Didn’t the GOP just straight up cancel one of the early primaries just in case Trump might have a poor showing?
AFAIK, none have yet but a few states have said they might.
South Carolina is the most likely as the SC GOP apparently did it in 2004 for Bush (and the SC Democrats did it in 1996 and 2012 for Clinton and Obama).
This feels like this shouldn't be a thing in our political system. Just because you're a republican or Democrat doesn't mean your happy with the person in office and doesn't mean you'll vote for the other side. If somebody wants to challenge the sitting president from their own party, it should be embraced.
Political parties aren't really part of the government. They are organizations that can choose their own rules. I'm pretty sure they could change the rules and just appoint a random guy as their candidate.
I mean, it sucks that it has turned into such an institution in the US, but there are other parties with other rules you could support if you don't like the main two. You are just also throwing your vote away. Such is the problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.
Anyways, trump tweeted about those two guys earlier
"Can you believe it? I’m at 94% approval in the Republican Party, and have Three Stooges running against me. One is “Mr. Appalachian Trail” who was actually in Argentina for bad reasons....Another is a one-time BAD Congressman from Illinois who lost in his second term by a landslide, then failed in radio. The third is a man who couldn’t stand up straight while receiving an award. I should be able to take them!"
Didn’t the GOP just straight up cancel one of the early primaries just in case Trump might have a poor showing?
AFAIK, none have yet but a few states have said they might.
South Carolina is the most likely as the SC GOP apparently did it in 2004 for Bush (and the SC Democrats did it in 1996 and 2012 for Clinton and Obama).
This feels like this shouldn't be a thing in our political system. Just because you're a republican or Democrat doesn't mean your happy with the person in office and doesn't mean you'll vote for the other side. If somebody wants to challenge the sitting president from their own party, it should be embraced.
Political parties aren't really part of the government. They are organizations that can choose their own rules. I'm pretty sure they could change the rules and just appoint a random guy as their candidate.
I mean, it sucks that it has turned into such an institution in the US, but there are other parties with other rules you could support if you don't like the main two. You are just also throwing your vote away. Such is the problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.
Anyways, trump tweeted about those two guys earlier
Please tell me that 94% approval rating with Republicans us one of his lies. I know he's popular in the Republican party, but I guess I had hoped more had turned on him for the horrible piece of shit he is.
Didn’t the GOP just straight up cancel one of the early primaries just in case Trump might have a poor showing?
AFAIK, none have yet but a few states have said they might.
South Carolina is the most likely as the SC GOP apparently did it in 2004 for Bush (and the SC Democrats did it in 1996 and 2012 for Clinton and Obama).
This feels like this shouldn't be a thing in our political system. Just because you're a republican or Democrat doesn't mean your happy with the person in office and doesn't mean you'll vote for the other side. If somebody wants to challenge the sitting president from their own party, it should be embraced.
Political parties aren't really part of the government. They are organizations that can choose their own rules. I'm pretty sure they could change the rules and just appoint a random guy as their candidate.
I mean, it sucks that it has turned into such an institution in the US, but there are other parties with other rules you could support if you don't like the main two. You are just also throwing your vote away. Such is the problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.
Anyways, trump tweeted about those two guys earlier
Please tell me that 94% approval rating with Republicans us one of his lies. I know he's popular in the Republican party, but I guess I had hoped more had turned on him for the horrible piece of shit he is.
I would also check Republican party membership while you were checking approval. As has been mentioned before, some people are leaving the party due to Trump. Hi Spool! (It wasn't his only reason, but it was definitely a giant fucking anvil that broke the camel's back).
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
And yeah it's like if @TexiKen was President, only with far less competent policy and less executive orders that Gerard Butler make a movie every six months. Also Texiken isn't a racist.
Didn’t the GOP just straight up cancel one of the early primaries just in case Trump might have a poor showing?
AFAIK, none have yet but a few states have said they might.
South Carolina is the most likely as the SC GOP apparently did it in 2004 for Bush (and the SC Democrats did it in 1996 and 2012 for Clinton and Obama).
This feels like this shouldn't be a thing in our political system. Just because you're a republican or Democrat doesn't mean your happy with the person in office and doesn't mean you'll vote for the other side. If somebody wants to challenge the sitting president from their own party, it should be embraced.
