Trump, Republican leaders realizing they may need each other

For Trump to actually be President, he would need roughly 75,000,000 American adults to vote for him. I have more faith in this country than to believe we are that crazy.

Trump won't win the presidency. The GOP nomination, however, would be more disastrous. If Trump is the nominee, millions of die hard republicans and conservatives won't turn out to vote for the big show. Presidency gift-wrapped for the Dems.

Republican leaders realizing they may need each other

No more hunger games? It was entertaining though, moreso than listening to the Dems.

Trump won't win the presidency.

Uh-huh...I remember when liberals said, the GOP won't win the House, they did in 2010 and then they said, they will NEVER win the Senate and they did in 2014. At this point, liberals need to say, I HOPE he doesn't win.

The GOP nomination, however, would be more disastrous. If Trump is the nominee, millions of die hard republicans and conservatives won't turn out to vote for the big show. Presidency gift-wrapped for the Dems.

At this point, if that means keeping Hillary out of office, I think they will do whatever it takes to avoid that from happening.

“I’m a dealmaker who will get things done,” he said Thursday during an event in Las Vegas. “There’s a point at which — let’s get to be a little establishment. We got to get things done, folks, OK?”

So if the Constitution calls for a dealer in chief, Trump's think'in, "Build a Wall!"

How is it the "establishment" story line sounds like backstory for a "Monsters of Politics" documentary of the Trump movement? At least, this is the storyline Trump is spinning. You bet ch'a!

As Dickens delivered Dorrit in dollops, Trump is delivering thirteen weeks of a campaign season in episodic storyboards.

The "Media" hasn't built the trajectory chart on Trump assaults vs. demographics offended, but even the rough figuring must include some 60% of the over all populace in the States, and some international condemnation.

How is the GOP a functioning body any more given they will welcome Trump as Messiah and abandon all decency?

Some have argued decency is the last thing the GOP was ever interested in, but, of course, that draws laughter.

Well, the GOP finally found god. He's a New York values liberal billionaire with a wicked racist streak wrapped in bigot blanket topped with bible gook and a healthy appetite for public funds.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Donald J. Trump, haberdasher, television personality, republican shia-tea

So if the Constitution calls for a dealer in chief

. . . better than a commander-in-retreat.

Uh-huh...I remember when liberals said, the GOP won't win the House, they did in 2010 and then they said, they will NEVER win the Senate and they did in 2014. At this point, liberals need to say, I HOPE he doesn't win.'

First, comparing a house election to a presidential one is apples and oranges. Second, I'm not a liberal. You know what they say about making 'ass'umptions. And the republicans won the house because they ran on anti-Obama conservative platform. Then the tucked tail and sold out the very people that put them in office. The base is tired of the establishment selling them out. Trump actions over the past few weeks--personal attacks on Cruz, crony capitalism, flipping on substantive issues, etc.--are turning off the true conservatives because they realize he doesn't stand on principle, much like the GOP establishment clowns. But, you sound like a establishment guy that will argue for the mere sake of argument. I'm sure you'll attempt to break this down bit by bit. Have at it.

At this point, if that means keeping Hillary out of office, I think they will do whatever it takes to avoid that from happening.

I think you're off on this. Most conservatives I know--and I know a lot--are already saying they would rather stay home then vote for Trump. See, conservatives are by and large principled people and they typically don't compromise on those principles--for better or worse. The root word of conservative being "conserve", as in "conserve" principles and traditions. Most die hard conservatives don't relate to Trump because they see him for what his is: a fraud, a man with no principles who constantly changes his empty rhetoric depending on the environment. They simply won't vote for man that doesn't represent their values. Trump changes politician affiliations so fast and often, no one truly knows where he stands. Trump is stands for Trump, and Trump will do and say whatever is in the best interest of Trump. He is largely supported by uninformed, uneducated drones who loves to hear his catchy phrases but are too lazy to do the research and dig deep into the important issues and see where exactly Trump stands. Unfortunately for Trump, these same people typically don't turn out to vote.

"On the Democratic side, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is facing an unexpectedly strong challenge from liberal insurgent Sen. Bernie Sanders."

What's up with that?

@Serrano, I think it's her dishonesty and the reports of the uber secret emails she misued. Her claims and the reported reality differ greatly.

