Support




Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
Powered by
Movable Type





Stop Bargaining with your Principles. [krakatoa]

This is from email with some of the other guest bloggers (GOBs?) and COBs. One was very much concerned about the prospect of a Clinton or Sanders filling out several SCOTUS chairs, so finding himself in the bargaining stage about who he could find himself voting for.

With some minor modifications I submit it here.

I used to find myself bargaining with my principles in presidential elections, all the way up to McCain winning the nomination in a primary season that opened my eyes to what appeared to be the orchestration of both the RNC establishment and the MSM to get the candidate they preferred. McCain was floundering against far more conservative candidates early, and suddenly the hard questions died down, the other candidates were set against one-another, and he ended up being the most "electable" candidate. Hmm. That tactic ring any bells?

At that point, I decided that it was finally time to simply stick to my principles, come what may.

I was excoriated plenty for that stance. "No vote for McCain is a vote for Obama" and all that.

But of course now, we all know what I said then: That McCain was a lying scumbag who couldn't be trusted to keep what few campaign vows he was making to the right. That his record was increasingly leftist, increasingly statist, and his view on American military power was the embodiment of the caricature the Left made everyone on the Right out to be. We know now that a vote for McCain would have simply been yet another vote for delaying the inevitable slide for this country into socialism, as McCain is a big-government neoaristocrat who cares little for the people who wanted their "damn fence."

My hope of course, was that after a predictably disastrous first Obama term we could nominate a Conservative to run against him and clean the floor. Instead we got Romney. While no McCain in terms of completely unearned ego as a statesman or the earned reputation as a Yosemite Sam of foreign affairs, a paragon of Conservative virtue he was not; and he was, on paper, decidedly a relatively easy win for Obama and the Media.

Rubio can't even go so far as to promise a fence. Amnesty in any form is the final state-sponsored sublimation of the cultural heritage our forefathers granted us. Sure he makes a passionate appeal, but if he is a true believer in the power of American soil alone being the incubator of free-market Conservatism, big (R) Republican values and fealty to the real words of the Constitution; and if he likewise believes non-assimilative entry to U.S. citizenship the best antidote to the far-left values illegal immigrants are bringing into the country, then he is worse than a blatant liar farcically claiming Gang of 8 was some sort of 3rd dimensional chess move: He is dangerously deluded and unfit for office.

I think he believes none of that though. I think Rubio, like McCain and Obama (and many many others), is simply another political opportunist willing to say just enough to win an election. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that prior to becoming Senator he was principled. But he was quickly and rather decisively corrupted, and simply has no record I can trust.

Trump's stated positions on so many issues through the years have been predominantly leftist and often at odds with whatever next comes out of his mouth, and his few positions he seems firm on (deportation, halting Muslim immigration) are populist cant with only the power of his pen to make happen.

How far will that pen go against the concerted efforts of the Dems and Chamber of Commerce Republicans? And what of the unceasing effort by both parties to flood this country with H1B visa holders, taking jobs from Americans who were simply unaware they just didn't want to do those jobs? Trump certainly holds no high-ground on this topic.

Contra those who lump most anti-Trump sentiment in with the Establishment "intellectual" class, there isn't a bit of snobbery in my opinion of Trump. God knows, I am the last person to be snobby about anything. I'm just a realist who refuses to buy the snake-oil any longer in the hopes that this time, it really can do what it says on the label. And this particular label has a whole lot of ingredients that are really bad for me.

So yes, I've been there, bargaining with my principles in support of the last man standing. I supported W (in no small part due to my utter contempt for McCain), and even his dad. But that was then. I got jaded to see the ratchet just continue to move one click right, 3 clicks left, tightening the chains of the state around us all. Every vote for the lesser of two evils "electable" "moderate" candidate is that click to the right. At the very best it validates the Establishment's belief that Conservatives will just fall in line and support whoever their chosen candidate is. At worst it becomes the ratification via Executive inaction of the previous 3 clicks to the left.

I'm not saying I'm smarter. I'm not saying I know better. I've just learned that choosing the lesser of two evils only ends up delivering the rationalizing away of one supposed rock-solid principle after another. When you keep on deciding this isn't the hill to die on, you will inevitably find yourself fighting in a trench hoping your last principle will simply be able to die with some semblance of dignity. But there is bloody little dignity to be found there in the mud and the blood, right?

