The question I think is; if Trump wins the 3 biggest states on the 15th, or wins 4 of 5 on the 15th, will Cruz's supporters still get out and vote for him? If so, Im not convinced Trump can easily get to 1,237 delegates. This too is assuming Rubio and Kasich drop out after the 15th.

Quote from: Hoofer on March 08, 2016, 05:42:29 PM
a.  I am not offended by anything you're said, apart from the mud slinging, you've had some interesting insight, and I'd like to hear more - minus the cutting comments. 

b.  Moderators own the system, they can ban whom ever they want, get over it - we are their "guests".
Nobody has asked me to contribute, the website isn't popping up ads right and left - yet someone is paying for it.   I can easily live within their rules, and the direction they wish to take this forum.

I'm not intending this in a condemning tone, but as advice, 'cause I'd rather listen to you, without the mud.  Consider it a compliment.

c.  Yeah, I ignore the Russian - when I figured out every link goes to RT (Russian Times), and did a little background checking.  It's not "our" call, if they want a knucklehead steeped in Communism posting stupid stuff ... well, we know there are others - just ignore them.

d.  From the internal polling, you and I agree, this primary is completely unpredictable - as I've cited 40% of the South Carolina were undecided 2 days before.  Cruz can indeed pull this out, I hope he does - but, both of us could be wrong and Kasich might surprise us all.  All speculation - nothing is fixed in stone.

I got hit a few times when I found this site, and I decided to stick around, because there are other SMART people here (like yourself), I wanted to talk to, and get their opinions.  One of the mods mentioned, you need to EARN their respect.... still working on that, we're not all lock-step, brain-dead, you're certainly not - but, any one of us can quickly wear out our welcome with just a few posts done in haste.

Cut both ways...?   We're riding in their Limo, Bus, back of their pickup truck.  They bought it, put the gas in it, we're guests.  The rest is your choice, if I can tolerate a Russian spewing propaganda (or ignore him) - I and certain, you could easily take the guy apart, chew him up, spit him out and use what's left as a doormat.  There are a lot of crummy systems / forums besides this, right?  We both have tough enough hides to ignore the insults, don't we?

OK, I said I'd get back to you on this. I'll confine myself to just two points I think are relevant.

First off, I hear you. Not so much this post, but something you said before has led me to rethink at least one aspect of how I post. That is, to be less condemnatory and inflammatory when I make an unsolicited post in response to a point of view I disagree with. On that issue, I will try, because I'm never actually attacking an individual poster, just disagreeing with an opinion they have posted, or pointing out a logical inconsistency or fallacy. Usually when I do so, I'm looking to engage, not to condemn, but obviously it doesn't always come of that way.

Of course that approach doesn't extend to defending myself when I'm attacked, although I will try to interpret critical comments with the most positive spin possible, even with posters I have clashed with in the past. This is a mental adjustment I can make -- to try to respond less reflexively.

It should be noted however that much of that has to do with the general atmosphere on the site. As taxed put it himself, we have "sharp elbows" here. Well, I can mix it up in the mosh pit with the best of them when I need to.


The second issue is specifically about the so-called "complaints" I make about the site. I don't consider it complaining, certainly not carping, at least in regard to the issue at hand. I consider it communicating and expressing a preference. Just my preference, I know. I think Taxed took it at face value. He disagreed with me, but my intention was never to get the rules and procedures reordered to my liking. Of course he would point out the valid reasons for policing the site exactly the way he does. It isn't an either/or issue to me. It's a more/less issue. There are problems with being too lax. There are problems with being too reflexive as well. That's all I was pointing out. Too little tolerance leads to stagnation and stifling conformity. Too little leads to chaos. I was weighing in for a shift along the continuum to a more tolerant/inclusive view. I know he understands the issues. I assumed as much before I even posted. As I said, it's called feedback.

I don't think Taxed ever had a problem with it. He has said as much. But then, here come the usual suspects rushing in thinking they have to act as gatekeepers of the temple. It's like when one bee is crushed......it sends out a pheromone, and the whole hive becomes incensed.

