Hannity to ‘Never Trumpers’: If Trump Loses, ‘You Own’ Consequences of Hillary Presidency

[RandallFan]

Hannity was saying this stuff to us in 2012 because we refuse to support Romney.

Except Romney promised war with Russia; & Clinton took Romney's position & trump runs to the left of Obama.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

when I see establishment types like Bill Kristol and others speak rabidly against Trump, it is hard for me not to root for him

What about establishment types like Hannity, Limbaugh, Cheney, McCain, Giuliani, Christie, and Adelson? Do you really hate/fear Kristol so much that you would throw in with Dick Cheney over Ron Paul?

 

[CCTelander]

So do witches!

"Burn the witch!"

 

[TER]

What about establishment types like Hannity, Limbaugh, Cheney, McCain, Giuliani, Christie, and Adelson? Do you really hate/fear Kristol so much that you would throw in with Dick Cheney over Ron Paul?

I don't think anyone of those days you listed support Trump for anything other than self-promotion and what's in it for them.

I don't fear Kristol. I pity him. What I do fear is the neocon crap which people soak up within the GOP.

I have explained my reasonings in a post above in this thread why I would vote for Trump. If Ron Paul disagrees, that is fine. We all have to make our own decisions. I am not trying to keep a legacy. I am trying to keep Hillary out of the White House.

 

[fcreature]

Hannity has carried Cruz, Rubio & Rand's water when they have made goofy policy comments; now they those supporters complain he does it for Trump, at a point when it's Trump vs Clinton.

We should bomb Russia because Rubio seems sincere when he gives speeches & Trump just wants to jock around with putin.

If you don't like that, watch Megyn Kelly. Hannity has to shill if he wants them on his show.

You can't be serious. Were you a Hannity listener during the primary?

Hannity spent 100% of his time supporting Trump. Tacitly for the first few months, then actively and even aggressively a couple months into it.

Between his radio show and his TV show, he gave significantly more coverage to Trump, regardless of his claims that he gave equal coverage. He simply can't do math.

It's not as simple as appearance counts either. Tally up the amount of time he gave the different candidates and you'll see that he gave far more to Trump than anyone else.

Aside from appearance count & appearance time, there is also the matter of how he handled those appearances and what he did with that time. He spent basically 100% of his time with Rand and Cruz attacking them, arguing with them, giving difficult questions and talking about Trump. He slobbered all over Trump giving him softballs and letting him talk about whatever he wanted without any interruption or argument.

 

[CCTelander]

You can't be serious. Were you a Hannity listener during the primary?

Hannity spent 100% of his time supporting Trump. Tacitly for the first few months, then actively and even aggressively a couple months into it.

Between his radio show and his TV show, he gave significantly more coverage to Trump, regardless of his claims that he gave equal coverage. He simply can't do math.

It's not as simple as appearance counts either. Tally up the amount of time he gave the different candidates and you'll see that he gave far more to Trump than anyone else.

Aside from appearance count & appearance time, there is also the matter of how he handled those appearances and what he did with that time. He spent basically 100% of his time with Rand and Cruz attacking them, arguing with them, giving difficult questions and talking about Trump. He slobbered all over Trump giving him softballs and letting him talk about whatever he wanted without any interruption or argument.

That's because Trump is so very anti-establishment. Don't you see?

/s

 

[CPUd]

Trump's relationships with people in media are very similar to the relationships between lobbyists and legislators. Go all the way back to the late 1980's and his M.O. is clear, and very consistent. Someone gets a new job sitting behind a desk on the teevee, he will send them gifts, have them out to Mar-a-Lago or a casino. If they are high profile, he'll even hang out with them. This creates a situation like we have now, where the entry level beat writers get shit on at his rallies, the mid level correspondents are afraid to ask him hard questions because they are afraid of losing access, and the bosses tell them keep doing what they've been doing.

 

[adissa]

You make good points, but when I see establishment types like Bill Kristol and others speak rabidly against Trump, it is hard for me not to root for him. Perhaps what you are saying is correct. That this is all an illusion and doesn't make any difference as the decks have already been stacked, but I can't shake the feeling that Clinton becoming President is indeed the greater of both evils and everything should be done to stop it, even if it is not in the way we would have liked or preferred.

what's so hard to understand about that?

 

[CPUd]

what's so hard to understand about that?

false dichotomy.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

I don't think anyone of those days you listed support Trump for anything other than self-promotion and what's in it for them.

I don't fear Kristol. I pity him. What I do fear is the neocon crap which people soak up within the GOP.

I have explained my reasonings in a post above in this thread why I would vote for Trump. If Ron Paul disagrees, that is fine. We all have to make our own decisions. I am not trying to keep a legacy. I am trying to keep Hillary out of the White House.

I don't care how you vote (not because it doesn't matter but because I'm not in charge of you). My comments were about the logic you are using. You made it clear that you've bought into the idea that Trump is better than Clinton because guys like Krystal have come out against him; that is bad logic. Krystal could be against Trump for self promotion (Trump is after all highly unliked), or he could be against Trump as a head fake, or he might be a stopped clock. Maybe none of those are true, but they could be, and just doing the knee-jerk opposite of half of the neocons is what Br'er Fox did. For your own sake you need to iron out your emotions about this.

