Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would Rubio, Cruz, Bush or any other Republican have won the 2016 Election?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Sort of like one of those maps showing the spread of an infectious disease.
    Yeah, we should be blue. The commie-socialist democrats should be red, that would match better the places where they are rioting and destroying.

    Dis-ease is coming to some ...
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Skoblin View Post
      Bush and Rubio might have won, but then again it would have been like voting for a Hillary with a penis...
      Best post of the day.

      Trump energized the voters, plain and simple.
      I'll tell you, I wasn't sure at the end, he flubbed the debates so badly It was like watching him phone it in.

      But none of the above would have won because the same people who blew MCain and Romney off would have had the same reaction to a Bush, a Rubio or a Cruz.

      Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
      Im not so sure about this one. I think the main issue was that the USA was not ready for a female POTUS just yet.
      You mean, like what I said 8 years ago... about America being far more ready for a Black man in office than a Woman of any sort?
      Yeah, it did occur to me.
      After all, Black (free) men have had the vote in the USA since day one, but Women have only had it since 1920.

      I'm starting to hate you more than ever, considering how much lame crap you have filled these boards with over the months. If you can make good points like that, why don't you do it more often?
      "Why is the Rum gone?"

      -Captain Jack

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
        Sort of like one of those maps showing the spread of an infectious disease.
        Wrong, it's the shrinking of a disease.
        "A foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse." Ulysses S. Grant

        Comment


        • #34
          If Hilary can't beat a man who mouthed off and offended people and even rubbed members in his own party the wrong way then I see no way she can beat Bush, Rubio, and Cruz.
          “When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun'.”
          ― Groucho Marx

          Comment


          • #35
            No, I don't think any other Republican could have managed this upset. Why?

            Because what was needed to counter the Left wasn't a candidate that was polite, articulate, and willing to compromise. What was needed was an in-your-face @$$hole who would go to the mat with the Left (aka Hillary). Trump was.
            You saw the backlash. He was vilified every way the Progressive Left could manage. That just made his support and the determination of his backers grow. The election became not about Hillary being elected but "Stop Trump!" from the Democrats and Progressive Left.
            They did what they always do when faced with real opposition: They became the biggest bunch of jerks and @$$es on the planet. They did themselves in because Trump was an in-your-face, blowhard, say whatever, candidate.

            Against the Left, nice guys finish last.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
              Yeah, we should be blue. The commie-socialist democrats should be red, that would match better the places where they are rioting and destroying.

              Dis-ease is coming to some ...
              I always thought we should have made the GOP green - they're so sick and disgusted by so much, it seems fitting - and the Dems could have been white, to reflect how there's nothing to their policies at all.

              And we could make the Greens Blue, just to annoy them.

              That would leave the Libertarians to be a nice rainbow color, because like rainbows they're beautiful but they don't really exist...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Checkertail20 View Post
                If Hilary can't beat a man who mouthed off and offended people and even rubbed members in his own party the wrong way then I see no way she can beat Bush, Rubio, and Cruz.
                NO: Trump was elected by the Deplorables;these would not have voted for establishment Republicans as Jebb,etc;the Deplorables did not vote for McCain or Romney .

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                  Yeah, we should be blue. The commie-socialist democrats should be red, that would match better the places where they are rioting and destroying.

                  Dis-ease is coming to some ...
                  Is confusing looking at the political map. Over here the Cinservatives are blue and the socialists are red.
                  "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Checkertail20 View Post
                    If Hilary can't beat a man who mouthed off and offended people and even rubbed members in his own party the wrong way then I see no way she can beat Bush, Rubio, and Cruz.
                    I think that's why Trump won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan (if the results are confirmed).

                    Prior to Wisconsin being called for Trump, I was 100% in agreement with what you posted.
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      No, I don't think any other Republican could have managed this upset. Why?

                      Because what was needed to counter the Left wasn't a candidate that was polite, articulate, and willing to compromise. What was needed was an in-your-face @$$hole who would go to the mat with the Left (aka Hillary). Trump was.
                      You saw the backlash. He was vilified every way the Progressive Left could manage. That just made his support and the determination of his backers grow. The election became not about Hillary being elected but "Stop Trump!" from the Democrats and Progressive Left.
                      They did what they always do when faced with real opposition: They became the biggest bunch of jerks and @$$es on the planet. They did themselves in because Trump was an in-your-face, blowhard, say whatever, candidate.

                      Against the Left, nice guys finish last.
                      I agree 100%, the last sentence says it all.
                      Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                        I think that's why Trump won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan (if the results are confirmed).

                        Prior to Wisconsin being called for Trump, I was 100% in agreement with what you posted.
                        I imagine that there is something there - her extreme reaction to Trump's extreme statements provoked a response in the electorate that may not have been there otherwise - but I also wonder if that is outweighed by the costs to Trump as well.

                        One might look at the loss of the blue rust belt states and see the wider issues heralding that shift - losses in blue-collar jobs, shrinking Union membership, wider cultural/social fears affecting white Americans - as not being unique to a Trump campaign.

                        It becomes an interesting thought experiment: was Clinton's negatives made even more impressive by their contrast/competition with Trump's personality, minus the impact of Trump's own scandals?

                        Or would another candidate have done better because, while they may have provoked a less impactful reaction from Hillary, they themselves would have avoided much of the negative drama associated with Trump's campaign in turn?

                        And one of the big unanswered questions so many here seem afraid to ask is just what role the media played in building Trump up. You'd be surprised at how many media professionals saw the media as being a major boon to Trump by providing him endless coverage, plastering his name everywhere and talking about him all the time.

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X