Political parties aren't really part of the government. They are organizations that can choose their own rules. I'm pretty sure they could change the rules and just appoint a random guy as their candidate.
I mean, it sucks that it has turned into such an institution in the US, but there are other parties with other rules you could support if you don't like the main two. You are just also throwing your vote away. Such is the problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.
Anyways, trump tweeted about those two guys earlier
Please tell me that 94% approval rating with Republicans us one of his lies. I know he's popular in the Republican party, but I guess I had hoped more had turned on him for the horrible piece of shit he is.
Most polls I've seen put it closer to 90%, but I don't doubt that he's hit 94% in one or two reputable polls at some point.
Sorry to break it to you.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+10
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
weld was tthe libertarian vp in 2016 I think? under gary johnson
and I think trump has been at like 88% with the GOP forever although now as I type it that seems almost too on the nose
With a Primary against an incumbent president I think it was Taft? Because I remember it was the point of the Bull Moose party And with Regan against Ford? I know the one with Taft lost to Theodore Roosevelt but that as I said not really a challenge within party
Yeah, someone probably should do a recheck on republican party membership before Trump was elected compared to now. I strongly suspect that membership is way down and that's going to skew things, if the never Trumpers are just abandoning the party.
Also if Walsh and Weld and whoever, is running, are serious. Instead of a primary, where it's been made pretty clear that Trump wants to kneecap any opposition and some state parties seem eager to oblige, it's probably better to run 3rd party. They aren't going to keep Trump off the ticket, but what they could do is deny Trump voters that the democratic candidate isn't going to pull off of him. Given the margins in PA, MI & WI, they could easily doom his re-election prospects and possible pave the way for his ass to get flatten electorally. OH, NC, AZ, FL, IA and that one district in NE are probably electoral votes they could deny him. Hell, might be all that's needed to cause TX and GA to flip, if we get a recession.
Then again, if the economy tanks before state parties decide to shut out primary challenges against Trump, things might get interesting. Doubt they'll get him off the ticket though, but that could create a scenario where the primary damages Trump's chances even further.
Oh, Sanford is another person that apparently is going to try. He's the moron form SC, that took a leave of absence on the Appalachian Trail with a mistress IIRC. Just recalled that he was trying right as I was about to post.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I wouldn't be so sure. My folks are still registered as Republicans despite both of them despising what the party is now. They just haven't taken the time to change their affiliation on the rolls.
I wouldn't be so sure. My folks are still registered as Republicans despite both of them despising what the party is now. They just haven't taken the time to change their affiliation on the rolls.
Sure but the real question is how they answer a pollster when they're asked what party they belong to. That is way more mutable than proper party registrations.
Also Weld was the governor of Massachusetts for a long time, and would be a billion times better than Trump as Prez. He should have been in 2016.
+1
Options
38thDoelets never be stupid againwait lets always be stupid foreverRegistered Userregular
Pretty sure I caught an interview with Weld on NPR on the way in today.
His goals are:
Balance the Budget
Secure women's rights
Stop befriending dictators and insulting allies
Repair the state department
Didn't hear anything about the environment, SC justices, etc. but as Spool says sounds much better than Trump. I just don't see how he defeats Trump in a Republican Party that Trump took over.
Pretty sure I caught an interview with Weld on NPR on the way in today.
His goals are:
Balance the Budget
Secure women's rights
Stop befriending dictators and insulting allies
Repair the state department
Didn't hear anything about the environment, SC justices, etc. but as Spool says sounds much better than Trump. I just don't see how he defeats Trump in a Republican Party that Trump took over.
I was gonna say, it's too bad he doesn't actually represent the current composition of the Republican party.
Best case scenario is Trump gets primaried and then runs as a 3rd party out of spite and hands 2020 to the Dems. But, it's just wishful thinking and is just not going to happen. We're talking Infinite Improbability Drive levels of unlikely.
Realistically, the best we can hope for is that this primary challenge shaves away at Trump's margins. If it causes a few Republicans to sit out 2020 in key states, that's fine by me. A wedge in the Republican party, even a tiny one, is good.
And if nothing material happens, at the very least I'll be able to enjoy the schadenfreude of Trump whining on Twitter about the challengers.
That all being said, I'm not giving these guys any credit. Especislly Walsh, since he's a racist shitlord.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Approval rating polls among the Republicans of this sort are like... Of course Republicans will be behind their sitting-in-office person. They have to specifically be asked "if you could replace Trump with another Republican, would you?" That would result in a different number.
