• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Republican Echo Chamber Love Fest (Debate #4)

WFFaithful said:
Deportation-per-year-timelineUS-NYTIMES-e1391705531645.jpg
Click to expand...

A total myth, which I have been over several times in previous threads already and will not rehash here.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Trump's been claiming everyone must go. He'd use "deportation forces" to round up and deport 500K a month. Kasich and Jeb wouldn't be calling out Trump if he was merely advocating enforcing the law and selectively deporting illegals. Getting rid of everyone would crater GDP and overwhelm the courts.

Hillary holds serve and carries the states Dems have won in the last six elections, all she needs is Florida alone or Ohio and Virginia. Kasich, Rubio, and Jeb have a much better handle on OH and FL voters than Trump. Trump makes all kinds of ridiculous statements that won't fly and be toxic in a general election, even against a severely flawed candidate like HRC. The last poll of Latino voters had 75% disproval rating for Trump.
Click to expand...

Trump isn't going to be the nominee.

Deporting people does not require the use of the courts most of the time. You pick people up and bus them back. People who are deported via a Notice To Appear have their dates with an IJ (immigration judge) in court, but that is specific to immigration. Yes, a lofty (and unrealistic) goal of 500k would swamp those courts, but it isn't as if you can't get more IJs. You would not be swamping criminal or civil courts. This is the only administration I can think of that specifically instructed its lawyers to cease pursuing removals en masse when cases had already progressed to the IJ stage.
 
Nominee is likely to be Rubio, Trump, Cruz, or Carson. Among those, Rubio's potentially the only one would directly challenge Trump's immigration nonsense. Cruz is bright enough to know Trump's rants aren't even remotely feasible, but he wants to be to the right of Rubio on every issue in the primaries. Unlikely that Jeb or Kasich will be the nominee, but they've staked out immigration positions that wouldn't hand the election to Hillary. GOP is quantitatively challenged and doesn't trust polling, but there's no uncertainty in examining electoral college results from the last six presidential elections. States that went for Gore and Kerry aren't going for Trump, Cruz, or Carson. Tea Party loves purity, but that's also the reason they only hold 10% of House seats. Beating Hillary rather than appeasing a tiny vocal slice of the electorate should be the focus.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Trump's been claiming everyone must go. He'd use "deportation forces" to round up and deport 500K a month. Kasich and Jeb wouldn't be calling out Trump if he was merely advocating enforcing the law and selectively deporting illegals. Getting rid of everyone would crater GDP and overwhelm the courts.

Hillary holds serve and carries the states Dems have won in the last six elections, all she needs is Florida alone or Ohio and Virginia. Kasich, Rubio, and Jeb have a much better handle on OH and FL voters than Trump. Trump makes all kinds of ridiculous statements that won't fly and be toxic in a general election, even against a severely flawed candidate like HRC. The last poll of Latino voters had 75% disproval rating for Trump.
Click to expand...

As has been stated here many times, the electoral math is much kinder to the Dems than the Pubs. HRC in fact could lose FL, CO, & OH and still win the election by holding NM, IA, & VA along with the other recently held blue wall, pulling out a narrow victory with 272 EV's.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Nominee is likely to be Rubio, Trump, Cruz, or Carson. Among those, Rubio's potentially the only one would directly challenge Trump's immigration nonsense. Cruz is bright enough to know Trump's rants aren't even remotely feasible, but he wants to be to the right of Rubio on every issue in the primaries. Unlikely that Jeb or Kasich will be the nominee, but they've staked out immigration positions that wouldn't hand the election to Hillary. GOP is quantitatively challenged and doesn't trust polling, but there's no uncertainty in examining electoral college results from the last six presidential elections. States that went for Gore and Kerry aren't going for Trump, Cruz, or Carson. Tea Party loves purity, but that's also the reason they only hold 10% of House seats. Beating Hillary rather than appeasing a tiny vocal slice of the electorate should be the focus.
Click to expand...

That's the biggest problem with Cruz. He's bright enough to know a lot of what he says is complete horse shit, but he'd rather incite the mob. Cruz scares the shit out of me. His brand of right wing populist, mob rule politics remind me of Hitler.
 
