Kasich threatens to leave GOP

[RINO Tom]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

[uti2]

^also, all of those potential delegate redistributions wouldn't have mattered that much in the end as Trump would've taken WTA OH to offset potential losses elsewhere.

[publicunofficial]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

Hell look at any campaign speech by Kasich. He doesn't really go into policy, he just goes on long rambling folksy stories about growing up in Ohio and tells some life lesson his Dad taught him and stuff like that.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

Hell look at any campaign speech by Kasich. He doesn't really go into policy, he just goes on long rambling folksy stories about growing up in Ohio and tells some life lesson his Dad taught him and stuff like that.

Um I went to his townhall and he was more policy orientated than any candidate  in the race

[Fight for Trump]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

Hell look at any campaign speech by Kasich. He doesn't really go into policy, he just goes on long rambling folksy stories about growing up in Ohio and tells some life lesson his Dad taught him and stuff like that.

Um I went to his townhall and he was more policy orientated than any candidate  in the race

Proving his point.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

Hell look at any campaign speech by Kasich. He doesn't really go into policy, he just goes on long rambling folksy stories about growing up in Ohio and tells some life lesson his Dad taught him and stuff like that.

Um I went to his townhall and he was more policy orientated than any candidate  in the race

Proving his point.

He talked about how in detail he would reduce the deficit , and his history of opposing programs that republicans supported as well.

[Rjjr77]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

FWIW Kasich won Ohio; and denied the 66 delegates to Trump whilst Rubio couldn't even win Florida.

This. Kasich was definitely more electable than Rubio

And he wasn't a freaking robotic empty suit with no accomplishments.

M


I preferred and still do prefer Rubio to Kasich. Kasich is a jerk with no accomplishments. I'd take a robot over a jerk anyway

No accomplishments lol:

Kasich has had more conservative accomplishments then most republicans by far

In the house :


- he balenced the budget when he was the budget chairman in the house

- was not a hypocrite when it came to fiscal issues (supported cutting waste even when that waste was supported by his own party )

- got welfare reform passed


As governor:

- turned an deficit into a surplus

- reformed Ohio criminal justice system

- helped turn around Ohio Economy (and make it the best out of any state in that region )


which current  republicans have this type of record , and the ones who don't how are they better than Kasich and why should they get to define what the GOP is over Kasich .

Except Kasich didnt do much of that.

The federal government hasnt had a real balanced budget since the 1950s. Borrowing from SSA money doesn't balance a budget.

"was not a hypocrite when it came to fiscal issues (supported cutting waste even when that waste was supported by his own party )"

This is not an accomplishment, this is a fairy tale statement, Kasich voted for his share of pork, quite a bit of Farm Subsidies and quite a bit of government waste.

In Ohio its even more hilarious:
He never turned a deficit into a surplus, Ohio cannot run a budget deficit, nor does the governor set the budget. The rainy day fund was down to change and the house rehabilitated that, he did sign those budgets into law, but they were passed by strong republican majorities in the house and senate.

Helped turn ohios economy around? thats news to many people in Ohio. Ohio isn't thriving, the "Ohio Miracle" he touted was mostly mularkey, he himself said Ohio was on the verge of slipping into a recession (not true) but Ohio is not the best in the region economically.

He did have a hand in Criminal Justice reform, but again, it was something pushed by many republicans in the house, this is probably the only thing you can give him credit for from your list. His most conservative accomplishment in Ohio is ending the estate tax, something you didnt give him credit for.

[Rjjr77]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

VA is in the bag for Rubio without Kasich, it was a tight race WITH kasich, and northern VA republicans were only voting Rubio or Kasich.

Again its a momentum argument, the election was over on Super Tuesday, and it was lost because Kasich and Carson cost Rubio and Cruz the narratives of big wins Super Tuesday. After that Trump became inevitable.

[Rjjr77]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

Hell look at any campaign speech by Kasich. He doesn't really go into policy, he just goes on long rambling folksy stories about growing up in Ohio and tells some life lesson his Dad taught him and stuff like that.