The root word of conservative being "conserve", as in "conserve" principles and traditions. Most die hard conservatives don't relate to Trump because they see him for what his is: a fraud, a man with no principles who constantly changes his empty rhetoric depending on the environment. They simply won't vote for man that doesn't represent their values. Trump changes politician affiliations so fast and often, no one truly knows where he stands. Trump is stands for Trump, and Trump will do and say whatever is in the best interest of Trump. He is largely supported by uninformed, uneducated drones - comments

While the etymologies of "conservative" can be debated, it is far more important to read the earnest truth from, what many hope, is a representative voice of the GOP that reviles Trump for the same reason the liberal socialist reviles Trump for.

While the etymologies of "conservative" can be debated

Actually, no it can't. "Conservative" is derived from "conserve." As you love to through around big words, I'm sure you have a thesaurus right next to you. Pick it up.

it is far more important to read the earnest truth from, what many hope, is a representative voice of the GOP that reviles Trump for the same reason the liberal socialist reviles Trump for.

.....what?

aside: "conserve" principles and traditions"

not sure what this even means, hence, etymologies. sidebar ends . . .

not sure what this even means, hence, etymologies. sidebar ends . .

Perhaps because you're cherry-picking and quoting it out of context specifically to argue something? Although, no one really know what point it is you're trying to make. Do you have point? Would like you debate substance? Or, continue focusing on etymology and cherry-picked quotes, neither of which has anything to do with my overall argument.

It's not that complicated. Get those wheels turning. You'll figure it out eventually.

You can't say it isn't interesting. I at least have never ever seen a primary campaign where the two top front-runners in a party are both trying to be destroyed by that party. At this point most people are simply looking for answers, explanations, information, and an answer to the basic question, "What the hell is happening out there?"

Bass,

If you are seriously suggesting that Trump would make a better president than Clinton, then you -- and by extension --conservatives have truly lost their way when it comes to promoting the common good for all Americans.

And I'm being serious here. This isn't our usual snark-filled tit-for-tat exchange I'm engaging in. I'm deadly seriously when I say Trump would be a disaster of a president, inflicting political, social, and economic damage on America and its image in ways that can't even be calculated. The man is a megalomaniac that puts Hillary's admittedly strong ambitions to shame, and would take an entire generation to undo the harm he would do to the fabric of America is allowed to pursue even one of his more devisive "policies."

Honestly, if Trump really is the best the GOP can muster at this stage of the game, and if mainstream Republicans, in a bid to "defeat Hillary at any cost," are willing to back the lowest common denominator to accomplish just that, then I'm afraid the GOP is effectively over as a legitimate party in America.

If the GOP seriously backs Trump, it has for all intents and purposes signed its own death warrant.

I have to admit I'm enjoying the battle between Trump and Cruz. Both are egomaniacs.

Watching the GOP going through the Kübler-Ross model is entertaining. I'd say GOPers can at this stage be divided into three groups: those who actually support Trump, those somewhere towards the end of the model (depression, acceptance), and those stubbornly at the top (denial, anger, bargaining). We'll likely soon see some serious infighting between these latter two groups.

In fact, it's already started. The conservative standard National Review - apparently in anger stage - the other day published an anthology of conservative authors' arguments against Trump and Trumpism, and today the RNC - apparently quite depressed - disinvited them from the next debate. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/national-review-donald-trump-debate_us_56a24a3ce4b0404eb8f14410

Whatever happens to Trump at this stage is really of no matter; the GOP will never be the same.

"Watching the GOP going through the Kübler-Ross model is entertaining." - comments

Seems terribly unfair to Kübler-Ross.

Is it more a death spiral twelve step, and no ones gets well.

I have to admit I'm enjoying the battle between Trump and Cruz. Both are egomaniacs.

What person seeking the highest, most powerful office in the history of man isn't an egomaniac?

Oh yeah, another MSM propaganda piece that makes my day.

If you are seriously suggesting that Trump would make a better president than Clinton, then you -- and by extension --conservatives have truly lost their way when it comes to promoting the common good for all Americans.

