You naysayers still think Trump doesn't have X-over appeal?

[Rooster]

Back last summer there was a political topic that came up where I wondered how much crossover appeal Trump had with Democrats. At the time I wanted to see a poll where Dem voters would be asked if they could support him. I made the assertion that he would pull a lot of Democrats over to the Republican side, but there was some scoffing that that would happen. After seeing what he did in Massachusetts where he got 20,000 Dems to switch sides, do you still think he doesn't have much appeal to the Left?

[smackaholic]

He definitely has crossover appeal and will get more from the Berniestas. As for the Massholes, I believe a good number of them were Trump fans, but, I wonder if a decent number were Dems wanting to help Trump to the nomination figuring he is easier to beat. I think there are much more of the former than the latter.

[Diego in Seattle]

The crossing over might have had more to do with dems feeling that Clinton was already the pre-selected nominee for their party & wanting to vote where they might make a difference.

[smackaholic]

The crossing over might have had more to do with dems feeling that Clinton was already the pre-selected nominee for their party & wanting to vote where they might make a difference.

That would be the butthurt Berniestas. There are a surprising number of folks, mainly blue collar types that will go with the D if Bernie is not an option. And it is looking like he is not an option.

[BSmack]

There is a group of people in this country who want to vote for someone who will kick the establishment straight in the nuts. Trump has those people convinced he will do just that.

[Dr_Phibes]

Not a Yank, I'm a Red. He is by definition, revolutionary

[Diego in Seattle]

The crossing over might have had more to do with dems feeling that Clinton was already the pre-selected nominee for their party & wanting to vote where they might make a difference.

That would be the butthurt Berniestas.

Wrong. The media was anointing Clinton long before Sanders hinted at running.

[Rooster]

Moar:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... ocrats.php

[Felix]

Trump has those people convinced

trump has lots of people convinced about a lot of things, but I've never seen a candidate who's not being held accountable for past actions....yeah great business guy who's had so many business failures it's mind numbing....but people seem to overlook that....they overlook tons of stuff when it comes to trump

it will be an unmitigated disaster if that fucknut is elected, I'm telling you now....

[mvscal]

I wonder if a decent number were Dems wanting to help Trump to the nomination figuring he is easier to beat.

In a tight primary race? I doubt there has been much of that.

[smackaholic]

I wonder if a decent number were Dems wanting to help Trump to the nomination figuring he is easier to beat.

In a tight primary race? I doubt there has been much of that.

Good point, as the dem primary in taxachusetts was very close. Can't imagine there were many Berniestas that were willing to pass up a vote for comrade Bernie.

[BSmack]

The so called "reasonable Republicans" are so week they can't even finish a hit when they start one. Epic fail Rubio the Explorer.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/yup ... epic-fraud

[LTS TRN 2]

I think it makes sense. Consider that the Democrats know that Huillary is essentially odious, and she can certainly be beaten by Rubio, or even Cruz. But, they figure, surely if something like Trump--an absolute caricature of a cartoon, an impossibly over-the-top blustering buffoon--is the GOP nominee, well somehow a sort of sanity reflex will kick in and she can win.

This latest farce of a debate certainly took this whole charade to a new low, and it wasn't just the Donald desperately reassuring us that his penis size is "no problem...guaranteed!" Oh no, the absolute nadir of American presidential election debate was reached when Trump responded to Rubio in purest sixth-grade playground taunt, "Okay little Marco.." At this point there's no point in even trying to discuss policies or plans. The entire fiasco that is or was the GOP is basically defunct and dead in the water.

[smackaholic]

I think it makes sense. Consider that the Democrats know that Huillary is essentially odious, and she can certainly be beaten by Rubio, or even Cruz. But, they figure, surely if something like Trump--an absolute caricature of a cartoon, an impossibly over-the-top blustering buffoon--is the GOP nominee, well somehow a sort of sanity reflex will kick in and she can win.

This latest farce of a debate certainly took this whole charade to a new low, and it wasn't just the Donald desperately reassuring us that his penis size is "no problem...guaranteed!" Oh no, the absolute nadir of American presidential election debate was reached when Trump responded to Rubio in purest sixth-grade playground taunt, "Okay little Marco.." At this point there's no point in even trying to discuss policies or plans. The entire fiasco that is or was the GOP is basically defunct and dead in the water.

Who stole turd's password? That was a fairly coherrent post.

I have thouroughly enjoyed Trump's complete prison raping of our PC culture, but, it can be overplayed and he really did last night. "Little Marco" might have been funny at one time, but when you pull it out as a response to Marco's stating that all he has is physical insults, you look like a complete fukking retard.

I

[Rooster]

I know, right? What's next, LTS pulling a Trump and declaring that his conspiracy ideas require some flexibility to make them work.

As for the Republicans being in disarray, I wholeheartedly disagree. This is most healthy thing for the party since Reagan tipped over the apple cart. Contrast what is happening on the Right with the careening of the Left into socialism and what's going on in the GOP is unbelievably healthy.

[LTS TRN 2]

You contrast the "Left" with the GOP, so you really mean the Democrat party. Okay, but how can you possibly suggest that it's moved to the left? Hillary? You think Hillary is a liberal? She's a shill of Wall St., the pentagon, AIPAC, and the insurance industries. She's harshly opposed to any whistle blowers like Snowden.