It was completely unnecessary. Taxed is a grown man and perfectly capable of defending himself. He didn't ask for help, and at no point appeared to need it. He seemed to understand the discussion a lot better than those jumping in presumably on his behalf.

I don't want to be deterred from expressing my considered opinions on any topic, including those narrowly relating to fraternal issues and disputes that crop up here. I would never want that to be a major focus of what I'm doing, however. Frankly, it just isn't that interesting.

I'm not a troll and I'm not a liberal. As such, I'm within the prescribed boundaries to be a member in good standing on this site.

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
OK, I said I'd get back to you on this. I'll confine myself to just two points I think are relevant.

First off, I hear you. Not so much this post, but something you said before has led me to rethink at least one aspect of how I post. That is, to be less condemnatory and inflammatory when I make an unsolicited post in response to a point of view I disagree with. On that issue, I will try, because I'm never actually attacking an individual poster, just disagreeing with an opinion they have posted, or pointing out a logical inconsistency or fallacy. Usually when I do so, I'm looking to engage, not to condemn, but obviously it doesn't always come of that way.

Of course that approach doesn't extend to defending myself when I'm attacked, although I will try to interpret critical comments with the most positive spin possible, even with posters I have clashed with in the past. This is a mental adjustment I can make -- to try to respond less reflexively.

It should be noted however that much of that has to do with the general atmosphere on the site. As taxed put it himself, we have "sharp elbows" here. Well, I can mix it up in the mosh pit with the best of them when I need to.

Posting a reply is one hing, but qualifying it with "What is wrong with you"? That is an attack.
Just setting the record straight.

QuoteThe second issue is specifically about the so-called "complaints" I make about the site. I don't consider it complaining, certainly not carping, at least in regard to the issue at hand. I consider it communicating and expressing a preference. Just my preference, I know. I think Taxed took it at face value. He disagreed with me, but my intention was never to get the rules and procedures reordered to my liking. Of course he would point out the valid reasons for policing the site exactly the way he does. It isn't an either/or issue to me. It's a more/less issue. There are problems with being too lax. There are problems with being too reflexive as well. That's all I was pointing out. Too little tolerance leads to stagnation and stifling conformity. Too little leads to chaos. I was weighing in for a shift along the continuum to a more tolerant/inclusive view. I know he understands the issues. I assumed as much before I even posted. As I said, it's called feedback.

I don't think Taxed ever had a problem with it. He has said as much. But then, here come the usual suspects rushing in thinking they have to act as gatekeepers of the temple. It's like when one bee is crushed......it sends out a pheromone, and the whole hive becomes incensed.

It was completely unnecessary. Taxed is a grown man and perfectly capable of defending himself. He didn't ask for help, and at no point appeared to need it. He seemed to understand the discussion a lot better than those jumping in presumably on his behalf.

I don't want to be deterred from expressing my considered opinions on any topic, including those narrowly relating to fraternal issues and disputes that crop up here. I would never want that to be a major focus of what I'm doing, however. Frankly, it just isn't that interesting.

I'm not a troll and I'm not a liberal. As such, I'm within the prescribed boundaries to be a member in good standing on this site.

Policy is no ones business but those affiliated with the forum, if you have a problem with that, too damn bad, just questioning it is a bootable offense because it is never up for discussion, EVER!.
It's my policy, period, it's not negotiable.

Oh-oh...  George and Jeb's brother Niel, joined the Cruz-team a few days as finance-director... and now Jeb is going behind closed doors with Cruz, Kasich, and Rubio before tonight's debate:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeb-bush-to-meet-with-cruz-kasich-and-rubio-before-thursdays-debate/

Quote from: kit saginaw on March 10, 2016, 03:44:51 AM
Oh-oh...  George and Jeb's brother Niel, joined the Cruz-team a few days as finance-director... and now Jeb is going behind closed doors with Cruz, Kasich, and Rubio before tonight's debate:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeb-bush-to-meet-with-cruz-kasich-and-rubio-before-thursdays-debate/

I'm surprised they included Cruz.

