I've a lifetime Republican, I'm voting for Hillary (or any other Democrat)


#1

How many times have you heard this from a person when you are debating with them about politics? I’ve heard repeatedly, and I’ve come to the conclusion that this might well a Democrat talking point to rope you into their position. They say thus to get you thinking that perhaps you might change their minds IF they had been “real Republicans,” but most of them are not.

If you scratch them hard enough, you learn that they might have voted for Reagan, if they are old enough to have done that. The fact is the are RINOs at best.

Hillary Clinton is running a bunch ads here in Florida with these Republican converts “who are voting Democrat and for Hillary for the time.” They clam they can’t vote for Trump because of things he has said, yet they ignore Hillary’s record. It just doesn’t add up if they REALLY had Republican attitudes.


#2

People vote funny. Some vote with their pocketbook (or because of their pocketbook). We got some of those around here. Small business owners that believe that if Hillary get in higher taxes will put them out of business.
.
Other vote because of one political item. They are so focused on that 1 agenda item that whatever party comes closest to what they want, they vote for. The gay issue is a good example but I know someone that only votes democrat because of their stance on Gays. What’s more she got laid off for a while & never put together that it was the same party she sides with on the gay issue that laid her off. Very focused.
.
Then there’s people like my sister in law that are life long democrats. She doesn’t even follow the issues because she is a democrat & has always been a democrat. The funny thing there is that she was an old conservative democrat in her youth & hasn’t followed the party enough to see how they have changed. She blames the stuff that democrats do on republicans because she doesn’t check who stands for what.
.
So I don’t know that I am surprised that some republicans will vote democrat. There are all kinds of reasons for it. Not logical to me because I don’t find democrats logical but then very few people these days think logically. They run their lives by emotions. Oh well.


#3

Yeah, like when people voted a man as unelectable as Trump as our Candidate.

We all knew he was bad, that he was prone to gaffs, and likely had skeletons that no one would be endeared by, but apparently, millions thought he could just continue to defy political gravity, and keep the media as his “friend”.

Millions who didn’t understand that they were operating within a Garden, while the woods of the generals election, would tear him apart.

Emotion. That’s all Trump had going for him. And it was our downfall.


#4

Yeah, like when people voted a man as unelectable as Trump as our Candidate.
.
The times, they are a changing. I don’t know that George Washington could be elected at this point in time. Right now in our country there is a wave of anti Washington, anti politician sweeping the citizens like never before. Because of that I think that Trump had almost as good of a chance getting elected as any of our politicians. But there’s more going on than just Trumps problems.
.
The Republicans say things but then really don’t DO much when they get into power (except not move the country to the left as much as lefties). And to be honest what they do accomplish tends to either have a negative spin on it or is bland behind closed door actions that doesn’t fire up anyone. That’s because of the control of the media by the left. Then of course they get caught paying off the people that got them elected just like the left does. Oh & they tend to be boring. By that I mean the last good speaker that Repbs had was Reagan. Good speakers sell ideas, bad speakers put you to sleep. Mitt’s speeches should have been sold as sleeping pills. Then there’s the fact that repbs are constantly at war with each other. They spend more time attacking each other than they do attacking the left. Could there ever be a more flawed candidate than Hillary & yet the left is totally behind her. Repbs could learn from that. The sad fact is that liberals embrace a bunch of different fractions in this country while repbs attack or ignore them. It’s like they are saying we are the elite party who will never get elected again because you, you & you can’t join because your different. Liberals are teaching people to be liberals in college while conservative are forcing people into liberal camps by attacking them & their beliefs. Republican thinking is about 20 years out of date & it wasn’t that long ago that it was 50 years out of date. Think about it, 40 years ago did republican leadership know that there were blacks & Mexicans in this country? They acted like they didn’t but even if they did realize it they did NOTHING to get them to join the republican party. Want to talk failure? The party that got blacks equal treatment & basically the right to vote only gets about 5% of their votes 60 years later. That is massive failure & it all comes down to a “You have to fit into our mold to be a republican” mentality. The mold of what you have to be to be a republican is killing the republican party. Just look at Trump. He doesn’t fit into that mold & so republicans are attacking the hell out of him. The mental stance of I’d rather be right & lose than compromise & win is killing the republican party. IF Trump is able to do something about changing that attitude even if he does nothing else he would have done more for the republican party than anyone else since Reagan. Just my view.


