[Rama Set]

Unless Trump murders a half-black, half-Asian Jewish Muslim LGBTQ toddler with Asperger's, the Republican nomination is sewn up.

And even then...

[Roundy]

Unless Trump murders a half-black, half-Asian Jewish Muslim LGBTQ toddler with Asperger's, the Republican nomination is sewn up.

And even then...

Really it could only make him more popular with his fanbase.

[sandokhan]

Without David Duke's support, Trump's leads in the southern states he did win would have been much smaller (GA, TN, AL).

By the time the Clintons get done with Trump, 9 out of 10 Hispanics will not vote for him (not to mention the African-American vote).

As I have said from the very start, contrary to each and every other opinion posted here, Trump's role/mission is to prepare the way for someone else.

Not only would Trump lose to either Clinton or Sanders, but the elections for the Senate and the House will turn into a nightmare for the GOP.

Trump is history for the Republican party.


From now on, Trump is going to have to deal with the Trump university scam, the tax returns issue, the New York Times tapes, the KKK comments: it is all over.

How is any delegate at the Cleveland convention going to vote for Trump, once his tax returns are out in the open?


Cruz won his home state big (exactly as I have said from the beginning), a thing that neither Rubio nor Kasich would be able to do.

No matter how much DC dislikes him, Cruz can win against either Clinton or Sanders, he can unify the GOP so that they will win handily in the Senate and the House.

Rubio might have a chance against Clinton, but he does not have the charisma needed to bring the necessary results for the GOP in either the Senate or the House races.


The ultimate Democratic insiders know it too.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/11/clinton-ally-david-brock-cruz-will-end-nominee/

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/podesta-cruz-is-likely-gop-nominee-216713


For those who know, who really understand politics, these two statements are very important as to what is going on the GOP side of the election:

Tonight Iowa has proclaimed to the world: morning is coming. (T. Cruz)

Donald is not going to make America great, he's going to make America orange. (M. Rubio)

[Lord Dave]

Cruz won his home state big (exactly as I have said from the beginning), a thing that neither Rubio nor Kasich would be able to do.

You said

On March 1, whichever of the candidates is from a home state, will win big overall on that day.

As of March 1, that was Ted Cruz.  He did not win big overall.  He won 2 states. He lost big, over all.


You very strongly implied that Ted Cruz would win the south because he devoted significant resources to it.  He did not.
So who is Trump paving the way for?  Because it isn't a GOP candidate.

[sandokhan]

The two quotes from my previous message can be understood even better, if an answer can be provided to the question/challenge I posed earlier:

Who founded the KKK?

Remember, if you can answer this question, you will be able to understand everything re: American politics.

[Lord Dave]

The two quotes from my previous message can be understood even better, if an answer can be provided to the question/challenge I posed earlier:

Who founded the KKK?

Remember, if you can answer this question, you will be able to understand everything re: American politics.

No.  No it doesn't.
Your quotes are quite clear: you indicated Ted Cruz would win big.  He did not.

[Lord Dave]

I have not yet finished reading this but so far its interesting:
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism

[sandokhan]

Did Cruz do what he was supposed to do, attack Trump directly and strongly on the issues which would have derailed any other candidate? He did not.

Yet, with doing practically nothing at all, he won three states (Alaska included).

Had he reminded the voters on the Trump university scam, the tax returns issue, he would have won in Arkansas, and perhaps in Georgia too.

I was right about everything except the extent of Cruz's win on super tuesday; yet, he refrained from attacking Trump, which would have done the job.


Now, can anybody answer this question: who founded the KKK?

Remember, you have to go back to at least 1830 to understand the whole issue.

[Lord Dave]

Did Cruz do what he was supposed to do, attack Trump directly and strongly on the issues which would have derailed any other candidate? He did not.

Yet, with doing practically nothing at all, he won three states (Alaska included).

Had he reminded the voters on the Trump university scam, the tax returns issue, he would have won in Arkansas, and perhaps in Georgia too.

I was right about everything except the extent of Cruz's win on super tuesday; yet, he refrained from attacking Trump, which would have done the job.


Now, can anybody answer this question: who founded the KKK?

Remember, you have to go back to at least 1830 to understand the whole issue.

Attacking Trump would have no effect.


Also: 1830?!
The KKK didn't exist then.


Also, you tell us the answer because the answer I google will most likely be wrong to you.

[sandokhan]

The KKK was founded by the Knights of the Golden Circle, one of the most mysterious secret societies of the United States.

Now, who founded the KGC?

[Lord Dave]

The KKK was founded by the Knights of the Golden Circle, one of the most mysterious secret societies of the United States.

Now, who founded the KGC?

I was going to list 4 names so it's a good thing I let you answer your own question with your own answer.

And how could I know if it's the most secret society in the US?  It doesn't have a wiki page if it's so secretive.