Kasich grew up in PA

[uti2]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

VA is in the bag for Rubio without Kasich, it was a tight race WITH kasich, and northern VA republicans were only voting Rubio or Kasich.

Again its a momentum argument, the election was over on Super Tuesday, and it was lost because Kasich and Carson cost Rubio and Cruz the narratives of big wins Super Tuesday. After that Trump became inevitable.

VA Republicans didn't really vote for Rubio in the first place for the margin to be that close. He only outperformed the polls because there were a ton of democratic crossovers (people who wanted to 'stop' Trump). Those who were willing to vote for him despite his conservatism did so. The others weren't able to stomach it.

Also, like I said, the net effect for various state delegate total reassignments would be offset by Trump's win of WTA OH. Rubio would've hit more delegate thresholds which would've mainly hurt Cruz, but that would've been the primary effect.

[uti2]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

By the way, this is a particularly rich comment considering Kasich was the first republican to actually pay for ads against Trump back in 2015. Rubio didn't spend a dime or even attack Trump once until 2 weeks before he dropped out in a last minute spree of desperation.

If you're an ideological conservative, and you busily play footsie with someone you believe to not be so conservative and are willing to gamble the likelihood of that person potentially taking over the party (to boost your own odds in your own mind), you're not that ideological to begin with. Both Cruz & Rubio played this game. Go watch the CNBC debate in Oct. 2015, the moderators asked both to attack Trump point blank and both deflected and bashed the media and the moderators instead.

Kasich at least attacked Trump point-blank whenever he was asked to do so.

As for phoniness.....

[Shadows]

John Kasich is the guy who put strong restrictions on abortion, voted for the war in Iraq, supported NAFTA, Patriot Act & cut welfare & has proposed gutting the pre-existing conditions in ACA by granting the states a waiver. This guy is such a warmonger that he wanted to punch Russia in the nose by playing war-war with Putin - That was his claim in a GOP debate instead of some serious policy to counter Putin.

This is the guy who blasted the Paris Climate Change Conference & wanted on waging new wars. In which world does he become a moderate? Only when the current GOP is a band of extremists. Kasich is a war worse candidate that what Hillary Clinton was - I have no idea why Democrats would even think of supporting him.

Paul Ryan, a strong right wing conservative is a RINO & Kasich is a moderate? What has the world come to!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

voted for the war in Iraq,

Fox News TV hosts have a vote on war authorizations? Kasich retired in 2000 after challenging Bush in the primary for President.

[OSR stands with Israel]

John Kasich is the guy who put strong restrictions on abortion, voted for the war in Iraq, supported NAFTA, Patriot Act & cut welfare & has proposed gutting the pre-existing conditions in ACA by granting the states a waiver. This guy is such a warmonger that he wanted to punch Russia in the nose by playing war-war with Putin - That was his claim in a GOP debate instead of some serious policy to counter Putin.

This is the guy who blasted the Paris Climate Change Conference & wanted on waging new wars. In which world does he become a moderate? Only when the current GOP is a band of extremists. Kasich is a war worse candidate that what Hillary Clinton was - I have no idea why Democrats would even think of supporting him.

Paul Ryan, a strong right wing conservative is a RINO & Kasich is a moderate? What has the world come to!

Kasich wasn't even in congress during the time the patriot act was enacted or when the Iraq war resolution passed .

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Kasich should become a moderate Democrat. I'd support him over Bernard or Warren.

Charlie Crist 2.0? I'll pass.

Charlie Crist is, at least, moderate. John Kasich only appears moderate because of how far right the GOP has become.

Kasich is no moderate, but I think he has somewhat moderated from his days as a Gingrichite deficit hawk.

I like Kasich a lot, but he was opportunistic and filled the void he saw in this past primary season.  Like most politicians, he probably has more of a "world outlook" than this iron-tight ideology, and his world outlook as absolutely more that of a Republican than a Democrat, IMO.

