You keep promoting your loser candidate who isn't going anywhere, who can't manage to garner 3% in the polls, or do well at CPAC, and I will keep promoting mine until the owner tells me not to do so.
In the meantime, take a hike, loser!
Try to refrain from the personal attacks. The owner of the forum might just hold you to that one simple rule.
So, I am a socon who supports a socon candidate on a socon forum "who can't manage to garner 3% in the polls," and I'm having some trouble with some "conservatives" who are pushing a solib candidate on a socon forum and I'm called the bully. That's pretty rich. Of course, we all know what happened to Dean when he was front runner in the last election, but that's not proof enough that polls don't mean much this early in the game.
I ain't no bully, just someone surprised to see a social liberal being pushed onto a socon forum. And then they don't answer posts of substance. Their candidate is the loser. With a guy like that, even if he wins, the republican party loses.
Would you care to answer the false dilemma? Since team rudy is so fond of its own false dilemma, after all.
My contention: If rudy gets the nomination, he loses the base and the election.
Your contention: If Hunter gets it, he wins the base and loses the election.
Hypothetical to answer your hypothetical. Both sides losing to Hillary.
Side A: The solib republican splits the base. The MSM turns on him the moment he is nominated. Hillary wins. Republican party is split.
Side B: The socon republican wins the nomination, loses to hildebeast in a tough fight. Republicans are united against the hillary presidency.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?
Win-Win false dilemma:
Side A: Solib wins presidency by ignoring the socon base and permanently splitting the republican party.
Side B: SoCon wins presidency by (obviously) relying on the socon base.
Which candidate is best for the republican party, Side A or Side B?