So then, you think we all would be better off with a Hillary presidency? Knowing that she'll take us through a 3rd Obama presidency essentially, you think that's a better alternative?? As I said before, I'm not really a Trump guy, but I understand why a lot of conservatives like him and like Sanders on the left, both men are shaking up the traditional political system and it's driving the establishments on both sides crazy. Traditional libs don't want Sanders, they know Hillary is a deeply flawed candidate, so they'll go with her instead of Sanders that believes in FREE everything, which is impossible to achieve in a nation of 350 million people. Likewise, the same goes for the GOP, many don't want him, but who else is there? Cruz perhaps?

And I'm being serious here. This isn't our usual snark-filled tit-for-tat exchange I'm engaging in. I'm deadly seriously when I say Trump would be a disaster of a president, inflicting political, social, and economic damage on America and its image in ways that can't even be calculated.

I'm not saying you're wrong, you may be right, but imagine a Hillary presidency, imagine financially what that will do to us, the country is already in the dumps because of Obama and the woman wants todo more of the same???? I'm serious when I say, this is both the worst case scenario, damned if I do and damned if I don't.

The man is a megalomaniac that puts Hillary's admittedly strong ambitions to shame, and would take an entire generation to undo the harm he would do to the fabric of America is allowed to pursue even one of his more decisive "policies."

Could be, but do you want someone in the White House that has a history of shadiness and dishonesty right out of the gate and governing the country? She has the worst credibility problem and on that alone, she should be disqualified. Not to mention the ongoing FBI investigation is not exactly helping her.

Honestly, if Trump really is the best the GOP can muster at this stage of the game, and if mainstream Republicans, in a bid to "defeat Hillary at any cost," are willing to back the lowest common denominator to accomplish just that, then I'm afraid the GOP is effectively over as a legitimate party in America.

Maybe and the same goes for the Dems if they elect Sanders as their nominee. How is it that in our nation of freedom and our pride in self-reliance and small government we could possibly elect a socialist?

If the GOP seriously backs Trump, it has for all intents and purposes signed its own death warrant.

Again, you may be right, but for millions of Americans, even thinking about Hillary as president is a fear worse than death.

If you are seriously suggesting that Trump would make a better president than Clinton, then you -- and by extension --conservatives have truly lost their way when it comes to promoting the common good for all Americans.

Spoken like a true idiot. It's really shocking that anyone supports Hillary Clinton. She is SO tied into wall street and the international terrorism scam. just shocking

Someone in Salon notes regarding the Review's anthology:

Any discerning reader knows that, on some level, you’re meant to root for the monster to turn on Dr. Frankenstein, for the Pied Piper to take the children away, for Satan to finally come for Dr. Faustus. And so it’s impossible not to take pleasure in watching the conservative base come extract its pound of Trump-shaped flesh out of the establishment.

http://www.salon.com/2016/01/22/conservatives_in_a_meltdown_national_reviews_confused_against_trump_issue_is_an_amazing_testament_to_the_rights_implosion/

Another conservative yesterday noted the choice between Trump and Cruz is analogous to being shot or poisoned.

Both have a point: The GOP is reaping the whirlwind of its own making, and it is impossible not to take pleasure in watching.

The GOP is reaping the whirlwind of its own making, and it is impossible not to take pleasure in watching.

Why? So you can witness the end of a two-party system, and any possibility of restoring true small-r republicanism? Or because what you libs truly desire is a bonafide one party system where you and fellow party members will hold all the wealth and power and can rule with impunity? See where I'm going with this?

And I say that with all the love and respect I can muster. :)

"The GOP is reaping the whirlwind of its own making"

And the Democratic Party is reaping the whirlwind of its own making. It looks like they'll either nominate Hillary or Bernie Sanders. Can't they come up with anyone better than those two?

Serrano: And the Democratic Party is reaping the whirlwind of its own making. It looks like they'll either nominate Hillary or Bernie Sanders. Can't they come up with anyone better than those two?

The entire field seems to be devolving .... I wonder what we can look forward to 20 or 30 years from now?

That ripping sound you hear is the GOP tearing itself apart. And they did it to themselves.

Trump elected US president = America going off the deep end. Better cozy up to China.

RickDaHo, schadenfreude is a thing. Since Nixon's southern strategy to win the South for the Republican Party in the 1968 and 1972 elections through the ungodly melding of evangelicalism and neoliberalism started by Reagan (who, honestly and quite ironically, would be considered too liberal by today's GOP standards), warnings from all sides that the GOP was courting disaster were met not just with deaf ears but with a smug assurance that the strategy could continue forever with no repercussions.

