.
Not only are the rubes voters no longer buying TRUMP PIVOTS, even the folks inside the Repub compound are getting restive…
50 GOP national security officials: "None of us will vote for Donald Trump." https://t.co/Eh0JqaQg3d by @sangernyt pic.twitter.com/8crezYrPau
— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) August 8, 2016
Unprecedented denunciation of Trump's candidacy by 50 senior Republican foreign policy leaders. This is important. https://t.co/LslsVnEHQn
— Nicholas Burns (@RNicholasBurns) August 8, 2016
The "Free the Delegates" campaign that completely failed is back with a "remove Trump as the nominee" campaign. https://t.co/xwG6g9w63l
— daveweigel (@daveweigel) August 8, 2016
Trump critics urge RNC to replace Trump in special meeting https://t.co/Xy9H59nGP5
— Teddy Schleifer (@teddyschleifer) August 8, 2016
I would like to inform Past Dan that this article exists just to watch him try to process it. https://t.co/5bU7wK89rx
— Daniel Drezner (@dandrezner) August 9, 2016
Donald Trump is the most unifying force in American politics since World War II. https://t.co/iuEqGvNLUk
— Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) August 9, 2016
.
Could not happen to a more deserving crew.
Mary G
It is opposite world. Fortunately these bozos can’t agree on anything, and are all still out for No. 1. No way any of this happens because all of the incumbents are too scared of the base to stick their nose out. Everyone who signed the the letter is out of government already.
one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer
You’d think the accountability boys would proofread their graphics prior to going live.
Anne Laurie
@one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer: Hah! Wondered if anyone else would catch that typo…
Knight of Nothing
Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, and the rest are just like Burke from the Weyland-Yutani Corporation – after everything, they *still* think they can contain this monster.
Mary G
@one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer: @one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer: The capitalization?6
hellslittlestangel
Can the Accountability Projet account for their rather slap-dash logo?
one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer
@Knight of Nothing:
He’s like a combination of Greg Stillson, Lonesome Rhodes and the Aliens, all wrapped up in one neat package.
Amir Khalid
“ACCOUNTABILITY PROJET”? Tsk, tsk.
one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer
@hellslittlestangel:
They corrected it overnight:
Knight of Nothing
@one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer: Good one! Had to ask the Google machine about Lonesome Rhodes. Is there a place beyond parody? I think we’ve arrived.
Schlemazel
@Knight of Nothing:
What are their choices? If you find yourself on the back of a tiger it is safer to just hold on for dear life because coming off the tiger means you will very likely be eaten.
It is what they deserve, they are the ones that have been teasing and taunting the tiger in the first place.
Poopyman
@Anne Laurie: I thought it was French, perhaps. Nahhhhh!
MattF
What are they gonna do? ‘Suggest’ to Trump that he withdraw? Tell the white nationalists and other assorted racists that they’re just white trash? It’s their party– they can cry if they want to, but they’re stuck with it.
amk
@Schlemazel: More like rethug pols are getting squeezed to death by a vicious anaconda. No great escape for them.
Jeff Spender
The GOP “GOP Accountabilty Projet” Accountability Project
Knight of Nothing
@Schlemazel: for one thing, they could do what dozens of Republicans are doing.
Schlemazel
@Knight of Nothing:
That means they are turning their backs on the GOP base and very likely will pay a heavy price if they have to get elected. They are in damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. I will assume those who are publicly joining or saying they will vote Hillary actually put country ahead of party. Weasels will deny Drumpf but stop short of voting against the GOP. The chicken shit, the insane and the elephant uber alles crowd will ride him all the way down.
Ceci n'est pas mon nym
@Schlemazel: actually put country ahead of party.
Never a safe assumption with Republicans. I’m guessing it has more to do with pressure from the voters and worries about re-election. Which is really nice if large chunks of the Republican base are that much anti-Trump and vocal.
Knight of Nothing
@Schlemazel: I don’t think we are in disagreement. As many others have pointed out, ‘establishment’ Republicans are in a bed of their own making. They can do an honorable thing and un-endorse Trump, support one of his opponents, and pay a political price. Or they can go all-in for Trump and pay a different kind of price. These guys are choosing the most cowardly option – to try and split the difference. If you’re saying it’ll pay off for them, maybe you’re right. But that doesn’t mean I can’t call it for what it is – cynical and craven pandering.
