70% of Republicans Would Consider Joining New Party Formed by Donald Trump, Poll Find

[samhain]

(02-11-2021, 04:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: That could happen, but it depends on Trump being the GOP candidate for 2024 or being the Patriot Party candidate for 2024.  He's got a following to really screw over the GOP if he's a 3rd party candidate.  You assume he's just going to storm the GOP primaries again?  Could be.

I assume he hates Biden and the Dems.  There's zero doubt that he's reeling from losing to guy he painted as a senile loser incompetent for months.    He's either going to mentally collapse or lash out like a cornered animal.  Roy Cohn passed along the idea of enhanced payback to him a long time ago, and he's never once not tried to get it.  

His fanbase (because that's all they are now) may support him ride-or-die, but he has to feel pretty beaten down at this point.  His legacy went down in flames in the most humiliating way imaginable.  He lost to a cardboard cutout establishment regular and lost badly.  Some might say he lost twice with the Georgia runoff.  I think he'll do all he can to get some revenge/redemption.

[samhain]

(02-11-2021, 04:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: People keep thinking that a new Trump party is about winning, it's not. It's about fundraising, it's always been about fundraising. The windfall they took in selling false stolen election narratives was a windfall of epic proportions.

Yep.  He doesn't need to win a single election to raise money from his base.  He just has to stay visible and cook up the right con.  His base will trip over themselves to send him their money.  Most of them are used to doing it for clownish televangelists anyway, so he will have little trouble pointing them in the right direction.  He'll be like Joel Osteen without having to pretend to be all into Jesus and stuff.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(02-11-2021, 04:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: That could happen, but it depends on Trump being the GOP candidate for 2024 or being the Patriot Party candidate for 2024.  He's got a following to really screw over the GOP if he's a 3rd party candidate.  You assume he's just going to storm the GOP primaries again?  Could be.

My guess is Trump will run in 2024 but Ivanka not Donald, and as a R. 

First female US President, youngest US President. Has the Trump name, but isn't Donald. Isn't Ted Cruz. 

Would have to get a Pence-ish VP to calm the Christians since she practices Judaism.

I'll never vote for someone whose family has already won the Presidency before on sheer principle, but I can see where that could potentially be a winning ticket if I put myself in Republican voter shoes. It would also undercut what will presumably be Kamala Harris' 2024 run for President since she can't use the "first female US President" rallying banner behind just her.

[*Nately120*]

(02-11-2021, 04:50 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: My guess is Trump will run in 2024 but Ivanka not Donald, and as a R. 

First female US President, youngest US President. Has the Trump name, but isn't Donald. Isn't Ted Cruz. 

Would have to get a Pence-ish VP to calm the Christians since she practices Judaism.

I'll never vote for someone whose family has already won the Presidency before on sheer principle, but I can see where that could potentially be a winning ticket if I put myself in Republican voter shoes. It would also undercut what will presumably be Kamala Harris' 2024 run for President since she can't use the "first female US President" rallying banner behind just her.

I can't see the future, but I don't think Ivanka has the addiction to attention/winning/screaming that her ol' man has.  She's loaded and set for life, she doesn't have the mental illness it would require to spend the next 4-12 years traveling around the country and screaming about fake outrage to a bunch of rabid peasants.

I'm not vouching for her, but she seems like she may actually be able to enjoy her life and her family unlike the toxic male members of her family.  Or I could be wrong and she could be talking rigged 2024 before we know it.

[Au165]

(02-11-2021, 04:56 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I can't see the future, but I don't think Ivanka has the addiction to attention/winning/screaming that her ol' man has.  She's loaded and set for life, she doesn't have the mental illness it would require to spend the next 4-12 years traveling around the country and screaming about fake outrage to a bunch of rabid peasants.

I'm not vouching for her, but she seems like she may actually be able to enjoy her life and her family unlike the toxic male members of her family.  Or I could be wrong and she could be talking rigged 2024 before we know it.

It's been reported she was terrified the JAN 6th events tanked her political career. The belief is she will run for some sort of position in Florida to setup for a potential bigger play down the road. 

[*Nately120*]

(02-11-2021, 04:58 PM)Au165 Wrote: It's been reported she was terrified the JAN 6th events tanked her political career. The belief is she will run for some sort of position in Florida to setup for a potential bigger play down the road. 

