A Trump-Carson ticket?

a reply to: nwtrucker

Thoughts? Sounds like a combination of Elmer Gantry and the black version of Mr. Rodgers to me. Neither one is qualified to be POTUS.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Answer

OK. I think at this point it would take a Superman/Batman ticket to turn around the GOP.

And that is why your input is unnecessary in this thread. No offense.

It's like me interrupting a "who should Hillary pick as her VP" thread with "It won't matter cause I won't vote for her and she sucks! Nugent/Budwesier 2016!"

Now now. Just because someone see's the reality of the GOP, they are not allowed to participate in this thread??
As in - "If you don't think like (we've been told to) think - you aren't welcome here"?????

It would take a lot more than a Superman/Batman ticket to revive the GOP. The numbers just aren't there. Outside looking in, that's the reality.

Whether you accept it or not, is a whole other can of beans.

Wait and see....

a reply to: justme2

Not qualified? Based on the Constitution?

Please enlighten us....Oh, that's right, you guys put that document aside when it suits....I forgot for a second there.

Someone, Trump or Carson will want Kasich or Rubio to help deliver Ohio or Florida.
Both Kasich and Rubio are looking for VP spot at this point.

a reply to: nwtrucker

What? You're counting out the man who taxed the rain?

Not feasible imo. IF Trump could get the Republican nomination and that's a BIG if, he wouldn't resonate with the majority of Americans. He has a solid base in his demographic but those outside would run the other way. Including Centrists and they are the ones that decide elections.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

The problem I see is the Constitutionalist is restricted by it's very conventions. The Judicial would block any moves to return to a Founding Father's version. (Not to mention there's near equal guilt on the right in violating it)

In that vein, we probably need an Obama-like president from the right to restore some sense of balance before the Constitution could be workable again. (I'm thinking a bit out of the box on that one...LOL)

I heard a Carson interview on the radio this past Thursday as he's in this area doing book signings. Missed my opportunity to see him in person this afternoon in fact ... so wanted to go and get his book signed.

But, they asked him - one term or two. His answer was basically that he thought one because if he was elected he would do what needed doing and would be too unpopular for re-election. Take that as you will. They had just finished budget talks ...

a reply to: Answer

If the majority really disagreed, we'd have had either President McCain or President Romney.

a reply to: ketsuko

Really! That's a surprising comment. I'd have thought he wouldn't operate that way.(too nice a guy(?))

In that case, he has my support!

a reply to: intrepid

Usually centerists carry the day. Romney carried the center and still lost. Largely due to a poor republican turn-out.

Secure the base....then work on the center.

Besides based on the overwhelming voter swing to the right in every level of gov't in the nation...except the presidency, it won't take a broad-based candidate to win...just one that carries the base and even some interest from the center/left.

Just my opinion though...the 'experts' agree with you....

Funny to see this here; I just mentioned the same thing to my banker today and discussed how that would be a winning combination (not a Trump fan; btw). The country is still waiting for some change and getting desperate....

I think it would be a one term from Trump (think Trump & Dump for your trading folks) with Carson having a hard time with the re-election bid at the next election against a strong Democrat. That theory is for another thread that I am contemplating a post on, as it is just a theory and I know that as a conspiracy theory website, theories without evidence are frowned upon (just don't ask me why....).

a reply to: nwtrucker

Don't get me wrong, I think Ben would be the perfect VP candidate. It's Trump that doesn't work.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: EternalSolace
I'd rather see a Carson/Trump ticket. I can envision Trump causing a war because of his mouth and ego. Not that it's a bad thing overall. But being a hot head has no place in diplomatic situations. Carson and Trump would definitely compliment one another though.

Trump is quite anti-war, actually. He was against the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions.

Putin has quite the mouth and ego but most of the world respects him when he's not busy trying to take over Ukraine.

Carson seems to exude the "big stick" ideology. I can see him being much more level headed and diplomatic than Trump. But not so diplomatic that he's going to get pushed around and made a fool of on the world stage. The world is such a volatile place anymore that remaining level headed and keeping the ability to see five moves ahead is paramount. I just can't see Trump doing that as he likes to provoke too much and has zero tact.

Like I said, I don't necessarily believe that's a bad characteristic in Trump. I like how he calls people out. It balances out Carson's calm demeanor perfectly. I just don't think he can turn that off when needed.

a reply to: notmyrealname

Personally, theories are cool. They're 'what ifs'.

Most of mine tend to be wrong....LOL. I do learn from them......

a reply to: nwtrucker

Heh, I've seen several theories that Cruz is actually fairly well positioned. He's about the only one who has both outsider and insider cred. He's standing back in the pack but not so far that he can't capitalize on the falling establishment types or pick up from the outsiders and put on a surge.

He's managing his money well enough and fundraising strongly enough that he can afford to hang around and play the waiting game for quite some time.

The question is whether or not his strategy will pay dividends.

a reply to: intrepid

Trump makes me nervous, as well. That is modified by the sense of desperation at the state of affairs.

For many, that desperation 'trumps' the nervousness.

Do not underestimate that factor. It explains the poll results....IMO.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

The problem I see is the Constitutionalist is restricted by it's very conventions. The Judicial would block any moves to return to a Founding Father's version. (Not to mention there's near equal guilt on the right in violating it)

In that vein, we probably need an Obama-like president from the right to restore some sense of balance before the Constitution could be workable again. (I'm thinking a bit out of the box on that one...LOL)

LoL well , I like thinking out side of the box, however I cant say I agree, I dont think the answer is a "progressive lite" president

From a conservative standpoint, we have been traveling that road for many years now and its just gotten worse and worse..

No in my mind we need to turn course.......

The majority of the country would disagree with you, I'm afraid.

we will see on election day I suppose, but I dont think so at all

a reply to: nwtrucker

THAT I understand very well, with our election just this week. But does that trump the machine? Is it REALLY going to be anyone except Jeb and Hillary? Obama was a bloop. He caught the Dem's off guard with his internet campaign. That ain't happening again.

a reply to: ketsuko

Interesting. He is well versed in the game and obviously pisses off the Republican Establishment....

Question. Assuming the RHINOs aren't in the camp of trump, Cruz and Carson. which one would they back if their guy(s) don't get the traction to win?

a reply to: nwtrucker

Why do think Ryan is positioning to be Speaker of the House? They'll work hard to make sure they can at least control Congress if they think they'll not take the top job.

So far, no one has unseated McConnell.

That leaves Congress in RINO hands. No matter who becomes president, they will have to contend with the establishment in that circumstance.