Waldo
The anti-Trump GOPers remind me of the guy who had second thoughts about committing suicide while in mid-plunge off the Golden Gate Bridge. Better late than never, I guess.
greennotGreen
In the linked Daily Caller article was yet another suggestion that because it looks like Clinton will trounce Trump, she should offer Republicans a SCOTUS pick for their endorsement. Huh? NO! Why should Dems do that? If one of the strongest reasons for choosing a Democrat over any Republican is the Supreme Court, why would we give that away because it is increasingly likely we’ll win? What kind of logic is that?
BTW, at this point these rosy scenarios are no more reliable than pipe dreams. GOTV!
Thoughtful David
So the anti-Trumpers are French? I thought they hated the French. So shouldn’t they change the name of their group to the “GOP Accountability Freedom”?
Thoughtful David
@Knight of Nothing:
This. They are totally cowards and should be called out on it.
Iowa Old Lady
@greennotGreen: Presumably one reason people vote for Clinton is that they want her to choose the Supreme Court judges, not the opposing party.
aimai
@Amir Khalid: Accountability Projet, Lack Of
Dictionary entry.
Lurking Canadian
@greennotGreen: Right? What’s the logic supposed to be? “Oh no, Hillary’s beating us like a rented mule! Let’s ask her to give us something in exchange for our support!”
To which Hillary replies, “Huh? I’m beating you ANYWAY. Why should I give you so much as a pat on the cheek?”
aimai
@Waldo: Only if, as he’s going down, he is screaming at the would be rescuers “this is all your fault!!!!!”
Waldo
@aimai: Or “I’m ready to cut a deal!!”
Exurban Mom
Unbelievable. Negotiated surrender? After all their obstructionist behavior? Excuse my francais, but fuck them with a rusty pitchfork.
Mandarama
From risible Daily Caller article–
I don’t think they have been paying attention to the real Secretary Clinton.
Saskexpat
The Daily Caller piece is more fantasy-world tripe wherein the left gives the right huge concessions for essentially nothing. If such a deal were to occur, it would hurt Clinton more than it helps. The author obviously know nothing about negotiations or the concept of surrender. It’s like arguing that as part of WW II surrender, US should have ceded control of Guam and Hawaii to Japan.
randy khan
@Saskexpat:
“Fantasy” was the exact word that came to mind. I can’t think of one item on that list that realistically would be of interest to Clinton. The closest would be the immigration item, but since there’s essentially no chance that they could deliver the votes in the House, I can’t see why she’d bite.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Saskexpat: Yes, why would Hilary negotiate over anything at this point? They Republicans are losing, they can accept it and move on or fight to futile bitter end.
BC in Illinois
@Saskexpat:
It’s not as if Clinton and the Democrats would get nothing from the proposed bargain.
From the Daily Caller fantasy piece:
See? They would “do everything they can.” They would “do their best.” They would “agree to help.” Who could resist such a commitment?
Still, it deserves looking into. Send a research intern to look into all the occasions when a Republican candidate, seeing victory at hand, offered to adopt planks of the Democratic candidate’s platform. I await their report.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@BC in Illinois: The wording reminds me of an ex-girlfriend, several former bosses, and a guy I bought a car from once.
The Other Chuck
HRC’s response to the idea of negotiation could go something along these lines
eyelessgame
I had a different reaction to the Daily Caller article. I understand why he wouldn’t get how unacceptable the Democrats would find his “negotiated surrender.”
What I don’t understand is why he doesn’t get how unacceptable Republicans would find it. He doesn’t see that any Republican official making any kind of deal with Hillary Clinton at all would lose their next primary. He doesn’t understand his own party. Still. Even now.
The Other Chuck
Here’s the thing about surrenders in a war: even negotiated ones involve the losing party being dismantled to remove their capacity to make war in the future. I could accept a negotiated surrender that involved the utter, absolute, and permanent dissolution of the Republican Party. I propose that we give them naming rights for a few post offices in exchange.
Thoughtful David
@The Other Chuck:
Few=3. And not a fucking thing more.
bluefish
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Ha ha ha ha. Good one. Precisely!
Saskexpat
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: The only possible benefit to Clinton would be to negotiate in private, require huge upfront concessions to even talk, crater the negotiations quickly while offering nothing meaningful, and leak details to hurt the R’s base turnout by showing the party is totally scared of the likely election outcome.
Big Picture Pathologist
@The Other Chuck:
Only if they are Bob LaFollette, Dwight Eisenhower and Abraham Lincoln.