Starting to lean towards Evan McMullin for President

He's still way more anti immigration than Hillary. He has softened a bit, sure. But he's not talking global amnesty... yet.



BTW. I'm pro immigration and think that we should let more people into our country. Building a wall talk is just dumb. BUT, I'm anti welfare state. Let them come here legally and easily, get a job, pay taxes (and let's just get rid of most of the taxes while were at it), get educated, contribute, raise good families and not suck on the welfare state's teat for generations. It's becoming a joke. Let those who want to contribute enter, take away the entitlements so people who are leeches have much less incentive to come here.

So, we're back to the "He's not Hillary" argument, which is proving to simply not be enough to win. He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

SpiffCoug wrote:
So, we're back to the "He's not Hillary" argument, which is proving to simply not be enough to win. He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

Actually a lot of polls are turning against Hillary. And yes, I will continue to compare Hillary to Trump as that's basically the two options we have at this point. Read my EDIT above. I don't care about immigration, but I think that Hillary will take away more rights and freedoms vs Trump. That's all that I care about at this point.



He is certainly a loser candidate, I'm not arguing that. But HRC has basically been deemed the winner of this election for years. Just using a map and the electoral college system you knew WHOEVER was going to run against Hillary was going to be fighting an uphill battle. I commend Trump for making it THIS competitive. Look at Romney vs Obumbler in 2012. That should have been a guaranteed Republican victory. Unprecedented poor polling incumbent presidential numbers and still the country couldn't help but turn it into a disaster. I think some of you are forgetting (and don't give enough credit) that Trump's message (like it or not and I like it a lot more than HRC's) resonated strongly with a ton of (according to the whiny press -white angry privileged) people. If electing Trump sends a message to both parties to clean up their act, great.

BroncoBot wrote:

So, we're back to the "He's not Hillary" argument, which is proving to simply not be enough to win. He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

Actually a lot of polls are turning against Hillary. And yes, I will continue to compare Hillary to Trump as that's basically the two options we have at this point. Read my EDIT above. I don't care about immigration, but I think that Hillary will take away more rights and freedoms vs Trump. That's all that I care about at this point.

Agreed. The GOP voters screwed the pooch on this one. They chose to go for the candidate who now has the same position on immigration that he used against his opponents to snooker the voters to reject candidates who could have beaten Hillary and select the one candidate who didn't want to win.

SpiffCoug wrote:

SpiffCoug wrote:
So, we're back to the "He's not Hillary" argument, which is proving to simply not be enough to win. He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

Actually a lot of polls are turning against Hillary. And yes, I will continue to compare Hillary to Trump as that's basically the two options we have at this point. Read my EDIT above. I don't care about immigration, but I think that Hillary will take away more rights and freedoms vs Trump. That's all that I care about at this point.

Agreed. The GOP voters screwed the pooch on this one. They chose to go for the candidate who now has the same position on immigration that he used against his opponents to snooker the voters to reject candidates who could have beaten Hillary and select the one candidate who didn't want to win.

On this we agree completely.

I have to wonder if Trump is a patsy whose goal is to deliver the presidency to Hillary.



I certainly don't think Hillary could win if she were opposed by a reasonable conservative.

vancouvercougar wrote:
I have to wonder if Trump is a patsy whose goal is to deliver the presidency to Hillary.



I certainly don't think Hillary could win if she were opposed by a reasonable conservative.

I think that's lazy thinking. Romney was that "reasonable conservative" 4 years ago. There are a TON of people in this country who have been duped into thinking that voting for a "Dem" is the right thing to do, no matter who the "R" is.

SpiffCoug wrote:
He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

Unfortunately, I agree. But you're describing every Republican candidate that I can remember. #statusquo

BroncoBot wrote:

He stands for nothing. He can't be believed on any position he does take. He's a loser candidate. He's choking away an election against a extremely beatable candidate.

Unfortunately, I agree. But you're describing every Republican candidate that I can remember. #statusquo

Too true.

vancouvercougar wrote:
I have to wonder if Trump is a patsy whose goal is to deliver the presidency to Hillary.



I certainly don't think Hillary could win if she were opposed by a reasonable conservative.

Not only do I believe that he's a Clinton crony who is doing nothing more than guaranteeing the current election for Hillary, he's also done a fantastic job of driving a serious wedge between minorities and the Republican Party thus guaranteeing that no Republican will be able to win the Presidency for several elections to come.

Here is the Dems plan to rule the oval office for 48 straight years:



First black president

First woman president

First gay president

First lesbian president

First transgender president

First illegal immigrant president (they’ll find a way)



And regardless of their platform if you don’t agree with them then you’re a bigot.