The underlined part is, IMO, correct, and the reason Kasich leaving the GOP would be a silly move.

[TheSaint250]

John Kasich is the guy who put strong restrictions on abortion, voted for the war in Iraq, supported NAFTA, Patriot Act & cut welfare & has proposed gutting the pre-existing conditions in ACA by granting the states a waiver. This guy is such a warmonger that he wanted to punch Russia in the nose by playing war-war with Putin - That was his claim in a GOP debate instead of some serious policy to counter Putin.

This is the guy who blasted the Paris Climate Change Conference & wanted on waging new wars. In which world does he become a moderate? Only when the current GOP is a band of extremists. Kasich is a war worse candidate that what Hillary Clinton was - I have no idea why Democrats would even think of supporting him.

Paul Ryan, a strong right wing conservative is a RINO & Kasich is a moderate? What has the world come to!

Kasich wasn't even in the House when the Iraq vote occurred.

[pbrower2a]

John Kasich used to be considered fairly hard right lol. How times have changed.

Kasich is decidedly right-wing on 'social' issues and economics. In a more sane GOP he is the face. In a crazy GOP he is not completely welcome. He may have acceded to same-sex marriage and rejected young-earth creationism, but that is almost a 'so-what' position.

Unless he is going really liberal (or even moderate) he may be taking a protest position against the personality of Donald Trump.

[Rjjr77]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

By the way, this is a particularly rich comment considering Kasich was the first republican to actually pay for ads against Trump back in 2015. Rubio didn't spend a dime or even attack Trump once until 2 weeks before he dropped out in a last minute spree of desperation.

If you're an ideological conservative, and you busily play footsie with someone you believe to not be so conservative and are willing to gamble the likelihood of that person potentially taking over the party (to boost your own odds in your own mind), you're not that ideological to begin with. Both Cruz & Rubio played this game. Go watch the CNBC debate in Oct. 2015, the moderators asked both to attack Trump point blank and both deflected and bashed the media and the moderators instead.

Kasich at least attacked Trump point-blank whenever he was asked to do so.

As for phoniness.....

attacking trump makes him authentic?

Kasich is absolutely a fake. He runs as whatever benefits him. Kasich has been never trump simply because it benefits John Kasich. He has a history of taking self serving stances that are opposite to other stances hes taken in the past

[OSR stands with Israel]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

By the way, this is a particularly rich comment considering Kasich was the first republican to actually pay for ads against Trump back in 2015. Rubio didn't spend a dime or even attack Trump once until 2 weeks before he dropped out in a last minute spree of desperation.

If you're an ideological conservative, and you busily play footsie with someone you believe to not be so conservative and are willing to gamble the likelihood of that person potentially taking over the party (to boost your own odds in your own mind), you're not that ideological to begin with. Both Cruz & Rubio played this game. Go watch the CNBC debate in Oct. 2015, the moderators asked both to attack Trump point blank and both deflected and bashed the media and the moderators instead.

Kasich at least attacked Trump point-blank whenever he was asked to do so.

As for phoniness.....

attacking trump makes him authentic?

Kasich is absolutely a fake. He runs as whatever benefits him. Kasich has been never trump simply because it benefits John Kasich. He has a history of taking self serving stances that are opposite to other stances hes taken in the past

On some issues sure, but Kasich I believe supported the Individual mandate in the 1990s and continues to support it to this day , unlike many other Republicans who flip flopped on the issue.

[RINO Tom]

In other news:

Kasich did not threaten to leave the GOP.

[uti2]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

By the way, this is a particularly rich comment considering Kasich was the first republican to actually pay for ads against Trump back in 2015. Rubio didn't spend a dime or even attack Trump once until 2 weeks before he dropped out in a last minute spree of desperation.