Approval rating polls among the Republicans of this sort are like... Of course Republicans will be behind their sitting-in-office person. They have to specifically be asked "if you could replace Trump with another Republican, would you?" That would result in a different number.
Sincerly curious about the answer to that question, though I think the numbers might not be as different as outright support since I think Trump has definitely shaped the party to encourage (outward) loyalty to him, so some who dissent may do so privately.
I'm not particularly convinced that a primary against trump is going to be any more successful then an air soft pistol shooting at a freight train; Putting aside trump's relative success for a moment you have to consider the relative profile of the primary challengers (none of these guys were really household names), their financial backing (IE sheldon, the Koch brothers or other oligarchs) and the innate nature of the current base (I've seen no sign of real dissatisfaction from republicans at this point with trump's swaggering idiocy) and none of that suggests to me that trump has anything to worry about with regards to his own party.
No, if trump's going down in 2020 it's going to be because the dem's were able to find a decent candidate and because Americans realized that trump has absolutely no god damn idea what he's doing.
Approval rating polls among the Republicans of this sort are like... Of course Republicans will be behind their sitting-in-office person. They have to specifically be asked "if you could replace Trump with another Republican, would you?" That would result in a different number.
I have to share my favorite Bill Weld quote from back in 2016:
But when the conversation veered from spending cuts to Libertarian dogma, Weld's affable answers didn't always play. One delegate, who asked about how a Johnson-Weld administration would fight "the CIA's secret work inside the Middle East," learned something awkward about the candidate.
"That was my great-uncle-in-law, Kermit Roosevelt, who in 1953 came out of Groton and Harvard with a little walking-around money in his pockets and engineered Mossadegh's overthrow," said Weld, referring to the former Iranian prime minister. "So perhaps I'm not the best person to ask."
You couldn’t get a more old money response if you somehow granted sentience to a monocle, but it is very affable.
OneAngryPossum on
+11
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
It says something about our time, that the man who endorsed on Who Is America arming 4 year olds with machine guns, mortars and grenades, is now pitching himself as the sensible alternative to Trump - and not a single person can dispute it.
Sacha Baron Cohen is a satirist you may have heard of, as he tends to get stupid insane people to openly state how stupid and insane they are.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
Weaker shit than what the President has been confirmed to have done (Daniels and McDougal), much less the 20+ accusations still pending for various sexual assaults.
So, of course that's the specific issue that the President is attacking Sanford for.
I have to share my favorite Bill Weld quote from back in 2016:
But when the conversation veered from spending cuts to Libertarian dogma, Weld's affable answers didn't always play. One delegate, who asked about how a Johnson-Weld administration would fight "the CIA's secret work inside the Middle East," learned something awkward about the candidate.
"That was my great-uncle-in-law, Kermit Roosevelt, who in 1953 came out of Groton and Harvard with a little walking-around money in his pockets and engineered Mossadegh's overthrow," said Weld, referring to the former Iranian prime minister. "So perhaps I'm not the best person to ask."
You couldn’t get a more old money response if you somehow granted sentience to a monocle, but it is very affable.
He's the epitome of old money Boston Brahmin.
William Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts, is the most prominent living member of this family. When Massachusetts Senate president Billy Bulger publicly teased William Weld about his ancestors' having come over on the Mayflower, Weld joked: "Actually, they weren't on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready."
I have to share my favorite Bill Weld quote from back in 2016:
But when the conversation veered from spending cuts to Libertarian dogma, Weld's affable answers didn't always play. One delegate, who asked about how a Johnson-Weld administration would fight "the CIA's secret work inside the Middle East," learned something awkward about the candidate.
"That was my great-uncle-in-law, Kermit Roosevelt, who in 1953 came out of Groton and Harvard with a little walking-around money in his pockets and engineered Mossadegh's overthrow," said Weld, referring to the former Iranian prime minister. "So perhaps I'm not the best person to ask."
You couldn’t get a more old money response if you somehow granted sentience to a monocle, but it is very affable.
He's the epitome of old money Boston Brahmin.
William Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts, is the most prominent living member of this family. When Massachusetts Senate president Billy Bulger publicly teased William Weld about his ancestors' having come over on the Mayflower, Weld joked: "Actually, they weren't on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready."
