Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Breaking: CNN Calls Race for Trump & Sanders
With just a few percent in, too:
Published in PoliticsRepublican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders have cruised to victories in the New Hampshire primary, CNN projects, in a pair of results that will shake up the presidential race and confirm the strength of anti-establishment candidates. The billionaire reality star’s victory restores the mantle of a winner to his campaign after he trailed in second last week in Iowa and validates him as a powerful new force in American politics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTh2DwlR-N0Sanders, meanwhile, delivered a painful blow to Democratic national front-runner Hillary Clinton after she edged out the slimmest of victories in Iowa. His win ensures that the fight for the Democratic nomination will only intensify heading into Nevada, South Carolina and the Super Tuesday contest and may exacerbate signs of internal discontent about the structure of Clinton’s campaign that are already emerging.
Ok, so when Trump accepts the GOP nomination at the convention in July, then can we say it’s about Trump? Or will it still be about the phenomena?
As a perennial hay fever sufferer whose nose is usually too stuffy to admit sufficient air, I’ve never understood the alleged correlation between lack of intelligence and mouth breathing in the first place. Some of us have to breath through our mouths or pass out due to lack of oxygen…
You’re still missing the point a bit. It’s not that Trump represents their views, is that he represents them. Like I said, power politics. People vote for the candidate they think will best protect them from other social groups.
Let me get this straight- if a lot of voters want something you like, they are intelligent citizens. If they want something you do not like, they are an angry mob, deserving of losing the franchise.
I really do not care if you ever listen to them. This is a site where we talk politics, and some of us point out that if the GOP lies to this group and then does exactly the opposite of what they want, that they will react. I see them reacting by voting, an acceptable political act. You apparently for reasons known only to yourself, portray their voting as that of a mob.
And I don’t disagree in the least bit. But that is a very troubling development in US politics. That’s mob rule. (not that it’s a new development, such candidates have regularly popped up in politics).
My apologies Joseph. As they say, correlation is not causation.
No not really. My disagreeing with your stance isn’t the issue. It’s the fact that the prevailing argument from Trump voters is “they are not listening to me!” That’s not an argument as to why something should be done. “Cause people want it”, I always thought, wasn’t a sufficient argument. In fact, that is the definition of mob rule.
You have the right to what you want, isn’t in the US Constitution. And it’s Bernie’s argument anyway.
It’s not. And they’re not.
Though it does seem to be correlated with people named Joseph. At least, there are two of us here.
From what you are stating Trump supporters are angry, and Trump speaks to that anger. The Trump supporter has become very powerful this political season, not because of the issues, but because of the emotional angle. When challenged to defend Trump, it is interpreted as insulting, or being victimized. It is not my experience that members here indulge in gratuitous name calling People pay to comment, so you know that members are pretty serious about their politics and current events. Those of us that don’t support Trump don’t think you are a bad person, just mislead or wrong.
The national numbers indicate Trump will win everywhere.
This is unknowable.
But life is not going to be the same.
How do we know that some of those Presidents before TV weren’t just as repulsive as Trump?
Trump is a leader, and that is good we need a leader.
But the conservative movement is over. It had it’s moment, but got too nasty…. when we started having purity tests, we lost.
The minute the word RINO entered our vocabulary, the movement ended.
Actually, I care far more about the group of voters than I do any candidate. Apparently you read different comments than I do, but the disdain for Trump voters is quite pronounced , in my opinion . And, Ralphie, after twelve presidential elections, I do not get ‘mislead’, just exhausted by the certainty and arrogance of the young and inexperienced who fall for the usual politicians and hold their fellow Americans as a lower class than themselves.
(FYI, I have stated before, I support Cruz, Trump and Rubio as my first tier choices)
Given how Trump insults others, I’d expect thicker skins.
My mama taught me to seek friends better then myself. So yes, I’d like to vote for someone who is at least better than the modal voter.
Here again you’re making a populist narcissistic argument: “oh you think you’re better than me?” Is that a valid argument for supporting, or opposing, a candidate?
Why is it a bad thing to have disdain for people who vote for a candidate out of spite?
Or, two borrow a note from Michael Medved: The real story is that 2/3 of GOP Voters in the New Hampshire Primary voted against Donald Trump and only 40% of Democrats voted for Hillary Clinton. And Cruz comes in close to Kasich in one of the most liberal-GOP states. Good. Next up: SC. Place your bets now.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, we have learned that. We may also learn that if you ignore the problems of people with low IQs they get very angry and march in the streets and burn things down, and vote for socialists.
