Wow they were 30-1 on the moneyline

Stopping Trump even if it blows up the party seems like an honourable thing to do, but full of all kinds of unintended consequences and I wouldnt expect anyone to actually do it.

Instead they should just have him killed. Nobody blames the guys that tried to blow up Hitler or strung Mussolini up in the streets. Brutus has gotten a bit of a bad rep, but generally tyrannicide is a decent thing to do.

still low, because both Trump and Cruz supporters are guaranteed to want him dead regardless, but there's a case for it if and only if he starts scooping the back half

this is a one outer though, and Florida alone won't cut it

Too conditional to answer. Depends on what happens in Ohio, North Carolina, and Illinois.

"If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve."

That's my higher-brow way of saying lol no.

Success in politics (generally) demands a level of personal superficiality and exaggerated self-love/vanity that are frequently at odds with (what I judge to be) a life well lived.

Yeah I think you guys have convinced me that in a brokered scenario Cruz is the favorite. It would just look so bad any other way, scenarios where people won zero or little would just make a mockery of the process.

The equity is an illusion because Trump supporters will say Trump would have won and he just runs again in 2020.

I don't think anything but resounding losses in several elections will move the hard right from the theory that pure conservatives are the optimal candidates. They think they had the government shutdown battle won. They'll blame voter fraud/Hurricaine Sandy/GOP sabotage before accepting reality*.


*It's always possible that a really conservative candidate could actually win an election that a moderate candidate would lose. Seems pretty unlikely though.

I think if the party bypasses Trump at the convention then they probably nominate someone who has never run for president before they nominate Romney or someone who lost to Trump.

Paul Ryan or former cabinet members like Rice or Gates would all be way better choices as far as party unity and GE chances imo.

are there any Idaho or Hawaii polls to speak of?

Gates was the GOAT SECDEF but absolutely wouldn't be palatable to the substantial anti-intellectual wing of the party.

Trump would be 74 by 2021 inauguration fwiw

Well I suppose Trump could say that he was the conservative in the race and that he was denied, but obviously that's an insane claim because he fails 90% of the conservative purity tests. I'm just going from the nevertrump premise, if they deny him by giving it to Cruz and Cruz faceplants, there's a small chance that they could pivot a bit back to the center and maybe co-opt some of the populism of Trump. I have no idea how they're going to get the Trump supporter back, but maybe those people just go back to not voting, and the GOPe can then run on 4 years of Hillary Clinton's Failed Presidency etc..

This pledge thing is scary and fascist on the one hand, but it's also a super common cheap scummy salespeople kind of thinking. If you get people to say they are going to do something, they are way more likely to. Telemarketers and other hucksters are always trying to get some kind of verbal commitment.

"If I can show you how this product is the best and will save money, will you sign?"

Glenn Greenwald has been reading this thread

Shuffle - why doe you have Kasich dropping out after winning Ohio?

So sad and amazing how in so many ways Reagan would be absolutely vilified for being too lefty by many modern Republicans.

(quote within quote from Republican Trump denouncers)

Since the black candidate was elected POTUS in 2008 and 2012 how come the right wing media machine couldn't stop that from happening? Obama won easily in both elections. Maybe 2008 can be explained by several factories like Bush fatigue, the financial crises, the recession, Iraq, etc. but what about 2012? Furthermore if the Repubs have such an objectionable extremist running for POTUS (TRUMP or Cruz, take your pick) should be a slam dunk for the Dems in 2016 since we know that a black candidate is obviously capable of winning a POTUS election which indicates to me the electorate is largely not racist. Since it is a slam dunk for the Dems then the extremist candidate is repudiated and the extremist candidate is rejected by the people, the bigots lose at least some of their power within the Repub party as does the right wing media. That seems like prescription for progress to me.

#kickassintheelection

R.I.P Nancy Reagan

2nd pic

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...mers/?zoomable

Idk if there's any data to support it, but I could see him being competitive in states like Maryland, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin especially if Rubio drops out. And he would be a harder challenge for Trump in the rest of the Northeast than Cruz

Certainly how I best remember her, well played.

Regardless of your position on whether torture is ever appropriate/useful i think everyone can agree that advocating for it with the entire world watching is mind numbingly stupid.

Cruz and Drumpf polled first and second place in January in Cali. Cruz just won Maine with Drumpf finishing second.

I don't think the "west coast will be unfriendly to Drumpf and Cruz" story holds up.

It would be interesting to see hoe different the races looked if you switched the rules for the parties.

I wonder how many people have, in light of the TRUMP phenomenon and all is attendant ugliness, found themselves paraphrasing Reagan: "I haven't left the Republican Party. The Republican Party left me."

I haven't been able to find some solid source on this either, and I suspect every state is kind of different. The delegates aren't chosen by Trump as people loyal to him, they're simply required to vote for Trump on that first ballot afaict. The delegates seem to be local party leaders.

If that's right then can you really see Trump winning a set of votes from the GOPe directly? That doesn't seem likely.