Donald Trump

[TheHuckster]

It really seems that they are pandering to the conservative extremists. Which makes no sense since they will vote Republican no matter what. There's been no effort to try to convince anyone near the middle that they are going to do any good for the country at all.

Yeah, but because right now they are really competing against each other for primary votes, it makes sense that they want to appeal to as many conservatives as possible because they are the ones who are going to vote for them first.

[Rageaholic]

Okay this joke has gone on too long....

It is a joke.... right?

[Sarah Valentine]

If it is it's a sick one, as in it's making me feel that way. I thought when he first announced that he was running it was a joke and it would be corrected and he would go away, but instead he stayed and recently there are all these comparisons to Hitler that are making me nervous. They say those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

[Gravekeeper]

Yeah, but because right now they are really competing against each other for primary votes, it makes sense that they want to appeal to as many conservatives as possible because they are the ones who are going to vote for them first.

It doesn't make sense though because those will be the first and last votes they will get at this rate. Nevermind that every time one of them opens their mouth they're just handing the Democrats a new campaign ad. Though this may be because the GOP doesn't understand how TV or the internet works but still.

Plus along with alienating the nation as a whole they are undoubtedly alienating non-crazy conservatives even as they pick up crazy ones. Navigating the primaries is a delicate procedure, sure. But you can't forget that you're running to represent ALL Americans not just the handful of troglodytes you've cultivated since a black guy took office.

Its the perfect example of winning the battle but losing the war so to speak.

[TheHuckster]

Plus along with alienating the nation as a whole they are undoubtedly alienating non-crazy conservatives even as they pick up crazy ones. Navigating the primaries is a delicate procedure, sure. But you can't forget that you're running to represent ALL Americans not just the handful of troglodytes you've cultivated since a black guy took office.

Given how many people are supporting Trump, I don't think they're just a handful of troglodytes, sadly. And the runner up, Cruz, isn't much better, either.

I'd agree that the GOP would have a far better chance with a more moderate candidate like Lindsey Graham, though.

[Sleepwalker]

It's the lack of strong leaders in the Republican party that is doing this. Trump is running because he wants to, the Repubs are failing to respond in a cohesive manner because they have no strong contenders of their own and no strong leaders to look out for the benefit of the party as a whole. The other Repub runners are ludicrous choices as well, Trump is just the flashiest and most vile.

[Gravekeeper]

Given how many people are supporting Trump, I don't think they're just a handful of troglodytes, sadly.

Sssh, the only way I'm going to make it through the next US election cycle is if I keep telling myself this is only a vocal minority of crazy Americans. Don't pop my bubble. >.>

It's the lack of strong leaders in the Republican party that is doing this.

They haven't any sort of serious contender or strong leader in a long time. Even with Romney they were just biting the bullet and going with the one guy they could all sort of agree on. Bush really only stayed in office because he was a "wartime" president and it wasn't exactly the cleanest election that got him into office in the first place.

There's a reason they all fondly look back at a romanticized version of Saint Reagan(tm).

[Rageaholic]

Fuck, this is making me miss Romney.

[Sleepwalker]

Not just the presidential candidates, GK. The debacle with the Speaker and the general lack of leadership in the (federal) House and Senate make any sort of coherent response just about impossible. They are pulling separately, not together, and it shows.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

It's the lack of strong leaders in the Republican party that is doing this.

To some extent yes, but contrary to popular belief there is no Republican overmind. They're all a bunch of self interested people like the Democrats are (politically speaking that is.) They rationalized that a large field of candidates would give them the best one (so Rubio, Christie, and Bush all ran) so they didn't think about what was most likely to occur.

It's really a lack of foresight. CNN had a good article on it, but this is the culmination of Gingrich/Rove style politics played out over time. As fear and hatred (or delegitimization of the Democratic party if you want to be diplomatic about it) have been used for so long now to motivate that base, they are less Goldwater or Regan Republican (which aren't the same thing, but aren't this either) and more flat out defined by rejection of the opposing side. What at one time was a platform that had more nuance to it, it's sort of just become "not Democrat."

Which isn't good since governments generally broker compromise between two competing ideals. That's its function, not because everyone loves it but because smaller turns left and right tend to recognize an entire population better than massive left and right shifts which tend to ignore the centrist majority that don't live and breath fear of the other sides all day.

This is just the first time a candidate has dispensed with placating the base in an effort to make themselves both win the primary and viable for the general. Instead both Trump and Cruz have directly tapped that base using the emotional manipulation that's been in place for years in a naked fashion. They're not aiming for moderates which are the minority in the Republican party. They hate Obama too. They're pretty sure he's not American (maybe.) Wouldn't it be great if immigration was a faucet you could just turn off? They know a plummer. It's an old tradition and one that earned Andrew Jackson the name "King Mob." Fun fact, that pithy word play was later pilfered by the UK twice for an English radical group in the 60's and a Grant Morrison comic. No idea if any use predates Jackson though.