Oof.  Oh well, maybe I'll be a republican by then and be on board.

Actually, doesn't she also have enough liberal-leaning soundbytes out there that republicans would use against her? I think a lot of Trump's energizing magnetism comes from his gleefully toxic beta male bluster. Republicans would go after Ivanka for being a RINO who lacks the will and ability to truly curb stomp the liberals.

[CJD]

(02-11-2021, 03:25 PM)Au165 Wrote: Anyone see any Bernie flags flying in yards? Because there sure are a shit ton of Trump memorabilia still out in Ohio.

Bernie is merely the messenger of what "Bernie Bros" believe in. If he stopped pushing for Medicare For All, free college and decreasing the wealth gap in this country, his supporters wouldn't change with him. 

In fact, a fair number of "Bernie Bros" called Bernie a traitor for endorsing Biden, as a lot of lefties have trouble discerning the difference between Republicans and moderate Democrats (they make some good points, especially regarding foreign policy, but they take it to a whole other level and begin to sound like the morons on the right who can't tell the difference between Biden and a full blown socialist).

This is the difference between right wing and left wing populism. Left wing populism is about the policies. Right wing populism is about the personalities. Look no further than the 2000 dollar checks. Bernie was fighting and fighting and fighting for more money to the people. He was shut down everywhere, even by his own damn party (I know he's independent, but he's essentially a Democrat) until the bill passed at 600 dollars and what did Trump do? He rejected it and demanded more money to the people.

Then, suddenly, out of nowhere a bunch of Republicans, notably the two Georgians who were up for re-election, were like "Yea, we should totally do that! Why didn't anyone ever bring that up before?" and it had popular support among Republican voters. If it weren't for McConnell just straight up blue balling the resolution to increase it to 2000, it would have easily passed the Senate before the run offs.

I swear, if Trump came out for Medicare for All, we'd have it passed in less than a year because all the Republicans would suddenly be all for it.

[fredtoast]

(02-11-2021, 11:58 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: It won't. No viable third party can exist without extreme reforms to our electoral system. A third party in a first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system like we have throughout the majority of the country will always act as a spoiler until those in power coalesce into two parties, again.

While I agree with you in principle I think that a "Patriot Party" could actually win some seats because some districts are already 80%-90% Republican.  In one of those types districts and extremist like Trump might win.

Same goes for a an extreme left wing party in a overwhelming Democrat district.

But when talking about third parties fixing any problems I think we need third parties from the middle instead of from the extremes.  

[GMDino]

(02-11-2021, 05:11 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Bernie is merely the messenger of what "Bernie Bros" believe in. If he stopped pushing for Medicare For All, free college and decreasing the wealth gap in this country, his supporters wouldn't change with him. 

In fact, a fair number of "Bernie Bros" called Bernie a traitor for endorsing Biden, as a lot of lefties have trouble discerning the difference between Republicans and moderate Democrats (they make some good points, especially regarding foreign policy, but they take it to a whole other level and begin to sound like the morons on the right who can't tell the difference between Biden and a full blown socialist).

This is the difference between right wing and left wing populism. Left wing populism is about the policies. Right wing populism is about the personalities. Look no further than the 2000 dollar checks. Bernie was fighting and fighting and fighting for more money to the people. He was shut down everywhere, even by his own damn party (I know he's independent, but he's essentially a Democrat) until the bill passed at 600 dollars and what did Trump do? He rejected it and demanded more money to the people.

Then, suddenly, out of nowhere a bunch of Republicans, notably the two Georgians who were up for re-election, were like "Yea, we should totally do that! Why didn't anyone ever bring that up before?" and it had popular support among Republican voters. If it weren't for McConnell just straight up blue balling the resolution to increase it to 2000, it would have easily passed the Senate before the run offs.

I swear, if Trump came out for Medicare for All, we'd have it passed in less than a year because all the Republicans would suddenly be all for it.

To the bold he changed his mind and wanted $2000 checks mailed out and the gqp told him no.  Now he was headed out of office so they knew they didn't have deal with him anymore on a legislative level but I agree he has a force of will on a lot of elected members and will try to influence these things.

[Dill]

(02-11-2021, 05:01 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Oof.  Oh well, maybe I'll be a republican by then and be on board.

