The rebellion against Trump has begun.

[Anonymous]

The sentiments that liberals are expressing against Trump and the pathetic GOP backing of him is exactly how I feel as a liberal when it comes to the nomination of Clinton. I just can't believe that there are so many liberals who are willing to hold their noses and support her given her total lack of integrity and appalling judgement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ben sasse is one of the extremely few elected republicans who has steadfastly remained anti-trump. He's also really intelligent - Harvard plus Yale Ph.D. Pretty good looking to boot. I'm thinking he's a good contender for 2020. I used to like Paul ryan but have really lost respect for him since he gave in to trump. What a disappointment and I bet Romney feels the same way about him.

Peter Thiel is a very intelligent man. He received his B.A. in Philosophy from Stanford in 1989 and acquired a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1992. He supports Donald Trump. And he is not a professional politician like Ben Sasse.

Are you serious? Peter effing Thiel? The only thing most people know about him is all the hulk hogan sex-tape/gawker suing/gay-outing clown show. Maybe some also know about his ocean colony idea. Yeah, I don't think anyone will be clambering for this nutter in 4 years. Also, he's gay and I seriously don't see large segments of the evangelical base being ok with that. Adulterer and multiple divorcer like trump, sure, but gay? Don't see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It all depends on whether Trump threatens to lose Dukakis-style, with AZ, MT, NC, GA going blue, and TX a battleground.

If so, the rats will leave as they don't want to risk losing the Senate.

If it stays close ... there will be individuals who are seeking to help themselves (e.g. Kirk in IL, who's facing a re-election this fall) but the party apparatus will largely stay behind Trump, if only in a pro forma sense the way Reagan endorsed Ford in 1976 and then did absolutely nothing.

Don't forget UT. Becoming more liberal. And has to contend with generally-Mormon pop that values a presidents character and religiosity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ben sasse is one of the extremely few elected republicans who has steadfastly remained anti-trump. He's also really intelligent - Harvard plus Yale Ph.D. Pretty good looking to boot. I'm thinking he's a good contender for 2020. I used to like Paul ryan but have really lost respect for him since he gave in to trump. What a disappointment and I bet Romney feels the same way about him.

Peter Thiel is a very intelligent man. He received his B.A. in Philosophy from Stanford in 1989 and acquired a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1992. He supports Donald Trump. And he is not a professional politician like Ben Sasse.

Ben Sasse may be many things but I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a career politician.

[Anonymous]

I think they have jump in together. The visual I see is like flight 93 on 9/11. Give each other the look, and then all go in at once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all depends on whether Trump threatens to lose Dukakis-style, with AZ, MT, NC, GA going blue, and TX a battleground.

If so, the rats will leave as they don't want to risk losing the Senate.

If it stays close ... there will be individuals who are seeking to help themselves (e.g. Kirk in IL, who's facing a re-election this fall) but the party apparatus will largely stay behind Trump, if only in a pro forma sense the way Reagan endorsed Ford in 1976 and then did absolutely nothing.

Don't forget UT. Becoming more liberal. And has to contend with generally-Mormon pop that values a presidents character and religiosity.

Character? I can't see Hillary fitting that requirement. Neither would Trump, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are screwed wether they replace Trump or not. What do you think he will do if he is dumped at the convention? Sue of course! That will leave the replacement nominee in legal limbo while Trump continues to campaign.

Their best hope is to unendorse Trump and then argue they should keep the House and Senate because you can't trust Hillary.

I suspect that even if he loses to Hillary in November, they won't be able to call it because he will leverage lawsuits in several states. He is going to hose this thing eight ways left of Sunday.

He'll claim the vote machines were biased against him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all depends on whether Trump threatens to lose Dukakis-style, with AZ, MT, NC, GA going blue, and TX a battleground.

If so, the rats will leave as they don't want to risk losing the Senate.

If it stays close ... there will be individuals who are seeking to help themselves (e.g. Kirk in IL, who's facing a re-election this fall) but the party apparatus will largely stay behind Trump, if only in a pro forma sense the way Reagan endorsed Ford in 1976 and then did absolutely nothing.

Don't forget UT. Becoming more liberal. And has to contend with generally-Mormon pop that values a presidents character and religiosity.

Character? I can't see Hillary fitting that requirement. Neither would Trump, of course.

If it's Clinton v trump you'll see Utah become a swing state. And possibly in favor of hill.

Huge liberal growth there is staunchly democrat. And they'll turn out. Conservative pop divided between trump and those who stay home/write in/go third party. It all depends to what degree the staying home/writing in happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ben sasse is one of the extremely few elected republicans who has steadfastly remained anti-trump. He's also really intelligent - Harvard plus Yale Ph.D. Pretty good looking to boot. I'm thinking he's a good contender for 2020. I used to like Paul ryan but have really lost respect for him since he gave in to trump. What a disappointment and I bet Romney feels the same way about him.

I think even Ryan feels the same way!

Oh, he's regretting it every morning he wakes up. The best he can do at this point is do a mea culpa and drive the effort to replace Trump at the convention.

He doesn't regret it. He knew what he was doing. He had plenty of time to consider and he made his choice. And it was the choice a lot of us knew he would make. Ryan has repeatedly shown that his much-vaunted "principles" are empty rhetoric. The only difference between him and Mitch McConnell is that Ryan knows how to dress things up to look pretty and persuasive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ben sasse is one of the extremely few elected republicans who has steadfastly remained anti-trump. He's also really intelligent - Harvard plus Yale Ph.D. Pretty good looking to boot. I'm thinking he's a good contender for 2020. I used to like Paul ryan but have really lost respect for him since he gave in to trump. What a disappointment and I bet Romney feels the same way about him.

