supporters. Even though Trump is a wealthy S.O.B. he wants to do away with free trade policies, increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans and stop the flood of illegals coming in from Mexico. All those things sit well with and favor the middle class. If I were Trump, (predicting he gets the nominee) I would pick Sanders as a running mate. remember Sanders is technically an Independent. The way I see it, despite Bill Clinton's presidency being the eight best years this country had, at least in my lifetime, there are some major question marks surrounding Hillary. For one, Benghazi. That whole ordeal is far from settled and with all the stuff coming out about the emails and even a documentary (13 Hours), its far from over, and there's a possibility SHE may have committed a crime herself. Two, despite claiming to be for the middle class Hillary takes a lot of money from Wall St. Three, Hillary opposed the Keystone Pipeline which would have created thousands of jobs, mostly jobs for people middle class the same group that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump claim to be for. If the Republicans want to shoot themselves in the foot, go ahead and screw Trump and let Rubio or Cruz run against Hillary. Neither one will beat her. Or, Trump has enough money, let the Republicans screw him over, the party splits and now we have three major political parties. Could happen.
If you steal the nomination from Trump the nominee will be tainted and will have a very difficult time getting Trump's supporters out in November.
My money is on Hitlery. I do think Rubio is the only one that can beat her. Trump threw away the Hispanic vote in order to stand out from the crowd early and that will kill him in a general election.
Thanks, but isn't that just what disgruntled Hillary supporters said in 08? "Nominate Obama and we won't vote for him?" And then that didn't happen in any significant numbers.
That's said all the time in Primary campaigns. Nominate such and such, and so and so's supporters will never vote for such and such.
At the end of the day, there is simply no bridge between the two where it makes sense to go from supporting Trump to supporting Hillary.
Hillary has already won the president seat. its all rigged, its her time, it doesnt matter how many votes she gets, they have already been counted. she will win by 51.2% just like how the last four elections was rigged
Not wanting to nominate Trump, then for the above reasons, Rubio will be the strongest claimant at the Convention.
Rubio nominates Kasich as his Vice Presidential nominee.
Wildly popular in his home state, not only does he take Ohio for the ticket, but he likely makes things competitive in Pennsylvania.
Result: Democrats lose one single lesser swing state and they lose the farm.
So, what do you think?
You're talking about a brokered convention and handing the nomination to the guy who didn't win the most delegates. That is a sure fire way to divide the party and causes irreparable friction between Rubio and Trump supporters.
In that scenario, a lot of Trump supporters will stay home or even vote for Hillary. Rubio would be a tainted candidate. And there is no evidence that the VP choice influence how a state vote.
So no, your case is very unrealistic. If Rubio is to be the nominee he need to do it the traditional way - by winning.
.
Thanks, but isn't that just what disgruntled Hillary supporters said in 08? "Nominate Obama and we won't vote for him?" And then that didn't happen in any significant numbers.
That's said all the time in Primary campaigns. Nominate such and such, and so and so's supporters will never vote for such and such.
At the end of the day, there is simply no bridge between the two where it makes sense to go from supporting Trump to supporting Hillary.
Different scenario, for one, Hillary lost the primary to Obama. If Hillary won the most delegates but Obama got the nomination, then you'd have seen a much different reaction from the voters.
Second, many Hillary supporters also like Obama.
Third, Trump supporters can simply stay home and not vote.
.
Hillary has already won the president seat. its all rigged, its her time, it doesnt matter how many votes she gets, they have already been counted. she will win by 51.2% just like how the last four elections was rigged
And she did so with the assistance of Donald Trump!
You're talking about a brokered convention and handing the nomination to the guy who didn't win the most delegates. That is a sure fire way to divide the party and causes irreparable friction between Rubio and Trump supporters.
In that scenario, a lot of Trump supporters will stay home or even vote for Hillary. Rubio would be a tainted candidate. And there is no evidence that the VP choice influence how a state vote.
So no, your case is very unrealistic. If Rubio is to be the nominee he need to do it the traditional way - by winning.
.
If they took the nomination from Trump (because he did not win it under the rules) and picked someone, they would have made the calculation that Trump was going to lose the Presidency and would take scads of down ballot Republicans down with him. In that case, just writing off the White House for four years would be the better strategy. Really, moderate Republicans and the moneyed establishment have no quarrel with Hillary anywhere near as severe as they have been spinning things. In the long run, the party would recover and probably regain some of what it used to stand for before the southern strategy changed everything.
Thanks, but isn't that just what disgruntled Hillary supporters said in 08? "Nominate Obama and we won't vote for him?" And then that didn't happen in any significant numbers.
That's said all the time in Primary campaigns. Nominate such and such, and so and so's supporters will never vote for such and such.
At the end of the day, there is simply no bridge between the two where it makes sense to go from supporting Trump to supporting Hillary.
Obama was not nominated as a result of a broken convention. Trump is the very definition of a RINO. Most won't turn to Hillary but many will stay home Election Day.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He hopes he doesn't have to deal with the nuclear triad until he figures out what it is.
