Trump or Carson?

In the most recent CNN poll Donald Trump's leads with 27%, followed by Carson at 22%. Gov. Jeb Bush and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio are tied for third place with 8% support each, followed by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul each at 5%. Fiorina, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz each have 4% support, while Ohio Gov. John Kasich is at 3%. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum stands at 2% and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham holds 1%.

Ok, so between them Trump, Carson, Cruz and Huckabee, candidates who have said some of the extreme things during their run, have 58 percent of the Republican vote.

I keep hearing that it will be impossible for someone like Donald Trump to get the nomination, but I keep seeing people like Trump leading the field.

Can the Republicans actually field a sane candidate? If they nominate a Trump, what will happen to the party? Will people leave on principle (or disgust)?

I don't know how this polling tracks within primary states, but anyone below Jeb! and Rubio (8%) is dead in the water at this point (except Canadian Senator Cruz, who has deep funding). All are deeply flawed or simply in it to monetize their political brand (Reverend Huckabee).

If Trump were to win the nomination, he'd face an independent challenge from one of the losers representing the GOP "Establishment," possibly Jeb! Or Romney might throw his millions into the chase again. It would be trickier for Establishment Republicans to mount an independent challenge if Carson were to win.

The polls indicate that the active Republican base doesn't want a sane candidate; the base appears not to care whether the Republicans actually take the Presidency. The base represents identity politics at its finest.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Shows you how usless polls are. Carson is up 28-20 over Trump in lastest Iowa Quinnipiac poll.

In the GOP, I would vote for anyone besides Trump, Carson, or Fiorina. You might notice what they have in common. They are all non-politicians, so to speak, who portray themselves as outsiders, as candidates often do whether they are or not.

As much as I hate to admit it, I think you have to be a lawyer to be president, politician, or someone involved in the process of making law or policy. That disqualifies Trump, Carson, and Fiorina. Bills are written by lawyers in legal language. If you want to understand law or lawyers, you have to be educated in law and have some experience with it. Then you have to know how Washington works, how things are done on the Hill, in the White House, and so on. The person who knows has an advantage compared to someone wasting a lot of time learning on the job. A certain amount of the latter will of course be necessary, but it ought to be minimized if you want to know what's going on, want to try to get things done, or avoid getting devoured by sharks who really do understand how the system works. Assuming it works.

Everyone says Dr. Carson's a nice guy. That's exactly the reason he shouldn't be in Washington where he would be fed to the sharks.

ETA: edited typos

>3 barney67:

I'd never vote for some others, but I basically agree. Businessmen and neurosurgeons can become Congressman, even Senators. Maybe a governor. It's not even about elected office. Eisenhowever didn't have that. But at least he'd worked in government. To go from nothing to President is just reckless.

From ABC:

Donald Trump leads the Republican presidential field in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, not only in vote preferences but in expectations as well -– a remarkable feat for the non-politician who’s surprised the GOP establishment with his staying power as well as his support.

Trump has leveled off with backing from 32 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who are registered to vote, easily enough to retain his frontrunner status. Fellow outsider Ben Carson follows with 22 percent, also flat this month after sharp summertime gains.

Notably, even more leaned Republicans -- 42 percent -- say they expect Trump to win the GOP nomination for president. And given a list of six potential nominees, 43 percent pick Trump as having the best chance to win the general election just more than a year from now.

Our elections have turned into whoever has the most money wins. Therefore I prob. shouldn't be suprised to see Trump in the lead or high expectations of his winning.

A man about whom I can find very little to admire. A bad haircut passing himself off as a statesman.

I don't think he's passing himself off as a statesman.

>7 RickHarsch:

We've never agreed more.