The Kermit Roosevelt in question was TR's grandson.
I’d forgotten that second quote - maybe the bar has been lowered too far, but I find that his reasonable cleverness and greater opposition to the destruction of America than most of his ideological peers has me kind of charmed, so long as he remains in the periphery.
"Hiking the Appalachian Trail" as a sex euphemism is pretty great, you have to admit. Sanford's a lowlife for cheating on his wife but it's a pretty excellent turn of phrase
Weaker shit than what the President has been confirmed to have done (Daniels and McDougal), much less the 20+ accusations still pending for various sexual assaults.
So, of course that's the specific issue that the President is attacking Sanford for.
Unfortunately in the eyes of the Republicans Trump's non consensual rapes are probably worse than Weld's affair. Because Trump violently exploited his power to hurt people, thats fine. Weld seemingly experienced affection for another human being, what a wierdo!
I have to share my favorite Bill Weld quote from back in 2016:
But when the conversation veered from spending cuts to Libertarian dogma, Weld's affable answers didn't always play. One delegate, who asked about how a Johnson-Weld administration would fight "the CIA's secret work inside the Middle East," learned something awkward about the candidate.
"That was my great-uncle-in-law, Kermit Roosevelt, who in 1953 came out of Groton and Harvard with a little walking-around money in his pockets and engineered Mossadegh's overthrow," said Weld, referring to the former Iranian prime minister. "So perhaps I'm not the best person to ask."
You couldn’t get a more old money response if you somehow granted sentience to a monocle, but it is very affable.
He's the epitome of old money Boston Brahmin.
William Weld, former Governor of Massachusetts, is the most prominent living member of this family. When Massachusetts Senate president Billy Bulger publicly teased William Weld about his ancestors' having come over on the Mayflower, Weld joked: "Actually, they weren't on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready."
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
Didnt he use official funds for the trip?
I remember a bunch of people not knowing where he was when he was supposed to be working. Then some aids said something about hiking and it kinda exploded.
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
Didnt he use official funds for the trip?
Not for that trip specifically but IIRC there had been a previous trip to Argentina he took for ostensibly official reasons (a conference on something or other) that when they found out he had a mistress there looked a bit suspicious, and he ended up paying the state back for his room and tickets.
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
Didn't he admitted he did something wrong and expressed shame?
That's not the sort of depraved activity that the American public could support.
Posts
Political parties aren't really part of the government. They are organizations that can choose their own rules. I'm pretty sure they could change the rules and just appoint a random guy as their candidate.
I mean, it sucks that it has turned into such an institution in the US, but there are other parties with other rules you could support if you don't like the main two. You are just also throwing your vote away. Such is the problem with first-past-the-post voting systems.
Anyways, trump tweeted about those two guys earlier
"Can you believe it? I’m at 94% approval in the Republican Party, and have Three Stooges running against me. One is “Mr. Appalachian Trail” who was actually in Argentina for bad reasons....Another is a one-time BAD Congressman from Illinois who lost in his second term by a landslide, then failed in radio. The third is a man who couldn’t stand up straight while receiving an award. I should be able to take them!"
Please tell me that 94% approval rating with Republicans us one of his lies. I know he's popular in the Republican party, but I guess I had hoped more had turned on him for the horrible piece of shit he is.
I would also check Republican party membership while you were checking approval. As has been mentioned before, some people are leaving the party due to Trump. Hi Spool! (It wasn't his only reason, but it was definitely a giant fucking anvil that broke the camel's back).
I don't even know who that Weld guy we are talking about is. I have no idea who his even lesser known challenger is or what award someone couldn't stand up for or whatever Argentina is bad means.
It's all just gibberish from the president, to me
The Argentina is bad thing references a politician who said he was hiking the Appalachian trail and was instead hiking his way inside his Argentinian mistress.
And yeah it's like if @TexiKen was President, only with far less competent policy and less executive orders that Gerard Butler make a movie every six months. Also Texiken isn't a racist.
Most polls I've seen put it closer to 90%, but I don't doubt that he's hit 94% in one or two reputable polls at some point.
