GG Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 The homeless have nothing to lose either. Doesn't make them not homeless. What does this have to do with my response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 (edited) Trump needs 46% of the delegates in what is a 3 man race now to be guaranteed the nomination. The research polls have him leading in Indiana and California going forward. Things are looking up in Trump land. Should be easy for him to get the nomination now. Edited April 27, 2016 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Chances are, the conservatives who are dead set against Trump, will have far less to lose if he wins than his most ardent supporters. But carry on with your fantasy island ^ This. His Presidency would be more of a letdown than a bride on her wedding night at Niagara Falls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 (edited) What does this have to do with my response? It means that conservatives like LA obviously have nothing to lose with a Trump presidency because that would mean they already lost. It's easy to have "nothing to lose" when you're already being sat on by the class bully being forced to eat sand. Edited April 27, 2016 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 If Trump wins Indiana it's over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 It means that conservatives like LA obviously have nothing to lose with a Trump presidency because that would mean they already lost. It's easy to have "nothing to lose" when you're already being sat on by the class bully being forced to eat sand. Are you implying that Trump is the class bully who will have his way with the conservatives and they already lost, while his supporters are going to end up as net winners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Are you implying that Trump is the class bully who will have his way with the conservatives and they already lost, while his supporters are going to end up as net winners? If that's the implication, then it's very short-sighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 (edited) If Trump wins Indiana it's over. CBS, Fox News polls et al. have Trump leading at a minimum of 5 points. The momentum will help him even more in the coming weeks. I think Indiana will be a closer race than California but I think he will take both. Edited April 27, 2016 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 It means that conservatives like LA obviously have nothing to lose with a Trump presidency because that would mean they already lost. It's easy to have "nothing to lose" when you're already being sat on by the class bully being forced to eat sand. Except there will be no Trump presidency. The same people who point to polls with him winning Indiana and California are the same people who refuse to acknowledge the polls showing Clinton beating Trump so badly he'll barely be allowed to clean the toilets at Trump Towers. Then she'll make him a czar of some sort, and you'll all sit around thinking "Why was I the only one who didn't see this coming?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 (edited) Are you implying that Trump is the class bully who will have his way with the conservatives and they already lost, while his supporters are going to end up as net winners? No idea on the bolded, I'd say probably not. But to say that Trump's ascension isn't in part a failure of the conservatives who don't support him is just untrue. As such, they aren't coming out net winners either. They are losers for this happening, plain and simple. Not to say they are the only ones to blame, but they are a distinct portion. Twisting the logic that the folks who don't want Trump are actually more successful and better off than the ones who do is the equivalent of the uncoordinated kid on the playground who whiffs at bat then claims "he wasn't really trying anyway." Except there will be no Trump presidency. The same people who point to polls with him winning Indiana and California are the same people who refuse to acknowledge the polls showing Clinton beating Trump so badly he'll barely be allowed to clean the toilets at Trump Towers. Then she'll make him a czar of some sort, and you'll all sit around thinking "Why was I the only one who didn't see this coming?" Hah. That's distinctly possible, but I doubt she rewards him publicly. The funny thing is that you're the same person, just on the flip side. Who cares about the polls in Indiana and Cali, Crusich are beating Hillary nationally, am I right? Edited April 27, 2016 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 No matter who wins about 70-75% of Americans are going to be somewhere between disgruntled to apocalyptic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 No idea on the bolded, I'd say probably not. But to say that Trump's ascension isn't in part a failure of the conservatives who don't support him is just untrue. As such, they aren't coming out net winners either. They are losers for this happening, plain and simple. Not to say they are the only ones to blame, but they are a distinct portion. Twisting the logic that the folks who don't want Trump are actually more successful and better off than the ones who do is the equivalent of the uncoordinated kid on the playground who whiffs at bat then claims "he wasn't really trying anyway." Hah. That's distinctly possible, but I doubt she rewards him publicly. The funny thing is that you're the same person, just on the flip side. Who cares about the polls in Indiana and Cali, Crusich are beating Hillary nationally, am I right? Except the analogies aren't correct. To apply Bills' fan experience to the current situation is like clamoring for JP Losman to save the franchise from the disaster that was Drew Bledsoe. Why, because JP was the shiny new object. And when that didn't work, people staked out firm battle lines between JP & Trent Edwards. How did that hopey change work out for the fans. I find it hilarious that conservatives are getting blamed for 40% of the GOP electorate falling for a self-promoting huckster. Just like the Bills' QB debacle, history has shown that narcissistic self-promoting populists make bad situations far worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Except the analogies aren't correct. To apply Bills' fan experience to the current situation is like clamoring for JP Losman to save the franchise from the disaster that was Drew Bledsoe. Why, because JP was the shiny new object. And when that didn't work, people staked out firm battle lines between JP & Trent Edwards. How did that hopey change work out for the fans. I find it hilarious that conservatives are getting blamed for 40% of the GOP electorate falling for a self-promoting huckster. Just like the Bills' QB debacle, history has shown that narcissistic self-promoting populists make bad situations far worse. How about putting somebody out there who can actually resonate with voters and win? When you trot out dog**** candidates over 8 years, you shouldn't be surprised that disenfranchised GOPers decide to look elsewhere. Your analogy is ridiculous because you're saying that JP fans, Trent fans and Bledsoe had a clear side "better off" than the others. They all were losers. No winners whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 How about putting somebody out there who can actually resonate with voters and win? When you trot out dog**** candidates over 8 years, you shouldn't be surprised that disenfranchised GOPers decide to look elsewhere. Your analogy is ridiculous because you're saying that JP fans, Trent fans and Bledsoe had a clear side "better off" than the others. They all were losers. No winners whatsoever. Which is the whole point, which is hell of a lot more clear in retrospect. But Bills fans were going gaga over the losers (self included) and voices who said they all suck were generally ignored. Alos, if you look at the initial slate of candidates there were a couple of people who are better than the remaining three. But people are ready to support the political version of a blind epileptic squirrel running the offense because he's the shiny new object. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 The funny thing is that you're the same person, just on the flip side. Who cares about the polls in Indiana and Cali, Crusich are beating Hillary nationally, am I right? What are you talking about? The result is still the same. If Trump wins the nomination, he gets his ass handed to him...and in all likelihood you're looking at all GOP gains at all levels over the last eight years getting wiped out. Hillary with the WH, House and Senate. Every reasonable person sees this with the Trump nomination. Hell, I wish I was at least the kind of person who enjoys saying "I told you so" because if Trump gets the nod, it'll be the biggest, fattest, most amazing "I told you so" of all times. Believe me. I talk to people. They tell me all the time how yuuuuge it's going to be. The biggest. Ever. He's a dump phuck and will embarrass everyone. Mark my words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 He's a dump phuck and will embarrass everyone. Mark my words. Let's not underestimate how quiet the news media has been in the last three weeks on Trump as he's inching closer to the nomination. Then get ready for a four month frontal assault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Except there will be no Trump presidency. The same people who point to polls with him winning Indiana and California are the same people who refuse to acknowledge the polls showing Clinton beating Trump so badly he'll barely be allowed to clean the toilets at Trump Towers. Then she'll make him a czar of some sort, and you'll all sit around thinking "Why was I the only one who didn't see this coming?" To be fair, polls can change dramatically over a 6 month period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 To be fair, polls can change dramatically over a 6 month period. And they will, with Clinton reaping the benefit when the media turns its full attention to pointing out all of Trump's many, many, many, failings and shortcomings while HRC gets a free pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 And on the other side, Trump has been getting boat loads of free air time from the constant 24-7 coverage of him. It's almost as if the media chose our candidates for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts