IT’S OFFICIAL: Anti-Trump candidate to challenge Trump for GOP nomination

A candidate who advocates for heavy gun control and said that Comey did the right thing in letting Hillary off the hook in 2016 is now set to challenge Trump in the GOP primary.

Earlier this year we told you former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld was considering a challenge to Trump on the Republican side of the aisle.



Well today he’s announced that he is definitely running for president against Trump:

This is laughable. Weld actually tells Tapper that he really believes he can beat Trump in the GOP primary.

He’s the only one!

Weld is so far left on certain issues that Trump won’t even have to campaign against Weld to beat him. He can just tweet out this 2016 video of Weld advocating for gun control and that will be the end of him:

Seriously if NeverTrumpers want to beat Trump, they gotta do A LOT better than this RINO.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

280 thoughts on “IT’S OFFICIAL: Anti-Trump candidate to challenge Trump for GOP nomination

    1. Name the Conservative that you’d want to see go up against Trump and get plastered as the jerk Republican who was attacking Trump on the national stage along with the Democrats.

  1. He distinguishes between guns for hunting and guns that have no real purpose…..or whatever. Self defense isn’t a legitimate purpose?

  2. This is just sad…

    He probably thinks he has a chance because of Trump’s approval numbers and lots of media propaganda.

    The more likely reality is that Weld doesn’t quite realize which party he’s in.

  3. So it looks like we will have Weld and Kasich running for the R nomination in the 2020 election. I’m not sure that is even worthy of my attention.

  4. oh God dude seriously? oh well Kasich will announce soon wait and see perhaps he will pick a commie lefty as his running mate since he is one himself

  5. Now, if my man Darrell Castle from the Constitution Party jumps into this thing, I’ll have to think seriously about whether Trump really needs my vote in Texas.

    1. Also, he should totally use the campaign slogan, “Who needs a wall when you’ve got a Castle.”

  6. He didn’t impress me as Gary Johnson’s running mate on the Libertarian ticket in the 2016 presidential election and he won’t impress me now.

    1. Part of me wishes that the Libertarian party were a force in this country, because I believe in some of the purity of their ideas on individualism.

      But they always put up such worthless nut jobs for candidates.

  7. We need a more serious candidate than this against Trump in the primaries. It’s not that I think a better candidate would, should, or could beat him, it’s that I want a lefty RINO to push Trump further right during the primaries.

    1. Weld isn’t lefty RINO enough? The guy is practically a Democrat. How would any RINO push Trump further right in any effective way? Do you expect that if Trump says some things that are more to the right, he’ll do them?

  8. Weld will have a snowball’s chance in the nether world of winning the presidency. I’m not sure if he’s delusional or just wants to throw his money away.

  9. I would like to vote for a republican other than Trump but this weirdo isn’t it.

  10. Well, we have a 2008 Hillary supporter (Trump) running against a 2008 Obama supporter (Weld). Is there a Republican who supported John Edwards in 2008 who’s going to run in the GOP Primary?

    1. Just a quck question Sonofagip- You are obviously well known as a Trump hater at the RS. Who would you support to run against Trump in 2020? Please name anyone you believe can beat Trump in 2020. Surely you have to have some name that you believe can beat Trump. Please name that candidate.

      PS- You keep looking back, but please post your forward looking agenda with candidates that can beat Trump. Get out of the past, and get into 2020.

      1. This is the question I find myself asking some of these people too.

        The real answer is that they don’t care if the candidate beats Trump. They would like for the candidate to hurt Trump and are fine if Trump is damaged enough to lose the election to the Democrat.

        You have to remember – these people have been savoring their TDS for a good three years now. They hate Trump with a fiery passion (no matter how much they may not admit it, the evidence is there). They just want to see Trump lose so they can do a little dance on his grave. They long ago ceased to care about whether or not the progressives were going to destroy the country.

  11. Weld was never “NT,” let alone representative of it or a leader — there were no leaders. NT ceased to exist in November 2016. The original idea and promotion was by staunch conservative writers at Red State and then picked up by other conservative writers at NRO (e.g. David French).

    None of those who coined the term and started writing about NT would ever vote for the likes of Weld. They’d sooner walk barefooted over hot coals. Self-proclaimed NT care about ideology and identify themselves as conservative, long before identifying as Republican. They identify based on ideas and policy, not on some letter next to a name. Many, myself included, are no longer Republicans.

    1. @txgrunner I was NT before the election and wrote in Cruz but I won’t be surprised to see some NTs endorse him.

      1. I’m sure you’re right, but several prominent NT folks already wrote they will support this president, Erick Erickson and Glenn Beck to name just two. Whatever some think of Beck and Erickson, they’re conservative and they care policy and ideas.

        If a better candidate came along, they might back them, but they will never back Weld — they’re both fervently pro-life and pro-RKBA. They would only back somebody to the president’s right. That’s also true of many like Steve Deace, his core team, and many more like him.

        For myself, I’m no long a Republican and I won’t be voting in GOP primaries again. Every once in a while I think I might vote for the president based on something good he does, but then he does something to confirm my decision to never cast a ballot for him.

        1. @txgrunner

          For myself, I’m no long a Republican and I won’t be voting in GOP primaries again. Every once in a while I think I might vote for the president based on something good he does, but then he does something to confirm my decision to never cast a ballot for him.

          I’m in complete agreement.

    1. He was probably rejected by the DNC as a candidate, so ran as a Republican….party affiliation and party tenets mean very little to progressives.

    2. As a prisoner of NY, I can tell you that there is.

      It’s simply what an establishment / GOPe is. A republican, mostly on fiscal / economic issues (though less so) and much more socially liberal. They essentially surrendered their beliefs after being beaten down so much and try to appeal to the “moderate”. Instead of fighting and standing up, the NE is the birthplace of your RINO’S.