So yeah, the SCOTUS may go full leftist. They may overturn every 2nd amendment ruling over the past several years. They may decree that every child is a ward of the state to be molded or disposed of as the state sees fit.

But then they and their Leftist brethren will own all that, and they will have to enforce it. At some point, the states will either reclaim their constitutional authority, or... well, the people will claim it for them and it will be far uglier before it gets better.

But, and this is key: It will get better. I truly believe there can be no progress without struggle. We have gotten to this sad point in a very large degree due to our collective craving for comfort. But there are still enough liberty-loving people in this country to reclaim our own space, whatever mechanism is required to achieve that.

I see a vote for Rubio or Trump at this point to be a vote for comfort, over doing the very hard things necessary to reverse the tide of Socialism that is rapidly rising.

Like I said during McCain's farce of a campaign: I'm done with the slow slide.

I'll vote my principles. My generation and those of my parents and theirs pissed away the American heritage choosing comfort. We systematically bargained away our liberties for the lesser of two evils and refused to vigorously defend the American culture post WW2.

We are a Greek tragedy played on the largest stage: A shining state of hope and opportunity; a nation of inimitable, unprecedented strength and the envy of the world in every conceivable way, brought low not by external enemies, but our own unwillingness to defend the fundamental principles that granted us our lofty position. We refuse to teach history, much less learn it, and so we have marched ourselves well down the road to post-modern irrelevance.

Yes, Cruz most likely isn't going to win. Courtesy of yet another primary manipulated by the R-establishment & the media who unflinchingly calls a lie anything that factually represents what another preferred candidate literally said, and also thanks to some relatively minor missteps by his campaign staff that would literally be yesterday's news the moment they hit were those missteps to occur by a Dem or by Rubio.

Yes, Cruz's ego doesn't take a back-seat to anyone else's. But at least he's got the right enemies, and he's an eloquent defender of the Constitution.

So short an absolute implosion by Trump which seemed likely a year ago and completely unlikely now, Cruz is finished. He can't win a 3 man race with Trump & Rubio.

But neither Trump nor Rubio get my vote by default.

Could either of them get my vote? While I never say never, it would require some very unambiguous, public, and consistent statements in support of the principles I hold very dearly. It is difficult to imagine either of them making those sorts of promises, much less keeping them.

I'll continue to vote my principles, or not vote at all. I owe no allegiance to an organization that treats me with such contempt, and has demonstrated no remorse over lying to me repeatedly.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:30 PM




Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 No way...

Posted by: Tim in GA at February 27, 2016 05:31 PM (C7Lea)

2 Sorry Skip

Posted by: Tim in GA at February 27, 2016 05:32 PM (C7Lea)

3 Quatro?

Posted by: Hrothgarace at February 27, 2016 05:37 PM (wYnyS)

4 I'll continue to vote my principles, or not vote at all. I owe no
allegiance to an organization that treats me with such contempt, and has
demonstrated no remorse over lying to me repeatedly.
===========================================


Amen. Preach it, brother.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 05:37 PM (dFi94)

5 I've become like Tommy Lee Jones in "The Fugitive".

-I
-Don't
-Bargain.

Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1) (T) at February 27, 2016 05:38 PM (OQ9R7)

6 Not voting against Hillary will get you lots of things that go against your principles.

We need your help.

Vote against Hillary or your principles are moot.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:38 PM (qUNWi)

7 Hillary is the enemy.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:39 PM (qUNWi)

8 At this point I want Donald to win the nomination, so all his supporters can graduate from Trump University this fall.

Burn it all down, Donald.

Posted by: TallDave at February 27, 2016 05:39 PM (74ZYB)

9 God bless you. That needed to be said, and it should be trumpeted far and wide.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at February 27, 2016 05:39 PM (d2g9U)

10 Wow.....roomy.

Anyhoo, there are 2 I can vote for, and they happen to be leading. If they screw with the Convention and try and shove a Dondi, Kasich or some other GOPe hack down my throat, all bets are off and I owe them nothing.

Posted by: Tim in GA at February 27, 2016 05:39 PM (C7Lea)

11 My vote for Trump, if he is the nominee, is purely a SMOD vote.

Media delenda est.