#5

Yeah, like when people voted a man as unelectable as Trump as our Candidate.
.
I had to add this because I was watching it on U-Tube this morning. So…when we are talking unelectable, what does that mean at this stage of the election? Well right now it more or less means that either 1. you believe that he is so flawed that he won’t be elected or 2. the polls have him way behind Hillary.
.
Let’s look at #2 there. Did you know that it’s very easy to have a poll reflect that 100% of the country is behind Hillary? It’s pretty simple to do, all you have to do is only include registered democrats in the poll. Hillary is leading something like 15% with women so you could have her up by 15% (statistically) just by only polling women. I could go on but I’m betting that you get my drift. But of course nobody would do that because they are impartial polls, right? Well if your a conservative you know that the media ISN’T impartial so why are you believing the polls? I’ll tell you why, because they look official & because of that they look real. Here’s an update…your old & you are very visual. You were born in a time where what you saw was mostly real & that habit is hard to break. Time to stop & examine what you see. Why?
.
There’s a guy on U-tube that makes predictions on the election. He sounds English (like UK English). Anyway he uses the state polls to predict the election BUT not just the final numbers. He goes into the polls & examines what criteria they used to get those numbers & part of that is who they are polling. For instance in polls where Clinton is winning usually they poll groups with higher percentages of people that she is more popular with (women, democrats, etc.). Subtract the slanted percentages & generally either they are even or Trump in winning. (not is democrat states of course). So basically right now Trump is doing pretty good & the guy is predicting him to win.


#6

To be honest, I’ve had a couple of known-to-me-to-be Republicans tell me they are not voting. However, I’ve never had anyone tell me they are a Republican - lifelong or otherwise - but will be voting for Clinton.

There are few things in this life that are mutually exclusive. Really being a Republican and actually voting for Hillary are probably two such mutually exclusive categories.


#7

Yes, I know several people who voted for Romney, McCain and Bush twice, who are voting for Clinton. I also know some people who voted for Obama, Kerry, and Gore who are voting for Trump.

The biggest difference I see between the two groups is enthusiasm. The Romney voters who are voting for Clinton are like “I don’t even like Clinton, but I’m scared of Trump”. The Obama voters who are for Trump are motivated and excited. I hear the same thing from them. They still like Obama, but are disappointed in him. They feel like he didn’t get much done because he wasn’t strong enough. They see strength in Trump, with the same message of change.


#8

At a local organization, a guy told me that he is a life long Republican, and then he told that Obama is the greatest president in history. The reason he gave me was Obamacare. The guy is my age or older and has to be on Medicare. It did no good to explain to him that the Democrats took a big chunk of money out of Medicare to pay for Obamacare.

“Are you kidding me?” I asked him. He was adamant that Obama was the best. Then he showed me a Republican membership card he had in his wallet. Crazy and mixed up is all I can think.


#9

We would have won this election if we ran anybody else; FACT.

Putting up Trump, lost us this election.

> The Republicans say things but then really don’t DO much when they get into power (except not move the country to the left as much as lefties). And to be honest what they do accomplish tends to either have a negative spin on it or is bland behind closed door actions that doesn’t fire up anyone. That’s because of the control of the media by the left. Then of course they get caught paying off the people that got them elected just like the left does. Oh & they tend to be boring. By that I mean the last good speaker that Repbs had was Reagan. Good speakers sell ideas, bad speakers put you to sleep. Mitt’s speeches should have been sold as sleeping pills. Then there’s the fact that repbs are constantly at war with each other. They spend more time attacking each other than they do attacking the left. Could there ever be a more flawed candidate than Hillary & yet the left is totally behind her.

