Anti-Trump Republicans, why now?

[Indy Texas]

You say you won't vote for Trump because he peddles lies and conspiracy theories. You were perfectly fine with your party's members claiming Barack Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim and talking about "death panels" and "terror babies."

You say you won't vote for Trump because he says hateful things about women and minorities. Your party had two US Senate candidates suggest women should consent to be impregnated against their will by rapists. You've had Tea Party rallies with protesters carrying some truly vile signs and saying truly bigoted things for nearly a decade now - many of the same people who are now supporting Trump.

You said that anyone who ever disagreed with you was a "RINO" or "Establishment" and that experience in public service made you an "insider." Trump won with this very playbook by being someone who has never held any kind of public office.

So why not Trump? He's from the private sector. He's created jobs. He hates that "political correctness" stuff. What's the deal?

[Matty]

Here's a better question: why do you lie to us all when you call yourself "Indy" when of the thousands of posts you have made, not a single one said anything negative about any other party?

[Mr. Reactionary]

mods pls drone

[Erc]

I've been disappointed in the way the party has been going, going on six years now.  I've remained hopeful that we could bring the party back to a semblance of sanity, and have not wanted to abandon half of America's political life to be taken over by the forces of hatred and ignorance.

Those forces secured a clear majority in the primaries this year, but that just means the fight is more important than ever.  I remain a committed Republican, but I believe it is incumbent on all Republicans to vote against Donald Trump this fall.  We have to show the media, the Republican party, and the rest of the world that Donald Trump does not represent America.  We can do this by voting for Hillary Clinton in competitive states (and there are far more than people think), or, if desired for third parties in non-competitive ones.  Staying home is not enough.

I'm proudly voting for Hillary in the fall, even as I vote Republican for many races further down the ballot.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not voting for Trump because he supports abortion. I don't vote for any Pro-abort, R or D.

Trump lost any chance of my support in November when he said he wanted to change the platform.

[The Other Castro]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not voting for Trump because he supports abortion. I don't vote for any Pro-abort, R or D.

Trump lost any chance of my support in November when he said he wanted to change the platform.

Except for very strange people, nobody is pro-abortion. The term you're looking for is pro-choice.

[Ljube]

I've been disappointed in the way the party has been going, going on six years now.  I've remained hopeful that we could bring the party back to a semblance of sanity, and have not wanted to abandon half of America's political life to be taken over by the forces of hatred and ignorance.

Those forces secured a clear majority in the primaries this year, but that just means the fight is more important than ever.  I remain a committed Republican, but I believe it is incumbent on all Republicans to vote against Donald Trump this fall.  We have to show the media, the Republican party, and the rest of the world that Donald Trump does not represent America.  We can do this by voting for Hillary Clinton in competitive states (and there are far more than people think), or, if desired for third parties in non-competitive ones.  Staying home is not enough.

I'm proudly voting for Hillary in the fall, even as I vote Republican for many races further down the ballot.

I think you misinterpreted the forces that have taken over the party. Voting for Hillary is just the worst kind of overreaction.

Anyway, there is still time for you and other NeverTrump people to think it over.

[Green Line]

I don't support Trump because I know he can never win and will destroy the Republican brand, not for any of the reasons you stated. A lot of his controversial ideas are fine, but I know the American public is too dumb to ever understand or embrace them.  Image and perception matter much more than actual policy in American politics, and Donald Trump is toxic in that respect.

In addition to that, he is NOT a conservative, and anyone with half a brain can see that he is lying through his teeth when he pretends to be one. That is most Republicans issue with him, not because we suddenly agree with the Democrats race-baiting identity politics.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That the first response to my statement is yours, just simply reinforces my conviction not to support Trump in the general. Yes I meant pro-abort.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

I think it's pretty obvious why I have been anti-Trump since the beginning, I'm not really a Republican since I don't subscribe to many of the party's conservative stances, but I'm R enough to consider myself one.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which explains why he threw North Carolina under the bus? No, he loves political correctness.

[The Other Castro]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That the first response to my statement is yours, just simply reinforces my conviction not to support Trump in the general. Yes I meant pro-abort.

I'm not really sure what you mean by that.

[Indy Texas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which explains why he threw North Carolina under the bus? No, he loves political correctness.

He, like most Americans, has better things to do than agonize over who is taking a piss/dump the next stall over at Target.

Your party's third-in-line to be president for 8 years, Denny Hastert, was a fricking serial pedophile.