      1. The RINO disease spread throughout the nation, though I do not know exactly when. Paul Ryan, Lindsey Graham, dead McCain, etc…perhaps that disease spread from both the left and east coast and sullied “the middle.”

  12. “I want to be important, but I don’t know how”

    That’s the question that drove this person to say “I am going to run for the GOP nomination”.

    As dumb as it is, I think it is probably a good thing for trump to use it towards ramping up his re-election bid, and he loves to campaign, so there’s that.

    1. All Trump needs to do is keep having rallies…the GOP is wasting their time putting up any other GOP candidates, who are not serious contenders anyway. Last month, when Jeb said he was thinking of running, I think most of us rolled our eyes. If Jeb shouldn’t run, sure as heck this guy from MA should not!

  13. O/T
    Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum are having a town hall in Bethlehem, PA with special guest Bernie Sanders……. I’m not kidding. Wish Scoop had a live feed of this because it’s entertaining in a I’m “sick to my stomach” way.

    1. Yeah I won’t be watching. Since the DNC has refused to allow Fox to chair any of the demonrat’s primary debates, they are doing these townhalls. So far that coffee dude had one and now Bernie. I did not watch and will not watch…waste of time but it sure does give them a voice with an audience that never sees CNN, MSNBC or the alphabets….IF anyone else is going to watch. I do not see the point. demonrats, rinos and independent progressives lie. It is the only way anyone will listen to anything they say, but I reject liars, so….

    2. @landscaper I’m 15 minutes in, and I’ve about had enough. However, I do give him credit for accepting the Fox invite, and being very gracious about it. He even said that many “on his side” (his words) advised him against it.

      Baier and MacCallum are doing a good job, asking fair and respectful questions. The other “mainstream” networks should only treat our people the same way.

      Edit: Ok, still watching, 30 minutes in. Bernie was just explaining his “Medicare For All” to an enthralled (and mostly Democrat) audience. Martha tried to pin him down on the question of “Who pays” for all this “free” healthcare, and he said “higher taxes, just like “we send our kids to school.”

      But I want to know, who will make the decisions about which medical procedures will be covered and which will be denied? Won’t that be a problem? They’re in a break now, so I’m afraid they will go to a new subject.

    1. No, they won’t.

      The folks who coined the phrase and started talking about NT were true conservatives at Red State. They’d sooner walk through hot lava fields than vote for the likes of Bill Weld.

      RINOs (e.g. David Frum, Nicole Wallace, Steve Schmidt, Mark McKinnon, etc.) were never part of NT, but rather openly endorsed HRC before the primaries were over because fundamentally they are power-hungry leftist elitists — they’ll be tickled pink.

      1. “The folks who coined the phrase and started talking about NT were true conservatives at Red State.”

        Wait, what? I was never aware that Billy Crystal, Rick Wilson, David French etc ever wrote anything for Redstate. They were the “true conservatives”? Spin is all you have. Yea, you have nothing but spin.

    1. He is probably hoping some never-Trumpers will chuck money his way….it is the only way politicians (who are failed at whatever they tried to do before) can make money…dishonestly.

  14. OK, Bill who? I mean really, he thinks that he can beat Trump with a gun control platform? He’d be better off putting a (D) after his name and running.

    1. He probably was a “D” once and lost to another “D” who was supported by the DNC….that is when those nor’easter types become Independent or RINOs.

      1. @Charli You’re probably right, especially considering that it’s Taxechusettes.

  15. Anybody thinks they’re beating Trump for the GOP nomination by running to the far left of him should have their head examined…..

    On the other hand, I guess I could have just said “Anyone on the far left should have their head examined” and left it at that….

    1. I’m pretty sure he was the “dumber” one on Gary Johnson’s “dumb and dumber” ticket in 2016.

      1. @tomnewman64 Yes, that’s him. I forgot about that. Then again I don’t ever think about Bill Weld. 😀

  16. I may still be #NeverTrump but that’s because I’m to Trump’s right, not left.

    Bill Weld should be running for the Democrat nomination, not the GOP.

    1. @finrod Weld is probably a prop by the GOP establishment to give Trump a very liberal punching bag and make him look conservative.

      1. Now WHY would Trump need a GOP punching bag when he is already having a good time with 70 (+/-) demonrats?! LOL

    2. @finrod One can argue that both Trump and Weld should be running for the Democrat nomination.

      1. Indeed.

        I find it pathetically sad that it seems like the only person talking about the critical danger the national debt and the deficits pose to this country is Howard Schultz.

  17. Gary Johnson’s VP on the Libertarian ticket is going to beat Trump? Yeah, I remember when I had my first beer. He’ll get plenty of love from the lamestreamers.

  18. I didn’t know they still elect “Republicans” in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts. So is this guy pretty much another RIomNOey?

  19. Just another self promoting fool with ZERO chance of accomplishing anything other than laundering campaign donations into his private account.

  20. He didn’t impress me as Gary Johnson’s running mate on the Libertarian ticket in the 2016 presidential election and he won’t impress me now.

    1. Part of me wishes that the Libertarian party were a force in this country, because I believe in some of the purity of their ideas on individualism.

      But they always put up such worthless nut jobs for candidates.

  21. Just another self promoting fool with ZERO chance of accomplishing anything other than laundering campaign donations into his private account.

  22. ‘NeverTrumpers’ would not take this man seriously at all. The idea behind Never Trump was having a Conservative candidate(Cruz) to vote in as Pres., and supporting that candidate. This guy isn’t fooling anyone.

  23. Considering the bump stock ban, that might not necessarily be the ideal topic for Trump to hit this guy on.

    1. Especially with the ‘red flag’ laws coming up for a vote. Another crazy shooter at the wrong time and Tromp could have a knee-jerk reaction and sign it.