 

[TER]

I don't care how you vote (not because it doesn't matter but because I'm not in charge of you). My comments were about the logic you are using. You made it clear that you've bought into the idea that Trump is better than Clinton because guys like Krystal have come out against him; that is bad logic. Krystal could be against Trump for self promotion (Trump is after all highly unliked), or he could be against Trump as a head fake, or he might be a stopped clock. Maybe none of those are true, but they could be, and just doing the knee-jerk opposite of half of the neocons is what Br'er Fox did. For your own sake you need to iron out your emotions about this.

Thank you. I will try my best to iron out my emotions on this.

But to explain one last time (as I already explained in an earlier post), my decision is based on the fact that I believe Hillary spells the end of this nation and possibly ushers in WWIII. I would vote for Trump NOT because I like him or because I think he will be a great President, but to stop Hillary, because I fear she would do much worse for this nation. This is not only because neocons have come up against Trump, but from what he has said and the positions he has taken on important issues, such as Syria and immigration. I don't understand why this does not sound logical to you, but that is okay.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

Thank you. I will try my best to iron out my emotions on this.

But to explain one last time (as I already explained in an earlier post), my decision is based on the fact that I believe Hillary spells the end of this nation and possibly ushers in WWIII. I would vote for Trump NOT because I like him or because I think he will be a great President, but to stop Hillary, because I fear she would do much worse for this nation. I don't understand why this does not sound logical to you, but that is okay.

That is indeed logical, and anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't understand logic. But that argument is based on the premise that Trump does not spell the end of this nation and will not probably usher in WWIII. The reasons you have given for believing that premise are what I find illogical.

 

[TER]

That is indeed logical, and anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't understand logic. But that argument is based on the premise that Trump does not spell the end of this nation and will not probably usher in WWIII. The reasons you have given for believing that premise are what I find illogical.

Let me try to rephrase it. I believe Hillary is MORE LIKELY to spell the end of this nations and usher in WWIII than Trump. Why? Because Hillary has already proved that she is willing to risk confrontation with Russia and continue the failed neocon Foreign Policy of the Middle East and of regime changes around the globe. She is also a known globalist and a shitty leader and on the social conservative moral values, she is utterly atrocious. As bad as one can get. Trump is not as bad on these topics. Whether he is lying or not, I have no idea. But I rather take my chances with him than with her. I hope that is logical enough for you. If it isn't, that is okay.

 

[AuH20]

Let me try to rephrase it. I believe Hillary is MORE LIKELY to spell the end of this nations and usher in WWIII than Trump. Why? Because Hillary has already proved that she is willing to risk confrontation with Russia and continue the failed neocon Foreign Policy of the Middle East and of regime changes around the globe. She is also a known globalist and a $#@!ty leader and on the social conservative moral values, she is utterly atrocious. As bad as one can get. Trump is not as bad on these topics. Whether he is lying or not, I have no idea. But I rather take my chances with him than with her. I hope that is logical enough for you. If it isn't, that is okay.

If the CFR wants war, she will give it to them. There can't be any powerful dissenting voices like Russia when the Great Reset occurs.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

Let me try to rephrase it. I believe Hillary is MORE LIKELY to spell the end of this nations and usher in WWIII than Trump. Why? Because Hillary has already proved that she is willing to risk confrontation with Russia and continue the failed neocon Foreign Policy of the Middle East and of regime changes around the globe. She is also a known globalist and a shitty leader and on the social conservative moral values, she is utterly atrocious. As bad as one can get. Trump is not as bad on these topics. Whether he is lying or not, I have no idea. But I rather take my chances with him than with her. I hope that is logical enough for you. If it isn't, that is okay.

I'm going to say one more thing and then I'll leave you alone. You are being very emotional about this and I can tell because you aren't hearing the words I'm actually saying. I specifically agreed with you that voting for Trump because he's better than Hillary is logical, yet your reply is an attempt to argue the point.

 

[RJB]

If Hannity says it, it must be true.

He's worked hard to earn the respect of the forum membership over the years.

 

[TER]

I'm going to say one more thing and then I'll leave you alone. You are being very emotional about this and I can tell because you aren't hearing the words I'm actually saying. I specifically agreed with you that voting for Trump because he's better than Hillary is logical, yet your reply is an attempt to argue the point.

I don't think I am being very emotional about this, but you can believe that if you wish. I am listening to the words you are saying, I just don't know what answer you are looking for.

 

[TER]

If Hannity says it, it must be true.

He's worked hard to earn the respect of the forum membership over the years.

lol! Hannity is a puppet extraordinaire of the neocons!

That being said, I agree with him that Trump is the best chance we have at defeating Hillary.

 

[RJB]

That being said, I agree with him that Trump is the best chance we have at defeating Hillary.

Yeah and Moe is the best chance we have at defeating Curly. Now what?

 

[TER]

Yeah and Moe is the best chance we have at defeating Curly. Now what?

I didn't know Curly was that bad. I guess we vote in Moe?