Never Trump

[BYE]

I think that they both will torture people. The big difference is the left won't care when Hilary does it.

One of your worst statements so far. This shows your red underwear and is founded on your assumption that Clinton will be a bigger hawk than Trump. She has never said anything about torturing people or killing the families of terrorists. Stop putting words in her mouth and creating a figure that is equal to Trump. You're so sure you understand the hidden intents of these candidates, and this astounds me.

 

[colton]

Yet, RNC Chairman Priebus willingly puts party above country. Probably an unfair way for me to put it; he is chairman and I'm sure he means well in his own mind, but really, threatening to punish ex candidates that do not support Trump? Kasich's office has since lambasted this RNC effort to intimidate GOP leaders.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/former-gop-candidates-who-won-t-back-trump-could-be-n650171

"t's not a threat, it's just the question that we have a process in place ... what should a private party do about that if those same people come around in four or eight years?"

Maybe people could thank them for having integrity at the time? Novel concept, Mr. Priebus.....

On the plus side, I'm liking Kasich more and more. And I voted for him in Utah.

 

[Stoked]

On the plus side, I'm liking Kasich more and more. And I voted for him in Utah.

Recently read a report that the RNC is considering barring from running again those that do not back the current nominee. Specifically Cruz and Kasich.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

I cannot at all imagine that people hear what he says and think that they could possibly vote for him.

I think it's pretty simple. They just wait a few weeks until his advisors finally convince him to reverse or soften what he originally said, and then they pretend he never really meant what he said and was just joking around. Or something.

 

[♪alt13]

One of your worst statements so far. This shows your red underwear and is founded on your assumption that Clinton will be a bigger hawk than Trump. She has never said anything about torturing people or killing the families of terrorists. Stop putting words in her mouth and creating a figure that is equal to Trump. You're so sure you understand the hidden intents of these candidates, and this astounds me.

I assure you that my underwear are much more blue than red. I have only voted for one republican in my life and that was Gov. Huntsman's second term.

Extraordinary rendition started under Bill, was partially supplanted by the CIA under Bush, and continues to this day under Obama. Further while Obama did ban "enhanced interrogation techniques" by the CIA he did so by making the army field manual the standard. The same Army field manual amended by Rumsfeld to allow for what human rights groups call torture of "unlawful enemy combatants". In other words people that we deem are outside the protection of the Geneva conventions. Obama could have removed Rumsfeld's wording from the manual but he didn't.

We still torture people and will continue to do so.

 

[NAOS]

I assure you that my underwear are much more blue than red.

confirmed

We still torture people and will continue to do so.

also confirmed

 

[BYE]

I assure you that my underwear are much more blue than red. I have only voted for one republican in my life and that was Gov. Huntsman's second term. We still torture people and will continue to do so.

I'll take you at your word about your underwear, green? Or did you Bern them? I respect your concern for torture and borderline interrogation techniques and think we should listen to McCain on this, i.e., someone who experienced it first hand. Be that as it may, the context in which you made your comment leaves very little to the imagination on what you were implying, and my point still stands on your juxtaposing of Clinton and Trump as more or less equals in what they have claimed. Once again, it's a case of your apparently incredible prowess for reading between the lines and determining what the "real" candidates will think and how they will act. This talent of premonition renders any real words and message the candidates have had pointless. Their candidacies matter and so does their respective words and actions within their candidacies.

 

[Stoked]

I'll take you at your word about your underwear, green? Or did you Bern them? I respect your concern for torture and borderline interrogation techniques and think we should listen to McCain on this, i.e., someone who experienced it first hand. Be that as it may, the context in which you made your comment leaves very little to the imagination on what you were implying, and my point still stands on your juxtaposing of Clinton and Trump as more or less equals in what they have claimed. Once again, it's a case of your apparently incredible prowess for reading between the lines and determining what the "real" candidates will think and how they will act. This talent of premonition renders any real words and message the candidates have had pointless. Their candidacies matter and so does their respective words and actions within their candidacies.

I agree. But he is, to a point, an exception to this. That's not a good thing. I do not think anyone really knows what he will do if in office. He is all over the place so often that it's impossible to pin him down. Again, that's not a good thing.

 

[colton]

Recently read a report that the RNC is considering barring from running again those that do not back the current nominee. Specifically Cruz and Kasich.

As long as they also bar Donald Trump from being the President if he does not follow through with all of the things he also said at the debates, I'm okay with that.

(Ok, not really serious)

 

[Stoked]

As long as they also bar Donald Trump from being the President if he does not follow through with all of the things he also said at the debates, I'm okay with that.

(Ok, not really serious)

Well, if the RNC did follow through on banning people from future candidacies if they fail to back the current one...I could see that possibly contributing to future fracturing of their party.

 

[♪alt13]

I'll take you at your word about your underwear, green? Or did you Bern them? I respect your concern for torture and borderline interrogation techniques and think we should listen to McCain on this, i.e., someone who experienced it first hand. Be that as it may, the context in which you made your comment leaves very little to the imagination on what you were implying, and my point still stands on your juxtaposing of Clinton and Trump as more or less equals in what they have claimed. Once again, it's a case of your apparently incredible prowess for reading between the lines and determining what the "real" candidates will think and how they will act. This talent of premonition renders any real words and message the candidates have had pointless. Their candidacies matter and so does their respective words and actions within their candidacies.

Your continued attempts to paint me as some caricature that you have in your head reveal more about you than they do me. You should stop doing that.

I did no such thing. I started by acknowledging that Trump's rhetoric and his campaign is way worse. I said that I think a Hilary Clinton presidency will end up being worse by those measures because people like yourself will not hold her accountable. The watchdogs will be silenced and their warnings would fall on deaf ears anyway.

 

[♪alt13]

Well, if the RNC did follow through on banning people from future candidacies if they fail to back the current one...I could see that possibly contributing to future fracturing of their party.

Too late. The party is already fractured. The question is whether all the kings men will be able to put humpty...