        1. No, he presented himself as a big 2A advocate during the primaries, but now, not so much.

  24. ‘NeverTrumpers’ would not take this man seriously at all. The idea behind Never Trump was having a Conservative candidate(Cruz) to vote in as Pres., and supporting that candidate. This guy isn’t fooling anyone.

    1. Name the Conservative that you’d want to see go up against Trump and get plastered as the jerk Republican who was attacking Trump on the national stage along with the Democrats.

  25. We need a more serious candidate than this against Trump in the primaries. It’s not that I think a better candidate would, should, or could beat him, it’s that I want a lefty RINO to push Trump further right during the primaries.

    1. Weld isn’t lefty RINO enough? The guy is practically a Democrat. How would any RINO push Trump further right in any effective way? Do you expect that if Trump says some things that are more to the right, he’ll do them?

      1. Weld is left enough, he’s not serious enough.

        And yes, Trump is non-ideological and malleable, which is oddly enough why he’s done more conservative policy than the Bushs. I think it’s more likely to result in conservative policy now while he’s in office.

        1. “Trump is non-ideological and malleable”

          No, Trump speaks in non-ideological and malleable ways. Trump does not articulate Conservatism, but over time he’s repeatedly shown that he has some sort of belief system that has moved us in a mostly Conservative direction.

          Getting Trump to say a bunch of stuff on a debate stage, because of some primary candidate, won’t get Trump’s policies to budge one iota. He’ll forget what he said in ten minutes and go back to doing things the way he wants to.

          All that a challenger will do is get roughed up in the process and take some swipes at Trump. The Democrats would love to see that happen.

          How does any of that advance Conservatism?

  26. Weld will have a snowball’s chance in the nether world of winning the presidency. I’m not sure if he’s delusional or just wants to throw his money away.

  27. I would like to vote for a republican other than Trump but this weirdo isn’t it.

  28. He knows the grift is good right now, anti Trump is pretty desperate for a primary challenger to Trump

  29. The first 6 months of his presidency I had my doubts but as successful as he’s been in exposing and destroying the Democrat party I honestly believe that he needs a second term. Anyone who claims to be a conservative and wants to take Trump down during the primary isn’t being honest with themselves about their political leanings and are leftist tools

    1. but as successful as he’s been in exposing and destroying the Democrat party

      Explain.

      Anyone who claims to be a conservative and wants to take Trump down during the primary

      Anyone who claims to be a conservative and wants to continue supporting Trump isn’t being honest with themselves. You can’t do both. Embrace nationalism, populism, right-wing progressivism, Trumpism, whatever you want to call it if that’s where your principles lie – I won’t begrudge you that – but don’t kid yourself that it’s Conservatism.

      Don’t mistake conservative goals for conservative means.

      1. Every now and then I get some rabid Trumpbot proclaiming how the “real conservatives” are the ones that support Trump.

        I always ask them how much of the writings of Ronald Reagan, Bill Buckley, Barry Goldwater, and Russell Kirk they’ve read.

        They never have an answer.

      2. There’s that stupid “support” thing again.

        Anyone who claims to be a conservative and wants to take Trump down during the primary

        That’s a different qualifier, logically speaking.

        Conservatives are supposed to respect reason. There is zero reason, as of this point in time, that any conservative–any single conservative alive–would be acting to take down this president.

        1. You are very wrong on that point, Bob.

          Replacing Trump with a conservative would be a huge net gain for the nation, for American society, and for the future of this country. But most folks view it through the paradigm of him being replaced with a Democrat. That’s their cowardice, borne of their Binary Shackles, talking.

          1. “Replacing Trump with a conservative would be a huge net gain for the nation”

            Did you read K-Bob’s post? Like the second sentence where he said:
            “Conservatives are supposed to respect reason.”?

            Any Conservative who went against Trump would lose. And big. At this point, the backlash that Cruz got for opposing Trump to the end would be 2x.

            Only an idiot or malcontent would go against Trump at this point. By definition, that person would lack the ability to reason, hence, not a Conservative.

            1. Any Conservative who went against Trump would lose.

              Probably (which is soul-crushingly sad and why I have zero respect for the extreme majority of Americans at this point). But that doesn’t change the fact that replacing Trump with a conservative would be a good thing for the nation.

              Agree or disagree?

              Only an idiot or malcontent would go against Trump at this point. By definition, that person would lack the ability to reason, hence, not a Conservative.

              A sad testament to our worthless electorate, isn’t it.

              1. Agree or disagree?

                I agree, depending on your definition of “conservative”. Nixon was not a conservative. George HW Bush was not a conservative. George W Bush was not a conservative. McCain was not a conservative. Romney is not a conservative. In the grand scheme of things, Trump is as effectively conservative as any President in the last hundred years apart from Reagan and Coolidge.

                And *then*, once you get an actual conservative in there, you need one who can get things done and oppose or work around Hollywood, the Democrats, and the bulk of the news media.

                A sad testament to our worthless electorate, isn’t it.

                People are stupid. What do you want to do about it? I didn’t vote for or support Trump in the last election, but now we’re stuck with him and I don’t see how sabotaging him would be useful to conservatism.

                1. Trump is as effectively conservative as any President in the last hundred years

                  Why do you lie to yourself like that? I don’t disagree with your assessment of the Bushes, McCain, or Romney – but making a comparative analysis like that doesn’t lead to a conclusion that Trump is in any way conservative.

                  Look, it’s like saying, “Those three guys are murderers. This guy is only a thief. He’s effectively a law-abiding citizen.” NO. He’s a still a thief. The fact that there are people worse does NOT make him any better. It’s not a scale, TT. He either is or he isn’t. And Donald is not a conservative.

                  And *then*, once you get an actual conservative in there, you need one who can get things done and oppose or work around Hollywood, the Democrats, and the bulk of the news media.

                  Gosh, seems hard. Eh, screw it.

                  Right?

                  but now we’re stuck with him and I don’t see how sabotaging him would be useful to conservatism.

