RNC Convention Chaos

[Green Arrow]

So, I'm watching Day One of the RNC on C-Span, and this is essentially what I witnessed transpire.

Last night, nine states submitted a petition demanding a roll call vote on the convention's rules. Those nine state delegations were led by Colorado, Utah, and Virginia. Overnight, three states withdrew their signatures, putting the petition just below the number of signatures necessary to force a roll call vote on convention rules.

The chair announces this, but refuses to mention who the three states that withdrew were, which is unprecedented. When the three state delegations of Utah, Virginia, and Utah tried to challenge it and still ask for a roll call vote and also the identity of the three state delegations that withdrew, the convention chair abandoned the stage for a good fifteen minutes, maybe even more. When he finally did return, the delegates of Virginia, Utah, and Colorado found their microphones were now turned off, to the point that Ken Cuccinelli, leader of the Virginia delegation, was basically waving his state's delegation sign in the air to get recognized. Finally, the chair recognized Utah, and they once again requested a roll call vote and the name of the three withdrawn states. The chair ignored his request and held a voice vote on the rules. Even though the ayes and nays were too close in volume to really tell who won without a re-do, the chair wasted no time giving it to the ayes.

Once that was done, the chair asked if anyone wanted to be recognized. Cuccinelli asked to be recognized. His microphone was off again. He raised his hand. He waved the sign. People shouted that Virginia was trying to be recognized. The chair ignored them and recognized West Virginia, whose delegation proposed a resolution to immediately adopt the new rules and move on.

I don't know about anyone else, but from where I sit, shit smells bad.

[del]

i guess this is how pols behave when they don't have the foresight to use super delegates.

[The Xl]

They're butt hurt that they can't rig it. It's why I support Trump on any level.

[Peter1469]

I am not paying it much attention. I have no doubt that some people are not going to like the outcome whatever it is.

[Green Arrow]

They're butt hurt that they can't rig it. It's why I support Trump on any level.

Seriously? If there's any rigging it's clearly on Trump's behalf.

[The Xl]

Seriously? If there's any rigging it's clearly on Trump's behalf.

How? He already won, he has nothing to rig in his favor

[Green Arrow]

How? He already won, he has nothing to rig in his favor

The roll call vote's purpose was to change the convention rules and allow delegates to vote based on their conscience, rather than the votes of their states. If a majority of delegates seriously opposed Trump, or even just enough to put him under the necessary total of delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot, every delegate would be unbound and virtually anyone could emerge as the nominee.

Even ignoring that much, it's pretty clear from what took place that the system is rigged. Normal procedures were ignored, the delegations from Virginia, Colorado, and Utah had their microphones turned off, and the RNC brass is doing everything in their power to ignore the minority voice. A minority voice that just so happens to oppose the nominee.

It's blatant and in your face.

[FindersKeepers]

Seriously? If there's any rigging it's clearly on Trump's behalf.

Actually, no.

It was the #NeverTrump group that made one last push to change the delegate rules but they didn't have enough support.

Today, they demanded a roll call vote, but the Chairman said they didn't have the numbers to force one. So, they lost, again.

Now, that could create enough hard feelings that some delegates walk out, but it won't matter.

That was basically their last shot -- and it was supported behind the scene by the Cruz people.

The majority of the GOP agreed that, whether they liked the candidate or not, it was the "will of the people" that must be considered.

[Green Arrow]

Actually, no.

It was the #NeverTrump group that made one last push to change the delegate rules but they didn't have enough support.

Today, they demanded a roll call vote, but the Chairman said they didn't have the numbers to force one. So, they lost, again.

Now, that could create enough hard feelings that some delegates walk out, but it won't matter.

That was basically their last shot -- and it was supported behind the scene by the Cruz people.

The majority of the GOP agreed that, whether they liked the candidate or not, it was the "will of the people" that must be considered.

So why turn their microphones off? Why abandon the stage? Why ask who wants to be recognized - and then ignore three states that want to be recognized and instead recognize the one state that supports the agenda? Why not give the names of the three states that withdrew from the petition?

Personally, I agree - Trump is the nominee. I think it would be wrong of the RNC at this point to nominate anyone but Trump, and I say this as someone who loathes Donald Trump almost as much as I loathe Hillary Clinton.

But the way they are going about supporting him is, frankly, wrong.

[Green Arrow]

And, FindersKeepers, whether the state delegations are part of the "NeverTrump" group or not is irrelevant. As I said: three state delegations, Colorado, Utah, and Virginia, led the fight on the floor. Their microphones were turned off, their requests were ignored, and the Virginia delegation was ignored altogether in favor of the West Virginia delegation, who conveniently supported the rules.

[FindersKeepers]

So why turn their microphones off? Why abandon the stage? Why ask who wants to be recognized - and then ignore three states that want to be recognized and instead recognize the one state that supports the agenda? Why not give the names of the three states that withdrew from the petition?

Personally, I agree - Trump is the nominee. I think it would be wrong of the RNC at this point to nominate anyone but Trump, and I say this as someone who loathes Donald Trump almost as much as I loathe Hillary Clinton.

But the way they are going about supporting him is, frankly, wrong.



I believe the RNC would have liked to have a different candidate -- just I wish the same. Not Cruz however.

But, at some point, the RNC has to stand up and accept that Trump won. The NeverTrumpers have continuously caused trouble, and Colorado even cancelled their primary and just gave Cruz the delegates. It's over. I just think the RNC is tired of the shenanigans, and, while I am not happy with Trump, it's about time the majority of the party came together. I didn't see the microphones shut off, but I'd guess it was to keep it from turning into another Kangaroo Kourt.

Hillary is most likely to be our next President and the RNC just needs to pull together and support the candidate.

[Green Arrow]

I believe the RNC would have liked to have a different candidate -- just I wish the same. Not Cruz however.

I agree. I liked Rand Paul and John Kasich. That's not really the point, though. Like I said, Trump won fair and square. He should be the nominee.

However, quite literally silencing dissent is not the way to defend Trump. The only way this could have been more offensive is if they had armed security escort the delegations of Virginia, Utah, and Colorado out the door.


But, at some point, the RNC has to stand up and accept that Trump won. The NeverTrumpers have continuously caused trouble, and Colorado even cancelled their primary and just gave Cruz the delegates. It's over. I just think the RNC is tired of the shenanigans, and, while I am not happy with Trump, it's about time the majority of the party came together. I didn't see the microphones shut off, but I'd guess it was to keep it from turning into another Kangaroo Kourt.

It was to silence dissent.

