RNC disqualifying first time voters in VA?!

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Early voters who do not already have the "loyalty oath" on record will not get to vote.

Wanna bet?

Did you see the form on which the "pledge" is executed?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage

I was just replying to you because reading your response reminded me of whats been going on with Trump vs the MSM over the last few months. I would have quoted you otherwise...

Its really an odd situation with Trump and the MSM but it sheds light on something that really pisses me off. The media have no business deciding who we should vote for, yet they continue to march on with that attitude. Where is the unbiased reporting that we were promised from the news? But I guess that is a subject for another thread.

Meanwhile, Trump continues to rally the angry voter which is usually the most assertive voter and those types of voters actually vote.

a reply to: BIGPoJo

The media have no business deciding who we should vote for, yet they continue to march on with that attitude.

You're kidding right? The media can't decide anything. Or tell me, will you vote for someone because your mother tells you to?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BIGPoJo

The media have no business deciding who we should vote for, yet they continue to march on with that attitude.

You're kidding right? The media can't decide anything. Or tell me, will you vote for someone because your mother tells you to?

I will not, but many people believe that the news is unbiased and trustworthy. Many people use the news to decide who to vote for. Take Barack Obama for example, the MSM coronation propelled him to the Oval Office twice.

a reply to: BIGPoJo

Take Barack Obama for example, the MSM coronation propelled him to the Oval Office twice.

How do you know that?
Can't be foolish without assistance? Mind, I'm not saying they were.

a reply to: UKTruth

Is there a source for this claim?

In general, there are always deadlines for registering with a political party. Plus, one needs no such party affiliation to vote. Some states might have rules for primaries, of course.

a reply to: UKTruth

I'm not sure whether there is even a legitimate legal challenge to be had. The primaries are not elections, more of an opinion poll for the party to determine who to select as a candidate for the best chance to win in an election. If a candidate were to receive 100% of the primary votes, the party could still nominate a different candidate to run in the election.

They could, in fact, choose not to have primaries at all, and simply select a candidate, as I believe most of the parties besides the 2 that matter do.

As to why they're doing this, it seems to me to be a move against Trump, as he is one of those candidates who tend to fire up new voters and young voters. Last time we saw that happen, a Clinton lost to an Obama in a primary. Methinks they don't want that to happen with Trump.

The more the They work against him, the more I think that if he won, maybe the first 100 days in office wouldn't be so bad. By then, though, he'd probably be heart attaked so meh anyway.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: CranialSponge

He's using his reverse psychology to outrage people who probably would never go vote. When you tell someone they can't do something, what do they secretly want to go and do?

That's right...he's going to anger a bunch of lazy non-voters into registering to vote. That's the strategy.

Trump has been playing people and their emotions since day one.

Actually I was talking about the Virginia GOP when I asked:

Why even bother with such ridiculously useless crap then ?

What purpose does it serve (other than the blatantly obvious divisive partisan BS) ?

Apologies if it wasn't clear as to whom I was directing my questions toward.



I know Trump is now drawing attention to it for his own purposes, that much is obvious.

But I'd like to know why the Virginia GOP is playing such a childish game to begin with, particularly because this 'pledge' is just a waste of people's time and energy.


I guess what it boils down to is that I'm completely blown away at all the ridiculousness that's been going on with this entire campaign process thus far.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you say that? Interested...

Because the required "pledge" is silly. It will not cause anyone who intended to vote in the Republican primary to "stay home."

It might backfire because it could well cause "outside" voters to vote in the primary out of outrage over being told that they cannot do so unless they agree to the "pledge."

It's 'merica, after all. We're an ornery bunch.

Haha yes - I have noticed the ornary nature of some of the responses and politics seems to bring it to the fore
I hope you are right about the strategy in Virginia backfiring. I am not particularly fond of Trump but the thought of a Rubio or Bush being elected is not very comforting to those outside America borders.

If Trump gets the nomination he'll need Virginia to win the presidency. To do that he almost certainly will need help from the state GOP establishment. If he thinks they're going to roll over and help an a**hat candidate just because he's a Republican he needs to talk to Ken Cuccinelli.

Trump has been manipulating traditional and social media. He's been giving the middle finger to a lot of individuals, organizations and institutions. Maybe that's the new bar for setting a campaign's tone. I don't know. Maybe he's some kind of political genius pretending to be a moron.

But if there is ever a crack in the Teflon there's going to be a lot of powerful people with a lot of money behind them ready to stick it to him.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you say that? Interested...

Because the required "pledge" is silly. It will not cause anyone who intended to vote in the Republican primary to "stay home."

It might backfire because it could well cause "outside" voters to vote in the primary out of outrage over being told that they cannot do so unless they agree to the "pledge."

It's 'merica, after all. We're an ornery bunch.

I am not particularly fond of Trump but the thought of a Rubio or Bush being elected is not very comforting to those outside America borders.

I don't like any of them but Rubio or Bush would be far better for everyone inside and outside our borders than Trump, Cruz or Carson.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you say that? Interested...

Because the required "pledge" is silly. It will not cause anyone who intended to vote in the Republican primary to "stay home."

It might backfire because it could well cause "outside" voters to vote in the primary out of outrage over being told that they cannot do so unless they agree to the "pledge."

It's 'merica, after all. We're an ornery bunch.

I am not particularly fond of Trump but the thought of a Rubio or Bush being elected is not very comforting to those outside America borders.

I don't like any of them but Rubio or Bush would be far better for everyone inside and outside our borders than Trump, Cruz or Carson.