Anyway:
You were wrong, Trump is going to win.  He'll probably win the presidency.
Then you'll be fucked and I'll be over here between laughing and cowering.

[Rushy]

Cruz couldn't even win more than 50% of his home state. His campaign is toast.

[Lord Dave]

Cruz couldn't even win more than 50% of his home state. His campaign is toast.

Sssoooo... he didn't win big in his home state?  (Sorry, haven't seen the full tallies)

Welp, Sandokhan was very wrong indeed.

[sandokhan]

http://conservativeangle.com/revealed-secret-recording-of-donald-trump-will-derail-entire-campaign/

Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) urged Republican challenger Donald Trump to allow the New York Times to release a “secret tape” of Trump allegedly explaining the flexibility of his immigration plans.

According to a report published on Monday, the New York Times editorial board recorded an off-the-record meeting it had with Trump in January where he portrayed his immigration proposals as more flexible than previously stated.

“I call on Donald: Ask the New York Times to release the tape and do so today before the Super Tuesday primary,” he said before a campaign rally in San Antonio. “There are one of two instances. It is either false, and if Donald didn’t say that to the New York Times than he deserves to have this cleared up and releasing the tape can clear it up. The alternative is that it is true.”

“That tape can clear it up and the voters deserve to know if he says something different when he is talking to the New York Times than when he is talking to the voters and they deserve to know before Super Tuesday,” he said.


Had the tapes been available to the public before super tuesday, Trump would have lost in most of the southern states; also, Cruz's current lead in Texas, 44%, would have increased to over 50%.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/271237-romney-nyt-transcript-could-be-another-trump-bombshell


lorddave...where did you attend school? Obviously you don't know d*ck about history, the four names you found were not the right ones.

[Lord Dave]

http://conservativeangle.com/revealed-secret-recording-of-donald-trump-will-derail-entire-campaign/

Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) urged Republican challenger Donald Trump to allow the New York Times to release a “secret tape” of Trump allegedly explaining the flexibility of his immigration plans.

According to a report published on Monday, the New York Times editorial board recorded an off-the-record meeting it had with Trump in January where he portrayed his immigration proposals as more flexible than previously stated.

“I call on Donald: Ask the New York Times to release the tape and do so today before the Super Tuesday primary,” he said before a campaign rally in San Antonio. “There are one of two instances. It is either false, and if Donald didn’t say that to the New York Times than he deserves to have this cleared up and releasing the tape can clear it up. The alternative is that it is true.”

“That tape can clear it up and the voters deserve to know if he says something different when he is talking to the New York Times than when he is talking to the voters and they deserve to know before Super Tuesday,” he said.


Had the tapes been available to the public before super tuesday, Trump would have lost in most of the southern states; also, Cruz's current lead in Texas, 44%, would have increased to over 50%.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/271237-romney-nyt-transcript-could-be-another-trump-bombshell

You seem to know alot about what would have happened yet not about what will.

lorddave...where did you attend school? Obviously you don't know d*ck about history, the four names you found were not the right ones.

And you know this... How?  I never posted them. 
Also, it was 6.  I didn't scroll right.

[Lord Dave]

I stand corrected.
The mysterious secret society KGC does have a wiki page.

[Rushy]

Hey Dave, could you do me a favor and stop baiting Levee. He is quite literally insane and is incapable of adding any worthwhile content to the thread. I'd prefer someone like Roundy chime back in. I know him and Saddam are capable of policy discussion. They just don't want to discuss it.

Trump's economic policy is the best of all candidates, for example. Several top economic firms have already stated that his economic package should produce the highest average growth in all sectors versus other candidates.

[Lord Dave]

Hey Dave, could you do me a favor and stop baiting Levee. He is quite literally insane and is incapable of adding any worthwhile content to the thread. I'd prefer someone like Roundy chime back in. I know him and Saddam are capable of policy discussion. They just don't want to discuss it.

Trump's economic policy is the best of all candidates, for example. Several top economic firms have already stated that his economic package should produce the highest average growth in all sectors versus other candidates.

Alright.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

Hey Dave, could you do me a favor and stop baiting Levee. He is quite literally insane and is incapable of adding any worthwhile content to the thread. I'd prefer someone like Roundy chime back in. I know him and Saddam are capable of policy discussion. They just don't want to discuss it.

Trump's economic policy is the best of all candidates, for example. Several top economic firms have already stated that his economic package should produce the highest average growth in all sectors versus other candidates.

Do you believe this growth to translate to a stronger middle class? Or is Trump going to be more worried about the 1% which he obviously can relate to a lot more than an average American Citizen.

[garygreen]

Trump's economic policy is the best of all candidates, for example. Several top economic firms have already stated that his economic package should produce the highest average growth in all sectors versus other candidates.

which firms?

also, what do you find appealing about trump's china policy?