I'll tell you the same thing I told the Democrats: You don't get unity by silencing your dissenters, even if they are in the minority. You get unity with compromise. All they wanted was a roll call vote instead of a voice vote. Why not just give it to them? What are they afraid of?


Hillary is most likely to be our next President and the RNC just needs to pull together and support the candidate.

People should support the candidate that fits in with their conscience.

[Mo B]

Seriously? If there's any rigging it's clearly on Trump's behalf.

I believe the rules call for a roll call not voice vote.

Whatever the riot squads might see more action in the stadium than out. Wait til all those sixtysomething fat old trumpets start throwing their xxxxl panties on the stage for Chachi.

[Safety]

Kinda makes the whole "superdelegate" thing seem like a frigging smart move...

[del]

nothing shows a commitment to democracy and the rule of law like shutting off microphones and hustling through voice votes.

[Hal Jordan]

Kinda makes the whole "superdelegate" thing seem like a frigging smart move...

How so?

[Safety]

How so?

It prevents having to shut off a microphone and basically treat this like they did Ron Paul in 2012.

[Green Arrow]

How so?

He means from the RNC perspective of controlling the results. Basically if the RNC is going to go through all this trouble to protect their nominee, they'd find it easier if they adopted superdelegates.

If I'm interpreting that right, Safety. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[FindersKeepers]

So why turn their microphones off? Why abandon the stage? Why ask who wants to be recognized - and then ignore three states that want to be recognized and instead recognize the one state that supports the agenda? Why not give the names of the three states that withdrew from the petition?

I really have no idea. It sounds odd, to be sure. Kind of like those coin-flips that somehow Sanders never won. I think the elites are playing by their own rules, perhaps.


Personally, I agree - Trump is the nominee. I think it would be wrong of the RNC at this point to nominate anyone but Trump, and I say this as someone who loathes Donald Trump almost as much as I loathe Hillary Clinton.

But the way they are going about supporting him is, frankly, wrong.

Legitimately, I guess the RNC could run someone else -- since they're a private party -- but, I think they'd lose a huge number of their members.

I think we're in for a rowdy, but interesting, general campaign.

[Green Arrow]

I really have no idea. It sounds odd, to be sure. Kind of like those coin-flips that somehow Sanders never won. I think the elites are playing by their own rules, perhaps.

That's the conclusion I came to. The GOP realizes that their only chance to win is to stick with Trump, because to dump him now would force him to run third party, and even if it didn't, I doubt a majority of his supporters would support the GOP after that - and justifiably so. No, even though they are starting out as the underdogs with Trump, they at least stand a chance of winning. They'd be stupid not to stick with Trump.

That said...I have been a very vocal critic of Ken Cuccinelli since I still lived in Virginia and he was running to be my governor. If I'm defending him...there's a problem.


Legitimately, I guess the RNC could run someone else -- since they're a private party -- but, I think they'd lose a huge number of their members.

I think we're in for a rowdy, but interesting, general campaign.

I've agreed with that from the start. This has been a rowdy set of primaries and is set to be an even rowdier general election. I will say though that no matter who wins, America loses.

[JDubya]

Simple explanation: Republicans are underhanded scum.

[Green Arrow]

Simple explanation: Republicans are underhanded scum.

Correct. Both parties are corrupt beyond salvaging. Time to throw them out.

[FindersKeepers]

I agree. I liked Rand Paul and John Kasich. That's not really the point, though. Like I said, Trump won fair and square. He should be the nominee.

I was surprised Rand Paul didn't get further. He's not a bad guy. He just couldn't get any traction. But Cruz, good golly, no.


However, quite literally silencing dissent is not the way to defend Trump. The only way this could have been more offensive is if they had armed security escort the delegations of Virginia, Utah, and Colorado out the door.

I'll tell you the same thing I told the Democrats: You don't get unity by silencing your dissenters, even if they are in the minority. You get unity with compromise. All they wanted was a roll call vote instead of a voice vote. Why not just give it to them? What are they afraid of?

People should support the candidate that fits in with their conscience.

I don't know the exact rules of the convention, but I don't think they have to grant a roll call vote if those demanding it are not one-fifth of the quorum. My guess is that the dissenters did not reach that number.

Usually, the rules take precedence. That would be my guess as to why they were denied a roll call vote -- because they didn't have the numbers they needed to force one.

But -- don't quote me on that -- I didn't see it.

[Green Arrow]

I was surprised Rand Paul didn't get further. He's not a bad guy. He just couldn't get any traction. But Cruz, good golly, no.

We are in agreement on Cruz. Rand Paul's problem was his rational, realist foreign policy had the misfortune of being delivered right before multiple terror attacks globally and here at home, so he was doomed at that point. Which is a shame.


I don't know the exact rules of the convention, but I don't think they have to grant a roll call vote if those demanding it are not one-fifth of the quorum. My guess is that the dissenters did not reach that number.

They do not have to, and the dissenters did not reach the number to force the vote. My point, though, is that if they want unity, granting a roll call vote (which they can do even if the dissenters don't have the numbers to force it) seems like a small thing. Accede to the demand, hold the roll call vote, the dissenters say okay, we lost, let's move on.

The lengths they went to in order to avoid even the suggestion of a roll call vote suggests that they feared it for some reason.

[Tahuyaman]

I think people are going to try to create drama here where it doesn't exist.

[Safety]

He means from the RNC perspective of controlling the results. Basically if the RNC is going to go through all this trouble to protect their nominee, they'd find it easier if they adopted superdelegates.

If I'm interpreting that right, Safety. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Nailed it.

[Green Arrow]

I think people are going to try to create drama here where it doesn't exist.

Some pretty big drama did exist. The state delegates from Colorado, Virginia, and Utah will tell you as much.

[FindersKeepers]

They do not have to, and the dissenters did not reach the number to force the vote. My point, though, is that if they want unity, granting a roll call vote (which they can do even if the dissenters don't have the numbers to force it) seems like a small thing. Accede to the demand, hold the roll call vote, the dissenters say okay, we lost, let's move on.

The lengths they went to in order to avoid even the suggestion of a roll call vote suggests that they feared it for some reason.

That makes sense, then.

I've seen that before where members of committees didn't want their vote made public.

I think that's "a thing" with Trump voters. We see a lot of folks saying they would not vote for him -- but someone's telling tall tales, because he sure raked in the votes.

The old "secret ballot" syndrome. LOL

[Tahuyaman]

Much ado about nothing.

[FindersKeepers]

Some pretty big drama did exist. The state delegates from Colorado, Virginia, and Utah will tell you as much.

Did you find out which state withdrew from the vote?

