Jon Huntsman, other Republicans call on Trump to drop out of the race

[homersapien 12,172]

2 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

 

I am hardly the only one who feels Hillary is qualified.

You probably think she killed those people in Benghazi don't you?

[AUFAN78 4,130]

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I am hardly the only one who feels Hillary is qualified.

You probably think she killed those people in Benghazi don't you?

Of course you aren't captain obvious. 

She certainly had a hand in their tragic deaths. You deny this?

[homersapien 12,172]

8 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Of course you aren't captain obvious. 

She certainly had a hand in their tragic deaths. You deny this?

Only by being secretary of state.  She was no more culpable than Powell and Rice were for the 60 diplomats killed during their time in office.  

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Just now, homersapien said:

Only by being secretary of state.  She was no more culpable than Powell and Rice were for the 60 diplomats killed during their time in office.  

Last I checked, Powell and Rice aren't running for POTUS. Stop the deflection. Take of those Blue glasses and admit what you know is true. You can do it homes. No one will hate you.

[homersapien 12,172]

11 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Last I checked, Powell and Rice aren't running for POTUS. Stop the deflection. Take of those Blue glasses and admit what you know is true. You can do it homes. No one will hate you.

"Stop the deflection?"

I was responding to a question you asked about Hillary's responsibility for the Benghazi tragedy. 

How about thinking before you post.  You can (probably) do it if you try real hard.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

"Stop the deflection?"

I was responding to a question you asked about Hillary's responsibility for the Benghazi tragedy. 

How about thinking before you post.  You can (probably) do it if you try real hard.

Powell and Rice = no deflection?  Brilliant.  Beer is flowing at homey's house.  Thanks for the laugh bro. 

[homersapien 12,172]

15 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Powell and Rice = no deflection?  Brilliant.  Beer is flowing at homey's house.  Thanks for the laugh bro. 

You forgot the 60 deaths they "had a hand in".

[AUFAN78 4,130]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

You forgot the 60 deaths they "had a hand in".

You apparently forgot they aren't running for POTUS. 

[Ramblin Wreck 4]

The Republican Party can actually remove Trump utilizing Rule 9 that stipulates the steps to be taken to replace a candidate.  There are a bunch of articles on it if you google.  The main challenge would be explaining to people that when they are voting or have already voted for Trump that they are voting to allow the Republican Electoral College to select the president.  Since Trump's name is already on the ballots, there wouldn't be any way with such short time in changing the name of the Republican candidate.  Most people don't understand that they don't directly elect the president and that the electoral college from each state isn't obligated to choose the person that receives the most votes in their state.

[alexava 6,974]

12 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

The Republican Party can actually remove Trump utilizing Rule 9 that stipulates the steps to be taken to replace a candidate.  There are a bunch of articles on it if you google.  The main challenge would be explaining to people that when they are voting or have already voted for Trump that they are voting to allow the Republican Electoral College to select the president.  Since Trump's name is already on the ballots, there wouldn't be any way with such short time in changing the name of the Republican candidate.  Most people don't understand that they don't directly elect the president and that the electoral college from each state isn't obligated to choose the person that receives the most votes in their state.

I know what you are saying and think I agree. It just gives me a headache. 

[alexava 6,974]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

You apparently forgot they aren't running for POTUS. 

That is true. I wish we could. Stick to the issues at hand without dredging up mud. If people wanted to vote on the best candidate based on character and qualification we wouldn't have either of these asshats. But I think homers point is Benghazi happened many times throughout history and there is always someone at fault or who could have done better yet she gets crucified like no other I can recall. 

[AUFAN78 4,130]

21 hours ago, alexava said:

That is true. I wish we could. Stick to the issues at hand without dredging up mud. If people wanted to vote on the best candidate based on character and qualification we wouldn't have either of these asshats. But I think homers point is Benghazi happened many times throughout history and there is always someone at fault or who could have done better yet she gets crucified like no other I can recall. 

First and foremost, we agree they are both asshats.

I think if Hilary would have come out from the beginning and admitted her mistakes Benghazi would have been simply another historical failure. Instead she chose her path, a path of blatant lies and directing others to blatantly lie. Changed everything. JMHO.

[Strychnine 1,808]

22 hours ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

The Republican Party can actually remove Trump utilizing Rule 9 that stipulates the steps to be taken to replace a candidate.  There are a bunch of articles on it if you google.  The main challenge would be explaining to people that when they are voting or have already voted for Trump that they are voting to allow the Republican Electoral College to select the president.  Since Trump's name is already on the ballots, there wouldn't be any way with such short time in changing the name of the Republican candidate.  Most people don't understand that they don't directly elect the president and that the electoral college from each state isn't obligated to choose the person that receives the most votes in their state.

 

That would probably be met with a serious backlash at the Republican Party.  Trump's supporters would cry foul at having the election "stolen" from him, and Democrats would cry foul about underhanded tactics.  Both would have a legitimate, if not technically legal, argument.  With such a short time frame left, I think it would be worse for the Republican Party than allowing Trump to stay in and lose to Hillary.  Organizing a move like that would leak, and possibly have severe down-ballot implications.