I think even Ryan feels the same way!

Oh, he's regretting it every morning he wakes up. The best he can do at this point is do a mea culpa and drive the effort to replace Trump at the convention.

He doesn't regret it. He knew what he was doing. He had plenty of time to consider and he made his choice. And it was the choice a lot of us knew he would make. Ryan has repeatedly shown that his much-vaunted "principles" are empty rhetoric. The only difference between him and Mitch McConnell is that Ryan knows how to dress things up to look pretty and persuasive.

I tend to agree. He's really nailed that "I'm a concerned human being" expression. What a crock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also -- we haven't had Obama coming out to campaign yet -- this will be the first time since 2008 he will be in pure campaign mode.

Trump's too stupid to try and play on Hispanic-Black tensions, he doesn't realize everyone who's susceptible to the race card is already voting Republican.

Trump isn't actually "too stupid", he just does things differently than Hillary. Hillary gets in front of a group of mostly black people and talks about issues that she thinks only matter to black people and that she thinks are the only issues black people care about. She talks about criminal justice reform, investing in poor/urban neighborhoods and affordable housing because she thinks that will get her "the black vote". Education? Jobs? Immigration? Nah, those aren't "black issues".

Then she gets in front of Latinos and talks about how racist Trump is and the wall he plans to build, amnesty, and deportation. Why would they want to hear what she has to say about education and the economy? They don't care about that!

So if what you're saying is that Trump isn't focusing on ways to divide the country (even more than it already is!) by creating more tension based on race and SES, then I guess you are right. But it's not because he's stupid.

Well, since Hillary did win a huge percentage of "the black vote" I guess she knows what she's doing. Haven't noticed Trump getting in front of an audience of mostly black people since for some reason they tend not to go to his rallies. Hmm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sentiments that liberals are expressing against Trump and the pathetic GOP backing of him is exactly how I feel as a liberal when it comes to the nomination of Clinton. I just can't believe that there are so many liberals who are willing to hold their noses and support her given her total lack of integrity and appalling judgement.

It's not just holding our nose. Many liberals have a higher opinion of her than you do. They may not like her much, but they realize that not every scandal manufactured by the right-wing sound machine is real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ben sasse is one of the extremely few elected republicans who has steadfastly remained anti-trump. He's also really intelligent - Harvard plus Yale Ph.D. Pretty good looking to boot. I'm thinking he's a good contender for 2020. I used to like Paul ryan but have really lost respect for him since he gave in to trump. What a disappointment and I bet Romney feels the same way about him.

Peter Thiel is a very intelligent man. He received his B.A. in Philosophy from Stanford in 1989 and acquired a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1992. He supports Donald Trump. And he is not a professional politician like Ben Sasse.

Are you serious? Peter effing Thiel? The only thing most people know about him is all the hulk hogan sex-tape/gawker suing/gay-outing clown show. Maybe some also know about his ocean colony idea. Yeah, I don't think anyone will be clambering for this nutter in 4 years. Also, he's gay and I seriously don't see large segments of the evangelical base being ok with that. Adulterer and multiple divorcer like trump, sure, but gay? Don't see it.

Hmmm no. Peter Thiel co-founded paypal with Elon Musk. He also co-founded Palantir. He is probably worth a couple of billions. I have never heard of Ben Sasse until this year as a nevertrump guy. To be honest I didn't find him having any original thoughts about Trump. I guess he is a politician and has to say the right thing. But nothing impressive jumped out of him from a few TV interviews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sentiments that liberals are expressing against Trump and the pathetic GOP backing of him is exactly how I feel as a liberal when it comes to the nomination of Clinton. I just can't believe that there are so many liberals who are willing to hold their noses and support her given her total lack of integrity and appalling judgement.

It's not just holding our nose. Many liberals have a higher opinion of her than you do. They may not like her much, but they realize that not every scandal manufactured by the right-wing sound machine is real.

There is also a matter of degree. Even if I agreed with you that Clinton lacks integrity and judgment (which I don't), I would weigh that against Trump who also lacks integrity and judgment and is a racist to boot. Also, he has said that he intends to violate international norms, weaken libel laws, and judge people by their race and religion. Not good things in my book. So the scale tips in favor of Clinton there. (Yes, I could vote for a third party, but I'm not willing to do anything that increases the chances of Trump winning.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also -- we haven't had Obama coming out to campaign yet -- this will be the first time since 2008 he will be in pure campaign mode.

Trump's too stupid to try and play on Hispanic-Black tensions, he doesn't realize everyone who's susceptible to the race card is already voting Republican.

Trump isn't actually "too stupid", he just does things differently than Hillary. Hillary gets in front of a group of mostly black people and talks about issues that she thinks only matter to black people and that she thinks are the only issues black people care about. She talks about criminal justice reform, investing in poor/urban neighborhoods and affordable housing because she thinks that will get her "the black vote". Education? Jobs? Immigration? Nah, those aren't "black issues".

Then she gets in front of Latinos and talks about how racist Trump is and the wall he plans to build, amnesty, and deportation. Why would they want to hear what she has to say about education and the economy? They don't care about that!

So if what you're saying is that Trump isn't focusing on ways to divide the country (even more than it already is!) by creating more tension based on race and SES, then I guess you are right. But it's not because he's stupid.

Well, since Hillary did win a huge percentage of "the black vote" I guess she knows what she's doing. Haven't noticed Trump getting in front of an audience of mostly black people since for some reason they tend not to go to his rallies. Hmm.

Yup, she's telling them what she thinks they want to hear.