[Green Arrow]

Much ado about nothing.

The party silenced the microphones of Virginia, Colorado, and Utah and ignored their requests for recognition.

It's not much ado about nothing, it's blatant suppression.

[Green Arrow]

Did you find out which state withdrew from the vote?

Nope, they (the RNC) are still refusing to say.

[del]

The party silenced the microphones of Virginia, Colorado, and Utah and ignored their requests for recognition.

It's not much ado about nothing, it's blatant suppression.

and new hampshire


According to the prevailing rules, if seven states requested a roll call, a roll call had to be granted. The NeverTrumpers managed to get nine states on board and submitted their petitions to the secretary of the convention. For most of the afternoon, nobody could find the secretary of the convention, which probably wasn't an accident. Their last chance was to call for roll call from the floor. Shortly after four, the report of the Rules Committee was put before the convention, including the rules that would keep the delegates bound to their states. Down in the New Hampshire delegation, Gordon Humphreys, an old-school Republican and a former U.S. Senator, kept shouting, "Parliamentary inquiry! Parliamentary inquiry!"His microphone was dead.
"This not a convention of the Republican National Committee," Humphreys said. "This is a convention of Trump brownshirts. "The microphone wasn't even on."

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46798/rules-committee-never-trump/

[Green Arrow]

and new hampshire



http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46798/rules-committee-never-trump/

I didn't even see NH on the cameras, but that may have just been because I couldn't see their sign in the camera. There were certainly other delegates shouting in favor of the roll call besides VA, CO, and UT.

[Mark III]

tweet

Debra Wexler ‏@debra_wexler (https://twitter.com/debra_wexler) 1m1 minute ago (https://twitter.com/debra_wexler/status/755202804160102401) Trump currently doing mult TV intvws, taking attn off #RNCinCLE (https://twitter.com/hashtag/RNCinCLE?src=hash)https://abs.twimg.com/hashflags/Conventions2016/RNCinCLE.png (https://twitter.com/hashtag/RNCinCLE?src=hash). If you still needed proof that he's a pathological narcissist - there it is

[Green Arrow]

tweet

Debra Wexler ‏@debra_wexler (https://twitter.com/debra_wexler) 1m1 minute ago (https://twitter.com/debra_wexler/status/755202804160102401) Trump currently doing mult TV intvws, taking attn off #RNCinCLE (https://twitter.com/hashtag/RNCinCLE?src=hash)https://abs.twimg.com/hashflags/Conventions2016/RNCinCLE.png (https://twitter.com/hashtag/RNCinCLE?src=hash). If you still needed proof that he's a pathological narcissist - there it is

He's actually being smart.

[The Xl]

The roll call vote's purpose was to change the convention rules and allow delegates to vote based on their conscience, rather than the votes of their states. If a majority of delegates seriously opposed Trump, or even just enough to put him under the necessary total of delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot, every delegate would be unbound and virtually anyone could emerge as the nominee.

Even ignoring that much, it's pretty clear from what took place that the system is rigged. Normal procedures were ignored, the delegations from Virginia, Colorado, and Utah had their microphones turned off, and the RNC brass is doing everything in their power to ignore the minority voice. A minority voice that just so happens to oppose the nominee.

It's blatant and in your face.
All a dog and pony show. The fact that their is even a process to block a legitimately nominated candidate is the actual rigged game.

[The Xl]

Correct. Both parties are corrupt beyond salvaging. Time to throw them out.

That, we agree on.

[Green Arrow]

All a dog and pony show. The fact that their is even a process to block a legitimately nominated candidate is the actual rigged game.

Dog and pony show? So, the RNC suppressed the voices of delegations that oppose the nominee...somehow as some way of opposing Donald Trump?

[Hal Jordan]

He means from the RNC perspective of controlling the results. Basically if the RNC is going to go through all this trouble to protect their nominee, they'd find it easier if they adopted superdelegates.

If I'm interpreting that right, @Safety (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1226). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Safety The problem is, there's still a chance of something like this happening at the DNC. The superdelegates may not have stopped anything. The parties are destroying themselves in this election.

[The Xl]

Dog and pony show? So, the RNC suppressed the voices of delegations that oppose the nominee...somehow as some way of opposing Donald Trump?

It's theatre. The RNC knows they can't stop Trump, so they have their minions cause a bit of a stir. Makes him look illegitimate and flat out bad.

I'm not even much of a Trump supporter at this juncture anyway. He's wish washy and Pence was a shitty choice. It's still apparent that he has his own ambition and isn't part of the globalist chess club. So I'm hoping he winds up laying waste to everything, himself included.

[Hal Jordan]

Nope, they (the RNC) are still refusing to say.

Or if any did. It definitely looks like they're either hiding that no states actually dropped out or that there was coercion involved.

[Safety]

Safety The problem is, there's still a chance of something like this happening at the DNC. The superdelegates may not have stopped anything. The parties are destroying themselves in this election.

I'm actually looking forward to it happening in the DNC, this is just a preview...

[Cigar]

Trump fundraiser resigns in anger after floor eruption"A top donor raising money for Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee says he has resigned in disgust after the party muscled through a vote on the convention floor that squashed the “Free the Delegates” movement.

Gary Emineth, the former North Dakota GOP chairman who joined the Trump-RNC joint finance committee earlier this month, says he was disgusted by the floor vote and immediately texted his resignation to Priebus."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/288227-trump-fundraiser-resigns-in-anger-after-floor-eruption

[silvereyes]

Its funny to watch them ASSUME he has already won. His wife just said we have chosen him as President.

We are so fucked no matter what.

[silvereyes]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/never-trump-delegates-have-support-needed-to-force-rules-vote-225716


Damn. Seriously?

[FindersKeepers]

All a dog and pony show. The fact that their is even a process to block a legitimately nominated candidate is the actual rigged game.



It's odd to say the least. I haven't paid a lot of attention to the conventions in the past but I don't recall so many folks unhappy with their Parties as they are this year.

[Peter1469]

A lot of the dem elites are shocked that Hillary is not much higher in the poll numbers. We will likely see some discord at the DNC convention.

[Subdermal]

The roll call vote's purpose was to change the convention rules and allow delegates to vote based on their conscience, rather than the votes of their states. If a majority of delegates seriously opposed Trump, or even just enough to put him under the necessary total of delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot, every delegate would be unbound and virtually anyone could emerge as the nominee.

Even ignoring that much, it's pretty clear from what took place that the system is rigged. Normal procedures were ignored, the delegations from Virginia, Colorado, and Utah had their microphones turned off, and the RNC brass is doing everything in their power to ignore the minority voice. A minority voice that just so happens to oppose the nominee.

