[the808bass]

Instead you're going to dig in your heels, cut off your nose to spite your own face, lose sight of the long term negative effects of a Hillary presidency for all the conservative causes you claim to so adamantly support, not to mention the negatives effects on our troops, our country and our standing in the world, and then disengenuously accept no responsibility for your actions.

Actions on both sides have consequences. Not just those of the social conservatives. If the Republican party nominates a person who differs drastically from we know to be Republican (don't play with definitions here, we all know what we're talking about), then they should be willing to accept that their social conservatives are not going to be gung-ho about their choice. You cannot say "compromise is part of politics" and then follow that immediately with "you do all the compromising" when addressing social conservatives. That's nonsensical.

[prairiebreeze]

My post 279 this thread, meant to ping you.

[dforest]

The Rooty apolgists are the “just shut up and vote crowd”. They have no problem yanking the platform out from under social conservatives.

Next they expect you to run out and vote for Rooty based on the “no principles whatsoever” platfom.

If Rooty wins, they will claim it was because of them. If he loses, it will be all the fault of those Bible thumping social conservatives. The Rooty rooters will claim “those socons musta lied to us”, and still dump them off the flotilla.

What incentive do they really have to believe this party deserves their vote?