We saw a reporter on MSNBC turn on her. We’ve seen a “friend” of the Clintons announce, publicly, that they aren’t going to vote for her.

Enthusiasm for Clinton is in the toilet. Even the left it seems has their limits.

> The mold of what you have to be to be a republican is killing the republican party. Just look at Trump. He doesn’t fit into that mold & so republicans are attacking the hell out of him.

He’s also an awful person, he doesn’t know anything necessary to do the job, and voices alt-right policies, if not downright leftist BS. Something he’s done unapologetically for 30 years.

No, right makes might, Reagan showed us that.

Trump is wrong, and he will drag Republicans down with him in flames.

No to anemic victories, yes to winning the argument. Trump could only ever be the former.

> The mental stance of I’d rather be right & lose than compromise & win

Rubio would be a “compromise”. Trump is simply conceding that we don’t stand for anything but wanting power.

You don’t understand the stakes, you yourself, probably don’t even know how far away Trump is exactly from someone like Reagan, or even a Bush.

He’s not conservative. He never has been, not even during this “change of heart” he conveniently had in time for the primary race. He’s just a leftist with a nationalist streak.

> IF Trump is able to do something about changing that attitude even if he does nothing else he would have done more for the republican party than anyone else since Reagan. Just my view.

He would kill our political capital. He would turn the electorate against us.

You are pinning to sell anything for an anemic victory, not lasting change.


#10

Just how much are you being paid by the Democrats for this nay-saying nonsense, AS? I’ve rarely seen anyone on any of these forums (forae?) who are as certain that (1) Trump is going to lose next week and (2) Even if he wins, we’re still doomed as a nation as you seem to be.


#11

insult deleted by DN don’t say stupid things.

Trump is going to lose, he won’t take New Hampshire, he won’t take PA, he won’t take Colorado.

He has no chance in any of these states, and he would need at least one to flip to win.

If you paid attention to RCP, you would see he has not lead in any of these states even once.

Colorado is the closest, and as someone who lives here, let me tell you this: the democrats are turning in more ballots.

> Even if he wins, we’re still doomed as a nation

I don’t know about “doomed”, but it would be a travesty.

Look up the Alt-Right Dave; that is who Trump Represents, not us. If you understand who they are, then you’d be as disgruntled as me.

As it stands, you’re making the mistake of thinking Trump is a rough-around-the edges rightist, or a “possible” Conservative.

The CEO of trumps campaign however, ensures this is not the case.


#12

An all out media war on Trump, and Republican backstabbing is the only reason Trump is losing. He’s had by far the most slanted coverage of any candidate ever. The entire media has been openly attacking him and shilling for Clinton this entire election.

Then you have many of the powers-that-be in the Republican Party like Paul Ryan and the Bush family, all working to get Clinton elected. No other Republican has ever had to overcome all of this. And yet, fighting all of these forces on all of these sides, Trump is closer to Clinton, than Romney(much less McCain) was to Obama.

Let’s take a look at Paul Ryan’s approval rating before he decided to stab Trump in the back. Went from +23 to -5. And Trump never trained his guns on Ryan the way much of the GOP establishment did to him.

You really want to sit here and tell me that what Trump is dealing with on his own side isn’t costing him a hell of a lot more than the 2 points he’s down?

There is exactly one reason Trump may lose, and that’s because many Republicans have done nothing but fight him, even after it became clear he was the nominee. The fact that Trump is within 2 points of Clinton after everything that’s been leveled at him, is a testament to how resilient he is. If Ted Cruz, much less Jeb Bush had dealt with all of this, they wouldn’t even be standing anymore.