Not eligible to vote, so this is just in fun . . . either as president would make the US the joke of the world, but Carson perhaps a bit less since more people outside the US won't know him and the crazy, disconnected things he says. But if I had to pick one of the two, I guess I'd pick Trump, only because I think he would just hire people to actually do all the decision making and work, and also because he wouldn't base any decisions on religious delusions. He says he'd just fix Syria? Yeah, and then he wouldn't, and he'd shrug his shoulders and make his scrunchy face. He's not going to start a holy war.

Nicholas Kristof put it well in the NYT yesterday: "Ben Carson Is Inspiring, but Not for President" http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/opinion/sunday/ben-carson-is-inspiring-but-not...

For my part, I don't fear him. Candidates with good stories often go far, early. But they can't hold on when people start looking at policies and competence. Carson will fade. I'm pleased he is at least taking some of Trump's share.

>9 Nickelini: You make good points. However, I think Trump has zero in the way of ideals, ethics, etc, so if anyone waved enough money in his face, well, who knows what could go on.

OK, here's a fun cocktail chatter fact guaranteed to scare your friends. Most celebrities who run as republicans are elected. Reagan, Bono, Fred Thompson, Schwarzenegger, Eastwood, Fred Grandy. Many celebrities who run as democrats are elected. Franken, Jerry Springer, Ben Jones (Cooter from Dukes of Hazzard). Clay Aiken, democrat who ran unsuccessfully as an NC representative, is a notable exception.

If Trump is not elected, he will be the most notable Republican exception. As well as the first.

Fred Thompson ran for President as a Republican in 2008 and lost. And Linda McMahon, wife of WWE CEO Vince McMahon, ran for Senate as a Republican and lost (twice!).

Maybe I'm just holding out hope that Trump won't get elected, but I'm sure there are other examples of celebrity Republicans failing at politics (more than most Republicans already fail at politics).

Doh! I forgot about about Thompson in 2008. Linda McMahon I wouldn't have counted. This is Washington, let's keep it under our hat and people won't remember. It's too good of a party trick. People's reactions are priceless.

I'm going to vote for me this time. You should, too. If we can get 10-20 others I may actually win.

Not that I like either of these characters---and I really don't but it just seems to me that people just can't get past their career politicians. It's like 'oh, oh what's this guy going to do? He's never been elected to anything before--people will laugh at me (us) if we elect this guy and he turns out to be a turkey'--and to a degree that's fair enough but I also look at it like this---your career politician might have more experience running some kind of smaller state govt. or been a mayor or whatnot but most often (to me anyway) it only means they have experience fucking things up. Usually they've already proven to be turkeys but I suppose they're turkeys that you know instead of a potential one you don't. So along comes Trump, Carson who might not have experience but at least haven't fucked anything up yet (though I'm pretty sure they will if they get the chance) but some people are afraid to give them a shot because they don't have any experience running a govt.

It's a way of saying I suppose that not having that experience at least in my point of view more often than not is an asset not a detriment.

Speaking of the republican party though I think they're all turkeys though Scott Walker was a demon turkey. Glad he's out of the picture.

On the other hand, heading up a gov't is in no way similar to heading up a business. If a CEO steps into the Presidency expecting everyone to just do as they say, then they aren't going to accomplish anything.

Suppopsedly when Eisenhower became President, Truman said something along the lines of, "Poor Ike. After being in the army, he thinks as President he can just tell people what to do, and they will do it! He doesn't understand that he really has little power in office."

15:
"So along comes Trump, Carson who might not have experience but at least haven't fucked anything up yet"

While Carson has been pretty good at his career as a doctor, I'm fairly sure Trump has "fucked up" tons of stuff in his career... just not at a government level...

Personally I think they are both monumental "fuck ups" in that 90% of what comes out of their mouths is crazy as bat shit.

>18 inkdrinker: Hear, hear. The entire candidate lineup is bizarre to me because I can usually pick off at least one who's not crazy as a loon, but not this round. I hope both these current frontrunners fade, and soon...but there is little comfort to be had from any of the replacements. Cruz? Fiona? eww.