It's still bad news. In previous years, a Republican probably had a better shot of winning the general but would still probably be constrained from full blown fascist behavior. Trump and Cruz are problematic because while they are less likely to mount any sort of victory against Clinton (if Sanders survived by a miracle I would be terrified about the general outcome though because centrists would literally have no candidate so that's a coin toss), the outcome if the unexpected happens is at best highly uncertain and at worst, an extremely dark period for the United States geopolitically speaking. There are no examples of his brand of politics working out well for any country in history I can think of. They're always the gateway to something bad.

[Gravekeeper]

They created this monster and catered to it for years. Then they were surprised when it wouldn't listen to them. Then even more surprised when crazy people elected crazy candidates. Leading to this block of Republicans in congress that are batshit insane. Toss onto that that the best plan they could come up with was "Ruin everything then pretend it was Obama's fault".

Democratic governments simply don't function without compromise. By becoming the Party of No(tm) they are effectively refusing to govern. Which is suppose to be their job. However, they spent years convincing their base that the job of an elected official isn't to govern but to be the last hope against Muslim overlords, brown people taking their jobs, the black guy taking their guns, terrorists are hiding under their beds, etc etc.

Don't stick your ( electoral ) dick in crazy. -.-

an extremely dark period for the United States geopolitically speaking.

The world has, by and large, been completely horrified at the insanity and incompetence of Republican politics for years now. The GOP doesn't have a single candidate running who would not be a pariah on the geopolitical stage if they actually got elected.

The biggest problem with a Trump presidency is that he would bail before the end of his first year because being president is actually hard. Leaving you with whatever incompetent fucking lunatic he chose as his VP.

[Jetfire]

It really seems that they are pandering to the conservative extremists. Which makes no sense since they will vote Republican no matter what. There's been no effort to try to convince anyone near the middle that they are going to do any good for the country at all.

It makes sense in the sense that those conservative extremists are the ones who will be voting to PICK who will be the GOP Presidential contender. And they believe for some reason that they are RIGHT and if they pick a contender who is extreme enough, then a silent majority of Americans will come out and see the light and vote for the GOP.

Basically, it puts the candidates in the worst possible situation. In order to win the Presidency, they need to win the Neutrals and Moderates. But in order to win the right to run for the Presidency, they need to win the Extremists. And the only way to win the Extremists is to go to their extremes which alienates the Neutrals and Moderates.

Unless a candidate has Charisma out the wazoo, they can't just ignore the Extremists because someone else (*cough*Trump*cough*) will appeal to them and win the candidacy instead.

[s_stabeler]

which is why the Republican Party is ending up closer and closer to electoral annihilation. (seriously, current demographic trends predict that this may actually be the last presidential election the Republicans can actually win. And while in general I support the Democrats, I do acknowledge thata de-facto one-party system is asking for trouble. (look at the UK during 1997-2009, when Labour were more-or-less uncontested, since the Conservatives were having such a tough time finding a leader who could both unite the party, and actually get elected. Labour got so arrogant that when it was clear the Conservatives would be part of the next government, not them, they actually went out of their way to sign contracts committing the next government to give out large amounts of money, with massive penalty clauses to back out. (to the extent that, when the new Chancellor entered his office, there was apparently a note either in, or on, his desk, saying "sorry, there's no money left"- and Labour spent the next 5 years opposing anything the government did to fix the situation, fortunately prevented.) It's one reason I'm concerned about the current state of the labour party- if Labour implodes, we may well have a similar issue with the Conservatives The issue is that, when they don't have to fear the voters (i'm talking ballot box here, not assassination), politicians usually stop caring about them.)

[Rapscallion]

We had a similar situation with the tories before 'new' labour got in. The tories were phenomenally arrogant, as they didn't think they'd be challenged. I remember one instance when Michael Heseltine was at a press conference announcing further pit closures and was utterly stunned when some of the journalists began booing him.

These days, I tend to think that politics work least worst when there are regular swings from one pole of the spectrum to the other every few years. Too long in power makes any side arrogant and high-handed.

Rapscallion

[protege]

And while in general I support the Democrats, I do acknowledge that a de-facto one-party system is asking for trouble.

I've seen it firsthand. I live just outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The city, and by extension the county, have been in Democrat control since the 1930s. They came to power during the Depression--they were put there by organized labor. Since then, Democrats outnumber everyone else roughly 5 to 1. At this time, I don't know why they even bother having elections. Short of firebombing the city, they'll keep getting reelected.