Talk:List of Republicans who opposed the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Article is false

According to the sources, Fred Upton does NOT "oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign." Susan Collins does NOT "oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign." Ben Sasse does NOT "oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign." The sources do not support this description. If you think the lack of an endorsement belongs in the article, the title must be changed. You accuse me of "trying to change the meaning/debate the meaning of the article" but you are the one who did change the meaning of the article from what it originally was, what the title it, and what is consistent with List of Republicans who opposed the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign, which is very clearly those who "announced their opposition." This is very simply not the same thing as not making an endorsement. The sources are clearer for Romney but not the others. I will also note that List of Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign endorsements only has 16 current senators listed, so if your criterion is that they have not endorsed him, there are many missing; same for representatives. Reywas92Talk 07:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct, I did change the meaning of the article 10 days ago and no one since has had any disputes over it. There are some valid points, such as Susan and Fred. I think for Ben, the article clearly states that he “emerges as GOP Trump critic ahead of November” so I think this one is pretty clear. A for the others, they did not explicitly “un endorse” Trump and if this page were the polar opposite of the Trump 2016 campaign endorsements, then I would agree that these references are not enough to add them. However, these are Republicans who oppose the campaign meaning they are showing opposition. If they have said that they haven’t thought about endorsing him, this shows opposition. If they later decide to endorse or show Trump support, then they will be removed. I hope this clarifies the issue! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Of course no one disputed it (except it is now!), the page was only created a week ago and no one knows about it either! Sasse: Wrong. A headline with a very short article saying he made a "swipe" at the administration is not (happy now?) the same as "opposing the campaign," and your inclusion is original research. This is wrong, they should be removed because they do not actively oppose the campaign. I hope you can understand the issue with you changing the criteria from the related article! Reywas92Talk 20:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
First Reywas92, I have no problem with you disputing this. Second, this article was created 12 days ago, and many editors have edited it including admins. I wasn’t even the one who created it. The article says that he will be in opposition to Trump in November (meaning the election for those of you not in the USA or who don’t know) which is opposition to the campaign. It’s not an explicit “un endorsement” where he says he’s not going to vote for him but it does say that he is showing opposition to the campaign. If he later says that he supports Trump in 2020 then it should be removed. I have other articles too stating that show he is opposed. None say that he is a Biden supported but they do say he is currently opposed. Therefore, this is not original research. As for the meaning of the article, I’m not quite sure if you want to debate this or not but currently I think that it is showing opposition. Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
I am absolutely baffled where in this source it says Sasse will be "in opposition to Trump". The headline calls him a "critic", and the content merely says he has "spicy slams" regarding executive orders, but nothing about the campaign or supporting him opposing his reelection whatsoever. This is ridiculous, it's a list of those who have stated they want Trump to lose, not those who have opposed certain aspects of the administration. Reywas92Talk 21:25, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Reywas92, the title of the article is “Ben Sasse emerges as GOP Trump critic ahead of November” showing that he is critical of him leading up to November. I’m not sure if you’re familiar with elections in the United States (you seem to be by looking at your user page) but this article is clearly referring to the lead up to the presidential election in November. It shows that he is opposed to Trump leading up to November. I can’t find a single source saying he’s supportive of Trump in 2020 but many that he is or will be opposed. I hope this helps. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, article titles are meant to be sensationalist click bait. Sasse is one of the few DC Republicans to criticize Trump at all. There is no indication that he opposes Trump. I do agree with Reywas92 that some of the people added to this list should not have been added, and should be removed. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Muboshgu, I don’t follow you with the “sensationalist click bait” but the article clearly says that he opposes Trump coming this November. {https://omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/one-name-missing-as-top-nebraska-republicans-sign-on-to-help-trumps-reelection-effort/article_7ef2c4d5-59bf-5fc1-b5b4-60053fe9dda7.html here} is another article saying that he is not in support of the campaign. He is both a critic and refuses to endorse. If he decides to endorse Trump, he can be removed. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, nowhere in the Axios piece does it say that Sasse opposes Trump. If Sasse "refuses to endorse", that does not mean he "opposes". Not signing on to be an honorary chair is not opposition. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
But Muboshgu, it says he’s a critic ahead of an election. It doesn’t say he “opposes Trump” but it says that as the election is approaching, he has become a Trump critic, meaning he’s showing opposition to him and his party. From all the sources I’ve looked at he appears to be a critic. The new article also says that his opponent says they need a senator who supported Trump. This obviously isn’t a great source and shouldn’t be the reason for inclusion, but it does prove my point in that he doesn’t support him. He is showing opposition to him. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, the Omaha World Herald article makes the point that Sasse supports Trump on Senatorial votes. That would have just as much weight here as some light criticism. Where does it say that Sasse opposes Trump's 2020 campaign? – Muboshgu (talk) 22:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
I have removed the inclusion of the three individuals. Muboshgu and others are entirely correct that the sources do not state that Collins, Murkowski, and Sasse "oppose Trump's campaign." We would need the sources to expressly indicate opposition. Criticizing isn't enough. Lima Bean Farmer, this is baseline Wikipedia policy; see WP:V (all content "must include an inline citation that directly supports the material."). Lima Bean Farmer, you were also very wrong to suggest in your edit summary that challenged content must remain "until the issue has been fully resolved in the talk page" or "a consensus has been reached." Precisely the opposite is true: see WP:ONUS. Neutralitytalk 22:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Sasse is all fixed. I’ll look for new refs for the others as well before I add them back. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
No, the reference you added just says that Sasse is endorsing no candidate, not that he opposes Trump, which is why Muboshgu just removed the entry. Please stop adding/re-adding material like this that has been challenged. Neutralitytalk 22:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
It says he won’t endorse trump. It literally said that in the article. I didn’t add back anything that’s challenged. I added a whole new ref. If Muboshgu would like, we can debate it here. But it clearly says in the article that he doesn’t endorse Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
That is not sufficient for this page, which is titled "List of Republicans who oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign" not "List of Republicans who have declined to endorse..." Neutralitytalk 23:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Well then I think this meaning should be debated. I think declining to endorse the nominee for your party is stating that you are opposed to him because you are stating opposition. If you later decide to endorse, you’re removed from the list. Almost no one on this list has specifically said “I oppose Trump in 2020” but we know they do because they say that they won’t vote or endorse him, or in some cases endorse another candidate. I think anyone who declares that they are not endorsing him should be added. Maybe the one congressman (Upton I believe) should not be added because he merely didn’t think about endorsing him but anyone such as Sasse and Collins who specifically say they won’t endorse him should be added. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

