So if Every Republican is Imploding...

[Free Bird]

Then who will they nominate?

[Xing]

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

[Free Bird]

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

[Statilius the Epicurean]

IMO the establishment will eventually get behind Trump after he beats Rubio.

[Xing]

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Of course he is now, but do you really think that he'd win a general election once everyone started to take him seriously, and realize that he's completely unqualified and unprepared to be president?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott have empty schedules and conservative records, if they're willing to relocate.

[TarHeelDem]

They'll put up Cruz, Trump, or Rubio, but it ultimately won't matter anyway, 2016 is not their year.

[Figueira]

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Weren't you ridiculing people for believing polls that showed Hillary ahead a few months ago?

Anyway, Paul Ryan is the obvious answer.

[dudeabides]

Most likely nominees:

1. Marco Rubio
2. Jeb Bush
3. John Kasich
4. Donald Trump
5. Ted Cruz

[eric82oslo]

Then who will they nominate?

Probably Jim Webb (sane).

[bobloblaw]

Most likely nominees:

1. Marco Rubio
2. Jeb Bush
3. John Kasich
4. Donald Trump
5. Ted Cruz

Which means #1 has a chance and the rest dont.

[bobloblaw]

2 years ago we were talking about polls that showed Hillary leading in TX, LA, IN, GA, etc., 2 months ago we were discussing polls that showed Hillary trailing by double digits in some crucial swing states and now we are calling the (close) election for Clinton with election day 12 months away. A little bit consistency, please.

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Of course he is now, but do you really think that he'd win a general election once everyone started to take him seriously, and realize that he's completely unqualified and unprepared to be president?

So you're saying no one has been taking him seriously in the past? Why? And why IS he leading in the swing states? There must be a reason, just asking. I mean, voters must see something in him...

No kidding good point. Right now Hillary is under polling Obama's 2012 result of 51%. Even in polls where she is ahead, she doesnt break 50%.

[eric82oslo]

They will be forced to rally around any semi-decent candidate in order to prevent Carson or Trump. If it's between both of them, they will choose Carson.

Yep. It's an extremely easy choice. Carson won't destroy America and its moral standing in the world unlike Trump.

[Lief 🗽]

Most likely nominees:


2. Jeb Bush

4. Donald Trump

hahahahaha lol

[/]

Jim Gilmore is not imploding.

[pbrower2a]

They might meet in some proverbial smoke-filled room and offer someone that America doesn't know well, praise him (or her) to the highest Heaven, and hope for the best.  Maybe someone with long and distinguished service to the GOP.

The GOP version of Walter Mondale?

[Xing]

2 years ago we were talking about polls that showed Hillary leading in TX, LA, IN, GA, etc., 2 months ago we were discussing polls that showed Hillary trailing by double digits in some crucial swing states and now we are calling the (close) election for Clinton with election day 12 months away. A little bit consistency, please.

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Of course he is now, but do you really think that he'd win a general election once everyone started to take him seriously, and realize that he's completely unqualified and unprepared to be president?

So you're saying no one has been taking him seriously in the past? Why? And why IS he leading in the swing states? There must be a reason, just asking. I mean, voters must see something in him...

No one is really taking a good look at his "qualifications" for being president. If, by some chance, he becomes the Republican nominee, the attack ads will write themselves. Conservative Republicans are excited by him right now, but we'll see how far ahead he is in the polls once people start thinking about what would happen if we actually elected someone who has no &^*$@#& idea what they're doing. Why was Hillary ahead by double digits back in 2013? Few people were looking at her critically, and she wasn't being subjected to the scrutiny that she is now.

Do you all seriously think Carson wouldn't be a disaster!? Jesus, what is this world coming to...

[eric82oslo]

2 years ago we were talking about polls that showed Hillary leading in TX, LA, IN, GA, etc., 2 months ago we were discussing polls that showed Hillary trailing by double digits in some crucial swing states and now we are calling the (close) election for Clinton with election day 12 months away. A little bit consistency, please.

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Of course he is now, but do you really think that he'd win a general election once everyone started to take him seriously, and realize that he's completely unqualified and unprepared to be president?

So you're saying no one has been taking him seriously in the past? Why? And why IS he leading in the swing states? There must be a reason, just asking. I mean, voters must see something in him...