Actually, doesn't she also have enough liberal-leaning soundbytes out there that republicans would use against her?  I think a lot of Trump's energizing magnetism comes from his gleefully toxic beta male bluster.  Republicans would go after Ivanka for being a RINO who lacks the will and ability to truly curb stomp the liberals.

Yes. During the 2016 primary, his poll numbers skyrocketed when he went after Muslims and Mexican "rapists."

I don't see Ivanka doing anything like that. Her rep was always that she might talk her father out of destroying the environment. Can you imagine her reading "the Snake" poem at a rally or parading on stage the parents of a teenager killed by an illegal immigrant?  

The sons can't do it as well either. Trump lites. 

[*Nately120*]

(02-12-2021, 01:11 PM)Dill Wrote: Yes. During the 2016 primary, his poll numbers skyrocketed when he went after Muslims and Mexican "rapists."

I don't see Ivanka doing anything like that. Her rep was always that she might talk her father out of destroying the environment. Can you imagine her reading "the Snake" poem at a rally or parading on stage the parents of a teenager killed by an illegal immigrant?  

The sons can't do it as well either. Trump lites. 

I wouldn't rule out Ivanka being able to have a political career, but I'm not bracing myself for Ivanka/Eric/Don Jr./Barron running for president against Obama's daughters for the rest of my life, either.  I could see Ivanka being seen as someone who has her father's ideals but knows how to deliver it in a digestable manner.

Then again, I'm reminded at how poorly received the notion of a female wing of the Proud Boys went, too.  I think neo-cons will listen to a hot blonde who agrees with them, but I'm not sure Ivanka has what they want in a leader.

[Belsnickel]

(02-12-2021, 01:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: While I agree with you in principle I think that a "Patriot Party" could actually win some seats because some districts are already 80%-90% Republican.  In one of those types districts and extremist like Trump might win.

Same goes for a an extreme left wing party in a overwhelming Democrat district.

But when talking about third parties fixing any problems I think we need third parties from the middle instead of from the extremes.  

Winning a seat here and there is possible, we know that from independents in Congress. But the long-term viability of a third-party just can't happen. You won't see them taking the high-value federal races or amassing enough wins to make a significant impact in Congress.

[*Nately120*]

(02-12-2021, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Winning a seat here and there is possible, we know that from independents in Congress. But the long-term viability of a third-party just can't happen. You won't see them taking the high-value federal races or amassing enough wins to make a significant impact in Congress.

Right, I just see a Trump 3rd party having the legit "you're gonna win it for the other side!" effect people continuously blame on 3rd party voters.  Perot being an election altering wild card in 92 convinced the powers that be to put 3rd parties under the proverbial bushel.  Thing is, Trump doesn't need debates or federal funding for people to know he's out there.

And again, when I vote for a libertarian I'm voting for a party that has never won a damn state.  When people vote for PATRIOT PARTY TRUMP they "know" they are voting for a candidate who has won TWO elections BY A LAAAAAANDSLIDE!!!!!!  Big difference.

3rd party candidates can't win...unless that 3rd party candidate is Trump who "can't lose!"

[Dill]

(02-11-2021, 05:11 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Bernie is merely the messenger of what "Bernie Bros" believe in. If he stopped pushing for Medicare For All, free college and decreasing the wealth gap in this country, his supporters wouldn't change with him. 

In fact, a fair number of "Bernie Bros" called Bernie a traitor for endorsing Biden, as a lot of lefties have trouble discerning the difference between Republicans and moderate Democrats (they make some good points, especially regarding foreign policy, but they take it to a whole other level and begin to sound like the morons on the right who can't tell the difference between Biden and a full blown socialist).

This is the difference between right wing and left wing populism. Left wing populism is about the policies. Right wing populism is about the personalities. Look no further than the 2000 dollar checks. Bernie was fighting and fighting and fighting for more money to the people. He was shut down everywhere, even by his own damn party (I know he's independent, but he's essentially a Democrat) until the bill passed at 600 dollars and what did Trump do? He rejected it and demanded more money to the people.

Two quick notes:

A lot of Bernie supporters weren't/aren't really "leftists." Some 10-12% weren't Democrats in 2016, and displayed attitudes towards race and immigration much more typical of Trump voters.  
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds

Right wing populism is also about scapegoating. That seems an international constant and a structural difference between the two types.