They have not only said that they are not making any endorsements at this time (like Lisa Murkowski) but these two senators and Rooney have specifically said that they will not endorse Trump or anyone at all in the race, showing opposition to their party’s nomination Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


Pretty big storm in a teacup. A few things, the issue with the word "oppose" in the list's title, is that oppose/opposition is pretty subjective. I disagree that Lima was ignoring baseline policy, but rather understood declining to endorse as opposition (as did I!). Lima was also correct in maintaining that the disputed removal be discussed first; ONUS did not apply to Lima, considering they already had WP:EDITCONSENSUS of almost 2 weeks. Going forward I believe a clear definition of what "opposition" is is needed, as to avoid any confusion. —MelbourneStar☆talk 05:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

There is hugely flagrant misreading of the word "oppose" being read as "said something not fully in the party line equals not supporting the 2020 reelection." It's beyond any sort of reasonable reading of dozens of these sources to say that, as well as a soft understanding of how specific voices within an organization do not represent the organization. A slew of non-notable ad hoc entities created to oppose Trump's reelection (an obfuscating some non-notable entities by linking to totally unrelated articles) should be removed immediately without discussion. Per the 2016 version of the article, those who outwardly oppose Trump's reelection and those who are asked and pointedly state on the record they do not endorse their party's nominee should be the bar for inclusion. Under Lima Bean's bar, we may as well add every elected and former elected Republican official who hasn't outwardly endorsed Trump on the basis of silence. Therequiembellishere (talk) 01:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
If you want to play a game of semantics, have at it. Opposition to me means "resistance to" so yes, I do understand where Lima and others are coming from. Per WP:OTHERCRAP I don't really need to know what the 2016 list is or isn't doing. —MelbourneStar☆talk 06:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
This article is at a minimum WP:BLP adjacent. Lima Bean Farmer included Brian Fitzpatrick with this source, which says Fitzpatrick said he will wait until the election to decide whether to vote for Trump or presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. How is that statement taken to mean that he opposes Trump? He might support Trump with his ballot in November. Whether he's willing to tell us how he votes before Election Day or not is another matter.. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
I did not add Fitzpatrick first of all. Second, he is not supporting or endorsing him (specifically stating that he is not) which I believe is opposition. It is his party’s candidate. He is not simply staying silent but he is saying that he will not endorse him. I think this should be the definition of opposition. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
It isn't. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
It isn’t? Can you clarify? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, you may not have been the first person to add Fitzpatrick, but you reinserted it here and here with the odd logic that we would need consensus to delete them. No, we would need to demonstrate that they should be included. The WP:ONUS is on whoever wants to include something. Regarding Fitzpatrick, it is clear that he is staying neutral, which is not opposition. You also used this 538 source about anti-Trump Republicans to claim that Tillerson, McMaster, and others oppose Trump's reelection. As far as I am aware, they have said nothing about Trump's 2020 reelection. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes but the article says they are anti Trump Republicans meaning they oppose him. Do you see anything saying that any of those people support him? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it's a political commentary. I literally said you'd have this skewed standard in which silence equals opposition and here it is, and no, it's not. Stated opposition, as used in the 2016 article and as I've articulated above, is a much clearer, brighter standard. As Muboshgu has said, that onus is on you to find definitive reliable sourcing. Without them, I think the cleanup and deletions I'd started before you restored it all for "consensus" cutting the page is half should be restored within the next day or so. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Please stop referring to the 2016 page and saying that I have a skewed standard. There is no standard for this page yet and that’s why I keep saying we should have a content dispute to see what that standard should be. Until then, the people on this list should not be deleted per edit consensus which I’ve cited before. The article is almost a month old now. Continuing to delete these people without first having a debate on the talk page will be reported as edit warring if it happens any further. I have no idea what you’re trying to say in the second part of your comment Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
There doesn't need to be a consensus for clearly out-of-line additions because you do not own the page. Your bar is ridiculously low and this page should reflect the prior consensus out its companion page from four years ago and not have a totally different standard. None of that is how Wikipedia works. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Actually, this is how Wikipedia works. We come to a consensus on a page for additions and article criteria. It does not matter (for the most part) what the consensus on last year’s page was. That’s why I would rather come to a consensus on this article’s criteria (which has not been done yet) and if needed, after that, the names which do not follow the criteria will be removed. The bar currently is whatever you can assume from the page. A few editors have challenged this, so let’s come to a consensus as opposed to using logic which does not apply to this situation to continue this edit war. Thanks Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Past often does actually mean protocol and in any case, based on the discussion happening here, the consensus is pretty clear. Regardless, I'm removing everything without an article as failing the notability test. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:18, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, we do not include things until consensus develops to exclude them; we exclude things until consensus develops to include them. You are misconstruing WP:EDITCONSENSUS, which says Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus. These edits you keep making don't have consensus! That's why we keep reverting them! – Muboshgu (talk) 22:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