No one is really taking a good look at his "qualifications" for being president. If, by some chance, he becomes the Republican nominee, the attack ads will write themselves. Conservative Republicans are excited by him right now, but we'll see how far ahead he is in the polls once people start thinking about what would happen if we actually elected someone who has no &^*$@#& idea what they're doing. Why was Hillary ahead by double digits back in 2013? Few people were looking at her critically, and she wasn't being subjected to the scrutiny that she is now.

Do you all seriously think Carson wouldn't be a disaster!? Jesus, what is this world coming to...

There is absolute a 0% likelihood that he would become a greater disaster than Trump, that's for sure. And that's what voters are slowly starting to realize as well.

[Xing]

2 years ago we were talking about polls that showed Hillary leading in TX, LA, IN, GA, etc., 2 months ago we were discussing polls that showed Hillary trailing by double digits in some crucial swing states and now we are calling the (close) election for Clinton with election day 12 months away. A little bit consistency, please.

They'll end up with Trump, Carson, or Cruz, and little hope of winning the presidential election.

Carson is leading respectably...

Of course he is now, but do you really think that he'd win a general election once everyone started to take him seriously, and realize that he's completely unqualified and unprepared to be president?

So you're saying no one has been taking him seriously in the past? Why? And why IS he leading in the swing states? There must be a reason, just asking. I mean, voters must see something in him...

No one is really taking a good look at his "qualifications" for being president. If, by some chance, he becomes the Republican nominee, the attack ads will write themselves. Conservative Republicans are excited by him right now, but we'll see how far ahead he is in the polls once people start thinking about what would happen if we actually elected someone who has no &^*$@#& idea what they're doing. Why was Hillary ahead by double digits back in 2013? Few people were looking at her critically, and she wasn't being subjected to the scrutiny that she is now.

Do you all seriously think Carson wouldn't be a disaster!? Jesus, what is this world coming to...

There is absolute a 0% likelihood that he would become a greater disaster than Trump, that's for sure. And that's what voters are slowly starting to realize as well.

Being less of a disaster than Trump is hardly an accomplishment. That's like advertising a restaurant as being "better than McDonald's". Case in point, Carson would still be a train wreck, and could do a lot of real, lasting damage.

[Del Tachi]

They might meet in some proverbial smoke-filled room and offer someone that America doesn't know well, praise him (or her) to the highest Heaven, and hope for the best.  Maybe someone with long and distinguished service to the GOP.

The GOP version of Walter Mondale?

I'm thinking that a brokered convention would be to the benefit of Mitt Romney

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Then who will they nominate?

I hear Putin is a climate change denier now. Combined with his anti-gay, pro-military, and other stances, he's a perfect Republican candidate. I'm sure the Republicans can work around that pesky natural born citizen requirement somehow... maybe they can blame the Liberal Media, or claim the Founding Fathers were Liberal stooges? (Some of them weren't even in favor of slavery! Damn Communists!)

[wolfsblood07]

Jeb Bush will get a big push beginning in about 6 weeks.  We have yet to see the full force of the Bush campaign. 
I honestly believe that the nominee will be Bush, but if they decide he is not their man after all, then Rubio is the safe backup plan.  But there is no way that Trump will even be anywhere in sight once this thing gets going.  Neither party ever nominates a total outsider, someone they can't trust.  Reagan was not an outsider in 1980, and he proved it by putting Bush on the ticket and in many other ways prior to that.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Then who will they nominate?

I hear Putin is a climate change denier now. Combined with his anti-gay, pro-military, and other stances, he's a perfect Republican candidate. I'm sure the Republicans can work around that pesky natural born citizen requirement somehow... maybe they can blame the Liberal Media, or claim the Founding Fathers were Liberal stooges? (Some of them weren't even in favor of slavery! Damn Communists!)

Stupidest post of the day, congrats.

[eric82oslo]

Then who will they nominate?

I hear Putin is a climate change denier now. Combined with his anti-gay, pro-military, and other stances, he's a perfect Republican candidate. I'm sure the Republicans can work around that pesky natural born citizen requirement somehow... maybe they can blame the Liberal Media, or claim the Founding Fathers were Liberal stooges? (Some of them weren't even in favor of slavery! Damn Communists!)

Best post I've read in a while. I'm thinking that Trump is much, much closer to Stalin than he is to Putin though. Putin is a really, really soft guy when compared to Trump, who has both Stalin and Hitler qualities galore.

[Rockefeller GOP]

^ And my previous awarding of stupidest post of the day has been validated!