You don't need to be Tim the Enchanter to figure this out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcxKIJTb3Hg America has survived the demise of major political parties before, and it will survive this. The small r Republicans will not become extinct, but they will either have to take their party back or create something new. But like, say, alcoholics, the first step towards recovery is recognizing the problem. In the meantime, those who saw this coming, on either side, can at the least enjoy a grim sort of satisfaction.

Serrano,

And the Democratic Party is reaping the whirlwind of its own making. It looks like they'll either nominate Hillary or Bernie Sanders. Can't they come up with anyone better than those two?

The key difference between the GOP's particular whirlwind and that of the Democrats is that Democrats actually like the candidates before them. That most certainly can't be said for the GOP with its hodgepodge patchwork of 17 dissonant candidates, very few of whom enjoy any real popularity among their constituency, Trump included.

It speaks volumes when the nicest thing Trump supporters can force themselves to say about their likely nominee is, "He speaks his mind," as if that alone were enough to qualify the man for the highest elected office in the land.

Thanks, but Democrats are infinitely more happy with their lot in the next election than Republicans obviously are. You know it, I know it, and Republicans know it.

The truth is . . . what's that phrase the now-defunct Moral Majority liked to bandy about? Ah, yes. The truth is written on your hearts: The GOP is in deep, deep trouble and needs to do some significant soul searching before this all spirals out of their control with the increasingly likely nomination of a narcissistic nutcase.

"So then, you think we all would be better off with a Hillary presidency?" Why not?

"Sanders that believes in FREE everything" Well, there is "Free" Medicare already.

"Not to mention the ongoing FBI investigation is not exactly helping her." Did they find something?

"There’s a point at which — let’s get to be a little establishment. We got to get things done, folks, OK?">

The man is barely articulate

From what I have seen, in the US, smart people no longer become politicians. Except Obama, who seems pretty smart.

from what I have seen, in the US, smart people no longer become politicians. Except Obama, who seems pretty smart.

Better not ask the Yemen's how they feel about Obama, you might get shot. Another war under obama's belt.

Palin thinks all her family's personal problems (and losing the election) is all Obama's fault.

"Another war under obama's belt." Obama declared war on Yemen?

Bernie Sanders FTW!

schadenfreude is a thing

Thanks for the German lesson. All wrapped up in that pretty veil of condescension.

Reagan (who, honestly and quite ironically, would be considered too liberal by today's GOP standards),

Not sure what you're basing this on, but it's very doubtful. The conservative base has been calling for a return to Reagan conservatism for years now.

Neoliberalism is an economic theory rooted in IPE, one given credence by conservative economists such as Milton Friedman and others. Not sure how you can meld that with evangelicalism. One is an economic theory, the other is religion. Care to elaborate? I'm not following that at all.

warnings from all sides that the GOP was courting disaster were met not just with deaf ears but with a smug assurance that the strategy could continue forever with no repercussions.

Again, I'm not following you. I don't understand how it relates and where you going with it. Maybe I'm just not as smart and witty as you. Clearly, the shortcomings lie with me.

Tim the Enchanter

Who? But, maybe I do need to be this guy but I don't know what you're talking about.

America has survived the demise of major political parties before, and it will survive this.

Clearly. But you failed to see through my sarcasm. My comments were made it jest. Playing. Horsing around. Joking. Having fun.

The small r Republicans will not become extinct, but they will either have to take their party back or create something new

This is my cue to give you a little lesson. I'll try not to be as condescending as you, I'm sure I'll fail.

"Small-r" is use to differentiate the between terms "republican." "Small-r" meaning republicanism, as is the form the government. Republican (with a big ole capital "R") refers the political party. The former is a common noun, the later a proper noun. Hence, the "small-r" moniker. Clearly I was referring to the form of government. So your entire post is completely off-base and pointless.

But like, say, alcoholics, the first step towards recovery is recognizing the problem. In the meantime, those who saw this coming, on either side, can at the least enjoy a grim sort of satisfaction.

"So then, you think we all would be better off with a Hillary presidency?" Why not?

Credibility issues are one of the main reasons.

"Sanders that believes in FREE everything" Well, there is "Free" Medicare already.

And that's just as bad.

"Not to mention the ongoing FBI investigation is not exactly helping her." Did they find something?