                  Would be if we got a conservative in office instead. Likelihood low, granted. But you asked how it would be useful.

                  If you could replace Trump with a conservative, you would, right? So, just say that. There’s nothing wrong with saying it.

                2. Why do you lie to yourself like that?

                  You throw out words like “lie” without understanding what it means. Why? Apart from the two I mentioned, name the President more effectively conservative than Trump in the last hundred years.

                  Look, it’s like saying, “Those three guys are murderers.”

                  That’s a really poor analogy. If you don’t understand the difference between the spectrum of tradeoffs from choices leading to more or less conservative governance vs the strictly negative consequences of the behavior of some murderers and a thief – I don’t know how to help you. It probably sounded good in your head to talk about murderers and a thief – but it tells us nothing about how to think about Trump’s conservative actions that we haven’t seen out of many other Presidents.

                  And Donald is not a conservative.

                  I didn’t say he was. I said he’s effectively more conservative than any President apart from Reagan or Coolidge within the past hundred years.

                  Somehow I get the feeling that you’re talking along the lines of “If I could snap my fingers and get a unicorn, I’d get a unicorn.”

                  Okay… whatever. David Johnson was talking about this idiot Weld (you know, the subject of this thread) and whether or not his run for the President is a good thing or a bad thing. Feel free to talk about unicorns, but the rest of us were discussing the reality of whether or not it’s good for a Republican or even a Conservative to run against Trump.

                3. Apart from the two I mentioned, name the President more effectively conservative than Trump in the last hundred years.

                  Again, it’s not a scale. He doesn’t get points simply because others came up short. I can’t explain it to you any more basic than I already have.

                  but it tells us nothing about how to think about Trump’s conservative actions that we haven’t seen out of many other Presidents.

                  They’re not conservative actions. They’re conservative goals. There’s a huge and distinct difference there that people without principles don’t understand.

                  I said he’s effectively more conservative

                  But he’s not. Look, if I take a test and I cheat, I get an A. I have effectively aced the test. But the cheating completely undermines the result. The A may look nice on my report card, but how I got it is the true judge of my performance.

                  Somehow I get the feeling that you’re talking along the lines of “If I could snap my fingers and get a unicorn, I’d get a unicorn.”

                  And I know with absolute certainty that you’ll settle for something inferior if it gets you a few things you want.

                  but the rest of us were discussing the reality of whether or not it’s good for a Republican or even a Conservative to run against Trump.

                  If it got a Conservative elected? Hell yes it would be. You’ve already admitted as much.

                4. He doesn’t get points simply because others came up short.

                  Siding with Israel that their capital is Jerusalem isn’t just “not coming up short”. Neither are many of the dozens of other conservative policies of Trump’s administration.

                  They’re not conservative actions. They’re conservative goals.

                  Haha, these arguments are already useless enough without getting into your notion of semantics. No thanks.

                  Look, if I take a test and I cheat, I get an A.

                  No offense, but you keep throwing out really lame analogies. Your other one was useless yet you doubled-down on it when I pointed that out. Now you’re equating cheating on a test to giving Trump credit for doing conservative things like getting taxes cut, fighting illegal immigration, halting the Iran deal, halting the Paris agreement, etc. Yeah, that’s all fake and phony just like cheating on a test. Try another approach because analogies aren’t your thing.

                  And I know with absolute certainty that you’ll settle for something inferior if it gets you a few things you want.

                  I will settle for something inferior to my ideal if it is better than the alternative in the long run. Self-destruction ain’t my thing.

                  While you’re looking for me to admit things, you do admit that Trump has governed more conservatively than most Republicans? You do admit that Trump’s administration has implemented more policies in accordance with conservatism than Hillary would have?

                  If it got a Conservative elected? Hell yes it would be. You’ve already admitted as much.

                  That’s more unicorn wishing. Running a conservative against Trump isn’t going to get that conservative elected. It’s just stupidity.

          2. Replacing Trump with a conservative would be a huge net gain

            Magic replacement? Sure.

            Ain’t no such thing, And I’m very right about that.

            Here in reality, it would be a disaster for what’s left of “the real conservatives” to somehow manage to effectively primary Trump. Not even their own mothers would love them for that

            1. But it would be a huge net gain, right? If we had a Conservative president instead of a Trump president? I mean, you can admit that much can’t you?

              We, as a nation, could do better than Donald Trump – if we wanted. Sounds like you don’t want to though. Is that accurate?

        2. Sure there is, from the right.

          Trump has been great, far better than I’d have imagined. But the fact is he’s still banning bump stocks and promising a Republican version of Obamacare. Those are lefty left left positions.

          That’s not to say Weld is to Trump’s right. He’s not. The guy’s a charlatan anywhere he goes. He wasn’t anywhere near libertarian enough to be Libertarian, and he’s not republican enough to be a Republican.

          1. I just sent Tromp and my two senators snail mail voicing my opposition to the ‘red flag’ laws. I’m hoping that there isn’t another tragedy causing another knee-jerk reaction.

          2. It’s not fantasy football. Yeah, it sounds good on paper… *poof!* new, *real* conservative POTUS! Yay!

            That’s not how it works.

            Primarying Trump will be:
            1) completely ineffective.
            2) will only do damage to those trying to primary him.

            1. I’m not saying it would work. But it would be great if it did. Far better than what we have now, yes?

            2. I’ve worked on 3 presidential primary campaigns. I can say with 100% certainty you are correct.

  30. This is just sad…

    He probably thinks he has a chance because of Trump’s approval numbers and lots of media propaganda.

    The more likely reality is that Weld doesn’t quite realize which party he’s in.

  31. So, not a challenge at all.

    Weld had a legit shot way back in 2008 and 2012, when we were about to be saddled with McCain and then Romney. He wussed out then, but sees a chance now? Someone must have offered him some serious enticement money, because he’s got far less of a chance than he had then.