They did have consensus since some of them were there for almost a full month. You deleted them and I reverted it so that we can come up with a new consensus. You started the edit war! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Sasse and Collins

Add these two back. It specifically says that Sasse will not endorse Trump. Not just that he isn’t thinking about it, but that he specifically will not endorse. As for Collins, I have sources specifically saying that she is withholding her support for Trump. The Maine GOP leader did say that she endorsed Trump but since this was not her and was not backed by a reliable source, she stays for now too. Please add back. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

NO. You do not have a source that says they "oppose the campaign." They do not belong on this article, and you do not have consensus that not explicitly endorsing and supporting him and his campaign for reelection means they oppose his campaign for reelection. "Withholding her support" is not the same as opposing the campaign. Stop twisting the English language, or get consensus to rename the article. Reywas92Talk 07:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
LOLOLOL you've been blocked from editing this article for "misrepresenting sources", so instead you make ridiculous demands of me to put false and misleading information into the article. Why are you still misreprenting sources? It is in fact a misrepresentation to suggest that "withholding support" is opposition! Opposition would actually be supporting Biden or otherwise encouraging against the reelection. Bradv should extend this page block because you clearly can't comprehend that "will not endorse" is not a synonym for "opposes his reelection campaign." There are lots of people who have not endorsed Trump, and we need not list all such negatives here. If Sasse opposes the Trump campaign and wants him to lose, there are not sources supporting this claim, so he does not belong here. Reywas92Talk 07:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Reywas92, this is people who have declined to endorse. I do have a source that says they have declined to endorse. Almost none of these people said “I oppose the Trump 2020 campaign” but it is inferred through them saying they will vote for or endorse someone other than Trump. Sasse said that he will not support Trump. I have an article saying Collins is withholding support. This does belong on this page and I bet Bradv agrees on these two. You may also want to read an article on civility which applies to talk pages as well. I don’t know what more of an extension you’d like my block to be for. This is ridiculous. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 09:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

No, it’s not. The article is for people who oppose, per the title. You changed it to be “declined to endorse” without consensus and in contradiction to the 2016 article. Therequiumbellishere and Miboshgu agree with this. Please go away. Reywas92Talk 16:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Reywas92, don’t tell me to go away. The only reason I’m here is because I’m blocked from editing this article. I sent you a link to civility and that’s no way to address another editor. The articles are those who declined to endorse Trump, as it says. Both Sasse and Collins have declined to endorse him and I have articles to prove it. Would you like me to show you those articles? Please add these back now. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I believe you, you don't need to "prove it"! But declining to endorse it not opposing, and I refuse to put in content that does not belong into the article, and you should not when your block expires. Reywas92Talk 17:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Michael Hayden

He signed onto a Republicans who support Biden page so even if he isn’t a republican he’s definitely a conservative. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

You yourself say he's not a Republican, so how is Hayden a "Republican who opposes Trump" if he isn't a Republican? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Seriously, Lima Bean Farmer, you are stretching "neutrality" into "opposition" in the same way you did before you were blocked from editing this article. It seems you don't get it, and should take a step back from here. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I most definitely do get it. It says any Republicans and conservatives. Since he signed a letter saying Republicans who endorse Biden, he must be at least a conservative, right? Also, I found a CNN article saying that he “along with 49 other Republican national security officials” so according to CNN on March 17, 2020, he’s a republican https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/26/us/michael-hayden-fast-facts/index.html Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

New Source for Sasse

https://www.rollcall.com/2019/08/05/ben-sasse-one-of-the-senates-last-remaining-republican-trump-critics-to-seek-reelection/ Says he still opposes Trump in 2020. https://omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/one-name-missing-as-top-nebraska-republicans-sign-on-to-help-trumps-reelection-effort/article_7ef2c4d5-59bf-5fc1-b5b4-60053fe9dda7.html This one shows he has opposition towards Trump. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Where in there does it say what you say it says? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

“The 47-year-old is one of the last remaining members of the “Never Trump” Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

New Source for John Kelly and James Mattis

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/09/04/all-the-republicans-who-have-endorsed-joe-biden-for-president/ This article actually uses the word “opposition”. They did not endorse Biden by the way, but do oppose Trump. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Trump’s former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and former Chief of Staff and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly have both expressed opposition to Trump as well, with Mattis calling him “the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try” and Kelly saying he wished “we had some additional choices.” Where in there did they explicitly say they oppose Trump's reelection? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