It's blatant and in your face.

How do you know that it's 'their conscience' which is actually reflected in any change of vote?

The people were heard. Time for these whiners to shut up and get with the program. By definition, 11th hour rules changes smacks of collusion and corruption.

[Green Arrow]

How do you know that it's 'their conscience' which is actually reflected in any change of vote?

I don't, but it's not relevant.


The people were heard. Time for these whiners to shut up and get with the program. By definition, 11th hour rules changes smacks of collusion and corruption.

They aren't asking for a rules change, just a roll call vote on the rules. The RNC can say no all they want, fine. But turning off microphones, abandoning the stage, and ignoring states that want to be recognized is disgusting tactics.

[Subdermal]

nothing shows a commitment to democracy and the rule of law like shutting off microphones and hustling through voice votes.

If you weren't a 20 year stroke victim, you'd perhaps question just how the Fock you can claim some 'rule of law' was being honored here when the purpose of the dissenting loudmouths was to change both the Rules and the Laws.

[Subdermal]

The party silenced the microphones of Virginia, Colorado, and Utah and ignored their requests for recognition.

It's not much ado about nothing, it's blatant suppression.

No, it isn't. The votes have been cast, and they simply don't like the results. In fact, it will be no different whatsoever than what the Dems are going to have to do to control Bernie voters in their upcoming convention.

There is but one difference: super delegates are in the bag; GOP delegates have more leeway. They don't, however, have the leeway to arbitrarily change rules to alter an already determined outcome in the 11th hour.

But let's be real: this is the GOP political process right out in the open. There is a time to stop the nattering nabobs of negativity and disruption, and there is no better way than to do it right out in the open, so the public can view and absorb it. Those that are complaining are doing it on the convention floor.

The Dems will not be given that chance. Credit to the GOP for sucking up their loss and sticking with the necessary integrity to avoid screwing with rules at the last minute.

After all: what is the point of delegate rules wrt Nominees, if they can simply be rewritten any time?

Unlike the Superdelegate process, which is the Dem Party's way of exerting full iron-fisted control over the outcome - making the only alternative to voice objection take place on the streets outside the Convention, where (I believe) it has twice the chance to turn violent - the GOP process is far more transparent.

[Subdermal]

Dog and pony show? So, the RNC suppressed the voices of delegations that oppose the nominee...somehow as some way of opposing Donald Trump?
@The Xl (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=865)'s point was simple.

The fact that anything like the possibility that there is a mechanism in place enabling hearing from delegates from States which object to the GOP's Nationally Chosen Candidate in an effort to call a vote to change rules and pull the rug out from under said Nationally Chosen Candidatte is PROOF that the Party can rig outcomes if it so chooses.

The time for objecting has passed. If these crybabies wanted a legitimate forum in which to state their case, it was months ago, when they could have sent their people into other States holding their caucuses and primaries, and influence the minds of those casting votes - including delegates, caucus-goers, and primary voters.

They lost. What they're doing is no different at all than anyone who pickets the White House because someone they opposed was voted President.

[Subdermal]

Its funny to watch them ASSUME he has already won. His wife just said we have chosen him as President.

We are so $#@!ed no matter what.

:facepalm:

[Cigar]

Angry Mob Forms In Downtown Clevelandhttp://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r589/duadmin/160718-angry-mob-forms-in-downtown-cleveland_zpsa4eswunq.jpg

[Subdermal]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/never-trump-delegates-have-support-needed-to-force-rules-vote-225716


Damn. Seriously?

There is not one focking thing new in that article - yet you are acting as though there's an enormous scoop there.

These are whiny grievance groups whose time has passed. There is a reason the term 'whip' is used: for use against crybaby losers like these idiots, who cannot abide that their guy lost.

Their guy, BTW, was my guy. The difference is that I - like Kenny Rogers - know when to fold 'em.

[Subdermal]

I don't, but it's not relevant.

Of course it's relevant. If you're hear lauding some sort of check and balance against corruption - and yet you blithely brushing off the distinct possibility that the objection to the Rules of Nomination is brought by GOP insiders themselves - you're defeating your own proclaimed purpose!

This was The Xl's point.


They aren't asking for a rules change, just a roll call vote on the rules.

:facepalm: There is only one reason - only one - to call a roll call vote 'on the rules': to change them.

And - thus - attempt to override the clearly stated will of the people who voted in the GOP primaries and caucuses.


The RNC can say no all they want, fine. But turning off microphones, abandoning the stage, and ignoring states that want to be recognized is disgusting tactics.

No, it isn't: no more than shutting off a Senator's microphone after his time on the podium has expired is 'disgusting'. It's preservation of rules of decorum, and no more than that.

These Conventions, however, are supposed to be a bit gaudy and rowdy; this is just another part of that.

[Subdermal]

Angry Mob Forms In Downtown Cleveland

http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r589/duadmin/160718-angry-mob-forms-in-downtown-cleveland_zpsa4eswunq.jpg

BWHAAHAHAHAHA!

The twit thinks that is what an 'angry mob' looks like.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/02/23/article-1359891-0D53376D000005DC-952_634x410.jpg

[del]

*focking*

:rofl:

[Green Arrow]

Of course it's relevant. If you're hear lauding some sort of check and balance against corruption - and yet you blithely brushing off the distinct possibility that the objection to the Rules of Nomination is brought by GOP insiders themselves - you're defeating your own proclaimed purpose!

This was @The Xl (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=865)'s point.

Not really. I criticized the effort to change the rules and defended Trump's status as the nominee.

That doesn't justify the RNC's thuggish tactics to silence dissent.


There is only one reason - only one - to call a roll call vote 'on the rules': to change them.

And - thus - attempt to override the clearly stated will of the people who voted in the GOP primaries and caucuses.

Are you unclear on what "delegate" means? The states in question - Virginia, Utah, and Colorado - did not support Trump in the primaries/caucuses. Their delegates represent the will of their states and the will of their states was not Trump.

They would be acting counter to their purpose to bow down to Trump.


No, it isn't: no more than shutting off a Senator's microphone after his time on the podium has expired is 'disgusting'. It's preservation of rules of decorum, and no more than that.

