Never Trumpers irrelevant?
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York
25 Aug 2019, 8:15 am
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Try a thought experiment.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
Ted Cruz would have won the nomination a that wing of the party would still be angry and he was different enough from the Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio type people. Cruz or any nominee would have beaten Hillary as she was the absolute worst candidate for the moment.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she go more popular votes than anyone else.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she got more votes than anyone else including Trump.
Was Ted Cruz the second most popular with GOP voters after Trump? Maybe. If he were, and if he had been nominated in the absence of Trump - he would have gone to the General with all disadvantages of Trump (he was an extremist who alienated folks), but with none of the appeal of Trump across party lines. Trump was an unothorodox populist who drew voters away from the Dems. Cruz was orthodox GOP but extreme right, so would alienated as many folks as Trump but would not being able to offset that by stealing away blue collar votes from the Dems.
A more centrist GOPer like Rubio, or Kasich, might well have beat Hillary.
Hillary may have gotten more votes but would any of the other Democrat have ignored Michigan, Pennsylvania and called a group of voters a “basket of deplorables” and tell coal minors they wanted to end their industry? Remember Trump did not happen and no “corporate democrat” loss had happened thus much less if no “resistance” and the rise of wokeness etc. A lot of this has been galvanized by Trump winning some democrats seem more free to openly write off the a large section of voters as irredeemable old racists then before 2016.
Cruz was in second place in the Republican primaries.
The people for whom this thread is about the Never Trumpers would have voted for Cruz instead of staying home, voted for Johnson, or voted for Hillary. More anti Hillary/Bernie Bros would have not voted for Cruz as some did for Trump, stayed home, or voted for Stein because the opponent was not Trump. If Hillary was the worst candidate in history Trump was arguably a close second. I would agree that a centrist and likable candidate would have beaten Hillary by a larger margin then Cruz would have.
_________________
“Self Acceptance is a process not a performance”
“You are autistic enough. And you always have been”
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.
Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 25 Aug 2019, 8:41 am, edited 4 times in total.
25 Aug 2019, 8:28 am
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Try a thought experiment.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
Ted Cruz would have won the nomination a that wing of the party would still be angry and he was different enough from the Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio type people. Cruz or any nominee would have beaten Hillary as she was the absolute worst candidate for the moment.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she go more popular votes than anyone else.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she got more votes than anyone else including Trump.
Was Ted Cruz the second most popular with GOP voters after Trump? Maybe. If he were, and if he had been nominated in the absence of Trump - he would have gone to the General with all disadvantages of Trump (he was an extremist who alienated folks), but with none of the appeal of Trump across party lines. Trump was an unothorodox populist who drew voters away from the Dems. Cruz was orthodox GOP but extreme right, so would alienated as many folks as Trump but would not being able to offset that by stealing away blue collar votes from the Dems.
A more centrist GOPer like Rubio, or Kasich, might well have beat Hillary.
Cruz was in second place in the Republican primaries.
The people for whom this thread is about the Never Trumpers would have voted for Cruz instead of staying home, voted for Johnson, or voted for Hillary. More anti Hillary/Bernie Bros would have not voted for Cruz as some did for Trump, stayed home, or voted for Stein because the opponent was not Trump. If Hillary was the worst candidate in history Trump was arguably a close second. I would agree that a centrist and likable candidate would have beaten Hillary by a larger margin then Cruz would have.
Okay so... if we are JUST talking about "Republican never Trumpers" (they wouldn't have even been a "thing" if Trump hadn't run): they would have voted for Cruz if he had been the GOP nominee. I don't see any reason to doubt that.
================
It is interesting though how both parties seem to be at war with centrists right now.
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York
25 Aug 2019, 2:20 pm
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Try a thought experiment.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
Ted Cruz would have won the nomination a that wing of the party would still be angry and he was different enough from the Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio type people. Cruz or any nominee would have beaten Hillary as she was the absolute worst candidate for the moment.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she go more popular votes than anyone else.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she got more votes than anyone else including Trump.
Was Ted Cruz the second most popular with GOP voters after Trump? Maybe. If he were, and if he had been nominated in the absence of Trump - he would have gone to the General with all disadvantages of Trump (he was an extremist who alienated folks), but with none of the appeal of Trump across party lines. Trump was an unothorodox populist who drew voters away from the Dems. Cruz was orthodox GOP but extreme right, so would alienated as many folks as Trump but would not being able to offset that by stealing away blue collar votes from the Dems.