    As it stands right this minute, I see not one 2016 Trump voter who would vote against Trump in 2020.

    Not one.

    If someone says to you that they voted for him in 2016, but tells you they didn’t vote Trump in November of 2020, the probability they are lying approaches certainty.

    1. If someone says to you that they voted for him in 2016, but tells you they didn’t vote Trump in November of 2020, the probability they are lying approaches certainty.

      Well yeah, if they said that right now, they’d obviously be lying since it’s still 2019. 😛

    2. “I see not one 2016 Trump voter who would vote against Trump in 2020.”

      Back in 2016, as a Cruz supporter, I watched sadly as Ted was knocked out and villified after a bitter campaign where he gave it his best shot. Ted was my man, though, and he fought a tough campaign – so I gave him the benefit of the doubt on his actions, especially those at the RN Convention where I didn’t see the point of his last poke in Trump’s eye.

      If Ted Cruz announced today that he was going to primary Trump, I would have nothing but contempt and pity for his decision.

  32. Now, if my man Darrell Castle from the Constitution Party jumps into this thing, I’ll have to think seriously about whether Trump really needs my vote in Texas.

      1. He’s a hardcore constitutionalist. He was smeared as a conspiracy theorist, but he gives several good interviews debunking those arguments. The main problem is he gets almost no attention or support, so his pure constitutional views never really get an airing.

    1. Also, he should totally use the campaign slogan, “Who needs a wall when you’ve got a Castle.”

      1. Ha, it depends on your definition of Conservative. I read at one time that John McCain was viewed as, and called himself a Conservative. Define Conservative if you can according to the “modern” definition.

        1. @scope-formerly-pinecone Intellect goes with conservatism, no matter how many far-right knucleheads exist.

          It would be legitimately stupid to try and primary a sitting POTUS as effective at getting genuine conservative platform items done as Trump has. I don’t care that he’s not a conservative, he’s moved the ball to the right better than anyone dared hope.

          1. It now all depends on the definition of Conservatism. I’ve seen many called Conservative, such as Jennifer Rubin at the WaPo called conservative for a long time. Same thing with the Dems, they are no longer Dems, they are progressives/socialists. The chaos theory has been in place for at least a decade.

            1. It’s a fairly simple collection of principles, conservatism. But rejecting reason ain’t among ’em.

              Most of the “think they are conservative” types are not familiar with the basics. They just viscerally reject leftism, so they think that’s all it takes. That’s fine for rank & file types.

              What’s mystifying are the columnists who claim to be less ignorant than those general types, and then go on to justify anything they like by pronouncing it to be conservative, while being unable to show how it is consistent with that simple collection of principles.

    1. Hey Sonofagip, give me your best candidate to run against Trump in 2020 that you honestly believe can beat Trump? You see anyone on the horizon who can have a chance at that?

  33. He distinguishes between guns for hunting and guns that have no real purpose…..or whatever. Self defense isn’t a legitimate purpose?

  34. So it looks like we will have Weld and Kasich running for the R nomination in the 2020 election. I’m not sure that is even worthy of my attention.

  35. Considering the bump stock ban, that might not necessarily be the ideal topic for Trump to hit this guy on.

    1. Especially with the ‘red flag’ laws coming up for a vote. Another crazy shooter at the wrong time and Tromp could have a knee-jerk reaction and sign it.

  36. oh God dude seriously? oh well Kasich will announce soon wait and see perhaps he will pick a commie lefty as his running mate since he is one himself

    1. @jazzee Please tell me that arrogant prick isn’t running. The guy is so in love with himself he probably has ten mirrors in every room of his house….including above his bed.

  37. Gary Johnson’s VP on the Libertarian ticket is going to beat Trump? Yeah, I remember when I had my first beer. He’ll get plenty of love from the lamestreamers.

    1. of course or wait for my dad was a mailman kasich UGH AND ICK he reminds me of that mayor running the little gay/christian and rachel the man maddow……….they preach so insulting and so damn boring they are

  38. I didn’t know they still elect “Republicans” in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts. So is this guy pretty much another RIomNOey?

  39. Well, we have a 2008 Hillary supporter (Trump) running against a 2008 Obama supporter (Weld). Is there a Republican who supported John Edwards in 2008 who’s going to run in the GOP Primary?

    1. Just a quck question Sonofagip- You are obviously well known as a Trump hater at the RS. Who would you support to run against Trump in 2020? Please name anyone you believe can beat Trump in 2020. Surely you have to have some name that you believe can beat Trump. Please name that candidate.

      PS- You keep looking back, but please post your forward looking agenda with candidates that can beat Trump. Get out of the past, and get into 2020.

      1. @scope-formerly-pinecone I disagree with your premise that I’m a Trump hater. I do like to poke fun at Trump for being all over the map politically and not following through on many of his campaign promises. He is more liberal than conservative imo.
        As for my conservative challengers: Ben Sasse would be the most likely conservative to challenge Trump in 2020. He refused to endorse Trump in 2016 because of character problems. Sasse is also to the right of Trump, having voted against prison reform, opposed Trump’s bump stock ban, and has expressed concern with the debt (which Trump has not). Ideally I’d want Tom Cotton, but I don’t think he has the personality to run for president.

        1. I don’t see Cotton going against Trump in a primary but it would be interesting to see Sasse do it.

          But I don’t think he has the guts to.

          1. Sasse knows he has about as much chance of winning against Trump as the man in the moon. Sasse has been a major disappoint for me. I know I am not alone. Sasse is a lightweight.

        2. ” I do like to poke fun at Trump for being all over the map politically and not following through on many of his campaign promises.”

          How many campaign promises can Trump follow through on without the Congress?

          Is it Trump’s fault that the House and Senate refused to “repeal obamacare”?
          That is clearly the fault of Ryan and McConnell. NO?