These Conventions, however, are supposed to be a bit gaudy and rowdy; this is just another part of that.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Cigar]

Melania Trump's notepad...Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears
I have a dream
You can't handle the truth!
Fourscore and twenty years ago
We shall fight on the beaches
Luke, I am your father


If Michelle Obama did anything like this, The RW Nuts would be Jazzing in their Panties for Months ... :laugh:

[Docthehun]

Lifelong Republican here. "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

The end result is exactly what we deserved and many don't like it. It is indeed time to suck it up. We devoted so much time, energy and money to defeat Hillary that we totally pissed away two years of controlling Congress and end up with a candidate that many don't even believe is a Republican, let alone a Conservative. Without any doubt, our approach is anything but rigged......obviously!

I'm looking forward to a rousing speech from the "thrown under the bus", NJ Governor. With any luck, we'll have special guest appearances by Sarah and Michelle (the "crazy eyed" one) and I'll be extremely disappointed if the Donald doesn't rise out of the platform, in a cloud of smoke wearing the Burger King outfit. Just kidding.............:smiley: (he'd get sued)

[Tahuyaman]

It appears that the Democrats word of the week is "chaos". No matter what happens, it's described as chaos.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm wondering what will be the word of the week during the Democratic convention? Any predictions? Maybe inspiring or hopeful or even inclusive?

[silvereyes]

Shall i make a list of con's favorite screechings this week?

[JDubya]

It appears that the Democrats word of the week is "chaos". No matter what happens, it's described as chaos.

Chaos by any other name is still chaos.

I prefer clusterfuck myself.

[Tahuyaman]

Chaos by any other name is still chaos.

I prefer cluster$#@! myself.


They could choose any number of words, but virtually all of the liberal media is using the same word. It shows that they are all in mind numbed lock-step with each other. They are of one mind. Not one iota of intellectual curiosity in the bunch.

[JDubya]

They could choose any number of words, but virtually all of the liberal media is using the same word. It shows that they are all in mind numbed lock-step with each other. They are of one mind. Not one iota of intellectual curiosity in the bunch.

Right.

Meanwhile the Trumpster Divers are all spinning like pinwheels in a hurricane about how the plagiarized parts of Melanoma's speech were just "common words and thoughts" that anyone might have uttered.... IN THE EXACT SAME ORDER THEY WERE SAID BY MICHELLE OBAMA.

Intellectual curiosity my ass.

[silvereyes]

Right.

Meanwhile the Trumpster Divers are all spinning like pinwheels in a hurricane about how the plagiarized parts of Melanoma's speech were just "common words and thoughts" that anyone might have uttered.... IN THE EXACT SAME ORDER THEY WERE SAID BY MICHELLE OBAMA.

Intellectual curiosity my ass.

Im curious about something right now: i wonder how furious Melania is right about now?

[Peter1469]

Im curious about something right now: i wonder how furious Melania is right about now?
More like mortified.

[Tahuyaman]

They could choose any number of words, but virtually all of the liberal media is using the same word. It shows that they are all in mind numbed lock-step with each other. They are of one mind. Not one iota of intellectual curiosity in the bunch.


Right.

Meanwhile the Trumpster Divers are all spinning like pinwheels in a hurricane about how the plagiarized parts of Melanoma's speech were just "common words and thoughts" that anyone might have uttered.... IN THE EXACT SAME ORDER THEY WERE SAID BY MICHELLE OBAMA.

Intellectual curiosity my ass.

Right.

Not only is there no intellectual curiosity on the left, there's no independent thought allowed.

[Green Arrow]

I'm wondering what will be the word of the week during the Democratic convention? Any predictions? Maybe inspiring or hopeful or even inclusive?

As interesting as the GOP convention has been so far, I'm hoping the DNC convention is at least not boring.

[Tahuyaman]

As interesting as the GOP convention has been so far, I'm hoping the DNC convention is at least not boring.


It won't be boring. I'll just take note of the difference in how the mainstream media reports the happenings there.

[kcvet]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/66784-Trump-wins-the-nomination

[Cigar]

Christie Tells Convention "We Cannot Reward Incompetence And Deceit"http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r589/duadmin/160720-yet-somehow-this-happened_zpsefigbomt.jpg

Donald Trump Claims Nomination, With Discord Clear but Family Cheering (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/us/politics/donald-trump-rnc.html)

The bloodlust in Chris Christie’s speech against Hillary Clinton is not normal. It’s sick. (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/07/chris_christie_and_his_hateful_lock_her_up_mob.htm l)

[Common]

Then theres this GRIN

http://i.imgur.com/D44FUKT.jpg

[silvereyes]

More like mortified.

Im sure. I know if it were me id be lasping into my native tongue using words my momma would wash my mouth out with soap for using.;)

[Cigar]

Then theres this GRIN

http://i.imgur.com/D44FUKT.jpg


... and they have nothing to do with what is going on at the GOP Convention that under control of Donald J Trump ... but nice try :laugh:

[Common]

... and they have nothing to do with what is going on at the GOP Convention that under control of Donald J Trump ... but nice try :laugh:

Cigar if anyone else tried to tell me my post wasnt a part of the thread but you, I would have taken it seriously lol... but YOU the king of posting unrelated :)

[kcvet]

http://i64.tinypic.com/qox7gx.jpg

[nic34]

Actually, no.

It was the #NeverTrump group that made one last push to change the delegate rules but they didn't have enough support.

Today, they demanded a roll call vote, but the Chairman said they didn't have the numbers to force one. So, they lost, again.

Now, that could create enough hard feelings that some delegates walk out, but it won't matter.

That was basically their last shot -- and it was supported behind the scene by the Cruz people.

The majority of the GOP agreed that, whether they liked the candidate or not, it was the "will of the people" that must be considered.

But if you're going to claim patriotic BS like: make America Great again (Emphasis on AGAIN) at least make an attempt to LOOK like you support the democratic process you supposedly support.

[FindersKeepers]

But if you're going to claim patriotic BS like: make America Great again (Emphasis on AGAIN) at least make an attempt to LOOK like you support the democratic process you supposedly support.

You gotta remember, the RNC and DNC are private entities. They can basically do as they see fit. The 'democratic process' is what is getting ready to happen -- the general election. And even then, it's the electoral college that counts.

Trump had the votes -- so, in the end, the process was democratic, I suppose. With a few glitches.

[Truth Detector]

I am still waiting for this chaos the idiot premise of the thread is talking about; anyone find any yet???

So far, I am seeing a party come together and make the Democrats choice look like the sociopathic lying, inept, incompetent and corrupt twit that she is. :biglaugh:

[kcvet]

But if you're going to claim patriotic BS like: make America Great again (Emphasis on AGAIN) at least make an attempt to LOOK like you support the democratic process you supposedly support.

what's Hitlary's battle cry?? screw the taxpayers till they bleed??