“Expressed opposition, as well” refers to the fact that both of them, as well as George Bush and Jeb Bush oppose the Trump 2020 campaign. It literally says the word oppose and is referring to the campaign. These two should be added back immediately. It literally says oppose. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Factual accuracy of article tag

This tag on the article is justified and accurate. I audited just a few references/sources and they all failed verification:

This is just a handful, all the people listed in this article need to have their sources fact checked and any person/source that fails verification needs to be removed. Isaidnoway (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Just remove them all. A certain user appears to think that absense of an endorsement is the same as opposing the campaign, which it is not, resulting in inaccurate and unverified content. Reywas92Talk 17:35, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't know who added these names/sources, but criticism of Trump is not the same as opposing his presidential campaign (unless it's explicitly stated in the source), and in Bush's case when there is a denial, we can't state in WP voice that he opposes the campaign either. I will remove these, and when time permits check some more sources. This really is unacceptable. Isaidnoway (talk) 17:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, Chertoff, Gates and Maryanne Barry should remain deleted. I misread some of these articles. The Kelly and Mattis articles don’t show opposition but I have a new source which I added to the talk page. There’s no denial for Bush as far as I’m aware, a ton of reliable sources have reported he will not vote for Trump. The new article for Murkowski says that she has always opposed Trump and that she’s struggling on whether to support him now (which she hasn’t). Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
If you have someone that openly states that they won't endorse Trump/back his re-election. Isn't that a de-facto form of opposition to his presidency? Otherwise, wouldn't this page just be Republicans that have publicly endorsed someone other then him? Tipsyfishing (talk) 19:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Tipsyfishing, no, it's not. It's staying neutral. For context Rashida Tlaib is not endorsing Joe Biden, but she still wants him to win. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Then should this page just turn into Republicans that have endorsed someone other then Trump? That'd make it much more clear who belongs here going forward. Tipsyfishing (talk) 19:59, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Or, instead, could it be “Republicans who are not supportive of the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign”? That way, those who have declined to endorse will be added but those such as Gates, Barkley, and Maryanne Barry, who have not commented on the campaign will still not be listed. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, if you want to see the scope of this page changed, that would require consensus among editors about what the page should be, probably best obtained in an RFC. For now, the page is about Republicans who oppose Trump, explicitly. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok Muboshgu, how do I start an Rfc? I’d rather do this than keep arguing over every person and every single article. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, the instructions are at WP:RFC. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah exactly. Like I’ve said, very few people have said “I oppose the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign” but we know from them saying that they aren’t endorsing him (and explicitly stating that they won’t support him) that they are opposed to the campaign. Would a better name for the article “list of Republicans who do not support the Trump 2020 campaign”? Can this be an issue that is discussed? I’d definitely support a better name that is more inclusive of those saying they do not or have not yet supported the campaign. If not, almost everyone on this list would have to go since they didn’t specifically “oppose” the campaign Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:35, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok so where does it say that any of these people want Trump to win? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:BLP is very firm on this issue: when making claims about living persons, the burden is on the editor who wants to include material to demonstrate that it is supported by reliable sources. If you want to include a person in this list, you need to show a source stating plainly that they oppose Trump's reelection. Any claims about living persons that aren't supported by a reliable source should be immediately removed. You can't turn things around and demand that editors come up with sources showing that someone supports Trump's reelection to have them removed. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 04:31, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Red Rock Canyon, what are you talking about? There’s still no clear definition on oppose. Look at any of these sources. No one says “I oppose the Donald Trump 2020 re election campaign”. However, we know this from them saying they don’t support them. Support is literally an antonym or oppose. Honestly, what do you think oppose means? Runs against in the race? If someone said “I oppose Donald Trump in 2020” would you not include them because they didn’t mention the campaign but Donald Trump himself? I mean this is ridiculous. If you say you don’t support him, you oppose him. That’s what this article is about, Republicans who do not support their party’s nominee, president Trump. I think this is a very valid point and should be taken into account when other editors view this talk page, and think about why we would have a page for only Republicans who explicitly state they oppose the campaign. If you truly believe this is the requirement, then please delete almost everyone on this list and we can discuss further after that. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
If you say you don’t support him, you oppose him. That’s what this article is about, Republicans who do not support their party’s nominee, president Trump. This is simply false. The article is titled Republicans who oppose Trump, not Republicans who do not support Trump. Lack of support is not the same as presence of opposition. To me, opposing someone's campaign means that you don't want them to be elected. The wording doesn't need to be exact. We can make reasonable inferences. For example, anyone who has endorsed Biden obviously opposes Trump's reelection. But in the past few years, many Republicans have come out to criticize Trump while still supporting him, or have said they don't support him while still not opposing him. They have often couched their replies to try to avoid coming down firmly on one side or the other. Take the Polito interview as an example. In it, the interview asked her "Will you work for the re-election of the president?" and in her reply she said no, she isn't supporting him, and she wants to avoid national politics. When asked what she thinks about people who vote for him, she said she doesn't want to tell people how to vote. You could interpret this to mean she doesn't want him reelected, but that's not the only reasonable interpretation. Maybe she doesn't care one way or the other if he's reelected. To me it looks like she's just trying to avoid taking a position on a figure who is very popular with her party but very unpopular with her constituents. It is not our job to interpret these statements to strictly follow some unrealistic "if you're not with him you're against him" standard. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 06:35, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Red Rock Canyon, really good point. I definitely see what you mean here. However, if you look at the Trump 2016 article of the same type that has people listed simply because they said he should step aside for Pence or that they will not support him. I agree with you that Polito should not be added with the current standards. That’s why I believe the current article should be changed in meaning and potentially even name. Also wanted to apologize for my above rant. It was not based on your edits or comments but just my frustration with the article in general. My apologies. Regards, Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 06:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