Sorry to break it to you.
and I think trump has been at like 88% with the GOP forever although now as I type it that seems almost too on the nose
Also if Walsh and Weld and whoever, is running, are serious. Instead of a primary, where it's been made pretty clear that Trump wants to kneecap any opposition and some state parties seem eager to oblige, it's probably better to run 3rd party. They aren't going to keep Trump off the ticket, but what they could do is deny Trump voters that the democratic candidate isn't going to pull off of him. Given the margins in PA, MI & WI, they could easily doom his re-election prospects and possible pave the way for his ass to get flatten electorally. OH, NC, AZ, FL, IA and that one district in NE are probably electoral votes they could deny him. Hell, might be all that's needed to cause TX and GA to flip, if we get a recession.
Then again, if the economy tanks before state parties decide to shut out primary challenges against Trump, things might get interesting. Doubt they'll get him off the ticket though, but that could create a scenario where the primary damages Trump's chances even further.
Oh, Sanford is another person that apparently is going to try. He's the moron form SC, that took a leave of absence on the Appalachian Trail with a mistress IIRC. Just recalled that he was trying right as I was about to post.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Sure but the real question is how they answer a pollster when they're asked what party they belong to. That is way more mutable than proper party registrations.
Also Weld was the governor of Massachusetts for a long time, and would be a billion times better than Trump as Prez. He should have been in 2016.
His goals are:
Didn't hear anything about the environment, SC justices, etc. but as Spool says sounds much better than Trump. I just don't see how he defeats Trump in a Republican Party that Trump took over.
I was gonna say, it's too bad he doesn't actually represent the current composition of the Republican party.
Realistically, the best we can hope for is that this primary challenge shaves away at Trump's margins. If it causes a few Republicans to sit out 2020 in key states, that's fine by me. A wedge in the Republican party, even a tiny one, is good.
And if nothing material happens, at the very least I'll be able to enjoy the schadenfreude of Trump whining on Twitter about the challengers.
That all being said, I'm not giving these guys any credit. Especislly Walsh, since he's a racist shitlord.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Also a moderate Republican governor of Massachusetts in my childhood.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Sincerly curious about the answer to that question, though I think the numbers might not be as different as outright support since I think Trump has definitely shaped the party to encourage (outward) loyalty to him, so some who dissent may do so privately.
No, if trump's going down in 2020 it's going to be because the dem's were able to find a decent candidate and because Americans realized that trump has absolutely no god damn idea what he's doing.
I doubt it
You couldn’t get a more old money response if you somehow granted sentience to a monocle, but it is very affable.
Sacha Baron Cohen is a satirist you may have heard of, as he tends to get stupid insane people to openly state how stupid and insane they are.
It all makes perfect sense.
I dunno. If it is, it's his most unrealistic one yet.
Yeah, Mark Sanford met a lady at a dance and ran off for a week to meet up and have an affair with her a few years ago.
The affair was entirely consensual, the lady involved not a minor and of an appropriate age, there were no major abuses of power differential or intimidation and threatening through proxies, no large sums of money were transferred before or after the affair either in exchange for sex or silence.
My modern standards it could be described as “quaint”.
Weaker shit than what the President has been confirmed to have done (Daniels and McDougal), much less the 20+ accusations still pending for various sexual assaults.
So, of course that's the specific issue that the President is attacking Sanford for.
He's the epitome of old money Boston Brahmin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weld_family
The Kermit Roosevelt in question was TR's grandson.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I’d forgotten that second quote - maybe the bar has been lowered too far, but I find that his reasonable cleverness and greater opposition to the destruction of America than most of his ideological peers has me kind of charmed, so long as he remains in the periphery.
I can only imagine the horror with which a Republican might greet such a close brush with reality.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
Unfortunately in the eyes of the Republicans Trump's non consensual rapes are probably worse than Weld's affair. Because Trump violently exploited his power to hurt people, thats fine. Weld seemingly experienced affection for another human being, what a wierdo!
I like this guys wit. Our current crop of Republicans can't even muster a coherent sentence, let alone a decent turn of phrase.
Didnt he use official funds for the trip?
I remember a bunch of people not knowing where he was when he was supposed to be working. Then some aids said something about hiking and it kinda exploded.
Not for that trip specifically but IIRC there had been a previous trip to Argentina he took for ostensibly official reasons (a conference on something or other) that when they found out he had a mistress there looked a bit suspicious, and he ended up paying the state back for his room and tickets.
Didn't he admitted he did something wrong and expressed shame?
That's not the sort of depraved activity that the American public could support.