I know who I'm voting for

[unixknight]

Move over Gary Johnson.  Here's a candidate that actually matches my views better.

He's apparently supported by the Republican sector that absolutely won't vote for Trump.  That's a considerable support base.  Will it win him the election?  No, but if he can take even a couple of states then that will send a pretty clear message.

I'm in.

[anatess2]

Isn't that how we ended up with 8 years of Obama?  People sending a "pretty clear message" by sitting out the 2012 elections?

By the way, he doesn't have much of a platform yet... Hopefully, you're not just voting for him because he's Mormon.

Edited August 10, 2016 by anatess2

[mirkwood]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

 Hopefully, you're not just voting for him because he's Mormon.

No, that was why people voted for Mittens.  This guy actually appears to be a conservative.  I'm sure that is why unix chose him...assuming that unix is conservative.  I could be wrong...

Edited August 10, 2016 by mirkwood

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, mirkwood said:

No, that was why people voted for Mittens.  This guy actually appears to be a conservative.  I'm sure that is why unix chose him...assuming that unix is conservative.  I could be wrong...

If Republicans wanted a conservative, they would have picked Gingrich in 2012 or Cruz in 2016.  They didn't.  What does that tell you?

Edited August 10, 2016 by anatess2

[NightSG]

Wonder how much Hillary is paying him to spoil for her.

[Guest MormonGator]

49 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Wonder how much Hillary is paying him to spoil for her.

That's what perceptive republicans have noticed from the beginning. That Trump is a snake oil salesmen con artist who has duped a large amount of people. And like we all know, you can't convince people they've been duped. They have to figure it out for themselves. 

Remember that girl you "loved" when all your buddies told you she was a cheater? Then she broke your heart and left you miserable. Your buddies were correct.  

[Guest Godless]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

If Republicans wanted a conservative, they would have picked Gingrich in 2012 or Cruz in 2016.  They didn't.  What does that tell you?

This is just speculation on my part, but I'm going to say:

Gingrich - Not as charismatic as Mitt and a raging hypocrite on issues relating to conservative family values.

Cruz - A fair amount of conservatives seem to be disillusioned with the Tea Party, and Cruz is 100% a Tea Party candidate. Also, he has the personality of cow pie. 

Yes, when all is said and done, I truly believe that personality and charisma win elections more than anything else. That's why Bush was elected twice, as was Obama. That's why Trump dominated the primaries, and (ironically) that's why he will probably lose in November. HRC doesn't exactly ooze charm, but I believe that Trump's brash personality will ultimately win her the election. His personality and rhetoric are divisive and toxic, and that's going to make it nearly impossible for him to reach moderate and liberal voters. A lot of those voters are going to vote for Hillary, even if it's with great reluctance. And I have a feeling that many hardline conservatives will be taking a hard look at Johnson and McMullen.

[Guest MormonGator]

8 minutes ago, Godless said:

 

Cruz - A fair amount of conservatives seem to be disillusioned with the Tea Party, and Cruz is 100% a Tea Party candidate. Also, he has the personality of cow pie. 

 

Preach! When he talks I want to make sure my wallet is still in my pocket and when he smiles I want to call the FBI and make sure he isn't on their serial killer watch list. Guy creeps me out. 

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

If Republicans wanted a conservative, they would have picked Gingrich in 2012 or Cruz in 2016.  They didn't.  What does that tell you?

The trouble with this argument is, Trump's surrogates spent much of the primary pretending that Trump was a conservative; proclaiming that he had the endorsement of Jeff Sessions et al; that the other self-described conservatives were all phonies while Trump was the real deal, ad nauseum.  Any Trump supporter who made that kind of argument cannot now credibly suggest that his nomination represents a rejection of conservatism; unless said supporter also admits both a) that they were lying through their teeth before, and b) that nobody really believed their lies anyways.  At any rate, Trump won the smallest percentage of primary ballots cast, of any Republican nominee since Nixon in 1968; so the notion of his selection representing anything like the unified voice of the Republican party seems pretty thin. 

Interestingly, one of the reason a lot of ideological conservatives (like myself) opposed him, was that we suspected Trump and his surrogates were actually hostile to conservatism and would use a Trump victory to force the Republican party to the left.  Your making the argument I quote above, tends to suggest that our concerns were justified.

And, I agree with @Godless - Gingrich couldn't credibly talk about family values when he was--to quote a Facebook meme from 2012--"using daughters from his first wife to convince everyone that his second wife was lying about his third wife".  Notably, the only other modern Republican nominee whose proportion of primary votes won is almost as low as Trump's, was John McCain--who, war record aside, also had a pretty gruesome record of philandering and generally amoral behavior.  McCain couldn't rally conservative support to pull off a victory in the general even with the help of Sarah Palin, who strategically speaking (not looking at personal qualifications or subsequent history; but purely from a rally-the-base standpoint) was a much better VP pick than Pence is.

