Trump already is the 'Third Party' or 'independent' Candidate'.

Many have voiced the fear that Trump would break the agreement to support the Nominated Republican candidate.
Some as a valid fear others to erode Trump's support.

It's taken a while for this thought to develop, yet it has some validity.

Trump may have intended this from the outset or it may have merely evolved in this direction, but without anyone formalizing it, Trump represents those that dislike/have no use for either party.

I suppose my delay in realizing this is due to my belief and support for the Tea Party principals and that they represented the disaffected.

Apparently, that isn't the case.

Trey Gowdy's endorsement of Rubio, Tea Party and Republican Establishment. Together. Who'd have thunk it.

The endorsement speaks volumes. The lack of protest by the now 'so-called' tea party member speaks more than volumes. It completely takes the political wind out of my sails and left me adrift. No protest or comment by any other than Trump.

That also speaks volumes.

So I shifted my support to Trump. Not without reservations. Shifted none
the less.

The simple fact is, despite being a 'Republican' and labelled as such. The reality is he has no republican support. He has no 'Tea party' support. He has no left support, obviously. Yet he is a major player for president.

If he is, in reality, none of the above, then what is left?

Independent/Third Party. That's IS the reality...if one ignores the labels. Trump has either deliberately or through circumstance moved into an independent slot/category.

I say independent in the sense there is no 'party' behind him...officially. Is it possible that one is forming without plan? That the grass-root supporters of Trump are the forerunners of an official 'Third party'? The 'results' party. The 'outside the box' party.

I'm beginning to like the idea....

I would like to see a third party that wouldn't be corrupted like the T party was, a truly grass roots peoples party that cared about the working man. That's not Trump; Trump will support, if not extend the Corporate oligarchy. But Trump is a master showman and knows exactly how to fire up a base of disaffected people. But I have a hard time trusting a ruthless business man that has proven his disdain for the people.
If Trump is really serious about a run for the WH, he better get started on implementing the infrastructure for this 3rd party. I don't see the GOP giving him the nomination.

money.cnn.com...

I don't know what Trumps agenda is, but his past closeness with the Clintons should raise some questions. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Democrats are having a hard time containing their appreciation of Trump and his candidacy.

Politics operates with mysterious backroom deals and corruption. Nothing is like it seems on the surface.

originally posted by: olaru12
I would like to see a third party that wouldn't be corrupted like the T party was, a truly grass roots peoples party that cared about the working man. That's not Trump; Trump will support, if not extend the Corporate oligarchy.

I don't know what Trumps agenda is, but his past closeness with the Clintons should raise some questions.

I had similar reservations, especially his Dem contributions. One poster answered that by Saying Trump acknowledged those donations and had stated that as he was doing business in N.Y.C., that's what had to be done to conduct business. One paid of the democrats.

I haven't seen any verification of that statement. Yet know how 'business is done'. I can believe it.

I have a bit of a problem with your assumption that Corporations would increase their influence/power under Trump.

It seems a general assumption, but I don't see any evidence of it. Add in the federal gov't is a 'Corporation' and a failing one at that.

The argument can be made he's 'tailor-made' for the job.

I have no idea if he's the man for the job or not. All I know is I see fewer and fewer 'potential' people for the job.

If your not with the one you love....love the one your with.....

a reply to: olaru12

"I don't know what Trumps agenda is, but his past closeness with the Clintons should raise some questions."

Trump's agenda is pretty clear. He's there to peel voters away from the Republican party nominee. When Trump doesn't get the nomination in a "brokered" convention process, he'll stomp home declaring the process unfair and come the general election, his supporters will stay home assuring Clinton a victory.

What's curious is what's in this for Trump? I guess he's been promised all kinds of benefits for his business interests when Clinton is inaugurated.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: olaru12

"I don't know what Trumps agenda is, but his past closeness with the Clintons should raise some questions."

Trump's agenda is pretty clear. He's there to peel voters away from the Republican party nominee. When Trump doesn't get the nomination in a "brokered" convention process, he'll stomp home declaring the process unfair and come the general election, his supporters will stay home assuring Clinton a victory.