A more centrist GOPer like Rubio, or Kasich, might well have beat Hillary.
Cruz was in second place in the Republican primaries.
The people for whom this thread is about the Never Trumpers would have voted for Cruz instead of staying home, voted for Johnson, or voted for Hillary. More anti Hillary/Bernie Bros would have not voted for Cruz as some did for Trump, stayed home, or voted for Stein because the opponent was not Trump. If Hillary was the worst candidate in history Trump was arguably a close second. I would agree that a centrist and likable candidate would have beaten Hillary by a larger margin then Cruz would have.
Okay so... if we are JUST talking about "Republican never Trumpers" (they wouldn't have even been a "thing" if Trump hadn't run): they would have voted for Cruz if he had been the GOP nominee. I don't see any reason to doubt that.
================
It is interesting though how both parties seem to be at war with centrists right now.
Never Trumper usually refers to Republicans/ex Republicans and conservatives.
_________________
“Self Acceptance is a process not a performance”
“You are autistic enough. And you always have been”
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.
25 Aug 2019, 6:34 pm
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Try a thought experiment.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
What if Trump had sat out the 16 election?
What would have happened?
Presumably some conventional Mitt Romney type Republican would have been nominated.
The GOP would have won both houses of Congress like they actually did. Or I assume that they would have. Its possible our generic GOP presidential candidate would have won as well, even if was only via the electorial college vote, and not the popular vote. That's how it usually goes. One party runs the nation for eight years, and then the other party takes over for eight years.
But the GOP was already kind of floundering around.
Though the Dems also had their populist rebellion as well, led by Sanders. So both parties may have been in need of radical change.
A couple years ago I was willing to bet the GOP would reach out and try to recruit Hispanics (kinda like Nixon's southern strategy) so it could outflank the Dems. The Dems would continue to own the Black vote, so the GOP would own the vote of the comparable sized Hispanic vote. And we would see a browner face for the GOP. Exactly the opposite happened, and the GOP went nativist, and White supremist under Trump.
Ted Cruz would have won the nomination a that wing of the party would still be angry and he was different enough from the Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio type people. Cruz or any nominee would have beaten Hillary as she was the absolute worst candidate for the moment.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she go more popular votes than anyone else.
She may have been the worst candidate for the moment, but she got more votes than anyone else including Trump.
Was Ted Cruz the second most popular with GOP voters after Trump? Maybe. If he were, and if he had been nominated in the absence of Trump - he would have gone to the General with all disadvantages of Trump (he was an extremist who alienated folks), but with none of the appeal of Trump across party lines. Trump was an unothorodox populist who drew voters away from the Dems. Cruz was orthodox GOP but extreme right, so would alienated as many folks as Trump but would not being able to offset that by stealing away blue collar votes from the Dems.
A more centrist GOPer like Rubio, or Kasich, might well have beat Hillary.
Cruz was in second place in the Republican primaries.
The people for whom this thread is about the Never Trumpers would have voted for Cruz instead of staying home, voted for Johnson, or voted for Hillary. More anti Hillary/Bernie Bros would have not voted for Cruz as some did for Trump, stayed home, or voted for Stein because the opponent was not Trump. If Hillary was the worst candidate in history Trump was arguably a close second. I would agree that a centrist and likable candidate would have beaten Hillary by a larger margin then Cruz would have.
Okay so... if we are JUST talking about "Republican never Trumpers" (they wouldn't have even been a "thing" if Trump hadn't run): they would have voted for Cruz if he had been the GOP nominee. I don't see any reason to doubt that.
================
It is interesting though how both parties seem to be at war with centrists right now.
Never Trumper usually refers to Republicans/ex Republicans and conservatives.
Duhhhh!! !! !! !! !! !! !!
13 Sep 2019, 10:53 am
Even Susan Collins faces an uphill battle because of her Kavanaugh vote—she is being labelled a far-right extremist because of it. Collins is nowhere near far-right.
Yet Joe Manchin, a Democrat who is more conservative than Collins, and who also voted to confirm Kavanaugh, is not labelled as such. I don’t consider him to be far-right either.
I like both Collins and Manchin.
_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!