What consistently makes me laugh is that the Republicans all but had this election sewn up if they had nominated a rational candidate instead of a one-man self-targeting smear campaign.  Between Benghazi, e-mails and public perception, the controversy around Hillary is sufficient that Kasich or likely even Rubio would be cleaning up the floor with her right now, and that is regardless of whether there is actually anything to those controversies or not.

I think the best strategy for the Republican Party is to accept that Hillary is probably going to win (and should), and throw everything they have into down-ballot seats to keep her in check.  The President can do very little with a hostile Congress.  As for the Republican's Presidential candidate, they made their bed and deserve to lie in it.

[Strychnine 1,808]

42 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

First and foremost, we agree they are both asshats.

I think if Hilary would have come out from the beginning and admitted her mistakes Benghazi would have been simply another historical failure. Instead she chose her path, a path of blatant lies and directing others to blatantly lie. Changed everything. JMHO.

 

I do not think Benghazi would have ever been a big deal, regardless of her actions subsequent to it, if she had not been expected to be the next Democratic Party nominee.  I am not defending her at all, nor am I inclined to, but that is what I think changed everything.  Politics is not interested in truth, and politics was the motive in both any lies she told and the hunt for anything to nail her with.  I doubt anyone would have heard anything about Benghazi a month later if politics were subtracted from the equation.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

17 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

What consistently makes me laugh is that the Republicans all but had this election sewn up if they had nominated a rational candidate

You hear that phrase often, but I'm not sold. Despite her many faults the Democrats are strongly supporting Hilary. You'll occasionally hear a Dem state they might have considered Kasich, but I seriously have my doubts they are being truthful. Then examine the electoral map. It is becoming much more difficult for Republicans. So call me a skeptic or whatever, but I'm just not sold on this "sewn up" scenario. Easier path? Absolutely.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

18 minutes ago, Strychnine said:

 

I do not think Benghazi would have ever been a big deal, regardless of her actions subsequent to it, if she had not been expected to be the next Democratic Party nominee.  I am not defending her at all, nor am I inclined to, but that is what I think changed everything.  Politics is not interested in truth, and politics was the motive in both any lies she told and the hunt for anything to nail her with.  I doubt anyone would have heard anything about Benghazi a month later if politics were subtracted from the equation.

I think many agree and may be accurate. I can only speak for myself and politics simply didn't register with me on her handling of Benghazi. 

[alexava 6,974]

11 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

You hear that phrase often, but I'm not sold. Despite her many faults the Democrats are strongly supporting Hilary. You'll occasionally hear a Dem state they might have considered Kasich, but I seriously have my doubts they are being truthful. Then examine the electoral map. It is becoming much more difficult for Republicans. So call me a skeptic or whatever, but I'm just not sold on this "sewn up" scenario. Easier path? Absolutely.

I know very few who supported her in the primary. How she won I have no idea. I would prefer any of the democrats and at least a half dozen of the republicans that ran..

[alexava 6,974]

11 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I think many agree and may be accurate. I can only speak for myself and politics simply didn't register with me on her handling of Benghazi. 

I think the point is you would have never heard enough about how she handed it to have an opinion if not for the politics..

[AUFAN78 4,130]

5 minutes ago, alexava said:

I know very few who supported her in the primary. How she won I have no idea. I would prefer any of the democrats and at least a half dozen of the republicans that ran..

I primarily work with Democrats. I'd estimate 99% are and have been voting Hilary all along.

I imagine if you could sit down with Bernie he might offer a few suggestions on how she won.

You sound like an independent voter.   

[AUFAN78 4,130]

7 minutes ago, alexava said:

I think the point is you would have never heard enough about how she handed it to have an opinion if not for the politics..

That too is a possibility.

[alexava 6,974]

Where do you work. City? I work with very few democrats and they were all pro Bernie as I was

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Just now, alexava said:

Where do you work. City?

Birmingham

[alexava 6,974]

I was pro Hillary in 08 and it took a while for me to decide on Obama over McCain. 

[AUFAN78 4,130]

1 minute ago, alexava said:

I was pro Hillary in 08 and it took a while for me to decide on Obama over McCain. 

You were not alone.

[Strychnine 1,808]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

You hear that phrase often, but I'm not sold. Despite her many faults the Democrats are strongly supporting Hilary. You'll occasionally hear a Dem state they might have considered Kasich, but I seriously have my doubts they are being truthful. Then examine the electoral map. It is becoming much more difficult for Republicans. So call me a skeptic or whatever, but I'm just not sold on this "sewn up" scenario. Easier path? Absolutely.

 

 

The only real enthusiasm I saw from Democrats was relative to Bernie Sanders.  Hillary is not an engaging person that motivates me to support her when I listen to her.  The only thing that motivates me to support her at all is that she is not Trump.  Without her opponent making a fool of himself on a regular basis, she would not enjoy this advantage.  In a fight between her and a candidate like Kasich or Rubio, I think the latter picks up the moderates and a rather convincing win.  Unfortunately, we do not get to know.

What do you hear now?  Hillary will make such a fantastic President?  No.  You may hear that, but I do not.  You hear how bad Trump would be.  There is less pro-Hillary sentiment and more anti-Trump sentiment.  You may count me among them.  I would have voted for Kasich.  This was a very winnable election for the Republicans, had they not gone full potato with their nomination.