Quote from: kit saginaw on March 10, 2016, 03:44:51 AM
Oh-oh...  George and Jeb's brother Niel, joined the Cruz-team a few days as finance-director... and now Jeb is going behind closed doors with Cruz, Kasich, and Rubio before tonight's debate:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeb-bush-to-meet-with-cruz-kasich-and-rubio-before-thursdays-debate/

Why is it uh-oh? If Cruz is gonna win, he has to have at least some kind of establishment support. Look at Reagan in 1980. He selected GHW Bush. Now, it turns out that in the end that Reagan didnt need Bush, but he didnt know that when things started in the beginning of his general election campaign.

Quote from: Solar on March 09, 2016, 02:55:57 PM
Posting a reply is one hing, but qualifying it with "What is wrong with you"? That is an attack.
Just setting the record straight.
Policy is no ones business but those affiliated with the forum, if you have a problem with that, too damn bad, just questioning it is a bootable offense because it is never up for discussion, EVER!.
It's my policy, period, it's not negotiable.

That masterpiece of passive-aggressive balderdash about "never attacking an individual poster" was exceeded only with him thinking he was the innocent party and his critics were bees responding to a fallen hive member. But since the "hive" is us, and he was far from innocent, it's still him criticizing the group mentality.

Say "hi," all you self-appointed guardians. The temple is open 24/7/365....and the troll season is wide, wide open.

Quote from: mrconservative on March 10, 2016, 06:32:56 AM
Why is it uh-oh? If Cruz is gonna win, he has to have at least some kind of establishment support. Look at Reagan in 1980. He selected GHW Bush. Now, it turns out that in the end that Reagan didnt need Bush, but he didnt know that when things started in the beginning of his general election campaign.

I expect the GOP support to come very reluctantly if at all. He'd have to make a YUUUUGE dent in Dr. Strangehair's lead before the monbey bags open in earnest.

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
OK, I said I'd get back to you on this. I'll confine myself to just two points I think are relevant.

First off, I hear you. Not so much this post, but something you said before has led me to rethink at least one aspect of how I post. That is, to be less condemnatory and inflammatory when I make an unsolicited post in response to a point of view I disagree with. On that issue, I will try, because I'm never actually attacking an individual poster, just disagreeing with an opinion they have posted, or pointing out a logical inconsistency or fallacy. Usually when I do so, I'm looking to engage, not to condemn, but obviously it doesn't always come of that way.

That has always been the problem with this media, people will take personal offense easily - but saying, "What's wrong with you?" has little room for interpretation.   The choice of wording, adjusted to a more "pleasant persuasive tone", will be easy for a guy with good linguistic skills (little elbow poke, LOL).

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
Of course that approach doesn't extend to defending myself when I'm attacked, although I will try to interpret critical comments with the most positive spin possible, even with posters I have clashed with in the past. This is a mental adjustment I can make -- to try to respond less reflexively.

It should be noted however that much of that has to do with the general atmosphere on the site. As taxed put it himself, we have "sharp elbows" here. Well, I can mix it up in the mosh pit with the best of them when I need to.

Problem we have with football players, few of them act like they've ever been in the end-zone before.
Likewise, a mature, well reasoned individual can ignore a fool, lest he be associated with them.  There are some pretty intelligent people here, count yourself among them and consider it a privilege to use the forum.  I'll never demand respect, I'd rather humbly earn it.

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
The second issue is specifically about the so-called "complaints" I make about the site. I don't consider it complaining, certainly not carping, at least in regard to the issue at hand. I consider it communicating and expressing a preference. Just my preference, I know. I think Taxed took it at face value. He disagreed with me, but my intention was never to get the rules and procedures reordered to my liking. Of course he would point out the valid reasons for policing the site exactly the way he does. It isn't an either/or issue to me. It's a more/less issue. There are problems with being too lax. There are problems with being too reflexive as well. That's all I was pointing out. Too little tolerance leads to stagnation and stifling conformity. Too little leads to chaos. I was weighing in for a shift along the continuum to a more tolerant/inclusive view. I know he understands the issues. I assumed as much before I even posted. As I said, it's called feedback.