[MisterVeritis]

*focking*

:rofl:
One of my favorite punchlines involved the Fokkers flying Messerschmitts.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8Yf5B6GbYk

[Subdermal]

Not really. I criticized the effort to change the rules and defended Trump's status as the nominee.

That doesn't justify the RNC's thuggish tactics to silence dissent.

Thuggish? Why? The people who wanted to complain past procedure and protocol were the cause of shutting the mics and refusing the vote.


Are you unclear on what "delegate" means? The states in question - Virginia, Utah, and Colorado - did not support Trump in the primaries/caucuses. Their delegates represent the will of their states and the will of their states was not Trump.

They would be acting counter to their purpose to bow down to Trump.

:facepalm:

I voted for Cruz. As a Cruz delegate - by your standard - I would be well within my rights to interrupt the Convention to continue to stump for Cruz.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

If you wish to remain wrong, I suppose so. :D

[Subdermal]

Lifelong Republican here. "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

The end result is exactly what we deserved and many don't like it. It is indeed time to suck it up. We devoted so much time, energy and money to defeat Hillary that we totally pissed away two years of controlling Congress and end up with a candidate that many don't even believe is a Republican, let alone a Conservative. Without any doubt, our approach is anything but rigged......obviously!

I'm looking forward to a rousing speech from the "thrown under the bus", NJ Governor. With any luck, we'll have special guest appearances by Sarah and Michelle (the "crazy eyed" one) and I'll be extremely disappointed if the Donald doesn't rise out of the platform, in a cloud of smoke wearing the Burger King outfit. Just kidding.............:smiley: (he'd get sued)

:huh:

[AZ Jim]

Actually, no.

It was the #NeverTrump group that made one last push to change the delegate rules but they didn't have enough support.

Today, they demanded a roll call vote, but the Chairman said they didn't have the numbers to force one. So, they lost, again.

Now, that could create enough hard feelings that some delegates walk out, but it won't matter.

That was basically their last shot -- and it was supported behind the scene by the Cruz people.

The majority of the GOP agreed that, whether they liked the candidate or not, it was the "will of the people" that must be considered.Bottom line is you support thug rule.

[MisterVeritis]

Lifelong Republican here. "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

The end result is exactly what we deserved and many don't like it. It is indeed time to suck it up. We devoted so much time, energy and money to defeat Hillary that we totally pissed away two years of controlling Congress and end up with a candidate that many don't even believe is a Republican, let alone a Conservative. Without any doubt, our approach is anything but rigged......obviously!

I'm looking forward to a rousing speech from the "thrown under the bus", NJ Governor. With any luck, we'll have special guest appearances by Sarah and Michelle (the "crazy eyed" one) and I'll be extremely disappointed if the Donald doesn't rise out of the platform, in a cloud of smoke wearing the Burger King outfit. Just kidding.............:smiley: (he'd get sued)
Kook Alert! New suspect.

[AZ Jim]

Kook Alert! New suspect.You of all people should never call anyone a KOOK. YOU are the king of KOOKS!!

[FindersKeepers]

Bottom line is you support thug rule.

Actually, I think that's called "Robert's Rules of Order," big dude.

There were originally nine states that called for a roll call vote, and they needed seven to reach the percentage of the quorum to demand the vote.

However, three states dropped out just before the last count, so they didn't reach the number needed for the vote.

How does that translate into my support of thug rule?

Trump isn't my favorite candidate - but he earned the votes fair and square. How does the democratic process suddenly become thug rule?

[FindersKeepers]

Lifelong Republican here. "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

The end result is exactly what we deserved and many don't like it. It is indeed time to suck it up. We devoted so much time, energy and money to defeat Hillary that we totally pissed away two years of controlling Congress and end up with a candidate that many don't even believe is a Republican, let alone a Conservative. Without any doubt, our approach is anything but rigged......obviously!

I'm looking forward to a rousing speech from the "thrown under the bus", NJ Governor. With any luck, we'll have special guest appearances by Sarah and Michelle (the "crazy eyed" one) and I'll be extremely disappointed if the Donald doesn't rise out of the platform, in a cloud of smoke wearing the Burger King outfit. Just kidding.............:smiley: (he'd get sued)


Welcome to the forum!

Question -- what did you WANT us to do in Congress this past two years?

Secondly, Trump did not rise in a vacuum. Sure, the GOP could have chosen someone else earlier on -- but Trump supporters were reacting to being shuffled aside by the current Administration for the last two terms.

[Docthehun]

Welcome to the forum!

Question -- what did you WANT us to do in Congress this past two years?

Secondly, Trump did not rise in a vacuum. Sure, the GOP could have chosen someone else earlier on -- but Trump supporters were reacting to being shuffled aside by the current Administration for the last two terms.

Good to be here. (Subject to change of course.)

Well, let's see: Tax rate reform, tax code reform, business regulation reform, Obamacare, immigration and borders, a budget, a plan to eliminate or at least reduce the Federal deficit.

Secondly, no offense intended, you seem to imply that the President is responsible for the sorry state of the Republican Party. Seriously?

[FindersKeepers]

Good to be here. (Subject to change of course.)

Well, let's see: Tax rate reform, tax code reform, business regulation reform, Obamacare, immigration and borders, a budget, a plan to eliminate or at least reduce the Federal deficit.


Tax rate reform is one of The Donald's platforms, as is immigration and border (control), and we saw a LOT of push against Obamacare, it just didn't sprout wings and fly. We passed budgets, just not as restricted as they might have been. The biggest thing was to stop or reduce more government overreach by the dems -- and that was at least partially successful.




Secondly, no offense intended, you seem to imply that the President is responsible for the sorry state of the Republican Party. Seriously?

There's enough blame to go around, but yes, Obama's policies led to anti-establishment unrest, which fueled Trump.

And, as bad as the GOP is today, it's still better than the Democratic Party.

[Truth Detector]

Well, let's see: Tax rate reform, tax code reform, business regulation reform, Obamacare, immigration and borders, a budget, a plan to eliminate or at least reduce the Federal deficit.

I guess you forgot who would have to sign those bills into law didn't you? DUH!


Secondly, no offense intended, you seem to imply that the President is responsible for the sorry state of the Republican Party. Seriously?

I am amused by the IDIOT premise that the Republican Party is in a sorry state. Where do you come up with this moronic nonsense? In 2008 the Democrats held both the Senate and the House. Today, Republicans hold them with about 2/3rds of the State Houses.

If you were being factual, it is the Democratic Party that is in disarray as illustrated by their convention floor vote to keep God in the platform. They voted it down; then divined the vote was in the affirmative.