Trump is the closest candidate we’ve had to Reagan, since Reagan. Reagan only had to beat the party in the primary. He had a united Republican Party afterwards. He may well have lost to Carter if he’d been dealing with what Trump has had to deal with.


#13

Trump is losing for the same reason Hillary Clinton took a dive; he can’t hide his record. People dig it up, and he looks more and more awful.
He’s also worse than Clinton at hiding it, because he’s spent most of his life as a media figure.

He’s also a gaff machine that managed to say stupid things that turn non-conservatives off. He isn’t losing in New Hampshire or PA because conservatives aren’t coming out for him.

He’s losing there, because average people in the electorate don’t like him. He is the only one who can be blamed for that.

After all; no republican or Democrat made that recording of him with Billy Bush. Or the tweets where he gives the feminists the very material they need to make attack adds.

> Trump is the closest candidate we’ve had to Reagan, since Reagan

Yeah, no. You’ve already admitted that Trump isn’t a Conservative, so your beyond the pale to say this now.

> There is exactly one reason Trump may lose, and that’s because many Republicans have done nothing but fight him, even after it became clear he was the nominee. The fact that Trump is within 2 points of Clinton after everything that’s been leveled at him, is a testament to how resilient he is.

LOL, NO.

It’s a testament to how WEAK and CORRUPT CLINTON IS. Want proof? Look at the poll numbers before the FBI investigation came out a week ago. Tell me it was set to be anything but a blow out for her, and I’ll know you’re lying.

Congrats Trump, in a election where Democrats have put out their WEAKEST, most UNLIKABLE candidate ever, you managed to at least only be ***losing***​ by 1 or 2 states.

Any other candidate? Would have had this in the bag.


#14

One of the reasons Clinton is so weak today, is because of how many body blows Trump landed on her. She was leading the Republican field by 5+ points before Trump got into the race. The first time someone yelled “Sexism!” at Kaisch or Bush, they’ve have held a press conference to beg forgiveness over any possible misunderstanding. They’d have never dared to go after her the way Trump has. Trump has successfully framed Clinton in a way Republicans have tried and failed to do with the general public(non-consistent R voters) for nearly 30 years.

Look at the media coverage of Trump. Look at the things Clinton has done. Tell me, you think Clinton wouldn’t have done the same thing, ala paying people to start fights at events, the gaggle of Trump accusers, the potential “voting irregularities”, the coordinated media assault to any Republican opponent. Trump is the only one who could have weathered these attacks.

Look at the meltdown Cruz had over Trump’s tweets about his wife. Do you really think Cruz could have handled all of the things Clinton was going to throw at him? Cruz would have faced almost the exact same treatment as Trump. And Cruz made it very plain, he couldn’t take even 1/10 the heat Trump can. Do you really think Cruz would have had the wherewithal to stand on a debate stage with Clinton and state(correctly) that she should be prison to her face?

Do you really think the media would have treated Cruz better? Do you think Clinton would have been honest and fair with him?

I’ll grant, the media would have treated Rubio and Bush better. Clinton might have pulled some punches for Bush. But is that really the case you’re making? We should send Bush or Rubio out there because he’ll get better treatment by those in power?


#15

“Life Long” . . . pick your party. That “life long” phenomenon was something that used to be explainable, but now has become just an excuse for not understanding the issues.

My grandfather was a “life long” Democrat. He worked for the railroad in Altoona, PA. The fact that he was a railroad kinda’ guy, and hence a union kinda’ guy, explains why he was a Dem.

I remember he voted for Adlai Stevenson in 1956.

But today he would have been a conservative. He probably would have converted with Strom Thurmand and the rest of the “Dixiecrats”.

So “life long” no longer means the same thing to me that it once did. Back then it was explainable. Today it’s just an excuse.

(Don’t misunderstand, Old Tex, I’m not disputing your experience with your SIL, but rather using what you said as a springboard for my opnions on “life long”.)