#16--I absolutely agree with you on that by the way. Running a business is no special qualification for running a government.

Pretty much though my point was that just because somebody is a career politician doesn't make them a good candidate.

If USA Today* is correct, the
question should be "RUBIO
or ʻOtherʻ ?".

(USA Today, 11/04/15/ p.1)

21:
"question should be RUBIO
or ʻOtherʻ ?"

Yeah... I'm still not buying, but I don't think the Republican party has fielded a decent candidate in quite a long time. (Full disclosure - I'm pretty damn liberal, but a moderate republican who wasn't zealously religious could get my vote... That's pretty much what I feel like I have voted for in the form of the Democrat candidate in most elections over the last 20 years or so. :-( )

Iʻm a Democrat who pictured Rubio as a
strong Republican -- perhaps the only
strong one, if the media is right that
the Trump/Carson endorsements wonʻt
translate into votes.
If I were a Republican, I would want
M R to be the candidate, as the most
likely to beat H R C. Being a Democrat,
Iʻm afraid of his candidacy.

Of all the current choices, Sanders comes closest to my ideals (not perfect but I'm long past the age where I imagine that's possible), but Sanders can't win the general election... So I guess I'm stuck with HRC. She's definitely better than anyone on the Republican side to my way of thinking.

Hard to believe that there's only 443 days before Trump is sworn in as president.

gah

If Sanders can win the nomination he can win the general election.

I feel somewhat bad for Jeb! He dropped his last name to avoid association with his dumberer brother. He raised millions of dollars from hardworking, Republican big funders. He renounced his only serious policy idea (the Common Core) so that he would be more appealing to the anti-intellectual Republican base. All this should have secured an easy victory over pipsqueaks like Jindal, Huckabee, Paul, Cruz, and Rubio.

Instead, he’s been ambushed by a real estate clown and a retired surgeon who hocks quacksterish supplements.

>28 theoria: Ha ha, I've been thinking the same thing! He looks kinda shell shocked these days...how on earth could these simple moves not result in a lock in the polls? Must be astounding to be getting beaten by those mental midgets (even if he did watch his brother do it to Gore).

This a leading Republican candidate for President:

"Archaeologists are wrong, according to Ben Carson. The great pyramids of Egypt were not built as tombs (or with the help of aliens), but for grain storage.

That’s per a commencement speech the Republican presidential front-runner gave in 1998 at Andrews University, which is associated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. BuzzFeed surfaced the video Wednesday.

During the speech he talks about “thinking big,” and uses the Old Testament’s Joseph as an example. He recounts how Joseph, who was sold into slavery, rose to become the prime minister of Egypt and “saved the world” by warning the Pharaoh about a seven-year famine he had seen in his dream.

“My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain,” Carson said. “Now all the archeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs’ graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it. And I don’t think it’d just disappear over the course of time to store that much grain.” http://national.suntimes.com/national-world-news/7/72/2063896/ben-carson-pyramid...

He makes Sarah Palin look like a Rhodes Scholar.

I got a lot of personal theories. I think a lot about grain storage, too. Sometimes I wonder why the bedroom in this apartment is bigger than it need be? Tomb or grain?

Sadly, John Kasich (who I really don't like) is the most professional of the Republican candidates; it says a great deal that he's not even in the running, really. Carson is the poster guy for Heinlein's aphorism that an expert in one field always believes that expertise qualifies him to be capable in every field. And what would Trump do if he actually won...and was forced to realize that he'd have to work with people that he thought were incompetent and obstructive, but couldn't fire? Throw a tantrum?

>31 RickHarsch: It's for book storage, isn't it?