New opposition

Someone please add Meagan Simonaire, member of the Maryland House of Delegates from the District 31B (2015-2019), switched parties in 2018 due to Trump based on this article [1] Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:40, 9 September 2020 (UTC) Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

New source for Bush

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/06/us/politics/trump-biden-republicans-voters.html, please add him back Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Former President George W. Bush won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump, and Jeb Bush isn’t sure how he’ll vote, say people familiar with their thinking. Where in there did it explicitly say he opposes Trump's reelection? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Maybe this would help. It is the antonyms (based on the Dictionary.com) of support

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/support Therefore, if he says he will not support him, it is showing opposition to his campaign. Saying he does not support him is exactly what this article is for. Are you suggesting that Republicans who endorsed Biden but have not specifically “opposed” Trump be removed? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @Lima Bean Farmer: - The source you used is based on the New York Times article you listed above. Bush is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE, so when a source makes a claim about him, and then he denies it, like in this source, which says Freddy Ford, a spokesman for Bush, told The Texas Tribune that Bush would steer clear of speaking publicly on his presidential vote and called The New York Times assertion false...This is completely made up...He is retired from presidential politics and has not indicated how he will vote. You must include the denial, you can not say in Wikipedia's voice that Bush opposed the campaign, without also including his denial. Do you understand that? Isaidnoway (talk) 00:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Isaidnoway (talk), the source I used says specifically that Bush opposes the campaign. See, this is where this article is ridiculous, if a Republican says “I’m not voting for trump”, it means they oppose him. I have found numerous articles and almost every reliable source saying that Bush will not vote for Trump. The only thing against this is a spokesman saying that this is not true. Other articles have reported this but none have confirmed the spokesman’s information. A spokesman is not a reliable source. The reliable newspapers (New York Times, Forbes, Texas Tribune, etc) say that he opposes him. Also just because a spokesman says “He is retired from presidential politics and has not indicated how he will vote” is not saying “he does not oppose Trump’s campaign”. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
So according to your logic, a spokesperson who works for Bush is not a reliable source, but anonymous "people familiar with his thinking" is a reliable source? The spokesperson is named and directly quoted in the Texas Tribune article. And according to your logic, all those numerous articles you found haven't confirmed what the "people familiar with his thinking" said, they all are just repeating what is claimed in the New York Times article. Look, I'm not saying we exclude Bush being opposed, but if it is included, then we also must include the denial - that assertion is false and completely made up, he has not indicated how he will vote. Isaidnoway (talk) 09:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Isaidnoway (talk), just because a spokesman said it doesn’t mean it’s accurate. If you follow current American politics, you can see many cases where the current president’s press secretary will make a claim and then he will later deny it or refute it. Bush needs to be added back, and if needed, something saying a spokesman denied it could be added. However, you can’t put Bush himself denied it. As long as he’s added back. [2] here’s an article that could qualify as opposition for Jeb. It may not be though, the whole “opposition” definition is still up in the air. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:09, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
You also can't put Bush himself stated he opposes the 2020 Trump presidential campaign, because he's not quoted as saying that in the article, people said it. Like I said, Bush is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE, if a claim is made, and it's denied, the claim and denial both have to be included. For example: According to The New York Times, Bush won’t support the re-election of President Trump; a spokesperson for Bush said that assertion is false and completely made up, he has not indicated how he will vote. Isaidnoway (talk) 14:22, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Isaidnoway (talk), then add it back with that information. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
In a normal article, we can add information about the situation and explain to readers that some sources say Bush opposes Trump, but Bush's own spokesman has denied it. But this is a list article. If someone is on this list, it is assumed that they meet the requirements to be on the list. There's no room for nuance: either they fit the criteria or they do not. We have to be especially careful whenever making claims about living persons. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 05:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

RfC on a name change for “ List of Republicans who oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign”

Should the name of this article be called “List of Republicans who do not Support the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign”? The current wording is “oppose” which is a very specific term. Currently, almost no one on this list fits the criteria established on the talk page. Thank you Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