          Is it Trump’s fault that the activist Obama judges, especially from the 9th Circuit ruled against him with the Travel Ban, or the immigration policies he has tried to implement?

          Where were the Republicans who supported Trump on the border crisis, rather than sitting back and doing absolutely nothing to fight back?

          I don’t agree with some of the policies/bills Trump has supported such as Prison Reform, but how many liberal polices has Trump signed into law, rather than what he has supported through his executive actions that you disagree with.

          No Sonofagip, you have been willing to take your hammer to Trump, again and again, with nothing more than lefty talking points and criticism. You can’t find a dang thing that Trump has ever done, that you can applaud him for. I, and everyone here knows your gig.

          1. Don’t you just love seeing the people who left here in an anti-Trump rage coming back to pretend that they didn’t and don’t have a perpetual hate-on for Trump?

            Ranks right up there with the people who were sold on Trump/Russia collusion from the first intelligence leak. They loved the pee stories and were sure Mueller was going to vindicate their beliefs..

            Now those same people pretend that they were never confident that Mueller had piles of damning evidence while they pretend that if they could just get the right redactions of the Mueller report, all of Trump’s collusion would be revealed.

            1. @trytothink – I’m not so sure that at least a handful of them ever left. They’ve just kept propping each other up with their attaboys when they have never found even one thing positive to say about Trump, but never hold back on the criticisms. They are very much so in the minority here at this website, and don’t seem to have infected anyone else with their TDS infection. They would truly rather see a Hillary, AOC or Illhan Omar become the president just to get rid of the guy they love to hate.

              1. When the comment system changed, most of them didn’t bother to get new accounts. I’m seeing more and more of them with new wordpress accounts. It’s a shame. I think the place is better off without the mindless vitriol.

                I gave some of those people the benefit of the doubt that they weren’t totally over the cliff of rationality, but when they started supporting Christine Blasey Ford’s nonsense, I wrote them off completely.

            2. @trytothink

              Don’t you just love seeing the people who left here in an anti-Trump rage coming back to pretend that they didn’t and don’t have a perpetual hate-on for Trump?

              For example…?

                1. @trytothink Okay, I’ll rephrase my question:

                  Have the balls to name some names, you passive-aggressive p***y. While I might not have time anymore to keep a close eye on each and every thread, I definitely don’t remember anyone “leaving here in an anti-Trump rage” only to come back and pretend otherwise. But I’m willing to entertain the possibility that some did and I simply missed it, so I’m very curious as to who it is, specifically, that you’re indirectly addressing with such sneering condescension.

                2. @cws Are you really this dense? Sonofagip is one of the whiny TDS-suffering losers who ran off to that other site to nurture his rage in that TDS bubble. Is reading basic English beyond you?

                  “But I’m willing to entertain the possibility that some did and I simply missed it”

                  Like I give a flying F what you’re willing to entertain. You’re just a peripheral player in a gaggle of people who were totally laughably wrong so many times in so many ways – but who still can’t just admit it. You think I care much about the opinions of someone who can’t think his way out of a wet paper bag?

                3. @trytothink

                  Like I give a flying F what you’re willing to entertain. You’re just a peripheral player in a gaggle of people who were totally laughably wrong so many times in so many ways – but who still can’t just admit it.

                  If someone or something proves me wrong, I have no problem admitting it, at all.

                  For example, I once mistook you for someone who deserved respect. That was clearly a significant error of judgment.

                4. “If someone or something proves me wrong, I have no problem admitting it, at all.”

                  Oh yeah? Then start by admitting you were wrong in not being able to read this thread and understand that I was directly talking about sonofagip and so your calling me a passive aggressive p*ssy was completely out of line.

                  Prove it. Unlike almost every one of those chickensh*t losers at the toilet blender who claimed that they would freely admit that they were wrong if it were shown that Trump was not involved in “Russian collusion”.

                  Don Sutherland was the only one with the balls to come here and admit *somewhat* to being wrong. The rest are cowards. But keep giving me your useless disdain.

                5. @trytothink Okay. I may be fed up with the strawman crap and the false attributions many Trumpists habitually dish out to me and others, but that doesn’t excuse my wording, so I do apologize for that. I also shouldn’t have tried to involve myself in anyone else’s personal feud.

                  As for the rest, I never bought into the “Russian collusion” thing in the first place, so I have no admissions to make on that front. And my comment history will prove it. So if you’re accusing me of being a part of “that crowd”, I’ll expect you to own up to it as readily as I’ve owned up to this.

                6. @c-w-smith Well thank you. That’s all I’m really looking for is enough intellectual integrity from people to take ownership of their words.

                  If you never bought into the Russian collusion narrative, I take you at your word. Good for you for paying attention. I don’t recall thinking of you as a hardcore collusion supporter and I don’t think I accused you of such. In terms of naming names, I could name a few that stick in my mind – but I actually don’t think it’s polite to name specific people in this forum when they aren’t here reading it to defend themselves.

                  I apologize for being rude as well. Personally, I don’t like hostile exchanges online and wish that people would disagree with less passion and more logic.

                  Have a good Easter weekend.

        3. “I disagree with your premise that I’m a Trump hater”
          “He is more liberal than conservative imo.”

          Nah, only a Trump hater could still be nurturing the idea that Trump is more liberal than conservative.

          Trump has a huge list of Conservative accomplishments, just the top few are not only staunchly Conservative, but they’re more Conservative acts than any Republican president has taken in modern history. Find the liberal who would stand by Israel, lower taxes, fight for Keystone, fight for border security, oppose all the Title IX shenanigans, oppose Obamacare, nominate the slate of Conservative judges Trump has, and on and on.

          The contention that he’s more liberal than conservative is twisted and probably flies at the delusional newstoilet, but not here.

          But look at your choices to run against Trump. Do you think that Ben Sasse or Tom Cotton are stupid enough to run against Trump? Do you think that their career destruction just to make a few holdover #nevertrumpers happy would be a good thing for Conservatism?