I disagree. The American war mongering has to stop and I don't trust Bush or Rubio to do that. The effects on Europe of the illegal wars are being seen now with hundreds of thousands people pouring over borders and Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan in chaos. This is why America has become such a distrusted and disliked nation across Europe (as well as the middle east). We all know who the aggressor is, despite the PR machine.

Both Bush and Rubio are all for declaring a no fly zone over another countries' airspace (!) and shooting down Russian planes if they fly over a country they have been invited to be in. Call Trump names if you like, but Rubio, Bush, Christie and Kasich are the craziest lunatics I have ever heard. That is a path to WWIII and millions of deaths. That's not a better scenario in my book.

originally posted by: DelMarvel
If Trump gets the nomination he'll need Virginia to win the presidency. To do that he almost certainly will need help from the state GOP establishment. If he thinks they're going to roll over and help an a**hat candidate just because he's a Republican he needs to talk to Ken Cuccinelli.

Trump has been manipulating traditional and social media. He's been giving the middle finger to a lot of individuals, organizations and institutions. Maybe that's the new bar for setting a campaign's tone. I don't know. Maybe he's some kind of political genius pretending to be a moron.

But if there is ever a crack in the Teflon there's going to be a lot of powerful people with a lot of money behind them ready to stick it to him.

Trump built a huge business, is well educated and is building an impressive campaign despite the MSM trying to derail him at every opportunity. To call him anything other than a very smart man is simply nonsense. I suspect that if he wins the nomination we'll see a different strategy adopted to beat Hillary - which may include Cruz on his ticket.

I guess we can all only hope those very powerful men with a lot of money are finally neutered as we go through 2016. It certainly seems they are powerless right now to stop Trump.

a reply to: UKTruth

The MSM trying to "derail" him? That's a laugh. If they were trying to derail him they would stop giving him free coverage. CNN is all Trump all the time. He doesn't even have to buy advertising. He's driving ratings and the talking heads are breathless over every idiotic tweet.

And we'lll soon see what kind of campaign he's actually built. The last I read he had all of 30 people show up in person to train as precinct captains in Iowa and he supposedly has equally poor organization in SC and Nevada. Maybe he can win just by sending out nasty tweets from his penthouse. Maybe not.

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: UKTruth

The MSM trying to "derail" him? That's a laugh. If they were trying to derail him they would stop giving him free coverage. CNN is all Trump all the time. He doesn't even have to buy advertising. He's driving ratings and the talking heads are breathless over every idiotic tweet.

And we'lll soon see what kind of campaign he's actually built. The last I read he had all of 30 people show up in person to train as precinct captains in Iowa and he supposedly has equally poor organization in SC and Nevada. Maybe he can win just by sending out nasty tweets from his penthouse. Maybe not.

His ground organisation might well be his undoing - we'll see if he has a handle on it over time. All we know for sure right now is that he is ahead in the polls and his opponents are most certainly scared of him (they wouldn't be so focused on him otherwise). Belittle all you want, but it won't stick because of what he has achieved. As I said, that takes smarts. I think the last hope for the establishment candidates will be the delegate allocation rules that have been changed to favour Bush. For that reason I think Bush is still in the race.

The vast majority of MSM coverage of Trump is negative. They keep doubling and tripling down on trying to smear him and twist his words. I do not think the coverage is a result of media support/bias in favour of him. They are trying to destroy him - and failing.

originally posted by: UKTruth
I think the last hope for the establishment candidates will be the delegate allocation rules that have been changed to favour Bush. For that reason I think Bush is still in the race.

And how specifically do you see the delegate allocation rules favoring Bush and hurting Trump moving forward from this point?

Considering that (for just one example) the GOP is now trying to discourage independents and Democrats from crossing over to vote in the Virginia primary which by traditional metrics would favor a moderate candidate.

a reply to: DelMarvel

They are using him for ratings. People want to see and/or hear what he will do next. It is in a very negative light but this is someone who has rebuilt his business a few times, does billion dollar deals around the world with shrewd negotiation and gets the job done. If he is elected, he will surround himself with the smartest and not who the lobbyists are putting forth or need to be rewarded.

His true poll numbers are closer to 60-70% in many parts of the country but the only ones really being reported right now are the ones where he is real close or behind Cruz.

I truly want to see a Clinton/Trump debate. Bush is weak. Rubio would be a Paul Ryan. Make Christie the new AG but Kasich is a nut.

originally posted by: matafuchs

His true poll numbers are closer to 60-70% in many parts of the country

You have a source on that or are you just pulling it out of the air?

I'm in a very red part of the country and know a lot of Republicans and he's definitely no where near that here.

a reply to: DelMarvel

Sorry, certain parts of the country when you break up the age and sex demographic as compared to what is being reported in the MSM to show the others gaining. I heard it on a few News stations as a byline.

It is called the Bradley Effect. It means a person may vote for one person but during exit polling they will say they voted for the 'mainstream' candidate to not look crazy or in the case of Bradley racist during exit polls.

I have read that his numbers are not a direct reflection for a few reasons. I looked it up on line and with a quick google search you can find it. Where as a CNN poll may say he is at 39% (latest polling) he is actually quite a bit higher as explained above. The weirdest one is that he is polling about 7-10 points higher in polls that are done online over phone polls.

I have to say that I have quite a few old school Democrats who are looking at voting for Trump and similarly some old time Republicans who want a 3rd party candidate and not Trump.

It is going to be an interesting election this year.

originally posted by: matafuchs
I looked it up on line and with a quick google search you can find it.

You looked it up online? How about a link? You're the one who made the claim.