Trump has a CEO's mentaility--delegate tasks and order people around. I don't think the other two branches of government really figure into how he thinks things are going to work and between the House, the Senate and the Courts I expect he's going to be in for a really rude awakening. As I've said before it's pretty much known that he is not the guy that the Republican Party movers and shakers want--he has almost no political endorsements from any governors, house members, Senators or cabinet members or any former governors, house members, Senators or cabinet members. I can only assume that the big money people don't want him either--certainly not the Koch brothers. Probably not very much Wall St. or investment bank support either. The Democrats certainly aren't going to help him at all. He could very well be more like a sitting duck than a lame duck if he manages to win next November. So apart from the American public having to put up with all his bluster for 4 years--I just don't really see him accomplishing much which might be okay or a lot better than a Republican who might accomplish more---I worry sometimes about what people call accomplishment. Sometimes--quite often nothing is better than something. In that respect I like him a lot better than all the establishment assholes in that party.

30: "He makes Sarah Palin look like a Rhodes Scholar."

Brings an entirely new meaning to the old saying:

"It's not brain surgery..."

>33 theoria: Taking no chances, I've removed the books and replaced them with bags of oats and a well-wrapped corpse.

>36 RickHarsch: So, that's what happened to Jimmy Hoffa.

Hard to believe there's only 442 days before Trump is sworn in as president.

Ack-shully, the chatter in Washington is that Rubio is about to surge in the polls and he'll get the nomination, teamed up with John Kasich as his VP.

Fucker smells like Jack Nicholson.

FAMOUS QUOTES:

Donald "Rue the Day" Trump -- "Sadly, because president (sic) Obama had done such a poor job as president, you won't see another black president for generations."
-- Carson leads you in the polls, buddy. Predicting a Republican loss?

Ben "Wikipathetica" Carson -- "You know Obamacare is really I think the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery. And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care. It was about control."
-- Uncle Tom has spoken. Oh yeah, and slaves didn't build the pyramids. Obama did.

How can any intelligent voter possibly choose between the two of them?

I haven't read the previous posts. I wanted to make one point about Trump portraying himself as an outsider.

First, here's a link to what is, I think, is a fairly non-biased account of how Trump made his money: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/08/07/industry-focus-financials-08-03...

The article taught me that, despite his claim to be an outsider to government, many of Trump's deals, though legal, ambitious, and even clever, were nevertheless the result of help by government. Perhaps I overemphasized his outsider status in my previous post. He has worked quite closely with government and knows quite a bit about law, at least as it pertains to real estate. Whether knowledge of real estate law qualifies one for president, I have my doubts.

It also seems odd to me that in every election there are candidates who boast about being outsiders while running for office, which, if they win, will become insiders -- politicians. Does something magical happen on the plane ride to D.C.?

If I'm to take the title of this thread seriously, I would pick Carson over Trump because under Carson not much is likely to change, but Trump has the potential to create disaster. And I would hate to see him on TV all the time. Seems like I've been seeing him on TV for decades. He and the Clintons. Can't they find anything better to do with their time?

ETA: Fixed typos.

>41 barney67: A candidate claiming outsider status has nothing to do with them actually being an outsider. It's just another label that makes them look good to their base. I mean, in SC the winning candidate for governor ran as an outsider, despite having both the previous governor and his estranged wife campaigning for her.

I'm surprised that JEB, Lindsay Graham and Rick Santorum haven't claimed they are outsiders yet. It might help their campaigns.

I really don't get this outsider thing in American politics. I think it boils down to a rejection of decadence. But for me I see a faux lack of sophistication that shows nothing but contempt for those who take it at face value. Bill Clinton former President claiming to be a simple country boy. Newt Gingrich acting like he was never speaker of the house. Who the hell swallows such crap.

Will this matter to his base at all:

http://www.vox.com/2015/11/6/9681558/ben-carson-west-point

I mean, if they were fine with the great pyramids being grain silos, why should they care if Carson lied about his background?

The fact that Mr Carson is a fabricator makes him the ideal Republican candidate.

Christie's fallen by the weigh side, Carson's been sent to the back of the class. Hard to believe there's only 441 days until Trump is sworn in as president.