Posted by: votermom at February 27, 2016 05:40 PM (cbfNE)

12 My mother told me the other day that, of course, I have to vote. I have to support the Party.


I told her No I Don't, and also, You're Not the Boss of Me. (okay maybe that last bit I just said inside me head.)

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 05:40 PM (dFi94)

13 I like the "text cut from various printed material ransom note" look of this post.

Posted by: Aviator at February 27, 2016 05:41 PM (c7vUv)

14 The country is being overrun by people who couldn't figure out the economics of toilet paper. When we reach a tipping point, you can kiss the constitution goodbye.

Posted by: Ostral B Heretic at February 27, 2016 05:41 PM (5zyvn)

15 Well, obviously I agree with much of this, however I think the tone is too defeatist for February 27th. Let's see what happens over the next several weeks.

Work hard to elect Cruz. Make sure to vote for him and kick him some bucks.

Cruz is campaigning much harder, and mostly smarter, than any candidate I've supported in quite some time. It's too early to throw in the towel.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 05:42 PM (t5zYU)

16 Hillary is the tipping point.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:43 PM (qUNWi)

17 Sitting here in Arizona thinking that moron McCain will most likely get voted in for another 6 years. Stupid people. I have never voted for that fool for any office. If he gets past the primary, I will vote for the DEM in hopes that might take him out. There is no difference anyway.

Posted by: Angry American at February 27, 2016 05:43 PM (aGTdg)

18 >>Well, obviously I agree with much of this, however I think the tone is too defeatist for February 27th. Let's see what happens over the next several weeks.

Work hard to elect Cruz. Make sure to vote for him and kick him some bucks.

Cruz is campaigning much harder, and mostly smarter, than any candidate I've supported in quite some time. It's too early to throw in the towel.
Posted by: Y-not
--------------------------------------
Early voting today here. We voted for Cruz, hope it does some good.

Posted by: Aviator at February 27, 2016 05:44 PM (c7vUv)

19 And yeah, we're gonna dick around and compromise and hellary will be the next pResident.

Posted by: Eromero at February 27, 2016 05:44 PM (zLDYs)

20 Vote against Hillary or your principles are moot.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:38 PM (qUNWi)
==========================================

That only applies if Wisconsin goes to a dead tie, and Wisconsin is the swing state in the Electoral College vote. I believe the odds of that happening are nearly zero. I will not put my name to something which violates my conscience.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 05:44 PM (dFi94)

21 Well, that was exactly what I was expecting.

In my 4 decades + of voting I've never once had the opportunity to vote for anyone who had as much as 50 percent of my principles, and that includes Ronaldus Magnus.

Guess I just shoulda stayed home. Oh well.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at February 27, 2016 05:45 PM (Z8DIA)

22

You can try to deny Trump the nomination if
You want Cruz. You don't want Trump. You'll get Romney.

You can try to deny Trump the nomination if Cruz and Rubio and Kasich hang in to stop him from getting an absolute majority of delegates going into Cleveland. But we'll likely wake up Wednesday with Cruz having won Texas and Arkansas, Trump the rest, and Rubio shutout and trailing Trump by over 20% in the Florida polls. So with upcoming primaries becoming winner take all, Trump should have his delegate majority going into Cleveland even if he wins most of his states with less than 50%.

But Romney's people put in a convention rule that says you need to have won at least eight states with an absolute majority in those states before your delegates can even vote. This would come in to play if Trump is kept below 50% in most of the primaries, a not unlikely outcome if Cruz and Rubio and Kasich hang in.

Romney has started to use his American Future Fund PAC to run attack ads against Trump including about Trump University. Mitt reassembled his core team from 2012 for an event earlier this week.

Methinks Romney is making a play to get the nomination at a brokered convention. Third time's the charm!