  • Support In favor of changing the name. Makes it much more clear what is allowed and what isn't allowed. Tipsyfishing (talk) 23:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
    Per WP:RFCNOT, this is a WP:RM matter. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
    Redrose64, this isn't just a name change, but a proposed change in the scope of the article. Instead of including Republicans who oppose Trump explicitly, Lima Bean Farmer wants this page to be expanded to Republicans who do not offer support to Trump. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
    No part of Lima Bean Farmer's statement (timed at 23:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)) suggests that a change in scope is desired. That statement (and the section heading) is entirely about renaming the article in order that it conform with the people listed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Should be parallel and consistent with List of Republicans who oppose the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign and List of Democrats who opposed the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign. This is not a difficult concept: these lists are for people established to want Trump to lose. The people you have pushed to include are equivocators who would be perfectly happy to see him reelected. Being a Trump critic is not the same as opposing his reelection and your above sources are worthless. Reywas92Talk 08:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong support Does not have to be exactly like the one in 2016 for Trump or Hillary. I think this is based on the comments made by ImTheIP. We don’t know exactly what the definition is of the article. I say we rename it to say Republicans who do not support his re election campaign. That way, people like Murkowski, Collins, Sasse, Mattis, W. Bush, Kelly, and many others can be added (since they have articles saying that they are not in support of his re election or said they will not endorse, which would qualify for this article). However, just a quote saying “Trump is the worst president in the world” would not be enough since this could have been said January 21, 2017 but opinions could have changed since. The person themself or the article, assuming it’s from a reliable source, would have to say something to the extent of “I/they are not supporting (or endorsing) Trump in 2020” or “they oppose Trump in 2020”. The latter is very rarely used. Like I’ve said, just because someone endorsed Biden doesn’t even mean they oppose Trump. Could just mean they like Biden more. Some other editors have said that saying Bush won’t vote for/support Trump is not enough to oppose and I agree. Almost none of these people are. Almost none of the people on the Trump 2016 page are either, many just said they can’t support him or won’t vote for him, not that they oppose him. That’s why I think this article needs to be changed in both title and in meaning. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 12:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Again, some bits of this I am not disposed to disagree with you, but saying, "Like I’ve said, just because someone endorsed Biden doesn’t even mean they oppose Trump. Could just mean they like Biden more." is such a wild twist of thought. I don't want to feed to you throwing guidelines around as if you have a mastery of them when you're actual quite an inexperienced editor (which there shouldn't be any shame of--we all were once and I have thought that our earlier interactions with you have been a little harsh at times), but a lot of the issue we're running into is purely covered under WP:SENSE. Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Reywas92. Expanding the scope of this page from "Republicans who oppose Trump" to "Republicans who don't actively support Trump" gets dicey in terms of determining what the exact inclusion criteria are. Also, what benefit is there for including politicians like Ben Sasse or Susan Collins who are trying to have it both ways? They don't have the courage to out and out say that they oppose Trump. This page should be left to the Republicans who do, like Kasich and Snyder. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose The sources at present are not great as it is. If the name is changed to people from republicans who just haven't endorsed trump publically it becomes even harder to verify and leaves even more to speculation. Alexandre8 (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose This article already has major issues with verification, and changing the scope like this will open it to even greater problems. Also, this should be a move request, not an RFC. See WP:RM. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 04:25, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose I suggest keeping it parallel with the 2016 page. However, i don't see why a section couldn't be added like, "Republicans who have been critical of Trump". It makes sense to have clarification of some of the big names discussed at length above and clarify that no, they haven't endorsed Biden but they have been (at times) critical of Trump. If this is a clearly different section that would be useful to those coming to the article for clarity.

Comments

The article does not do a good job of defining its inclusion criteria. "Republicans and conservatives who oppose the re-election of incumbent Donald Trump." Does it include Republicans and conservatives that are not American nationals? Does it include people that die before or after the November 3 election? How is it determined if someone is a conservative? Would a Neo-Nazi be a conservative even if they haven't explicitly defined themselves as one? If it will become more likely that Trump will be reelected, then tons of his Republican opponents are bound to jump ship. Would they still be listed?

And what is the meaning of opposition? I guess endorsing Biden implies opposition, but would saying "Trump is the worst president ever!" also imply opposition?

I suggest you add text to the intro paragraph to answer these questions. ImTheIP (talk) 11:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

In response to Muboshgu, I don’t think there’s currently a consensus or really any definition to “oppose the campaign”. George W Bush does not support Trump in 2020 and many reliable sources report it. People like this should be added. As for Sasse and Collins, as well as others, since they are Republicans/conservatives and have openly said they are not supporting their party’s nominee (Trump) in 2020. I agree that people like Fred Upton should not be re added, but I think this article should include those who have openly said (or a reliable source reports) that they do not endorse or support, they should be added. Calling this page “Republicans who do not support the Trump 2020 Campaign” would show those Republicans who are not supportive of their nominee. People like Kasich, who have openly supported Biden or another candidate can still have the (endorsed .....) after their name. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:13, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I would say that the consensus was set with List of Republicans who opposed the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign and List of Democrats who opposed the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign and we should not deviate from those inclusion criteria. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