[Au165]

(02-12-2021, 01:28 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Right, I just see a Trump 3rd party having the legit "you're gonna win it for the other side!" effect people continuously blame on 3rd party voters.  Perot being an election altering wild card in 92 convinced the powers that be to put 3rd parties under the proverbial bushel.  Thing is, Trump doesn't need debates or federal funding for people to know he's out there.

And again, when I vote for a libertarian I'm voting for a party that has never won a damn state.  When people vote for PATRIOT PARTY TRUMP they "know" they are voting for a candidate who has won TWO elections BY A LAAAAAANDSLIDE!!!!!!  Big difference.

3rd party candidates can't win...unless that 3rd party candidate is Trump who "can't lose!"

What if political retribution, and fundraising, is the whole point of the party? Backing candidates against Republicans who turned against him and then backing Republicans in places that were loyal? People who question viability assume that winning is the purpose of the party, which would be true if it wasn't tied to Trump. 

He can get "revenge"...check
He can get more media attention....check
He can raise large amounts of money....check

[*Nately120*]

(02-12-2021, 01:31 PM)Au165 Wrote: What if political retribution, and fundraising, is the whole point of the party? Backing candidates against Republicans who turned against him and then backing Republicans in places that were loyal? People who question viability assume that winning is the purpose of the party, which would be true if it wasn't tied to Trump. 

He can get "revenge"...check
He can get more media attention....check
He can raise large amounts of money....check

I'm a behaviorist, so Trump's mindset is pretty irrelevant.  If he is on the ticket I can't see how it doesn't get him money and attention and exact revenge on the GOP.  He may run because his ego forces him to avenge his loss, ala Hulk Hogan v The Ultimate Warrior at Halloween Havoc 98, but the result could just end up being flat-out revenge porn for lefties.

[Dill]

(02-12-2021, 01:31 PM)Au165 Wrote: What if political retribution, and fundraising, is the whole point of the party? Backing candidates against Republicans who turned against him and then backing Republicans in places that were loyal? People who question viability assume that winning is the purpose of the party, which would be true if it wasn't tied to Trump. 

He can get "revenge"...check
He can get more media attention....check
He can raise large amounts of money....check

Yes, I think the bolded has been under analyzed in explanations of Trump behavior. After he lost the election, the Big Lie kept money coming into his campaign and PACs.  

His businesses appear to be in a shambles, paralyzed by lawsuits and the like. The Trump brand is much less marketable now, and that's where he made most of his money. 

So along with the revenge motive, creating political clickbait has become an economic necessity for the man, and the party is now tied to the man in a way which renders its nominating processes unstable all the way down the line.

Also, I think you make an important point that "winning" is not necessarily the point. In any case, the current GOP base is often moved by stories of candidates who won when the MSM and GOP establishment said they couldn't.  That is even more incentive to vote for candidates at high risk of losing once out of the primary. 

[Dill]

(02-12-2021, 01:36 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm a behaviorist, so Trump's mindset is pretty irrelevant.  If he is on the ticket I can't see how it doesn't get him money and attention and exact revenge on the GOP.  He may run because his ego forces him to avenge his loss, ala Hulk Hogan v The Ultimate Warrior at Halloween Havoc 98, but the result could just end up being flat-out revenge porn for lefties.

Lol, how does a behaviorist account for pathology? 

There is often a financial rationale to what trump does, but it is often irrationally pursued.

[*Nately120*]

(02-12-2021, 02:10 PM)Dill Wrote: Lol, how does a behaviorist account for pathology? 

There is often a financial rationale to what trump does, but it is often irrationally pursued.

I'm along the lines of inferring a man's mindset by observing his actions.  Trump can run for president in 2024 because one of the palm trees as Mar a Lago told him to, for all it matters.

[fredtoast]

(02-12-2021, 01:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Winning a seat here and there is possible, we know that from independents in Congress. But the long-term viability of a third-party just can't happen. You won't see them taking the high-value federal races or amassing enough wins to make a significant impact in Congress.

I agree.

PLus a third party like Trump party would not change anything because I don't see it as any sort of  a "swing party" that would not vote 100% with Republicans.