What's curious is what's in this for Trump? I guess he's been promised all kinds of benefits for his business interests when Clinton is inaugurated.

I won't say it's impossible. I don't think his agenda is that 'clear'.

If he thinks he can win-and there's no reason he shouldn't considering his numbers- why 'give' it to Hillary? That makes even less sense....

a reply to: nwtrucker

Well, I'm not saying he's "giving" it to Hilary. He can't "give" anything to Hilary unless he were to actually be nominated by the Republican convention. But I really don't think that can happen; he could win a majority of the states delegates and still lose at the Convention because of the "Super Delegates" appointed by the RNC and they''ll throw the convention to Cruz, Rubio, or Bush.

Even if Trump were to somehow win the Nomination, he'll lose the general election because the closet Democrats that are the Republican "Establishment" voters will stay home or vote for Clinton.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: nwtrucker

Well, I'm not saying he's "giving" it to Hilary. He can't "give" anything to Hilary unless he were to actually be nominated by the Republican convention. But I really don't think that can happen; he could win a majority of the states delegates and still lose at the Convention because of the "Super Delegates" appointed by the RNC and they''ll throw the convention to Cruz, Rubio, or Bush.

Even if Trump were to somehow win the Nomination, he'll lose the general election because the closet Democrats that are the Republican "Establishment" voters will stay home or vote for Clinton.

You may be right.

He is, in truth, an independent. That is becoming more apparent as time goes on. His support may motivate an independent run.

Faced with a third option? I will vote for him....I think....maybe.....

I have always thought of him as an independent self funded non lobbyist independent. I have honestly never met anyone personally that likes or say they will vote for Hilary, its all Trump except for the Christian lady next door that thinks Ted Cruz will be the next president because it is Gods will. The streets here are flooded with Trump signs. Even the democrats I know are voting for Trump except one that cant give a clear reason. Maybe we need a madman in office. 10 years ago Trump wanted to legalize all drugs recognizing the failed war on drugs , now he has toned it down but is talking abut reform and recently cited Colorado and the money they are making, you know THAt gets his attention, he sounds pretty cool to me.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Trump refuses to follow the narrative set by the establishment and establishment candidates. He has created an opportunity for real discussions on the terrorist problem, illegal aliens, issues that regular people have.

For those reasons alone, I like him. Will he become president? I highly doubt it. Bu that's my opinion on the subject.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Bernie does not hide that he is an independent. No games there. And his record of bills that he sponsors that concern "people" is well recorded.

www.govtrack.us...

a reply to: olaru12

I would like to see a third party that wouldn't be corrupted like the T party was, a truly grass roots peoples party that cared about the working man.

Kind of like Bernie Sanders? Some people are terrified about Bernie labeling himself as a Socialist democrat. Infusing a capitalist government with a balance of beneficial socialist programs that have proven themselves popular in other countries is not a bad thing. It's about time the U.S. government starts focusing on the needs of it's citizens instead of corporate interests and overseas conflicts.

I get tired of the average struggling American complaining about...

-The high cost of medical bills and prescriptions.

-The constant threat of losing their Social Security by legislatures who embezzled money out of a program in which they paid into their entire life!

-The threat of losing a popular Medicare program in which the majority of elderly rely upon to help them offset living on a fixed income and the excessive costs of end of life nursing care.

-Outrageous high taxes due to excessive military spending when a small decrease in this budget would help programs that benefit and help it's citizens.

-The continued decrease in government spending on education which is the keystone of a strong economy and country.

-The outrageous tuition costs of higher education in which Student loan defaults have risen for a sixth straight year and putting our children deeply in debt which is directly affecting our economy.

-Corporate Greed and fraud. Criminal profit making schemes should be held accountable and prosecuted. American Corporate greed for higher profits have sent jobs over seas for lower wages and higher returns for their investors. Ignoring the plight of many Americans and hurting our economy.

Yet after all the complaining about higher taxes, the lack of good paying jobs and politicians not focusing on their needs, these same American's will still argue and defend corporate interests and excessive military spending! Citizen's deserve and should expect a return on their taxes! Taxpayers shouldn't have to use their hard earned in money to support high paid career politicians, excessive military spending, corporate welfare and fraud.

