Posted on 07/15/2016 9:01:00 PM PDT by Innovative
The Never Trump agitators have been defeated, but they say they’re not going away.
Republicans who failed to change party rules here this week and stop Donald Trump from winning the party’s presidential nomination are threatening to cause chaos on the floor of the national convention next week. Bruised by the way party leaders handled debate on a series of proposed rule changes, leaders of anti-Trump groups vowed Friday to find ways to draw at least some political blood when the party meeting begins Monday.
The options are limited, and attempts to cause trouble at political conventions are usually quickly thwarted. But anti-Trump activists who spent weeks trying to play within the party structure now say they will do what Trump hates the most — find a way to embarrass him.
“If they thought they were going to have the nice, unified kumbaya show, they just completely guaranteed they’re not going to have it,” said Kendal Unruh, a GOP delegate from Colorado who led an anti-Trump group.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Now you are inventing a crazy tinfoil hat conspiracy theory about me based on half a sentence you were not mature enough to handle.
Oh yea, I am doing Clinton's work... with half a sentence. LoL!
That, and Cruz didn't say that the sound of the Muslim call to prayer was the most beautiful sound on earth...and I don't *think* he has a half-brother in Kenya subsisting on a reported $20 / month. /rim-shot>
She claims to be a Christian. Just like Obama, I guess.
‘Trouble will give Trump the bounce he won’t get from Pence.’
It is impossible to know at this point in time whether Trump will get a Pence bounce. For you to state that he won’t is simply a way of dissing his choice. It’s one thing for you to not like it personally. But to say not enough will be enthused even to give Trump a modest bounce is to do the work of the Left.
LoL! You are still going on about a single sentence 12 hours later.
I posted Trump will get a bounce. I told you why I thought Trump will get a bounce. You are free to get bent about it. Like I care.
Warren slams Trump and Pence as 'two small, insecure, weak men'
Go get freaky on someone else with your weird conspiracy crap.
You posted that Trump won’t get a bounce from Pence. There is anecdotal evidence that Trump is already getting a bounce. Of course no one knows for sure how it will settle out until actual polls are conducted. None have been as yet since Trump and Pence only announced formally this morning. You may be proved dead wrong, and Trump may get a nice bounce out of his selection. It’s still too soon to know for certain.
Now that their apparent psychosis has been quantified, I would like for someone to explain ‘why’?
I don’t know, but here’s a theory. Cruz supporters are not monolithic. There are at least two types. The first, minority group, strongly buys all the religious rhetoric. They believe Ted is uniquely anointed to save the US at this perilous time in our history. For them, rejecting Ted is equal to rejecting God’s plan to deliver the US from evil. Naturally they feel an overwhelming need, in the face of that rejection, to validate Ted’s anointing by saying, ‘I told you so!’ every time the slightest thing goes wrong.
The larger group ignores the anointing angle. They simply believe Ted is a principled conservative—a rare gift to the country on the order of Ronald Reagan.
But even more than that, this second group believes Trump is a fake. They think he’s a huckster, a scam artist, a fraud, a lowlife, and far worse. They simply cannot believe we had the opportunity to choose a bona fide conservative or a conman, and we went with B. The chagrin alone is enough to nearly kill them.
So yes, definitely they NEED ‘I told you so,’ opportunities. It’s the only way to prove they are right. And they simply must prove they’re right; their judgment, intelligence, discernment, and practically their very identities depend on being right. After all, everything they think they know falls apart if they’re wrong, so that is simply not an option.
That’s why the need to say, ‘I told you so,’ is so compulsive. For the first group, it’s religious. There is a need to confront the moral slackers with the bad outcome they so freely and foolishly chose. The second group is simply dying to rub our noses in the truth—according to them—of who Trump really is. It would be the most satisfying moment they ever lived, if they could say, ‘I told you so!’, and we were forced to agree. (Which will never happen; they are profoundly mistaken as to Trump’s true character.)
Thanks for the armchair psychological analysis. On an intellectual level, I can grasp where their mindset originates. I just cannot imagine being so rigid in my views as to potentially shatter if I were wrong about something. I look at an error or mistaken opinion as an opportunity to learn something and not take it too personally.
Live. Learn. Move on.
‘I look at an error or mistaken opinion as an opportunity to learn something and not take it too personally.
Live. Learn. Move on.’
This may put you in the minority in a very positive way. Learning from mistakes is not as common as some might think.
Sorry about the loss of your cat. I am a cat lover too. They are amazing creatures.
Thank you. Grab your popcorn and watch the convention, then on to November. Time to save the future of the nation. Vote Trump!
+1!
They believe they are serving a greater good.
Instead they are enabling Satan his own self, as embodied in Hillary Clinton.
Sad but true.
The Republican nominee’s share of support has risen to 42% in the latest survey, putting him one point ahead of his Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton. Trump’s support is up from 40% in the previous round of interviews while Hillary Clinton’s support held firm at 41%.For the record - Turns out I was correct.