If we can’t have the optimistic Rubio… none of the rest seem any better than Trump me. Not Bush or Cruz.
Trump is crass. But maybe he has some real answers. He can’t raise taxes without Congress. It will be fine.
But they wouldn’t be able to vote, under my plan :) Besides, we’ve got cops for that.
They had it right back in the day. You had to be able to read and write, and own property, and pay taxes. Man, wouldn’t that be sweet! Instead of a voter registration card, you had to show your W-2 at the poll.
Can we revoke the New Hampshire first primary designation please? Buchanan, McCain, and now trump have all won there in the past….Huntsman and Kasich have based their entire MSNBC campaigns in that tiny state. It makes no sense in 2020 to do this again.
I agree there are better vessels. I am holding out lukewarm hope that maybe Cruz is a better vessel. Who else do you think would’ve worked well?
It isn’t a defense of him.
It isn’t an argument against those that dislike him. However, it is a wake up call to them that there is a block of voters without which we don’t win and their concerns are not being addressed by the conventional politicians.
The Republican party should replace the primary process. It has shown to select weak candidates that tend to lose the general. This time it may elect a “not a conservative/not a person believing in the constitution”. The fact that a very small portion of the Republican party members get to cast a vote before its over is ridiculous but not the main problem (so rotating states may feel good but not be enough). The problem is that the available choice of candidates, is too large, includes people who are neither Republican nor Conservative. We need to fix this before 2020 and there is a proposal from Cost/Anderson that is much better.
But as a binary constitutional originalist you of all people must realize that sometimes it neither is, nor should be, within the power of government to address those concerns.
I wholly agree. That is why we need someone who will strictly adhere to the original constructs and make the case why that is better.
I think we are a long way from that happening and acknowledge it is possible.
If Trump is accepting the nomination I hope all the high minded folks that ignored his supporters will admit they were wrong, but I will not hold my breath.
Somehow, despite the gang of eight being his biggest weakness, Rubio has been felled by a bizarre robot meme. I can’t explain it, I don’t get it, but it concerns me. I laughed off the “binders full of women” meme as nonsense four years ago and yet it had its intended effect. It is starting to look like the Rubot meme has legs. I might have to jump on the Cruz bandwagon just to coalesce behind the strongest anti-Trump candidate.
I think you are overestimating the damage the robot meme did. I would buy into it if Christie finished ahead of him, but that wasn’t the case.
I also think you are underestimating the G8 damage.
Trump got 35-percent of the vote, Kasich got 16-percent and Cruz got 12-percent, so Kasich and Cruz got a combined 28-percent of the vote. It must be the new math, where 28-percent of the vote is greater than 35-percent of the vote.
Thanks for clearing that up.
If you haven’t left the country with Barry in charge, what makes you think you’ll leave the country if Trump is in charge?
Maybe so, but either way, I’m beginning to have a hard time seeing how he wins. He finished 5th overall and as the 3rd establishment candidate in NH. Cruz on the other hand was at least able to hold on to a respectable 3rd place finish in a state he wasn’t expected to do very well in.
Brent, you keep making this argument and I don’t quite understand why. What you call high minded I call principled.’
This argument ignores the fact that the majority of Trump supporters aren’t interested in conservative solutions. They aren’t interested in conservative economic solutions but rather trade protectionism and government backed blue collar job security (whatever that means). They aren’t interested in Originalism but want a strong man authoritarian who will “win” – however that happens to be defined at the moment.
If Trump was offering anything close to a conservative vision for America this argument might hold water with conservatives. As such, and as a principled Originalist yourself, it makes little sense to accuse us of of high mindedness when all we want it fidelity to conservative principles and the Constitution.
What basis then should a person use to determine the candidate they support?
Your argument seems to be that a candidate who listens to your concerns and suggest policies that people want is a bad way to chose a candidate. This kind throws a lot of political theory out the window. Should a voter do the opposite and support candidates who ignore them and who proposes policies they dislike?
“mob rule” is one of those things in a Democracy that needs a bit better defining. The people wanting something so thus voting for a candidate they think best represents them is now “mob rule”? If this is the case the all democracies are ruled by mobs and should be scrapped.
I don’t want a President Trump, I just don’t understand the argument used here.