Walker to drop out

[Fuzzy Bear]

Isn't this "let's unite against Trump" rhetoric the kind of approach that will give Trump a petty reason to run as an Independent if he loses?

I suspect that Walker's dropping out in the way he did was a means by which to appear to be a "leader in the party".  By doing the "unselfish" thing for the good of the party, by helping the GOP voters "focus" on the "conservative message", ostensibly for the sake of stopping Trump, Walker becomes the unselfish prince, instead of the selfish snot-nose he is in real life.  He becomes a bit of a party "wise man", and a guy that the nominee will owe, at a minimum, a moral debt.

This "unselfish" act will possibly help Walker remake his image.  He's hated by many, but doing the "unselfish" thing may soften opposition to Walker amongst independents, and that's a good thing for a potential VP.  Shakespeare wrote "She Stoops To Conquer".  This is Scott Walker stooping to conquer what he can at this point in time.

[Fuzzy Bear]

What effect does this have on the Kiddie Table Crowd?

Walker sent a message to the entire GOP.  Trump must be stopped.  To his credit, he walked his talk.  He very well could have opted to lay low and hang out, but he didn't, and while it was probably the wise move, he does get props for unselfishness and leadership (to a point).

In that vein, what does it say that Gilmore, Pataki, Jindal, and Graham still trudge onward?  Jindal wanted to take the battle to Trump and said so in unabashed language, calling Trump a "madman".  Why, then, shouldn't Jindal also drop out and endorse Rubio, or, at least, winnow the field to allow the focus to narrow?  Why are Graham, Pataki, and Gilmore still there?  They all hate Trump; why don't they follow Walker and help take down Trump?  John Kasich, who I like, is simply not catching on; is the risk of a Trump nomination, or even a Cruz nomination, enough to help the party unite around someone more "reasonable"?  Why would Rand Paul allow Trump to rise by hanging in; Trump is the least "libertarian" of all candidates running?  

I would not be surprised if a number of the lesser lights disappear, and disappear quick.  

[Fuzzy Bear]

Maybe he's also trying to set up for a future run, instead of going so deep into debt on a campaign this year that failed to catch on.

I think that Scott Walker wants to be the VP nominee THIS year.  He's gone from a selfish puke to a "team player" instantly.  That's the kind of stuff a Presidential candidate seeks in a running mate.

I can't think of a single Presidential nominee who dropped out as early as Walker did and be nominated later on.  Not Liddy Dole.  Not Dan Quayle.  Not anyone from 2008.  The GOP is a "next guy up" party until proven otherwise.  Scott Walker won't be the "next guy up" unless he's the VP candidate this year.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Ah yes, Marco "I voted against the immigration bill with my name on it" Rubio, strategic mastermind.

Your Party's front runner claimed to be under sniper fire in Bosnia.

Your party's frontrunner claims vaccines can cause autism and that the Mexican government is sending rapists and murderers to the US. I could go on.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/july/the-transnational-gang-threat-part-1-joining-forces-to-meet-the-challenge/the-transnational-gang-threat-part-1-joining-forces-to-meet-the-challenge

For some reason, Trump discusses the issue of immigration in an overly general way.  But he's not wrong about the Mexican government sending "drug dealers", "murderers", and "rapists", not to mention human traffickers.  The issue of Transnational Gangs is a very real problem, and many of these Transnational Gang members have (A) crashed the Southern border of Mexico and (B) been encouraged to leave Mexico and enter the United States by a Mexican government that doesn't want them any more than we do.  They are the source of much of the gang violence in our Southwestern states.  Many have ties to dangerous Drug Cartels.  There presence is, IMO, the most compelling reason to build the Border Fence, much more so then some guy who'll wash dishes or pick crops off the books or some woman who seeks to give birth to an "anchor baby" and all that implies.  This group of folks could well, under some circumstances, be assimilated as law-abiding citizens.  The Transnational Gang Members are soldiers of cartels, they are dangerous, and they seek to destroy us.  If Trump wants to be taken more seriously, he ought to specifically address that issue and educate the populace on the compelling reason to build "the fence".