-

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: olaru12

I would like to see a third party that wouldn't be corrupted like the T party was, a truly grass roots peoples party that cared about the working man.

Kind of like Bernie Sanders? Some people are terrified about Bernie labeling himself as a Socialist democrat. Infusing a capitalist government with a balance of beneficial socialist programs that have proven themselves popular in other countries is not a bad thing. It's about time the U.S. government starts focusing on the needs of it's citizens instead of corporate interests and overseas conflicts.

I get tired of the average struggling American complaining about...

-The high cost of medical bills and prescriptions.

-The constant threat of losing their Social Security by legislatures who embezzled money out of a program in which they paid into their entire life!

-The threat of losing a popular Medicare program in which the majority of elderly rely upon to help them offset living on a fixed income and the excessive costs of end of life nursing care.

-Outrageous high taxes due to excessive military spending when a small decrease in this budget would help programs that benefit and help it's citizens.

-The continued decrease in government spending on education which is the keystone of a strong economy and country.

-The outrageous tuition costs of higher education in which Student loan defaults have risen for a sixth straight year and putting our children deeply in debt which is directly affecting our economy.

-Corporate Greed and fraud. Criminal profit making schemes should be held accountable and prosecuted. American Corporate greed for higher profits have sent jobs over seas for lower wages and higher returns for their investors. Ignoring the plight of many Americans and hurting our economy.

Yet after all the complaining about higher taxes, the lack of good paying jobs and politicians not focusing on their needs, these same American's will still argue and defend corporate interests and excessive military spending! Citizen's deserve and should expect a return on their taxes! Taxpayers shouldn't have to use their hard earned in money to support high paid career politicians, excessive military spending, corporate welfare and fraud.

-

This message has been approved by the coalition to elect Berne Sanders....

In one of the debates, Trump specifically said he would not endorse another Republican, and that he would run as an independent if he did not get the nomination. It has been clear since early on.

originally posted by: darkbake
In one of the debates, Trump specifically said he would not endorse another Republican, and that he would run as an independent if he did not get the nomination. It has been clear since early on.

Show us, please..

a reply to: nwtrucker

Trump is 'officially' something. Not an independent that would help. The UK may not let him in the country at some point. I don't see results from him. As for outside the box? Yes being loud, insulting and ignorant is pretty outside the box. Would it be a third party called "I don't GAF." ?

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: darkbake
In one of the debates, Trump specifically said he would not endorse another Republican, and that he would run as an independent if he did not get the nomination. It has been clear since early on.

Show us, please..

He did, at one point say that. He may have said something different later, but as darkbake typed, Trump did say this in a debate. This is just 4 months ago.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: darkbake
In one of the debates, Trump specifically said he would not endorse another Republican, and that he would run as an independent if he did not get the nomination. It has been clear since early on.

Show us, please..

He did, at one point say that. He may have said something different later, but as darkbake typed, Trump did say this in a debate. This is just 4 months ago.

He said he won't make that pledge. He didn't say he would run as an independent.

Frankly, it was a dirty move by Fox and their Corporate supporters, IMO. Trumps response was appropriate.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Trump is 'officially' something. Not an independent that would help. The UK may not let him in the country at some point. I don't see results from him. As for outside the box? Yes being loud, insulting and ignorant is pretty outside the box. Would it be a third party called "I don't GAF." ?

I don't GAF for the status quo?....Yep....

a reply to: nwtrucker
He would not say that he would not. Same thing. What, was it a gotcha question? Whether it is FOX or another network, republicans seem to complain about the moderators and their 'dirty moves'. Come on.

Thank God he wasn't asked what magazines or newspapers he reads. That would have been some type of discrimination, I know it.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Trump is 'officially' something. Not an independent that would help. The UK may not let him in the country at some point. I don't see results from him. As for outside the box? Yes being loud, insulting and ignorant is pretty outside the box. Would it be a third party called "I don't GAF." ?

I don't GAF for the status quo?....Yep....

You know what I meant. As in "I don't GAF about insulting the handicapped, etc"