My first impression of you is this; you NEVER were a life long Republican because you erupt like a brain dead clueless lefty.

[Docthehun]

I guess you forgot who would have to sign those bills into law didn't you? DUH!



I am amused by the IDIOT premise that the Republican Party is in a sorry state. Where do you come up with this moronic nonsense? In 2008 the Democrats held both the Senate and the House. Today, Republicans hold them with about 2/3rds of the State Houses.

If you were being factual, it is the Democratic Party that is in disarray as illustrated by their convention floor vote to keep God in the platform. They voted it down; then divined the vote was in the affirmative.

My first impression of you is this; you NEVER were a life long Republican because you erupt like a brain dead clueless lefty.

Those bills were placed on the President's desk for signature?

"Idiot" "Brain dead clueless lefty" Your Republican credentials would be?

[Docthehun]

Tax rate reform is one of The Donald's platforms, as is immigration and border (control), and we saw a LOT of push against Obamacare, it just didn't sprout wings and fly. We passed budgets, just not as restricted as they might have been. The biggest thing was to stop or reduce more government overreach by the dems -- and that was at least partially successful.




There's enough blame to go around, but yes, Obama's policies led to anti-establishment unrest, which fueled Trump.

And, as bad as the GOP is today, it's still better than the Democratic Party.

So essentially you agree that having control of Congress produced little, if any, tangible results.

[Bethere]

Those bills were placed on the President's desk for signature?

"Idiot" "Brain dead clueless lefty" Your Republican credentials would be?

The only thing that mattered in 2014: gop <67.

[Dr. Who]

I guess you forgot who would have to sign those bills into law didn't you? DUH!



I am amused by the IDIOT premise that the Republican Party is in a sorry state. Where do you come up with this moronic nonsense? In 2008 the Democrats held both the Senate and the House. Today, Republicans hold them with about 2/3rds of the State Houses.

If you were being factual, it is the Democratic Party that is in disarray as illustrated by their convention floor vote to keep God in the platform. They voted it down; then divined the vote was in the affirmative.

My first impression of you is this; you NEVER were a life long Republican because you erupt like a brain dead clueless lefty.
The most dysfunctional aspect of the GOP has been it's inability to divine its identity. Is it fiscal conservatism, is it neocon, the religious right or small government? It keeps trying to push the religious right and gets little public traction, but the fiscal cons have insufficient personality to compel the voters, the constitutionalists are a minority in the population and the neocons are not even really conservatives at all! So what happens - Donald Trump - not really a conservative, but someone who pushes all of the buttons provided by the MSM. The guy who went off script and spoke to all of the angry people. Has he spoken to religion - no, has he spoken to fiscal responsibility - no, has he even addressed the constitution - no. Has he endorsed neocon ideology - yes, but he's done it in a way that people are not seeing it. Trump is a moderate whose ideology falls between liberal and conservative - his ideology is about what works for him and his interests. He has depended on the flexibility of the liberals to create legislation that ultimately panders to his interests.

The GOP has been dithering for years over the fact that it won't win if it runs middle of the road. Guess what - Trump is middle of the road and worse, he's disingenuous. He is not making sure that he can fulfill these promises, he is running on a platform of pure bravado. That doesn't make Hillary any better, but despite her own shortcomings, she is not running contrary to her party line. There is a reason why few elected Republicans will endorse Trump. They know who he is not and they know that becoming president is really about his ego, not any real political principles.

Sadly, this is an election that will be remembered primarily by the fact that so many people will be holding their noses and voting according to their political allegiances, but not because they were provided with really stellar candidates or they will be voting for that bombastic non-politician, because they don't care anymore. They would just as soon see it all fall apart as to continue to have no real choices.

[Bethere]

Watching the fat guy, a former us attorney, convict someone in public without due process is shocking. On one hand it's obey the constitution! On the other it's no constitutional protections for Hillary.

9 congressional investigations and an fbi inquiry aren't enough to exonerate a democrat.

The gop is dangerous.

15252

[TrueBlue]

So, I'm watching Day One of the RNC on C-Span, and this is essentially what I witnessed transpire.

Last night, nine states submitted a petition demanding a roll call vote on the convention's rules. Those nine state delegations were led by Colorado, Utah, and Virginia. Overnight, three states withdrew their signatures, putting the petition just below the number of signatures necessary to force a roll call vote on convention rules.

The chair announces this, but refuses to mention who the three states that withdrew were, which is unprecedented. When the three state delegations of Utah, Virginia, and Utah tried to challenge it and still ask for a roll call vote and also the identity of the three state delegations that withdrew, the convention chair abandoned the stage for a good fifteen minutes, maybe even more. When he finally did return, the delegates of Virginia, Utah, and Colorado found their microphones were now turned off, to the point that Ken Cuccinelli, leader of the Virginia delegation, was basically waving his state's delegation sign in the air to get recognized. Finally, the chair recognized Utah, and they once again requested a roll call vote and the name of the three withdrawn states. The chair ignored his request and held a voice vote on the rules. Even though the ayes and nays were too close in volume to really tell who won without a re-do, the chair wasted no time giving it to the ayes.

Once that was done, the chair asked if anyone wanted to be recognized. Cuccinelli asked to be recognized. His microphone was off again. He raised his hand. He waved the sign. People shouted that Virginia was trying to be recognized. The chair ignored them and recognized West Virginia, whose delegation proposed a resolution to immediately adopt the new rules and move on.

I don't know about anyone else, but from where I sit, shit smells bad.
You Said It!! The RepCon has left one http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_wonky.gif for their being in utter disarray! Oooou-weee!

[Tahuyaman]

Lol. I love these liberal goof-balls.

I can't wait to see how they carry the water during the Democratic convention. I might even watch some of it.

if I watch it for fifteen minutes, that's ten more minutes than I have watched this one.

[FindersKeepers]

So essentially you agree that having control of Congress produced little, if any, tangible results.



Odd that you put it that way -- that's typically something a democrat would say.

Republicans understand that stopping more government IS the goal.

[Peter1469]

That is a good list of the groups that make up the GOP.

You would have a hard time making a list of the groups that make up the Dems. They are a loosely knit organization made up of victim groups who only have two things in common: the need to identify as a victim- of something; and the desire to use the power of the State to alleviate their pain.