Edited August 11, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest MormonGator]

17 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

a lot of ideological conservatives (like myself)

All this time I pegged you as a die hard Obama-Hilliary supporter. You know, like @mirkwood

Edited August 11, 2016 by MormonGator

[mirkwood]

3 hours ago, MormonGator said:

All this time I pegged you as a die hard Obama-Hilliary supporter. You know, like @mirkwood

 

From gators facebook page profile picture:

 

From mirks facebook page profile picture:

 

 

 

[unixknight]

14 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Isn't that how we ended up with 8 years of Obama?  People sending a "pretty clear message" by sitting out the 2012 elections?

By the way, he doesn't have much of a platform yet... Hopefully, you're not just voting for him because he's Mormon.

I'm not, it's just icing on the cake. 

I like that he's pro-life, which puts him ahead of Gary Johnson for me.  I also like to read what he has to say because it resonates with me.

13 hours ago, mirkwood said:

No, that was why people voted for Mittens.  This guy actually appears to be a conservative.  I'm sure that is why unix chose him...assuming that unix is conservative.  I could be wrong...

Yeah I'm conservative on most issues, and yeah that's a big part of why I'm picking him.  Trump is no conservative.  The man gave hundreds of millions to Hillary's various campaigns over the years and I'm supposed to believe he's a bona fide representative of conservative values?  Yeah...

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, unixknight said:

I'm not, it's just icing on the cake. 

I like that he's pro-life, which puts him ahead of Gary Johnson for me.  I also like to read what he has to say because it resonates with me.

Yeah I'm conservative on most issues, and yeah that's a big part of why I'm picking him.  Trump is no conservative.  The man gave hundreds of millions to Hillary's various campaigns over the years and I'm supposed to believe he's a bona fide representative of conservative values?  Yeah...

The man is not a conservative ideologue.  He's an instinctive conservative - that is... he cannot define what conservative means but his principles are conservative.  Therefore, somebody else's definition of what it means to be conservative (a lot of which have no relationship to classic conservatism) does not sway him.  What makes sense is what sways him.  The disadvantage of this is - if the conservative solution you hold dear is an ideology that is yet unproven does not make sense to him, he will not support you on it.  The advantage of this is - if you truly believe that conservative solutions is what makes sense for the USA - then you will be sure that he will fight tooth and nail for it.  He will not do what people claim is conservative if such a solution is not good for the USA.

Now, remember, the guy that all Republicans hail as the poster child of conservatism is... Ronald Reagan.  I'm still shaking my head on that one.  Reagan... the guy who passed a sweeping pro-abortion bill years before Rowe vs Wade - that conservative.  The guy who passed sweeping amnesty while President - that conservative.  The guy who left office with more debt than he went in with - that conservative.

Now, point to any platform solution that Trump has made that you believe is not conservative - he just made an Economic speech a few days ago.  It's as conservative as you can get.

Now, Jeff Sessions, Sarah Palin - Tea Party conservative poster children - are Trumpsters.  Robert C. Oaks - retired USAF general, emeritus LDS General Authority, staunch conservative - Trumpster.  Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee - religious conservatives for Trump.  Newt Gingrich - lifelong policy conservative, big-time Trump supporter.  Judge Jeanine, Rudy Giulliani, Rush Limbaugh - champions of conservatism, personal friends of Trump - big time Trump supporters.  Mike Pence - poster child of social conservatism, even considered an extremist - is not just a Trump supporter, he's his VP.  All of these people agree - Trump will be a champion for our conservative values as he completely agrees with our proposed conservative solutions. 

Now, I'm going to ask you a very important question.  If JEB BUSH won the nomination - will you be looking to vote for McMullin?

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Now, point to any platform solution that Trump has made that you believe is not conservative - he just made an Economic speech a few days ago.  It's as conservative as you can get.

What candidates say in speeches is nigh irrelevant to me.  Hillary Clinton claims a lot of things in her speeches that ought to seem good but I wouldn't bet a rusty nail against a new car that she'll do any of it.

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Now, Jeff Sessions, Sarah Palin - Tea Party conservatives - are Trumpsters.  Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee - religious conservatives for Trump.  Newt Gingrich - lifelong policy conservative, big-time Trump supporter.  Judge Jeanine, Rudy Giulliani, Rush Limbaugh - champions of conservatism, personal friends of Trump - big time Trump supporters.  Mike Pence - poster child of social conservatism, even considered an extremist - is not just a Trump supporter, he's his VP.  All of these people agree - Trump will be a champion for our conservative values as he completely agrees with our proposed conservative solutions. 

I bet better than half of those people are not pushing for Trump so much as pushing against Clinton by supporting him.

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Now, I'm going to ask you a very important question.  If JEB BUSH won the nomination - will you be looking to vote for McMullin?