[Indy Texas]

Here's a better question: why do you lie to us all when you call yourself "Indy" when of the thousands of posts you have made, not a single one said anything negative about any other party?

Your party provides so much easy material, I often don't get a chance to critique the other side (which I used to do in earlier times when I posted more often on here).

[Erc]

I think you misinterpreted the forces that have taken over the party. Voting for Hillary is just the worst kind of overreaction.

Anyway, there is still time for you and other NeverTrump people to think it over.

Nope.  Not now, not ever.

Even if Trump weren't the most morally repugnant person to win a major party nomination in the last century, I'm going to side with the candidate who's closer to the Republican line on trade, foreign policy, and the general preservation of American democracy, and that candidate is Hillary Clinton.

(Sorry if this gives ammunition to the diehard Bernie supporters out there.)

[Matty]

First off, the term "material" is subjective. A conservative would find it ridiculous "material"  that bernie sanders tweets about how "it's outrageous that school loans charge higher interest than car loans", or that rape victims should be automatically believed. A liberal would find it ridiculous that evolution isn't taught in some schools, on and on and on.

So if "material" is what drives you away from a certain party, then you are by definition not truly independent, because your biases are what make you think the material is easy.

[MK]

You say you won't vote for Trump because he peddles lies and conspiracy theories. You were perfectly fine with your party's members claiming Barack Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim and talking about "death panels" and "terror babies."

You say you won't vote for Trump because he says hateful things about women and minorities. Your party had two US Senate candidates suggest women should consent to be impregnated against their will by rapists. You've had Tea Party rallies with protesters carrying some truly vile signs and saying truly bigoted things for nearly a decade now - many of the same people who are now supporting Trump.

You said that anyone who ever disagreed with you was a "RINO" or "Establishment" and that experience in public service made you an "insider." Trump won with this very playbook by being someone who has never held any kind of public office.

So why not Trump? He's from the private sector. He's created jobs. He hates that "political correctness" stuff. What's the deal?

Elitism is the issue with these types.   You're right they were all in favor of "southern" strategies and wedge issues in 00 and 04 more so than Trump.   Trump isn't part of the their country club and on top of that he embarrassed their boys.   

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That you're actually trying to rephrase what I wrote explains everything that's wrong with political correctness in America.

[Indy Texas]

First off, the term "material" is subjective. A conservative would find it ridiculous "material"  that bernie sanders tweets about how "it's outrageous that school loans charge higher interest than car loans", or that rape victims should be automatically believed. A liberal would find it ridiculous that evolution isn't taught in some schools, on and on and on.

So if "material" is what drives you away from a certain party, then you are by definition not truly independent, because your biases are what make you think the material is easy.

If you think wanting evolution to be taught in schools makes someone a liberal, you're part of the problem. Why don't you ask some people in the Conservative Party in the UK or any other "right" party in the world how they feel about evolution? They'll look at you like you're crazy. Evolution trutherism isn't conservative; it's fundie nonsense. William Jennings Bryan argued against evolution being taught in schools - was he conservative?

I won't even respond to your rape comment because it's disgusting and more evidence of your party's underlying issues.

[Matty]

Are you ing kidding me? You think it is NOT outrageous when a major party candidate says that all rape victims should be automatically believed.. yea let's just throw out all legal precedence.

You are NOT an independent.

[Matty]

I'm genuinely curious why you think you qualify as an independent when it's extremely obvious where the majority of your views lie.

I mean, calling yourself an independent but  making a blanket statement about a party and views of minorities, women, etc seems ridiculous.

[Indy Texas]

I'm genuinely curious why you think you qualify as an independent when it's extremely obvious where the majority of your views lie.

I mean, calling yourself an independent but  making a blanket statement about a party and views of minorities, women, etc seems ridiculous.

You know, marty, I've actually voted for Republicans before.

But if your vision for your party is one where people who believe in evolution and don't think someone who gets pregnant from a rape should be denied access to the morning after pill are automatically not welcome, good luck ever winning a national election again. You guys could have had the Senate back in 2010 rather than 2014 if you weren't living in the 15th century on social issues (and science, for that matter).

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're suggesting that access should be restricted as part of a rape kit?

[SteveRogers]

when a major party candidate says that all rape victims should be automatically believed

[Citation Needed]

[The Other Castro]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That you're actually trying to rephrase what I wrote explains everything that's wrong with political correctness in America.

It seems like railing against political correctness is just a blanket argument for whenever people disagree with your inaccurate statements or backwards beliefs, and you can't come up with a response that addresses the actual points.