          You obviously hate Trump to want to see Sasse & Cotton end their careers just to stick a finger in Trump (and his supporters’) eye.

          1. @trytothink Tariffs, Prison reform, illegal immigration out of control and failing to repeal Obamacare, trillion dollar deficits, choosing Kavanugh over Barrett, paid family leave (which he wants), liberal Democrat Jared Kushner as chief adviser, caving to Pelosi on the shut down, donating to Hillary Clinton….. These are all traits of a liberal!

            1. You’re just being TDS/dishonest. Let’s look at your claims one by one.
              – Failing to repeal Obamacare – and yet Trump’s DOJ is fighting in court to end Obamacare. A liberal would be fighting in court to support Obamacare. Congress failed to repeal, not Trump.
              – Trillion dollar deficits – Republicans and Democrats have failed on reducing the deficits. They’re hardly the marker of a liberal.
              – Choosing Kavanaugh over Barrett – This is a joke, right? You believe that? A liberal would have chosen a Ginsburg or a Garland. Kavanaugh isn’t my choice, but he’s not a liberal choice.
              – Paid family leave – Sure, that’s a left-leaning policy. Let’s stack that up against ending the Iran deal. Canceled.
              – Caving to Pelosi – Ridiculous. The shutdown occurred because Trump was trying to get something Conservatives wanted, money for the border. The fact that he faltered and chose a different route (declaring an emergency) is not liberal.
              – Donating to Hillary – you said “is”. Trump’s past donations for his own reasons in New York are no indicator of his current political disposition.

              You said:
              “He is more liberal than conservative imo.”

              So is the above list the best you have? Because I have dozens of more that say that Trump is more conservative than liberal. You dealt with none of the pro-conservative items I listed and it’s easy to see why.

              I wish you guys would just be honest and say you hate Trump so you oppose him.

              Trump isn’t perfect, but you’re obviously lying or deranged when you say things like “He is more liberal than conservative imo.”

      2. This is the question I find myself asking some of these people too.

        The real answer is that they don’t care if the candidate beats Trump. They would like for the candidate to hurt Trump and are fine if Trump is damaged enough to lose the election to the Democrat.

        You have to remember – these people have been savoring their TDS for a good three years now. They hate Trump with a fiery passion (no matter how much they may not admit it, the evidence is there). They just want to see Trump lose so they can do a little dance on his grave. They long ago ceased to care about whether or not the progressives were going to destroy the country.

  40. Weld was never “NT,” let alone representative of it or a leader — there were no leaders. NT ceased to exist in November 2016. The original idea and promotion was by staunch conservative writers at Red State and then picked up by other conservative writers at NRO (e.g. David French).

    None of those who coined the term and started writing about NT would ever vote for the likes of Weld. They’d sooner walk barefooted over hot coals. Self-proclaimed NT care about ideology and identify themselves as conservative, long before identifying as Republican. They identify based on ideas and policy, not on some letter next to a name. Many, myself included, are no longer Republicans.

    1. @txgrunner I was NT before the election and wrote in Cruz but I won’t be surprised to see some NTs endorse him.

      1. I’m sure you’re right, but several prominent NT folks already wrote they will support this president, Erick Erickson and Glenn Beck to name just two. Whatever some think of Beck and Erickson, they’re conservative and they care policy and ideas.

        If a better candidate came along, they might back them, but they will never back Weld — they’re both fervently pro-life and pro-RKBA. They would only back somebody to the president’s right. That’s also true of many like Steve Deace, his core team, and many more like him.

        For myself, I’m no long a Republican and I won’t be voting in GOP primaries again. Every once in a while I think I might vote for the president based on something good he does, but then he does something to confirm my decision to never cast a ballot for him.

        1. You know what TXGrunner, you have your opinions, and others have theirs. I’m certain that not many will view your opinions as any more important than they would mine. But hey, have at it for all your opinions are worth. 😀

        2. I agree. Some will but not the ones I mentioned. Kristol is now being backed by Leftists…. or maybe he always was. I haven’t been a Republican since W but still vote Republican in the primary. In NJ I’m allowed to do that. Right now I will probably vote for Trump. No way will I allow a Socialist (Communist) to win.

        3. @txgrunner

          For myself, I’m no long a Republican and I won’t be voting in GOP primaries again. Every once in a while I think I might vote for the president based on something good he does, but then he does something to confirm my decision to never cast a ballot for him.

          I’m in complete agreement.

    1. No, they won’t.

      The folks who coined the phrase and started talking about NT were true conservatives at Red State. They’d sooner walk through hot lava fields than vote for the likes of Bill Weld.

      RINOs (e.g. David Frum, Nicole Wallace, Steve Schmidt, Mark McKinnon, etc.) were never part of NT, but rather openly endorsed HRC before the primaries were over because fundamentally they are power-hungry leftist elitists — they’ll be tickled pink.

      1. “The folks who coined the phrase and started talking about NT were true conservatives at Red State.”

        Wait, what? I was never aware that Billy Crystal, Rick Wilson, David French etc ever wrote anything for Redstate. They were the “true conservatives”? Spin is all you have. Yea, you have nothing but spin.

          1. The very first website I commented on after the FredHead website in 2008 was Redstate. I found Redstate through the Fred Thompson website. If I am not mistaken, I posted at the early Redstate site, which was a WordPress website back then as Scope. You may not remember me, but I very well remember you as being a poster at Redstate back then. We didn’t get alone very well back then. Do you remember Art Chance, and a few others from back then who thought they owned the website, and trashed everyone they disagreed with. Yup, they were considered the high honchos. Remember the diaries written back then from those that were not the regular writers such as VassarBushmills etc? Do you remember the night Eric Erickson “released the Kracken”? I do. I promise that I remember the early Redstate website, when Erick Erickson hadn’t gone to the CNN dark side. Do you remember all that? I do. 😀

    1. I’m pretty sure he was the “dumber” one on Gary Johnson’s “dumb and dumber” ticket in 2016.

      1. @tomnewman64 Yes, that’s him. I forgot about that. Then again I don’t ever think about Bill Weld. 😀

  41. O/T
    Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum are having a town hall in Bethlehem, PA with special guest Bernie Sanders……. I’m not kidding. Wish Scoop had a live feed of this because it’s entertaining in a I’m “sick to my stomach” way.