Yes, I probably would.  But then, he may be a bad example because I've never been impressed with him either.  Ted Cruz, on the other hand...

Edited August 11, 2016 by unixknight

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, unixknight said:

What candidates say in speeches is nigh irrelevant to me.  Hillary Clinton claims a lot of things in her speeches that ought to seem good but I wouldn't bet a rusty nail against a new car that she'll do any of it.

I bet better than half of those people are not pushing for Trump so much as pushing against Clinton by supporting him.

Yes, I probably would.

That will be true for Hillary as she will say anything to get elected.  Trump has not shown the same tendency.  He wouldn't be as hated as he is - even by the people in his party - if he does.  One thing Trump is well-known for is his attitude of - when I say I can do it, I'm gonna do it.  It's a matter of pride for him.  For example - he told the people in Iowa he's gonna give free helicopter rides in the State Fair.  The State Fair officials said no - we can't have helicopter rides in the fair... so Trump rented the open private field right across from the entrance to the State Fair and gave free rides anyway.  That's Trump.  Yes, he has no problem fighting dirty to get things done - like how he fought the city council in Palm Beach to put a taller-than-code flagpole on the Maralago by suing them for discrimination since there are other big estates with tall flagpoles in the area.  The council decided to fine them all as a solution to the charge.. Trump decided, well, I still want that flag, so he got dumptrucks to raise the ground level of the Maralago so he can put the council-approved flagpole and it would still rise above the Maralago roof.  Can do attitude.  That's what Trump is known for.  He says he'll do it, so he'll do it - by any legal means necessary.

No.  I didn't include names that are only pushing Trump because Cruz lost.  These guys - including Robert C. Oaks (I added after you quoted) - have been supporting Trump in the primaries.  Rush Limbaugh has a no-endorsement policy, but his program has promoted both Cruz and Trump and not anybody else.

Now, your vote for Jeb Bush just blew your conservative reason out of the water.  Jeb Bush and the Bush family are tepid conservatives - even more tepid than Romney.  Jeb is in the same level as McCain.  Trump's platform is closer to Cruz's conservative platform than Bush's is.

 

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

16 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Now, your vote for Jeb Bush just blew your conservative reason out of the water.  Jeb Bush and the Bush family are tepid conservatives - even more tepid than Romney.  Jeb is in the same level as McCain.  Trump's platform is closer to Cruz's conservative platform than Bush's is.

You asked me if I'd still vote for McMullin, to which I said yes.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, unixknight said:

You asked me if I'd still vote for McMullin, to which I said yes.

Oh!  I apologize.  Did you vote for both Bush's, McCain, Romney in the past elections?

[unixknight]

@anatess2 No worries. 

I supported GWB both times, though I agree that he was a tepid Conservative who never once used his veto power to curtail Democrat activity.  I liked McCain until I realized he was pretty Rhino-ish too.  I supported Romney though I didn't like that he'd already set a precedent for Government healthcare in MA.

[anatess2]

8 minutes ago, unixknight said:

@anatess2 No worries. 

I supported GWB both times, though I agree that he was a tepid Conservative who never once used his veto power to curtail Democrat activity.  I liked McCain until I realized he was pretty Rhino-ish too.  I supported Romney though I didn't like that he'd already set a precedent for Government healthcare in MA.

There you go.

I was for Keyes in 2000 but had no problem with W., Gingrich twice - I have a big problem with McCain, I was okay with Romney, then Ben Carson - I didn't like Cruz, I'm ok with Trump, and went full Trumpster after the AIPAC speech.

Full disclaimer:  I'm not American - I'm Filipino.  My decisions are colored by America's impact on the Philippines.

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

The thing to realize here is that the quality of candidates hasn't been great for the last several election cycles.  I'm tired of it.  If the Republicans and Democrats want my vote they're going to have to do a lot better than they've been.  I said I supported those guys.  I didn't say I voted for them.  GWB I did vote for the first time. 

Since then, I haven't voted but I regret that now.  I should have at least voted Libertarian.

[anatess2]

12 minutes ago, unixknight said:

The thing to realize here is that the quality of candidates hasn't been great for the last several election cycles.  I'm tired of it.  If the Republicans and Democrats want my vote they're going to have to do a lot better than they've been.  I said I supported those guys.  I didn't say I voted for them.  GWB I did vote for the first time. 

Since then, I haven't voted but I regret that now.  I should have at least voted Libertarian.

Vote Trump.  He feels the same way as you do.  That's why he registered Independent while Bush was in office.  And that's why he's running now.

The mark of a true conservative is not the guy who is a political conservative ideologue.  The mark of a true conservative is the guy who doesn't even know what being a conservative means but does conservative things because he thinks it's the right way to do things.  This will be the guy who will not get stuck in one side because of some impractical ideology.  This is a guy who will not care if it "doesn't sound conservative and will sink me in the next elections" if it is useless to the problem of the day.  This will be the guy who can bring 2 sides together and enact solutions that makes sense.