If Trump somehow manages to get the Republican nomination, that's just going to make Hillary, or even Bernie, a shoe-in for the main contest.

Hillary has significant negatives, even among women. So far, there is no shoe-in that I can see.

If Trump is elected, I'm going to stick around for the after-party then move to New Zealand because he'll blow up the world.

Only Trump could make Mrs. Clinton look like a good candidate.

>46 SomeGuyInVirginia:
"Christie's fallen by the weigh side. . ."

I saw what you did there. heh heh

". . .Move to New Zealand because (Trump)ʻll
blow up the world" (48)

Iʻm reminded by this of an article in an Australian
magazine in the 80s, purporting to be a descrip=
ion of the beginnings of World War III.* The first
sentence of it was, "Australia, New Zealand
and the Pacific Islands** are expendable." (It didnʻt say
if "Expendable" meant they would be blown up on
the first day, or that they were so insignificant that
a self-respecting war effort wouldnʻt bother to
attack or defend them.)

*And there I was, living on a Pacific island (Tonga).

**Who won, according to the article? Oh, NATO of
course. It was a streamlined version of a
repeat of WW II. The Soviet Union was pretty much in the
role of the Axis of WW II -- won battles at the
start, but couldnʻt win the war.

...

Ben Carson Defends Himself Against Allegations That He Never Attempted to Murder a Child

...

Carson Denies He Still Beats His Wife

Hard to believe there's only 438 days until Trump is sworn into office.

President The Donald. Sort of trips lightly from the tongue.

Donald Trump promises to end the War on Christmas. http://www.salon.com/2015/11/10/donald_trump_joins_the_war_on_christmas_brigade_...

“If I become president, we’re all going to be saying Merry Christmas again, that I can tell you.”

I'm wondering how he's going to implement this. Will it be an actual law? How often will every US citizen have to say it? Will there be a department of government overseeing this? As a visitor to the US, will I have to say it too? Even if it's September? So, so, so many questions. Still, I'm glad someone is tackling this issue--it must be one of the worst your nation has ever faced.

"President The Donald. Sort of trips lightly from the tongue."

As the vomit spews from my mouth.

Truthfully I still see next year's election as Hilary Clinton's to lose. It's true though that at least 50% of the electorate can't stand her--mainly those people are on the republican side but there are a lot on the left as well. As for The Donald. Nobody on the left or towards the left likes him. Nobody in the middle likes him. We can count out anyone that would identify as a moderate republican and even many conservatives. He's built up a very large base of people---almost all on the right even if I'd hardly consider him a hard right winger. He is on some things I suppose but on others not. Nonetheless even having built up this large base of people he has extremely little support from the party itself and should he become the nominee--it's a real question just how much support he'll get then. I don't really see established republicans pols or donors or other conservative entities going overboard to help him out.

SomeGuyInVirginia--it wouldn't be a huge surprise to see him nominated as the republican candidate. I don't see him winning. He's a guy who is either loved unconditionally by his supporters or loathed by just about everybody else and IMO there's even more loathers for him than there are for HRC----and to be honest I really dislike both of them and wouldn't vote for either under any circumstance. To me they are both a couple more aristocratic wannabes---not really in touch with the vast majority of Americans.

>55 Nickelini: He could win the war by putting "Merry Christmas" on money (the five or ten dollar bill), just as "In God We Trust" on the one dollar bill won the war against Communism.

>57 lriley: I can see Trump getting the nomination if the RNC writes the White House off and decides to work on state and local elections. If he loses then they can put a lid or short lease on the party's most conservative elements.

And frankly, I just don't see him wanting to be president. Janet Yellin is the most powerful person on the planet, and Chief Justice Roberts right up there. Why play third or fourth fiddle? Or at least I don't see his advisers allowing his narcissistic personality disorder to get the better of him. That just MO, though. I kind of thought he'd stir the pot and then drop out by now or very soon.