A change in the name of the article would create a better scope of what the page is. However, it would deviate from the 2016 article i that respect. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Muboshgu, I would consider supporting the old consensus from 2016. Could you be specific on what the inclusion criteria was from then? Thank you Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: My thoughts on the substance of the RfC are actually not as opposed (no pun intended) to some of the specific people Lima Bean is asking to include, but have a less expansionist distinction than them between opposition and criticism, and also on what constitutes appropriate sourcing. I'll flesh them out above later as deadlines allow. However, despite my choosing to leave them on the page during my reformatting of the page, Lima probably thought I wouldn't support them and seems to have WP:CANVASSED several other editors who might more obviously side with them and rather conspicuously didn't contact me despite being both a major editor and contributor to the original debate. Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Yes Therequiembellishere, I probably should have included you on this. However, you were instrumental in blocking me from this page, so I didn’t think you’d genuinely take me seriously, even if I did reach out. I’m confused on what you believe inclusion should be. If people like W Bush should be included when the New York Times is saying he will not vote for Trump, then simply saying you’re voting for Biden shouldn’t be included either and that’s the fault of the current standards of the article. I agree that people who criticize the president should not be added. For example, many senators including Lindsey Graham were against the tweet about postponing the election. However, they still support his election. But when there’s an article saying Sasse will not endorse Trump in 2020 (obviously referring to his presidential campaign), this should be added, since they are Republicans who do not support the campaign. Whether it’s a change in the name of the article or just how we treat inclusion I’m flexible about, but the main purpose of this article is to have Republicans who don’t support Trump in 2020 and to not include them defeats the whole purpose of the article. As I have stated earlier, people like Upton and Maryanne Trump would still not be added. But those who do not support him must be added for this to be a useful article. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
      • No, that's canvassing. You contact all people not just who is on your side. I literally couldn't have cared less nor did I advocate your page ban, I just rebutted your aggressive and misguided policy-throwing. And I'll reply to the substance later above, but, again, you're making a lot of logical twists almost through the looking glass here. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
        • Therequiembellishere, you’re misusing the term canvassing. Canvassing can be both helpful and fair or unhelpful and unfair. In my case, it was unfair and I should have notified you. I have not been uncivil towards you either. Where do you think I’m twisting logic? I’m really confused on what part you think I’m twisting logic. I don’t see the logic behind your idea of them having to “oppose” the campaign even if they say they won’t vote for him. However, I am at least seeing your point as well as everyone else’s. I’m not going to call anyone’s opinions “twisted” as everyone’s entitled to their own opinions. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
          • Girl, no, that's what canvassing it, try reading the multiple guides I've linked to here and in the discussion above before spouting off like you know what they mean as you're so oft to do. You turning me saying "logical twist" into calling you "twisted" is like, actually worrisome. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Therequiembellishere, I thought we were finally getting somewhere. I never called anyone twisted nor accused anyone of calling a user twisted. I used “twisted” to describe logic, in the same way you did. Anyway, this is getting off track. What part of my argument do you see as “twisted”. I’m still trying to figure out your own opinion, other than just finding ways to argue with me. Once again, this is getting out of hand so I want to do everything to keep this debate civil. I would just like to know where you disagree with my opinion. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:31, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Lima Bean Farmer, Charlie Crist and Dawn Addiego are DEMOCRATS! They are not Republicans. The fact that they used to be Republicans is irrelevant here. This is a major problem with how you want to loosen up the inclusion criteria for this page. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Addiego switched parties in 2019, I think that'd be fair to include her. We have Chris Vance, Beth Fukumoto, Micheal Cohen, Grant Woods, Paula Dorkley and others listed. Hell, Lincoln Chaffez is listed, and he hasn't been a Republican in 14 years. Tipsyfishing (talk) 23:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
      • Muboshgu, there two people isn’t some interpretation of an article dispute. The list criteria literally says anyone who switched after 2016 or held office as a Republican. These two people clearly fit the criteria. I agree that Sasse and Collins are disputable, but these two are not. They clearly held offices as Republicans and they clearly endorsed Biden. I’m making an addition to the already existing article, not probing some point of mine. If I wanted to do that, I’d add back all the senators that you deleted which obviously I wouldn’t do. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 4 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to place year after name. (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


– Should the year be before or after the name of the presidential candidate? feminist (talk) wear a mask, you stupid bastards 09:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bush is on the list?

LOL

Seriously?

He made no public statement opposing Trump's 2020 campaign.

You might as well claim his father opposed it at least we know he openly opposed trump in the last election. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.23.104 (talk) 01:19, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

If no one objects I'm going to remove Bush from the list for the sake of reality.

--71.193.23.104 (talk) 02:51, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

Ok, here goes my first shot at this. Could someone please add Victor Mitchell based on this citation [1] and add the citation to Ryan Call and Cole Wist? Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 16:55, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Democrats Who Oppose Biden

Should we create an article on Democrats who oppose Biden? Rod Blagojevich has endorsed Trump, but I know that just one person isn't enough. Does anyone else know about Democrats who oppose Biden? GamerKiller2347 (talk) 22:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Change title of the article post-election

The election is now over. Can we change the title of the article to reflect past tense: List of Republicans who OPPOSED the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign. --Mrodowicz (talk) 11:06, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. The campaign is over and the election has occurred. We should update the tense accordingly. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Done Just Piping In (talk) 09:13, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Former Republicans

I move to remove all former Republicans from this page. The name of this article is "List of Republicans who oppose the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign" NOT any Republican at all time that opposes Trump's 2020 campaign. For example, Justin Amash is a Libertarian, Charles Djou has been an independent since 2018, Wayne Gilchrest is a Democrat, James Comey has been an independent since 2016. I could go on further, but there are too many on this list for this list to be only "Republicans" who oppose. Grahaml35 (talk) 01:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Putting former Republicans on here would mean that Hillary Clinton, who was a Republican until 1968, would be on this list. GamerKiller2347 (talk) 22:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Not done (per what seems to be precedent, would probably need an rfc for this issue) Just Piping In (talk) 09:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Mitt Romney