I don't think Taxed ever had a problem with it. He has said as much. But then, here come the usual suspects rushing in thinking they have to act as gatekeepers of the temple. It's like when one bee is crushed......it sends out a pheromone, and the whole hive becomes incensed.

Without getting too personal, I spoke up, based on 11 years of running a BBS - you're the kind of person I'd try to keep around, not push out the door - hence my advice... but, this is not my system.  Who doesn't like a person who can carry an interesting thread, keep it lively, inject thought provoking insight - and without burning down the site.  Set down the cleaver and pick up a scalpel, force is often met with force.  Persuade, appeal, reason, present your case - make converts & silence the critics.

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
It was completely unnecessary. Taxed is a grown man and perfectly capable of defending himself. He didn't ask for help, and at no point appeared to need it. He seemed to understand the discussion a lot better than those jumping in presumably on his behalf.

We have to admire an individual with so many defenders ... he has obviously earned great respect.  Maybe someday, we too might be so blessed...

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
I don't want to be deterred from expressing my considered opinions on any topic, including those narrowly relating to fraternal issues and disputes that crop up here. I would never want that to be a major focus of what I'm doing, however. Frankly, it just isn't that interesting. 

We think alike...  mission minded.  Many people, not of our stripe, read this forum, we can have a great influence on them - all of us lose focus from time to time.  TEA & restoring Conservatism as the predominate influence in America is absolutely necessary for us to survive.

If a solid TEA party conservative was needed for a speech or whatever, would you have the reputation as the the biggest prick - or be the best pick?  Reputations are not easily recovered, once ruined.

Quote from: Cali Contrarian on March 09, 2016, 02:36:21 PM
I'm not a troll and I'm not a liberal. As such, I'm within the prescribed boundaries to be a member in good standing on this site.

Good!  ... doesn't hurt to acknowledge and thank the guys running the system.

Anyone watching tonight's results?

Trump by at least 60% in four, Kasich in second in three. 

Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

Maryland polls haven't closed yet.

It was a clean sweep tonight.

So now what? Am I just saddled with Trump now and have no choice but vote for him, or that witch on the Dimwit side who's more crooked and corrupt than my dogs hind leg!...thanks what a friggin great choice America.

Quote from: daidalos on April 26, 2016, 08:30:08 PM
It was a clean sweep tonight.

So now what? Am I just saddled with Trump now and have no choice but vote for him, or that witch on the Dimwit side who's more crooked and corrupt than my dogs hind leg!...thanks what a friggin great choice America.

http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/to-you-conservatives-with-weak-knees/msg302696/#msg302696

Quote from: daidalos on April 26, 2016, 08:30:08 PM
It was a clean sweep tonight.

So now what? Am I just saddled with Trump now and have no choice but vote for him, or that witch on the Dimwit side who's more crooked and corrupt than my dogs hind leg!...thanks what a friggin great choice America.

Dude, take your meds.  Cruz is going to blow him out.  Quit watching f*n TV for goodness sakes. 

Quote from: walkstall on April 26, 2016, 08:35:43 PM

http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/to-you-conservatives-with-weak-knees/msg302696/#msg302696

Walks thanks, however I don't have week knees quite to the contrary. I'm a pissed off voter who watched so called republicans in his own state vote for Kasich. A clear cut non republican of the neo-con mold if there ever was one.

And then there are nights like tonight.

It just totally destroys any faith I have in the voting populace anymore.

It seems that if given the choice, the majority of the electorate does the wrong thing every time.

Quote from: tsuke on April 26, 2016, 06:23:59 PM
i am. my tracking says trump gets to 955 tonight (without counting PA supertype delegates)
looks liks sweep in ct delaware pa md.

RI is hard to predict trump will get a few extra delegates if cruz doesnt hit 10% he has been hovering over that mark.

Did you expect something else?