Hillary is the DNC choice, but she's not loved and not widely liked. There's a lot of ill will in her party over her seeming vacillation over announcing her candidacy. remember those 'will she or won't she' stories? It's a pity she's going to steam roll over Sanders and make him look like a crotchety old man. She's pocketed the other Dem runners.

My deceased father got a letter this week from the RNC asking him to rank the various candidates. The list got thrown away, but it had about a dozen people on there, mostly described as "x Governor" or "former x Governor" (maybe senator?) with Carson getting "retired neurosurgeon and lecturer"(?) (I am unsure what came after the "and"), and Trump being just "businessman". I'm pretty sure this is the first time they've felt they should do such a poll.

>60 prosfilaes: Those are almost always just a way to beg for money. They don't really care how you fill out the survey.

The Donald reminds me in a way of that bit from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series (not sure which book--I only know the radio series script well) where it talks about how Zaphod Beeblebrox was elected Galactic President as a way to keep everyone's mind off who was really running the universe...

#59--I agree with most of what you say here. Trump's run kind of plays to me like something out of Barnum and Bailey's circus. Trump as a latter day W.C. Fields. How serious is he? I have no idea. It is major publicity for him though and he eats that up and when it comes to media savvy he makes the entire republican field look like a bunch of hayseeds--which for the most part they are. I think that lurks in the back of some of his supporters minds and they get a kick out of seeing some of these holier than thou stuffed shirts who are always promising but never delivering going nowhere fast. I really get the idea that Trump's not good at resistance---which the congress and the courts would give him shitloads of and the other thing is he doesn't strike me as being good at commitment which kind of goes with the job he's applying for--at least if he's interested in getting some kind of agenda off the ground. I really don't think he can win.

I think HRC can--she's got the backing of her party. That can go a long way. She's about as two faced as it gets as far as I'm concerned. I really don't like her. I never have and I don't like her husband either. She'll switch gears on TPP about two weeks after she's sworn in. She's completely buyable by special interests. This is not a person IMO that should be POTUS.The problem is---there's a real bandwagon for her and it will be rolling and when it comes down to a choice between her and the republican nominee a lot of people are going to put a clothespin on their respective noses and vote for her. Between the two party fields apart from Sanders I don't see anyone I'd consider likable. I'm really to the point where I think the entire electoral process is bullshit.

I'm waiting for Trump to tell us how he would handle the Starbucks cup controversy.

And I normally live in a very red part of a solidly red state. No women, including those who are very far to the right, like Trump at all. His contempt for women has been duly noted, and it will keep him off the ballot.

Perfect, RG, red state, women green with envy

>64 RidgewayGirl: According to an article I read in USA Today, he had this to say about it....

"I have one of the most successful Starbucks in Trump Tower," Trump told the crowd. "Maybe we should boycott Starbucks? I don't know. Seriously, I don't care. By the way, that's the end of that lease but who cares."

>63 lriley: Trump and Hilary fascinate me. Even for pols they are hot messes. I see Trump at war with the voice of reason and the voices in his head. If Trump stays in and loses the nomination he's better off than if he wins it and loses the race. I really think if he stays in and wins the office, it will ruin him. If Trump can manufacture some way to bow out gracefully (family reasons), he will ALWAYS be the go-to guy for GOP straight talk and that's a powerful position. He's got a window of power now when he can threaten to run as a third party candidate and hand the office to the opposition. Ditto Sanders.

Hilary has to win the race or she will always be an 'also ran'.

Rubio is about to surge in the pols. He's a viable contender for the office.

Rubio will be rapidly sunk by financial misdeeds.

Last night Rubio said “we need more welders and less philosophers.” He's either a Marxist or a philistine.

>69 theoria: Not to mention being ungrammatical.

>70 Marissa_Doyle:

That's part of the point.

>68 RickHarsch: Negatory. If so, he would not be about to rise in the polls.