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

I won't vote for Trump.  While I understand your arguments and I see where you're coming from, I have deep reservations about his personal character and approach.  If you feel like he's the best choice then by all means give him your vote, but I can't and I won't.

[anatess2]

32 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I won't vote for Trump.  While I understand your arguments and I see where you're coming from, I have deep reservations about his personal character and approach.  If you feel like he's the best choice then by all means give him your vote, but I can't and I won't.

Remember - he is running a campaign with ZERO (that is not an exagerration) political handlers.  Every single one of the candidates in the 2 major parties while I've been alive hire political handlers.  Rubio, for example, got exposed by Christie during the debates and then in his going completely out of character in the campaign trail as ADVICED by his political handlers.  But even Christie and Gingrich - the 2 most outspoken extemporaneous speakers in the Republican party are heavily handled.  Hillary has 80 people (not an exaggeration) whose only job is to research and prepare talking points - speeches, statements, interview answers, etc..  This makes politicians sound very polished and politically correct.  But then, you don't really know for sure that when the doors are closed to the mics if that's how they are behind it.

The disadvantage to all that political correctness is that the press has made it the gold standard of political discourse.  So much so that W was effectively painted as a stupid idiot because he can't get rid of his Texan speech cadence.  CADENCE - not even the words used.  Sarah Palin got painted as a joke of a bumbling idiot.  Romney got painted as a sexist bigot with his contraception/binders of women and 47% statements... and these are people with a slew of political handlers!

Trump sticks his foot in his mouth a lot because, 1.) this is his first foray into political campaigns, 2.) he decided he will fight political correctness by going extemporaneous all the way with ZERO handlers.  3.) he decided to blast through the liberal press by being larger and louder than they are, talking to anybody anytime all the time.  4.) He decided not to take big donor money - limiting his grassroots efforts, 5.) He decided not only to fight Democrats but to fight politically entrenched Republicans as well.  So you get the entire Trump public personality - bombastic, loud, New York slugfest style and the press has a whole slew of ammo to wage their character assassination war with. 

Now, I will posit to you that when you're facing the enormous, well-oiled Clinton political machine... the Romney/Bush high-brow style is not going to win.  2012 was Romney's to lose.  And he managed to lose it by being the gracious competitor in the last 2 debates.  That's not how you win against Clinton.  You need the bombastic, loud, take no prisoners personality to break through the press protecting Clinton and then breaking through the Democratic wall, then break through Clinton.  And Trump knows this.  Intimately.  Which is why he runs his campaign the way he is running it.

You can vote for whoever you want (I can't vote), but, when you're looking at people's resumes, you don't just chose the guy who you think is a great guy.  You chose the guy who you think can MAKE THINGS HAPPEN in the the next 4-8 years.

And that's all I'm gonna say about that.

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

12 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The trouble with this argument is, Trump's surrogates spent much of the primary pretending that Trump was a conservative; proclaiming that he had the endorsement of Jeff Sessions et al....

Nobody in their right minds would pretend that Trump was a conservative in the same manner that nobody in their right minds would pretend that Romney/Bush (all 3 of them) are conservatives.  Everybody with a microphone agrees that if you want to pick a conservative ideologue, you pick Cruz.  Now, being a conservative and being a conservative CHAMPION are 2 different things.  Jeff Sessions, et. al., endorsed Trump over Cruz not because he is a conservative ideologue but that he can CHAMPION conservative solutions.  Cruz was too rigid and self-serving using his conservative ideology as a bludgeon.

Edited August 11, 2016 by anatess2

[unixknight]

20 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

You can vote for whoever you want (I can't vote), but, when you're looking at people's resumes, you don't just chose the guy who you think is a great guy.  You chose the guy who you think can MAKE THINGS HAPPEN in the the next 4-8 years.

I agree with just about everything you said in your post, individually.  The thing is none of it makes me want to vote for him.  I agree that handlers are what create the veneer that most people see.  To be honest though, as much as I admire Trump going after the press openly and directly, I think it's made him careless and it's beginning to hurt him.

I happen to think with McMullin's experience he can get things done.  My biggest concern with Trump is that he's a successful businessman.  He knows the world of business well and is obviously good at it.  The problem is that the Office of the President doesn't work like a business.  It's the same reason military generals  tend to become lackluster Presidents.  The political arena doesn't work the same as the military.

That said, if I felt more comfortable with Trump's judgment and character I'd vote for him in the hope that he could successfully transition from the business environment to the political. 

The problem Trump and his supporters have is that we're in a new phase of the campaign now.  What worked in the primary phase isn't going to work so well now, and he hasn't changed tactics to adapt.  I think it's going to hurt him badly.