That Bernie's message is well received makes perfect sense. What part of it can you refute?

[smackaholic]

You contrast the "Left" with the GOP, so you really mean the Democrat party. Okay, but how can you possibly suggest that it's moved to the left? Hillary? You think Hillary is a liberal? She's a shill of Wall St., the pentagon, AIPAC, and the insurance industries. She's harshly opposed to any whistle blowers like Snowden.

That Bernie's message is well received makes perfect sense. What part of it can you refute?

The part where socialism, when practiced by more than a few dozen northern euros, is, without exception, a really bad idea.

[BSmack]

We are already practicing socialism and have been since the founding of the Republic. The only debate we are having is about the price.

[smackaholic]

We are already practicing socialism and have been since the founding of the Republic. The only debate we are having is about the price.

Over the last century, we have had increasing amounts of socialism. Most of it, particularly the welfare part has been an unmitigated disaster.

[War Wagon]

Since 1984, my wife has been canceling my vote and I hers. I told her that if Trump were the nominee, I would not vote.

Looks like this year her vote will not be canceled and better yet my daughter is upping the ante.

<---- fold

[The Big Pickle]

[Screw_Michigan]

Good thing Pikkkle's back. Now we have someone to post stale memes no one gives a fuck about.

[LTS TRN 2]

You contrast the "Left" with the GOP, so you really mean the Democrat party. Okay, but how can you possibly suggest that it's moved to the left? Hillary? You think Hillary is a liberal? She's a shill of Wall St., the pentagon, AIPAC, and the insurance industries. She's harshly opposed to any whistle blowers like Snowden.

That Bernie's message is well received makes perfect sense. What part of it can you refute?

The part where socialism, when practiced by more than a few dozen northern euros, is, without exception, a really bad idea.

Whats you don't seem to appreciate is that the "socialism" you fear and despise as you champion American "free-market" economics is now fully Corporate Socialism. That should be your proper enemy and target, not food stamps.

http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-john ... -destroys/

and

http://www.asepp.com/corporate-socialis ... f-america/

[Left Seater]

yeah great business guy who's had so many business failures it's mind numbing....but people seem to overlook that....they overlook tons of stuff when it comes to trump

Still far less to overlook than Killary.

[Diego in Seattle]

yeah great business guy who's had so many business failures it's mind numbing....but people seem to overlook that....they overlook tons of stuff when it comes to trump

Still far less to overlook than Killary.

And that's the problem I see with most people these days. There are far too many people who cannot admit that their candidate's shit smells. There's a reason why people call elections "the lessor of two evils," and this year that saying is very popular. People need to stop saying "Oh yeah, well look at so and so!"

[Smackie Chan]

There's a reason why people call elections "the lessor of two evils," and this year that saying is very popular. People need to stop saying "Oh yeah, well look at so and so!"

Why should they stop saying that? You admit that we're voting for the lesser of two evils, which implies that no matter who wins, little benefit will result. So what needs to be considered is who will do the least amount of damage, and to do that, comparisons among the candidates need to be made. When someone claims that one candidate is bad, opponents naturally will point out how the alternative is worse. Same as if someone claims a candidate is good, opponents will naturally show how the alternative is better. How else should voters distinguish among the candidates to make an informed decision?

[Diego in Seattle]

There's a reason why people call elections "the lessor of two evils," and this year that saying is very popular. People need to stop saying "Oh yeah, well look at so and so!"

Why should they stop saying that? You admit that we're voting for the lesser of two evils, which implies that no matter who wins, little benefit will result. So what needs to be considered is who will do the least amount of damage, and to do that, comparisons among the candidates need to be made. When someone claims that one candidate is bad, opponents naturally will point out how the alternative is worse. Same as if someone claims a candidate is good, opponents will naturally show how the alternative is better. How else should voters distinguish among the candidates to make an informed decision?

For me the bigger question is whether those candidates who have done wrong, have they learned from their mistakes/actions? If someone does something wrong but can't acknowledge as such, how can we voters know that such a candidate has learned or reformed from their mistakes/actions?

[Smackie Chan]

For me the bigger question is whether those candidates who have done wrong, have they learned from their mistakes/actions? If someone does something wrong but can't acknowledge as such, how can we voters know that such a candidate has learned or reformed from their mistakes/actions?

This is a different discussion from what you originally tried to argue so I'll accept your concession. As for what you're trying to argue here, many assumptions must be made and it still is a minor point in determining who should get one's vote, imo. First assumption is that anything a candidate says is believable. More importantly, however, is the criterion you seem to be advocating as being key to determining for whom your vote should be cast. If a candidate errs and admits the mistake, how does that show that the candidate has learned anything from the mistake? Simple acknowledgment of the error? Sure, it demonstrates some degree of humility and insight, which I agree are good qualities to have. Assuming all other factors are equal, this could be a deciding factor. But there are other far more important factors to be considered and compared to the other candidates on which the decision should be made.

[Goober McTuber]

Who stole turd's password? That was a fairly coherrent post.

Something you can only dream of.