'Negatory'. So cute.

He may rise in the polls, but he will be undone by his financial misdeeds.

In all seriousness, I don't think Clinton makes Sanders look like a grumpy old man. I think he does that himself. I remember watching PBS when the Dem contenders all introduced themselves and made shortish speeches, appearing on stage one-by one to officially start The Silly Season. I was surprised to note how glum, snarly, and "get off my lawn-y" Sanders appeared. He hardly ever raised his head, and never even smiled, not even when exiting. He just turned his back on the audience and walked off the stage. It was very strange.

In even greater seriousness, unless the RNC is totally overrun by Tea Party types, I doubt Rubio receives the nomination over Jeb! The looming reality for the Republicans is a brokered convention, in which case Old Guard Republicans will fight it out with Neocons and Tea Partiers. If that happens, Bush or Kasich are more Old Guard and stand a better chance of winning the nomination. It could be UGLY.

Most seriously, the folks at 538 are giving a slight edge to the Republican party taking the WH in '16, in spite of most polls indicating Clinton would beat almost every Republican running in the general. Perhaps the statistical weight of a party not carrying the presidency after holding it for 8 years has more weight in their considerations.

That's bad news for the working poor, 42% of whom earn under $15/hr. Unfortunately, this is also the demographic that historically votes against its best interests. Still, with all the Repubs on record as being opposed to raising the min. wage and most of that demographic being women (women disfavor Trump above all other Rs), perhaps they'll vote D in this election. Miracles can happen. Currently 11% of Republican voters in LA favor Edwards (D) over Vitter (R) for gov. Whodathunkit?

>74 Limelite: Well said. Jeb! Third time's the charm!

>73 RickHarsch: Time will tell (how very very wrong you are.)

The GOP leadership strikes me as being totally unfit to lead; their policy strategy seems designed to hinder efforts. That said, the Kasich PAC, seemingly with GOP leadership support, setting out to discredit Trump seems remarkably short-sighted. What if Trump says "Screw you guys, I'm running as an independent." He splits the vote and Hillary wins by a mile. Hell, a Trump/Cruz ticket might even have a shot.

IF there's no clear winner in the R primaries, and IF there's a brokered convention in which the Rs pick an unpopular (not right wing nut) candidate, i.e. not Trump, THEN he'll go Indy. Whether or not he can convince Cruz to thus sacrifice his political ambitions by shedding the R after his name is interesting to consider but probably a fantasy. On the chance Trump wins the nomination in a primary landslide, I think Cruz would crawl on his stomach from TX to NYC just so he could grovel before Trump, seeking to be his running mate.

Thinking about it, in the event Trump goes Indy, I can't imagine who he could get to go side-by-side with him over the cliff.

Still, my earnest hope and prayer is that he does not win the R primaries overwhelmingly, that the Rs' Old Guard call on Romney to save them, and that Trump does run as an I to complete the scenario you state.

Well put, and Cruz so pissed off McConnell that I could see him going independent. I think Romney's already said he won't run, but that doesn't mean he's out. Trump continues to pull ahead, and I really don't know what he's thinking.

It's a mess, the US desperately needs a leader who's got experience with international relations.

I do not see Trump lasting. Everyone is out to get him. the man has peaked.

>79 SimonW11: We keep thinking that, but every obnoxious, inflammatory, insulting bit of rhetoric that comes out of his mouth only seems to strengthen his lead. The latest bit of mocking a reporter with a physical disability, which one would think is the breakout moment for him to crumble into dust at last, seems to have had no effect. The crowds laugh and cheer.

>79 SimonW11: That's not going to work. The whole right sector of this country thrives on victimhood.

Through his mocking imitation of the physical disability of a New York Times reporter, Mr Trump is merely tugging at the heartstrings of the Republican Party’s sub-proletariat. His performative barbarism appeals to its inner Attila.

>83 RickHarsch: Well said.