If you're an ideological conservative, and you busily play footsie with someone you believe to not be so conservative and are willing to gamble the likelihood of that person potentially taking over the party (to boost your own odds in your own mind), you're not that ideological to begin with. Both Cruz & Rubio played this game. Go watch the CNBC debate in Oct. 2015, the moderators asked both to attack Trump point blank and both deflected and bashed the media and the moderators instead.

Kasich at least attacked Trump point-blank whenever he was asked to do so.

As for phoniness.....

attacking trump makes him authentic?

Kasich is absolutely a fake. He runs as whatever benefits him. Kasich has been never trump simply because it benefits John Kasich. He has a history of taking self serving stances that are opposite to other stances hes taken in the past

If you're a conservative and you believe someone is a threat to conservatism, you're supposed to risk helping him by not attacking him to improve your own odds? The only outcome of that strategy is an increase in the likelihood of conservatism failing.

That's some bitter irony, Kasich did more to defend his ideology of moderate conservatism than Rubio/Cruz did for their respective ideologies, yet you're slamming Kasich for not being ideological enough....

[uti2]

Of the 3 (Cruz/Rubio/Kasich), Kasich did the most to defend his ideology against perceived threats, The former 2 were more concerned with trying to game the odds to improve their own chances at the expense of their purported values. In other words, Kasich actually acted in the most ideological fashion as a candidate of the 3. So, if you want to talk about principles, Kasich did the most to stand up for his principles on a relative basis.

If you want to attack Kasich's perceived hypocrisy, that perceived hypocrisy climbed to higher scales for the former 2.

[Kingpoleon]

John Kasich is the guy who put strong restrictions on abortion, voted for the war in Iraq, supported NAFTA, Patriot Act & cut welfare & has proposed gutting the pre-existing conditions in ACA by granting the states a waiver. This guy is such a warmonger that he wanted to punch Russia in the nose by playing war-war with Putin - That was his claim in a GOP debate instead of some serious policy to counter Putin.

This is the guy who blasted the Paris Climate Change Conference & wanted on waging new wars. In which world does he become a moderate? Only when the current GOP is a band of extremists. Kasich is a war worse candidate that what Hillary Clinton was - I have no idea why Democrats would even think of supporting him.

Paul Ryan, a strong right wing conservative is a RINO & Kasich is a moderate? What has the world come to!

Mostly False!

- Kasich opposed withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, saying at one debate in the election: "The fact is that you can have a strong environmental policy at the same time that you have strong economic growth; they are not inconsistent with one another."

- A twenty to twenty-four week ban on abortions is supported by a majority of Americans.

- He opposes the Patriot Act now, for the most part.

- Supporting free trade is rarely considered "far-right", considering even progressive Democrats support free trade for the most part.

- Welfare is a vastly, unfortunately complex system, and cannot be simplified to "cutting" or "expanding".

- Using a metaphor hardly makes him a warmonger. Kasich opposed Iraq and the Bosnian intervention.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

"Threatening" to leave a party. God what a fool.

[Rjjr77]

Kasich is really pissing me off. If he wanted to stop Trump, he should have dropped out after the New Hampshire primary and endorsed either Rubio or Cruz. Instead, his ego wouldn't let him quit, and he played a major role in Trump winning the GOP nomination.

Maybe Rubio shouldnt have done so badly in NH.


Kasich came in 2nd in NH not Rubio , due to Rubio self destructing at the NH debate

By the way, the idea that Kasich played a role in helping Trump is fallacious. If you're a pro-choice/pro-medicare republican Trump is the most moderate of the 3 (Trump,Rubio, Cruz), that's why Trump consistently won moderates in every single primary, with Kasich collecting the second highest number of Moderates.

If anyone played that role, it was Rubio, who took conservatives away from Cruz, he was the one who should've dropped out and endorsed Cruz after NH.

You also need to look at it from the perspective of Kasich/Jeb/Christie, they're experienced governors and relatively more moderate, forcing them to pick a choice between two hard-right inexperienced congressmen is absurd at face value, because for them, in some policy respects, Trump would actually be more preferable.