Well, he sure seems to run a tight ship and understand laws pretty good....



http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/evan-mcmullin-running-mate-227803



:lol:



So, either they muffed in understanding the balloting requirements in putting a "placeholder candidate" on there that they now cannot remove, forcing him to narrow his selection process to only individuals with the name "Nathan Johnson", or he's failed to control his message in announcing that he's going for the all-Mormon ticket with the fellow who got some run in Utah for saying the invocation at the RNC.

snoscythe wrote:
Well, he sure seems to run a tight ship and understand laws pretty good....



http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/evan-mcmullin-running-mate-227803



:lol:

His fault for declaring so late. Still, ballot access laws can be a real pain in the butt for non-republicans or democrats.

byufan4ever wrote:
Here is the Dems plan to rule the oval office for 48 straight years:



First black president

First woman president

First gay president

First lesbian president

First transgender president

First illegal immigrant president (they’ll find a way)



And regardless of their platform if you don’t agree with them then you’re a bigot.

Point made about how the dems use race or other things in inappropriate ways. But I still get pretty uncomfortable around some of my relatives with the ways they tend to talk about Obama. It's hard not to think some of them think the fact he's black is an additional negative about him, when it should be irrelevant. If we're honest, we probably all have relatives or know people like that.



Trump, whether he's an actual racist or not plays right into that. I saw a clip of a rally speech once where he said something about Obama which was totally fair game. But then right after that he couldn't help himself by adding, "who happens to be African-American," after which there was a roar of approval/laughter from the crowd. I don't remember the location. No reason for that. Regardless of how inappropriately the dems pander about race, Trump doing it to pander to the redneck quotient isn't any better. Let's just stay the high road. Of course it's politics. I get how that isn't going to happen. But I'm not supporting the crap from either side with my vote. I don't want either major party to misinterpret my lesser of two evils vote for being real support. I'm sticking with my decision to vote for Johnson.

Trump supporter: Let's persecute Mormons!



http://www.vdare.com/letters/a-chicago-reader-objects-to-mormon-solidarity-with-muslim-immigration-proposes-fig

BlueK wrote:
Trump supporter: Let's persecute Mormons!



http://www.vdare.com/letters/a-chicago-reader-objects-to-mormon-solidarity-with-muslim-immigration-proposes-fig

Wow, not very good with history. Polygamy was not introduced until after the Saints were expelled from Missouri. As such, polygamy had nothing to do with it. However, the political power held by the Mormons, and the fact that they were a pretty insular community had everything to do with their persecution. and "no one was exterminated"??? You have got to be kidding me. The mass grave at Haun's mill begs to tell a different story.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

Trump supporter: Let's persecute Mormons!



http://www.vdare.com/letters/a-chicago-reader-objects-to-mormon-solidarity-with-muslim-immigration-proposes-fig

Wow, not very good with history. P and "no one was exterminated"??? You have got to be kidding me. The mass grave at Haun's mill begs to tell a different story.

I'm sure he probably doesn't think the Jews were mass exterminated either. That's pretty standard for white nationalists.



This is the bizarro hateful world of the "alt-right" which is Donald Trump's most loyal fanbase. Obviously not all of his supporters are this bad, but there is a reason Trump has attracted these folks.

McMullin just released an ugly voicemail his campaign got from a Trump supporter:



https://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/evan-mcmullin-turns-racist-voicemail-from-trump-suppporter-i?utm_term=.pqmKYjZWk#.oiD5pVGRd



This is the kind of absolute garbage Trump inspires and attracts and he just doesn't care.



By the way, the guy who wrote this article is LDS.

There was also recently a letter to the editor or an opinion piece in one of the big papers that said Trump should follow the lead of Govenor Bogg's and Missouri and persecute Mormons heavily. They need to let us know that our kind aren't welcome in the United States anymore.



I don't blame Trump for this stupidity, but it does highlight his most vocal supporters.

hawkwing wrote:
There was also recently a letter to the editor or an opinion piece in one of the big papers that said Trump should follow the lead of Govenor Bogg's and Missouri and persecute Mormons heavily. They need to let us know that our kind aren't welcome in the United States anymore.



I don't blame Trump for this stupidity, but it does highlight his most vocal supporters.

The problem is that there is a reason Trump is attracting this kind of supporter. He inspires it because he knows how to speak their lingo in such a way that they think he is totally with them and all their beliefs while staying vague enough in his language that Trump can always say he didn't mean it that way.