Has not opposed the Trump 2020 campaign. His convict vote during impeachment does not equate to opposing Trump's reelection campaign. He has to say he opposes it before we can assume he opposes it. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Flyedit32, find one source that says Romney opposes Trump's 2020 campaign. You are engaging in WP:OR by saying that his vote to convict in impeachment means he's opposing Trump's campaign. Not endorsing Trump is not "opposition". It's neutrality. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I agree that not endorsing is not opposition. But it's amazing to me that there can be an article titled "List of Republicans who oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign" and the one Republican in the Senate who voted to criminally convict Donald Trump, to remove him from office (while comparing him to an autocrat), in the very election year that the campaign is taking place, is not to be included in the list because he never said the exact line "I oppose the 2020 Donald Trump presidential campaign". – Flyedit32 (talk) 2:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
There is evidence that he supported impeachment, but there is no evidence that he either supports or opposes the 2020 campaign. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Added, but not based on this article. I agree that voting to convict is not campaign opposition. Just Piping In (talk) 09:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Clearing up the disputed accuracy tag

I've been checking the sources for each entry to see if we can get rid of the article tag. Most of them are pretty clear-cut: if a source says someone has endorsed Biden, then they're obviously opposing Trump. However, the case for Tom Ridge is a little less clear. This is the source used in the article [3], and here's the most relevant line: “I’m going to wait and see what the Democrats do before I make my final decision,” he said. “People know how I feel about Trump, so obviously I will be looking for an alternative. If not, as I’ve said to folks before, I wrote in the names of two Republican governors before because I love govs.” It's 9 months old and not 100% clear. I've looked for other sources, but there doesn't appear to be anything definite. He's been in the news quite a bit lately for his work with VoteSafe, and has been very critical of the Trump administration and campaign, but he hasn't come out and said he's opposed to Trump being reelected. Any thoughts? Red Rock Canyon (talk) 06:08, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes Red Rock Canyon, check out this article: [4]. It is from thesaurus.com, a branch of Dictionary.com. It says that an antonym to oppose was support. Since it is clear that Ridge does not support Trump in 2020, leaving him on the list of those who oppose him is fine. I think this may clear up some confusion. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Lima Bean Farmer, "not supporting" is not the same as "opposing". How many times do we have to say that? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
That user has been partially blocked from the article and the talk page. Do you have any opinion on Tom Ridge? The article currently used as a source has a mix of direct quotations of Tom Ridge and summaries by the reporter. He seems to be saying that he isn't sure who he's going to vote for, but it certainly isn't Trump. I believe that probably constitutes opposition, but I'm wary of reading too much into direct quotes. As far as I can tell he hasn't signed any of those numerous "Republicans against Trump" statements or endorsed Biden, and out of the many news stories where he is quoted or mentioned, none describe him as opposing Trump's election, though he often criticizes his actions. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 17:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
The disputed tag should remain on this article until all issues have been resolved. You can't "clear up the tag" until you clear up the article. I dispute the accuracy of this article at this point. Apparently so do others. That's a simple fact, and others saying they don't dispute it does not make it non-disputed. That should be noted on the article itself, not hidden on the talk page. That's the purpose! As the tag notes "Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page."
After I added a disputed tag, Just Piping In removed it saying "Already been highly debated on talk page" which is not a valid reason for removing it. The talk page is "behind the scenes" discussion about disputes (among other things) and not a substitute for accuracy of the article, including the detail that the accuracy is disputed.
Lima Bean Farmer: Saying that oppose is the opposite of support in the dictionary is fallacious as Muboshgu implies. Literally fallacious: it's called Denying the antecedent. Tall is the opposite of short. Does that mean that all people that are not short are tall? No!
I will revisit this page in a few days and the accuracy of the article remains disputed, I will restore the disputed tag if no one else has done that already. ---Vroo (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Not done, this topic seems to be forgotten for a months now (just sporadic editing). I don’t think this is a big enough issue for the tag. Just Piping In (talk) 09:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

New opposition

Someone please add Aundre Bumgardner, member of the Connecticut House of Representatives from the District 41 (2015-2017), democrat since 2017, endorsed Biden based on this article [5] Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 14:17, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Added, this checked out Just Piping In (talk) 09:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

New opposition

Someone please add Stephanie Clayton, member of the Kansas House of Representatives from the 19th District since 2013, democrat since 2018, endorsed Biden based on this article [6] Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Added, but not based on this source. This source seems to be misinterpreted. Just Piping In (talk) 09:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

David Durenberger

This man was a republican at the time he served in the senate. Also on the 2016 page similar to this one. Please discuss here if you have any problems with this first. Thank you ! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 01:09, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Done Just Piping In (talk) 09:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  1. ^ Salzman, Jason (October 12, 2020). "Trump Watch: Some CO Republicans Are Still Hiding Their Stance on the Prez; Some Aren't". Retrieved October 15, 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Republicans_who_opposed_the_Donald_Trump_2020_presidential_campaign/Archive_1&oldid=1126421921"