The whole "rounding up" a distinct group of people and shipping them elsewhere will not fly with even close to a majority of people in this country. Maybe 15-20%. Our country has its own ugly history with that, and it just won't work.

Cruz is smarmy. Brilliant orator and frames the issues well for his own goals, but the guy just comes off as a lying sack. Plus, he looks like Nixon. No chance.
 
DeacWatcher said:
As has been stated here many times, the electoral math is much kinder to the Dems than the Pubs. HRC in fact could lose FL, CO, & OH and still win the election by holding NM, IA, & VA along with the other recently held blue wall, pulling out a narrow victory with 272 EV's.
Click to expand...

Seems like if the GOP nominated Rubio, he selected one of the blue state governors as his VP, and they campaigned well enough to convinced moderates that they'd govern from the middle, that it would be a more competitive race. Those are three big if's though.
 
CantStandYa said:
Seems like if the GOP nominated Rubio, he selected one of the blue state governors as his VP, and they campaigned well enough to convinced moderates that they'd govern from the middle, that it would be a more competitive race. Those are three big if's though.
Click to expand...

I can't think of a blue state governor that would sign up for such a task much less find one that someone like Rubio would reach out to. He might have better luck looking at Sandoval of Nevada or Snyder of Michigan. Pubs need to find a way to pick up states out west where Latino population is growing like Nevada, but pissing them off with their immigration policies is not exactly the right way to go about it.
 
DeacWatcher said:
I can't think of a blue state governor that would sign up for such a task much less find one that someone like Rubio would reach out to. He might have better luck looking at Sandoval of Nevada or Snyder of Michigan. Pubs need to find a way to pick up states out west where Latino population is growing like Nevada, but pissing them off with their immigration policies is not exactly the right way to go about it.
Click to expand...

gov-john-kasich.jpg


You really can't think of ONE? Not even the one that is running for president right now? Ohio went blue the last two elections, and a Republican doesn't win the white house unless they can grab Ohio. If Kasich doesn't win the nomination (which looks to be the case) he is the obvious choice for VP.
 
Wrangor said:
You really can't think of ONE? Not even the one that is running for president right now? Ohio went blue the last two elections, and a Republican doesn't win the white house unless they can grab Ohio. If Kasich doesn't win the nomination (which looks to be the case) he is the obvious choice for VP.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact he's really unpopular with the base right now.
 
PhDeac said:
Except for the fact he's really unpopular with the base right now.
Click to expand...

Kasich has a +28 favorability rating among all voters in Ohio. Rubio has a +17 in Florida. Kasich still runs as a +13 by National Republicans which isn't great, but isn't a huge negative. I would still put most of that on him not being well known enough nationally. Rubio is a +43 Nationally with Republicans. Kasich and Rubio pair up to make a very formidable opponent for the Democrats. Taking Florida and Ohio is step #1. While not guaranteed this would give the Republicans a huge boost in those two states as compared to the alternatives. Would allow them not only to be more competitive in their home state, but also allocate resources in other swing states.
 
PhDeac said:
Except for the fact he's really unpopular with the base right now.
Click to expand...

You don't pick a VP for the base. It's not like the base is going to stay home and - in their eyes - let Hillary win. They'll fall in line with whomever gets nominated and that person's VP pick. The GOP's problem hasn't been the base - it's been independents/moderates in swing states.

Rubio/Kasich would be strong for the base and potentially moderates, although Hillary could hit them hard on limited international/foreign policy/national security experience.
 
CantStandYa said:
You don't pick a VP for the base. It's not like the base is going to stay home and - in their eyes - let Hillary win. They'll fall in line with whomever gets nominated and that person's VP pick. The GOP's problem hasn't been the base - it's been independents/moderates in swing states.

Rubio/Kasich would be strong for the base and potentially moderates, although Hillary could hit them hard on limited international/foreign policy/national security experience.
Click to expand...

Rubio would need to pick a VP for the base just like McCain and Romney needed to.

Kasich is getting crushed by Pubs post debate. I'd be shocked if the polls don't reflect it.
 
I don't think it is as easy as nominating someone from the two swing states and calling it a day. A lot different demographics and people vote in presidential elections than state ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top