Actually I have to disagree with this, so much of the presidential primary is about momentum. Had Kasich dropped out after Nevada (as he should have) Rubio wins VA and MN on super tuesday. This entirely changes the narrative, Rubio was down double digits in polling on VA and his victory would have been the talk of the race, and would have shown trump as far more vulnerable. Had Carson also dropped out after NV as he should have, Cruz most likely wins Arkansas.  

If actors in this primary acted rationally Trumps momentum would have been severely blunted on Super Tuesday, and would have possibly changed the entire campaign narrative to show a more beatable trump. Kasich staying in the race gave trump several states.

Without Kasich, it would've been a very tight race in VA, but it's hard to call him a spoiler when rubio came in fourth place in a number of states behind Kasich.  Do you not understand the irony in hating Kasich for being moderate when his voters are almost exclusively moderates? If you do the math and give a two-thirds margin to him and one-third to Trump, it evens out.

Anyway, the only thing that would've done is improved Rubio's margins a bit to getting more delegates which would have additionally come at the expense of Cruz. It would've just tanked Cruz's momentum after Rubio's defeat in FL to offset any impact Kasich had on Cruz's chances on the Trump v. Cruz finale.

I don't hate him for being a moderate, I hate him for being a phony.

By the way, this is a particularly rich comment considering Kasich was the first republican to actually pay for ads against Trump back in 2015. Rubio didn't spend a dime or even attack Trump once until 2 weeks before he dropped out in a last minute spree of desperation.

If you're an ideological conservative, and you busily play footsie with someone you believe to not be so conservative and are willing to gamble the likelihood of that person potentially taking over the party (to boost your own odds in your own mind), you're not that ideological to begin with. Both Cruz & Rubio played this game. Go watch the CNBC debate in Oct. 2015, the moderators asked both to attack Trump point blank and both deflected and bashed the media and the moderators instead.

Kasich at least attacked Trump point-blank whenever he was asked to do so.

As for phoniness.....

attacking trump makes him authentic?

Kasich is absolutely a fake. He runs as whatever benefits him. Kasich has been never trump simply because it benefits John Kasich. He has a history of taking self serving stances that are opposite to other stances hes taken in the past

If you're a conservative and you believe someone is a threat to conservatism, you're supposed to risk helping him by not attacking him to improve your own odds? The only outcome of that strategy is an increase in the likelihood of conservatism failing.

That's some bitter irony, Kasich did more to defend his ideology of moderate conservatism than Rubio/Cruz did for their respective ideologies, yet you're slamming Kasich for not being ideological enough....

I'm slamming Kasich for not being anything.

In congress Kasich ran as a budget hawk who supported some gun control.

in 2010 Kasich ran as a gun toting Tea Party conservative who was going to get things done

In 2011 Kasich supported a ban on public employee unions
In 2011 Kasich supported an amendment stopping Obamacare in Ohio
in 2014 Kasich decided he was going to run for president, and stayed on a conservative message, but distanced himself from the tea party
In 2015 Kasich realized he needed to fill a moderate side of the republican party to be effective in the presidential primaries, due to better conservatives with actual track records of getting things done
In 2015 Kasich killed a RTW ballot initiative in Ohio because he felt it would hurt this new switch in ideology
in 2014-15 Kasich accepted medicaid expansion (despite railing against it for years when running) and did it against the will of the legislature through some shady things.

On top of all this he went from a bombastic jerkish cross between Christie and Scott Walker to a soft touch compassionate conservative.

What does Kasich believe? nothing. He's shifted his positions dozens of times in efforts to get himself elected. Kasich never thought trump was a "threat to his ideology" because Kasich has no ideology. Kasich thought Trump was going to LOSE so he fought trump so he could be the heir apparent in the primaries in 2020, as he was "against trump the whole time"

You see Kasich as this moderate conservative warrior, when he isn't. hes a self serving jerk, and thats how people in OHIO see him