The most dysfunctional aspect of the GOP has been it's inability to divine its identity. Is it fiscal conservatism, is it neocon, the religious right or small government? It keeps trying to push the religious right and gets little public traction, but the fiscal cons have insufficient personality to compel the voters, the constitutionalists are a minority in the population and the neocons are not even really conservatives at all! So what happens - Donald Trump - not really a conservative, but someone who pushes all of the buttons provided by the MSM. The guy who went off script and spoke to all of the angry people. Has he spoken to religion - no, has he spoken to fiscal responsibility - no, has he even addressed the constitution - no. Has he endorsed neocon ideology - yes, but he's done it in a way that people are not seeing it. Trump is a moderate whose ideology falls between liberal and conservative - his ideology is about what works for him and his interests. He has depended on the flexibility of the liberals to create legislation that ultimately panders to his interests.

The GOP has been dithering for years over the fact that it won't win if it runs middle of the road. Guess what - Trump is middle of the road and worse, he's disingenuous. He is not making sure that he can fulfill these promises, he is running on a platform of pure bravado. That doesn't make Hillary any better, but despite her own shortcomings, she is not running contrary to her party line. There is a reason why few elected Republicans will endorse Trump. They know who he is not and they know that becoming president is really about his ego, not any real political principles.

Sadly, this is an election that will be remembered primarily by the fact that so many people will be holding their noses and voting according to their political allegiances, but not because they were provided with really stellar candidates or they will be voting for that bombastic non-politician, because they don't care anymore. They would just as soon see it all fall apart as to continue to have no real choices.

[Peter1469]

Watching the fat guy, a former us attorney, convict someone in public without due process is shocking. On one hand it's obey the constitution! On the other it's no constitutional protections for Hillary.

9 congressional investigations and an fbi inquiry aren't enough to exonerate a democrat.

The gop is dangerous.

15252

It was a political speech, not a criminal prosecution. Had you ever prosecuted someone you would have recognized that. He could have done that and used the actual elements of criminal offenses but was wise not to.

Both the GOP and the Dems are dangerous because they are both driving the US off a fiscal cliff into ruin. The only difference is the GOP is going 60 mph while the dems are going 100 mph.

[Peter1469]

Lol. I love these liberal goof-balls.

I can't wait to see how they carry the water during the Democratic convention. I might even watch some of it.

if I watch it for fifteen minutes, that's ten more minutes than I have watched this one.

I bet that they won't like the thread that will cover the Dem convention. We should keep tally of their lies and deflections.

[Docthehun]

Odd that you put it that way -- that's typically something a democrat would say.

Republicans understand that stopping more government IS the goal.

In the mode of which preceding Republican President?

[FindersKeepers]

In the mode of which preceding Republican President?

Elaborate on your question.

We were talking about the GOP Congress. Are you shifting to a different conversation now?

[Mac-7]

You Said It!! The RepCon has left one http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_wonky.gif for their being in utter disarray! Oooou-weee!

It sounds like a normal old time convention.

[Mac-7]

Elaborate on your question.

We were talking about the GOP Congress. Are you shifting to a different conversation now?

Same difference

[Tahuyaman]

I bet that they won't like the thread that will cover the Dem convention. We should keep tally of their lies and deflections.

I predict that will take a huge team effort.

[Tahuyaman]

You Said It!! The RepCon has left one http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_wonky.gif for their being in utter disarray! Oooou-weee!

What in the world is that supposed to mean?

[Docthehun]

Elaborate on your question.

We were talking about the GOP Congress. Are you shifting to a different conversation now?

That would have been a trick question since no Republican President since the Korean War has accomplished that feat, including President Reagan. The only time a Republican controlled Congress accomplished that task was during Clinton's Presidency. So despite all the rhetoric, it's not been a priority in Washington no matter who's running the show. It's like Coke and Pepsi who taunt each other to the benefit of both and to the detriment of the little guys.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm going to listen to Trump's speech. I'll opine on it later.

[Bethere]

Odd that you put it that way -- that's typically something a democrat would say.

Republicans understand that stopping more government IS the goal.

If so then why does the government expand everytime we elect a Republican?

[FindersKeepers]

If so then why does the government expand everytime we elect a Republican?


Simply "electing a Republican," and I assume you're meaning a President, doesn't guarantee there will also be a conservative-leaning Congress.

Reagan was able to cut spending and the taxes more than any other President, but presidents aren't dictators, they don't have absolute control.

When the GOP had the House during Clinton's term, they proposed massive limitations, but Clinton vetoed them.

[Bethere]

Simply "electing a Republican," and I assume you're meaning a President, doesn't guarantee there will also be a conservative-leaning Congress.

Reagan was able to cut spending and the taxes more than any other President, but presidents aren't dictators, they don't have absolute control.

When the GOP had the House during Clinton's term, they proposed massive limitations, but Clinton vetoed them.

Nonsense. Reagan nearly tripled the national debt.

15281

[FindersKeepers]

Nonsense. Reagan nearly tripled the national debt.




The dollar amount alone is misleading. Debt must be quantified by the nation's gross domestic product.

Bankers use a similar formula for figuring out just how much debt a person can afford, based on his income. While the debt did start to grow under Reagan, debt isn't the only factor used in determining "expansion" of government. Taxes and spending just, or more, important, along with other factors. Reagan cut both taxes and spending. You might say that's nonsense, but you're wrong.

http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2012/02/Debt2GDP.png

[kcvet]

Nonsense. Reagan nearly tripled the national debt.

15281

he had to after what that peanut farmer did to it

[Peter1469]

We have some math illiterates running amok.

[Bethere]

The dollar amount alone is misleading. Debt must be quantified by the nation's gross domestic product.

Bankers use a similar formula for figuring out just how much debt a person can afford, based on his income. While the debt did start to grow under Reagan, debt isn't the only factor used in determining "expansion" of government. Taxes and spending just, or more, important, along with other factors. Reagan cut both taxes and spending. You might say that's nonsense, but you're wrong.

http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2012/02/Debt2GDP.png

What I said was that reagan nearly tripled the national debt. Then I supported that statement with a source.

Hold me responsible for only the things I said and never for the things you think I said.

Thanks.

[Peter1469]

What I said was that reagan nearly tripled the national debt. Then I supported that statement with a source.

Hold me responsible for only the things I said and never for the things you think I said.

Thanks.

Statistics lie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics). No sane person can compare $220M with $9T+.

But fans can.

[FindersKeepers]

What I said was that reagan nearly tripled the national debt. Then I supported that statement with a source.

Hold me responsible for only the things I said and never for the things you think I said.

Thanks.



I thought you were interested in an honest discussion about government expansion and what it entailed.

I was wrong.

Have a nice day.

[Bethere]

I thought you were interested in an honest discussion about government expansion and what it entailed.

I was wrong.

Have a nice day.

Have you ever read David Stockman's book, "The Triumph of Politics?"