A lot. Whether the FBI is going to pursue and criminal charges and recommends to indite her is another matter.

Trump elected US president = America going off the deep end.

We've already passed that point 7 years ago.

Better cozy up to China.

Been to Walmart recently???

So you can witness the end of a two-party system, and any possibility of restoring true small-r republicanism? Or because what you libs truly desire is a bonafide one party system where you and fellow party members will hold all the wealth and power and can rule with impunity?

BINGO! Hit the nail on the head!

"Credibility issues are one of the main reasons." Specifics?

"And that's just as bad." This is saying get rid of Medicare.

"A lot. Whether the FBI is going to pursue and criminal charges and recommends to indite her is another matter." Do they have evidence or not?

"Credibility issues are one of the main reasons." Specifics?

That's going back about 35 years, that's a lot to go on and too many to talk on this thread without being dinged off topic.

"And that's just as bad." This is saying get rid of Medicare.

Yes.

"A lot. Whether the FBI is going to pursue and criminal charges and recommends to indite her is another matter." Do they have evidence or not?

Ask James Comey. It would be a nice thing though....

If she is not arrested that means there is no evidence.

The GOP house is burning down and their response is, "Gosh, that Hillary just isn't trustworthy."

I can't say I blame them. Pinning your hopes and dreams on a Clinton arrest would certainly alleviate the short-term election problems, but it does nothing to change the fact that Cruz and Trump are hated by their own party and will continue to be whether they win or lose. We know Republicans put party before country but waking up one day to President Trump won't give much satisfaction for preventing a President Clinton, but that's quickly becoming their only alternative. Either the frying pan or the fire.

What a mess.

The GOP house is burning down and their response is, "Gosh, that Hillary just isn't trustworthy."

Sup, give it up, you libs always, always seem to forget, the GOP has nothing to do with what is happening to Hillary. The FBI and the DOJ, that's it. You guys are delusional to even think of peddling that crap. If only the GOP had that kind of power, Hillary would be wearing a prison jump suit by now.

I can't say I blame them. Pinning your hopes and dreams on a Clinton arrest would certainly alleviate the short-term election problems,

Actually, that's what Dems think the conservatives are thinking. And, by the way, the same screwed up politics is not regulated to the GOP. Liberals and Dems have to deal with Sanders and the liberal establishment doesn't like him. You have a deeply flawed candidate with enough baggage stretching from Cairo to New York. The FBI have nothing to do with the GOP and vice versa. You guys think that, they don't have the right to question any possible corruption whether its them or the CIA or NSA, they just have to work on behalf of the GOP. Sorry, NO one and I mean, NO ONE is buying that.

but it does nothing to change the fact that Cruz and Trump are hated by their own party and will continue to be whether they win or lose.

True, but that has nothing to do with the lady in the pant suits.

We know Republicans put party before country

Actually, that would be the Democrats that do that and we can only go by the last 7 years of that as history.

but waking up one day to President Trump won't give much satisfaction for preventing a President Clinton, but that's quickly becoming their only alternative. Either the frying pan or the fire.

Better be careful about those predictions. Dems are really bad at that.

What a mess.

Sup, give it up, you libs always, always seem to forget, the GOP has nothing to do with what is happening to Hillary.

And Hillary has nothing to do with the article. What's your position on the Trump vs. Cruz vs. the GOP fiasco? You don't have to answer if you don't want to, but it is the topic at hand.

And Hillary has nothing to do with the article. What's your position on the Trump vs. Cruz vs. the GOP fiasco? You don't have to answer if you don't want to, but it is the topic at hand.

Trying to evade again, eh? My answer to that is simple, I'll take Cruz over Trump and by the way, they're all linked, so you can't dissect and cherry pick. We all know Trump is Trump, I'm not for the guy, I'd rather go with Cruz and as for the fiasco, what can one say? The establishment hates Cruz and the man by definition is a real conservative and not the water down version either. Trump is not historically a conservative, nothing in his past shows it. So do I trust the man, NO. But electing him over Hillary or even Sanders is not odeon science.

"the GOP has nothing to do with what is happening to Hillary. The FBI and the DOJ, that's it. " No evidence no indictment. But what charges (imaginary or otherwise) are we talking about? For example Murder? Are there any specifics to the felonies that Hillary has clearly committed while the authorities are somehow magically not charging here?