    1. Yeah I won’t be watching. Since the DNC has refused to allow Fox to chair any of the demonrat’s primary debates, they are doing these townhalls. So far that coffee dude had one and now Bernie. I did not watch and will not watch…waste of time but it sure does give them a voice with an audience that never sees CNN, MSNBC or the alphabets….IF anyone else is going to watch. I do not see the point. demonrats, rinos and independent progressives lie. It is the only way anyone will listen to anything they say, but I reject liars, so….

    2. @landscaper I’m 15 minutes in, and I’ve about had enough. However, I do give him credit for accepting the Fox invite, and being very gracious about it. He even said that many “on his side” (his words) advised him against it.

      Baier and MacCallum are doing a good job, asking fair and respectful questions. The other “mainstream” networks should only treat our people the same way.

      Edit: Ok, still watching, 30 minutes in. Bernie was just explaining his “Medicare For All” to an enthralled (and mostly Democrat) audience. Martha tried to pin him down on the question of “Who pays” for all this “free” healthcare, and he said “higher taxes, just like “we send our kids to school.”

      But I want to know, who will make the decisions about which medical procedures will be covered and which will be denied? Won’t that be a problem? They’re in a break now, so I’m afraid they will go to a new subject.

    1. He is probably hoping some never-Trumpers will chuck money his way….it is the only way politicians (who are failed at whatever they tried to do before) can make money…dishonestly.

  42. Anybody thinks they’re beating Trump for the GOP nomination by running to the far left of him should have their head examined…..

    On the other hand, I guess I could have just said “Anyone on the far left should have their head examined” and left it at that….

    1. As a prisoner of NY, I can tell you that there is.

      It’s simply what an establishment / GOPe is. A republican, mostly on fiscal / economic issues (though less so) and much more socially liberal. They essentially surrendered their beliefs after being beaten down so much and try to appeal to the “moderate”. Instead of fighting and standing up, the NE is the birthplace of your RINO’S.

      1. The RINO disease spread throughout the nation, though I do not know exactly when. Paul Ryan, Lindsey Graham, dead McCain, etc…perhaps that disease spread from both the left and east coast and sullied “the middle.”

    2. He was probably rejected by the DNC as a candidate, so ran as a Republican….party affiliation and party tenets mean very little to progressives.

  43. OK, Bill who? I mean really, he thinks that he can beat Trump with a gun control platform? He’d be better off putting a (D) after his name and running.

    1. He probably was a “D” once and lost to another “D” who was supported by the DNC….that is when those nor’easter types become Independent or RINOs.

  44. I may still be #NeverTrump but that’s because I’m to Trump’s right, not left.

    Bill Weld should be running for the Democrat nomination, not the GOP.

    1. @finrod Weld is probably a prop by the GOP establishment to give Trump a very liberal punching bag and make him look conservative.

      1. Now WHY would Trump need a GOP punching bag when he is already having a good time with 70 (+/-) demonrats?! LOL

    2. @finrod One can argue that both Trump and Weld should be running for the Democrat nomination.

      1. Indeed.

        I find it pathetically sad that it seems like the only person talking about the critical danger the national debt and the deficits pose to this country is Howard Schultz.

  45. “I want to be important, but I don’t know how”

    That’s the question that drove this person to say “I am going to run for the GOP nomination”.

    As dumb as it is, I think it is probably a good thing for trump to use it towards ramping up his re-election bid, and he loves to campaign, so there’s that.

    1. All Trump needs to do is keep having rallies…the GOP is wasting their time putting up any other GOP candidates, who are not serious contenders anyway. Last month, when Jeb said he was thinking of running, I think most of us rolled our eyes. If Jeb shouldn’t run, sure as heck this guy from MA should not!

  46. He knows the grift is good right now, anti Trump is pretty desperate for a primary challenger to Trump

  47. The first 6 months of his presidency I had my doubts but as successful as he’s been in exposing and destroying the Democrat party I honestly believe that he needs a second term. Anyone who claims to be a conservative and wants to take Trump down during the primary isn’t being honest with themselves about their political leanings and are leftist tools

  48. So, not a challenge at all.

    Weld had a legit shot way back in 2008 and 2012, when we were about to be saddled with McCain and then Romney. He wussed out then, but sees a chance now? Someone must have offered him some serious enticement money, because he’s got far less of a chance than he had then.

    As it stands right this minute, I see not one 2016 Trump voter who would vote against Trump in 2020.

    Not one.

    If someone says to you that they voted for him in 2016, but tells you they didn’t vote Trump in November of 2020, the probability they are lying approaches certainty.

    1. “I see not one 2016 Trump voter who would vote against Trump in 2020.”

      Back in 2016, as a Cruz supporter, I watched sadly as Ted was knocked out and villified after a bitter campaign where he gave it his best shot. Ted was my man, though, and he fought a tough campaign – so I gave him the benefit of the doubt on his actions, especially those at the RN Convention where I didn’t see the point of his last poke in Trump’s eye.

      If Ted Cruz announced today that he was going to primary Trump, I would have nothing but contempt and pity for his decision.

    2. If someone says to you that they voted for him in 2016, but tells you they didn’t vote Trump in November of 2020, the probability they are lying approaches certainty.

      Well yeah, if they said that right now, they’d obviously be lying since it’s still 2019. 😛

Comments are closed.