Unfortunately the controversy bounce was self inflicted so the other part of my prediction (Trump would get a bounce from the protesters) that you ignored ("how do I know?") didn't happen. So you can be happy about that. I guess.
I wasn’t expecting to hear from you again. Until your ping, I’d actually forgotten about the exchange. That wasn’t the case in the immediate aftermath. Rather, I felt some curiosity about you at that point. Namely, I wondered what would make a person so aggressively rude. You directed so many insults toward me, and every single one was gratuitous. Why?
I rarely look at people’s homepages, but for you I made an exception. I thought perhaps it might contain a clue as to your singular nastiness.
I confess I didn’t actually read the page. I had planned to, but I got distracted. As soon as it came up, I noticed three symbols at the top. I couldn’t tell you what the other two were, but the first one looked, to this evangelical Christian, like a Catholic symbol of The Lamb.
I was gobsmacked/dumbfounded. My exact thought was, ‘This can’t be! Why would a Christian go out of his way to be so rude???’
I left your page and did an image search. The keywords were, ‘catholic symbol lamb.’ Indeed, the image on your homepage popped right up. There had been no mistake.
The shock and amazement were incredible at first. I simply couldn’t reconcile your litany of insults with Christ’s commands about the way we should treat one another.
Still, in time the shock wore off. Life intrudes.
But here you are agsin, pinging me to that thread, so I might as well ask. Why WOULD a Christian be so rude? Have you lapsed since you appended that symbol to your homepage? If not, how do you reconcile your nastiness to the Golden Rule?
Go back and read through the exchange. Some of your insults are incredibly ugly. What was their purpose? What did you gain from them? I am not a Catholic, as I indicated. If the Catholic church encourages the type of unjustified insults you heaped on me, all I can say is that something profound is wrong somewhere.
Great Epic Meltdown there.
Not exactly what I was expecting - from a discussion on polling. LoL!
Interesting that you forgot about "our exchange" that you started 10 days ago and continued on the next day. Actually you were rudely wasting my time by spamming me after I politely answered your question in my first response.
Then you maliciously accused me of "spreading false info" when all I did was share an opinion in a single sentence, which actually predicted a poll bounce for Trump.
Now all I did here is give you a link showing I was correct after you told me I'd be "dead wrong".
I thought you might respond disputing the poll. But this weird attack on my Christianity... Detailing looking up a Christian Symbol on my About Me Page (including the file name of the picture) and taking cheap shots at Catholics... Shame on you Troll. You showed indisputably what you are about and it is mighty ugly. And again, all I did now was link you a poll and you went nuclear from it while claiming you forgot about it. Obviously a not!
Wow.
Here is your Christian post in this thread: It’s sad, embarrassing (for you) and pathetic that you couldn’t figure this out for yourself.
You have some nerve to rudely Troll me with spam and tinfoil hat accusations and now tell me to look back - so you enjoy looking at your nasty "Christian" post above.
I didn't need to look at your About Me Page to figure a cheap spammer out. That's for sure. That's why I told you to "enjoy your festivities". I was writing you off as a drinker because I couldn't believe someone in their right mind would be abusive over a person giving an opinion in half a sentence that you weirdly twisted into "a fact" so you could continue haranguing me about it.
You attacked Catholicism from a post with a link to a poll, and not a single insult... If the Catholic church encourages the type of unjustified insults you heaped on me, all I can say is that something profound is wrong somewhere.
... because you think you are entitled to harass a person who expressed an opinion in a single sentence, with spam, false witness, tinfoil hat accusations and now Trolling me about my Christianity on a political thread.
I hope you are proud of yourself. You are an Epic Example, but certainly not of Christianity so you can drop that right there.
Wow.
LoL!
Dear NYer, I am pinging you with a Catholic question. I chose your name because I have noticed you posting on many Catholic threads. You seem devout and knowledgeable, and I am willing to trust your judgment.
I have been accused of Catholic persecution. That strikes me as a very serious charge. I am a Christian. If I am in fact persecuting my own brothers and sisters in Christ, would not God take that sin very seriously?
For the record, Catholic persecution is the last thing on my mind, as it was when I made the post in question. Is it even possible to persecute people or a religious order without the least intention of doing so?
I believe the above post, number 196 [it being the post that earned me the charge of being a Catholic persecutor], is self explanatory. If not, the balance of the exchange could clarify any questions, or you could ask me to explain anything that’s unclear. If you don’t have the time or inclination to get involved, perhaps you can refer me to another knowledgeable Catholic. I am very serious about wanting and needing to understand this situation more fully. I have been active on FR since 2000, and I’ve never been accused of anything remotely anti-Catholic to date. The few doctrinal discussions I’ve participated in involved a particular Protestant sect. Even then I was always polite. The persecution of fellow believers is the last thing I want any part of.
Thank you in advance.
One more thing. The party that accused me of being a Catholic persecutor took some of my words entirely out of context. They weren’t even directed at him! The following is the quote, which, if read *in context,* is not what it was made to appear:
‘It’s sad, embarrassing (for you) and pathetic that you couldn’t figure this out for yourself.’
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.