Trump and Cruz together will probably have about 80% of the delegates. Why would any of them want to nominate Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, or whoever the devil de jure is? I'm tired of this scare tactic. Jeb Bush has a zero% cance of being the nominee, so does Romney, Ryan, or anyone else not running. Rubs and Kasich have maybe 1% chance each if things get wacky. It will be Trump or Cruz.
I won't be blackmailed into bowing down to Trump with threats of Trump going "I". If he's the nominee, I'll back him. Anyone who doesn't back the nominee is a traitor who I would have less regard for than the crap on the bottom of my shoe, and that would include anyone backing a Trump third party if he is not the nominee. NO HILLARY, PERIOD. That means no 1912 nonsense. Anyone that would seek to split the vote is not a "patriot".
[Rush mentioned that the Establishment forced Bush on Reagan via a convention threat.]
I never heard that. Have you, DJ? What I've was his own idea was Gerald Ford, but Ford demanded too much power so he turned to Bush. He seemed set on united the party, he chose a RINO as his 1976 running mate too. Should have chosen a conservative.
How much leverage will the Establishment have on Trump if he's forced to make a deal with them at the convention? How much would that water down his agenda?
Trump's only agenda is to get elected. His positions shift in the wind. Look for significant leftward movement if he's nominated to reach out to those "patriotic blue collar Reagan democrats" aka union swine.
‘I won’t be blackmailed into bowing down to Trump with threats of Trump going “I”.’
I don’t expect you to be blackmailed. I expect Cruz to be a statesman if he’s not the front runner. I expect him to unite the party.
That’s the kind of leader you deserve.
If Trump were some astro-turf insider, I could understand a convention challenge. But he’s not.
‘[Trump’s] positions shift in the wind.’
I do know that Hillary’s and Sanders’ political positions are as rock-ribbed as any conservative’s.
Have to disagree vehemently here. Given that I no longer support the Republicans when they play the role of Democrat ringer, who they nominate is paramount. If by some Satanic action they attempt to install a third ringer in a row, they can screw themselves. I have no moment of hesitation in repudiating a party that has embraced evil. I repudiated Willard the Rat, and I retroactively repudiated McQueeg. That party is not on my side. Only if Cruz (or Trump, so long as he doesn't go native) is nominated will I vote for their nominee.
"I never heard that. Have you, DJ? What I've was his own idea was Gerald Ford, but Ford demanded too much power so he turned to Bush. He seemed set on united the party, he chose a RINO as his 1976 running mate too. Should have chosen a conservative."
Possibly, but how much it is true I don't know. Reagan's weak spot was attempting to appeal to RINOs as such. Choosing Dick Schweiker may have been the straw that cost him in 1976 (although it supposedly caused him to move rightward, and it is unfortunate he retired from the Senate in 1980, which would've prevented the execrable Specter from taking his seat). Picking Ford would've been a fiasco, because you'd have had two cooks competing for lead chef, and the media would've used squishy Ford to drive a wedge between himself and Reagan's agenda. There was only one person who should've been chosen in 1980, and that was Paul Laxalt. A runner-up would've been Ohio's John Ashbrook, although he'd have died just a year into his term as VP.