"It's just sad in America that we have such poor choices right now. [Trump] is not yet the nominee. Officially that won't happen until the middle of July and so for me that's kind of the time frame. In particular I want to make sure that he renounces what he says, at least in regards to this judge." —Scott Walker, June 7, 2016
I have several questions for you, Governor Walker.
1. Trump made his first comments about Judge Curiel on February 28. They were racist. You said you would support Trump on April 20, because “it's preferable to have a Republican nominee over Hillary Clinton,” because “young voters ... don’t trust” Clinton. So on April 20, racist comments about Judge Curiel didn’t matter. But then, last week, Donald Trump, a racist, said something racist, about Judge Curiel, again. Why does it suddenly matter now?
2. You said that Trump is a “poor choice” on June 7. A poor choice who is the nominee, Governor, because people like you shrugged your shoulders and said, meh, he’s "preferable.” Why is Trump preferable to anything?
3. Would Trump be preferable to sea lice?
4. Would Trump be preferable to sea lice now that he’s repeated the racist thing that he first said in February, back before you endorsed him?
5. Based on your clearly very low standards, what would Trump have to do during this “time frame” you mention to earn back your hard-earned (hahahaha) trust?
5a. “At least” not be racist toward a federal judge?
5b. Maybe be racist toward a federal judge but not, like, in public?
5c. Eat a taco bowl? (Remember: this was fine just days ago!)
6. What if he doesn’t stop saying racist things? Will you endorse him then? (Because up until a week ago, he had no impetus to change whatsoever, because this was totally fine!)
7. Would you then try to take the nomination from Trump, because he said something you were fine with a week ago but now are not?
8. Now — sure, hypothetically — once Donald Trump receives the Republican nomination for the presidency at the Republican National Convention in July, Rule 9 of the Republican Party states: “The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States.” So would the Republican party take away Trump’s nomination because he said something you were fine with a week ago?
9. Would you take the nomination from the candidate favored by a majority of Republican primary voters -- a nominee you said was “preferable” to the Democratic alternative -- because the nominee said something you were fine with a week ago but suddenly aren’t? And give the nomination to …
10. ... Yourself?
11. Governor Walker, would you take the nomination from the candidate you support because that candidate said something racist you didn’t have a problem with a week ago, and then accept the nomination yourself? Is that correct?
12. If so, do you think there’s a small but statistically significant chance that you’re an idiot?
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter, and have a pleasant day.