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 27, 2016 05:46 PM (rs5De)

23 Yup...Hillary is the enemy. Don't be fooled by your principals or honor. She and the dems will never stop. It's all about acquiring power of you and other human beings. Power over another human being is when you are made to suffer until you do or don't do what they want.
They have no principals and no honor except to make you suffer.
They will never stop. You must do anything and everything to stop her and them. Democrats today are like the Commies of the 1920's and 1930's. Do not be polite, do not play fair, do not have remorse or guilt. Defeat them or you will be made to suffer.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 27, 2016 05:46 PM (ej1L0)

24 Well, Cruz is the cleanest vote in terms of principles and conservatism, but he's basically out of the race barring some extraordinary event so it doesn't really matter in the end.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 05:46 PM (39g3+)

25 Honestly, Krakatoa, that's one of the most meaningless, convoluted, bloviating, rambling, self-serving, posts ever.

Posted by: ouch at February 27, 2016 05:47 PM (40IrJ)

26 I voted for Cruz yesterday. If he and I were democrats, I'd vote for him again on Tuesday.

Posted by: huerfano at February 27, 2016 05:47 PM (NSb9d)

27 Yes, Cruz most likely isn't going to win. Courtesy of yet another primary manipulated by the R-establishment the media

I would hope that is enough to eliminate any thought of ever supporting Rubio if they manage to do it again this time.

Posted by: cool breeze at February 27, 2016 05:47 PM (ckvus)

28 JMHO, and I make no pretenses to big brains or anything, but I think that voting for Cruz, even if he does not win the nomination, sends a message to the playahs that there are still some principles that should not be mocked. A good R turnout for Cruz will also give him strength for the upcoming battles because he will retain his seat if he does not make the nomination.

Posted by: mustbequantum at February 27, 2016 05:47 PM (MIKMs)

29 This is kind of screed that makes me embarrassed to have ever called myself a conservative.

Posted by: Barzini in Miami at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (zmZ2x)

30 There is no difference anyway.

Posted by: Angry American at February 27, 2016 05:43 PM (aGTdg)

This is one of the things I worry about, because as far as I know, there is not an over-whelming level of widespread support for the anti-GOP candidates and there should be a tidal wave behind Kelli Ward. If senile McCain gets gifted another six years in the worthless McConnell Senate, AZ deserves to be a sanctuary state.

Posted by: Hrothgarace at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (wYnyS)

31 Trump and Rubio did a number on Cruz post-Iowa, and it really hurt him. Let's see how he plays this current situation through next weekend before we write him off.

The moderator in the debate made it pretty clear Cruz wasn't lying about DACA. Trump is calling Rubio a bigger liar than Cruz now, and Cruz is in a more favorable position where he has generally (not always) kept it about substance, and is now able to dictate the terms of when he wants to engage between the junior high insults flying between Trump and Rubio.

The last few days have been good for restoring the Alinsky like attacks on the "TrusTed" slogan. 3-1 is favorable ground, and the situation is highly volatile right now.

Hang in there one more week, and reassess if it is all too far gone.

Posted by: Dave S. at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (mhkbv)

32 I vote in Ohio. I will write-in Ted Cruz.

-I
-Don't
-Bargain.

Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1) (T) at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (OQ9R7)

33 24 Well, Cruz is the cleanest vote in terms of principles and conservatism, but he's basically out of the race barring some extraordinary event so it doesn't really matter in the end.
--

This isn't Fantasy Football. There are no points for correctly guessing who is going to win.

Cruz has a better shot than the other non-Trumps right now. The fact that he also happens to be the first conservative I've been able to cast a primary vote for in quite some time is motivation enough for me to vote for him, but if you need "electability" he's the best available today.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (t5zYU)

34 This is kind of screed that makes me embarrassed to have ever called myself a conservative.

Posted by: Barzini in Miami at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (zmZ2x)
================================================

What do you call yourself now?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 05:50 PM (dFi94)

35 I'm sorry, but if Hillary wins it's over. What comes next won't be pretty and it won't lead back to the original republic. You really expect the states to stand up to the Feds? I will vote for whoever gets the nod. At least there's a chance we can slow the bleeding so that another president may begin rolling it back. I have kids. I don't want to see it burn.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at February 27, 2016 05:50 PM (kTF2Z)

36 If we had McCain, we wouldn't have had Obamacare.

If we had McCain, we wouldn't have bailed on Iraq.

If we had McCain, the Iran deal wouldn't have happened.

If we had McCain, we wouldn't have move to normalize relations with Cuba.

If we had McCain, I'm not confident we would have put good justices on the Supreme Court, but they would have at least been merely squishes, not Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

I totally get people hating what asshole the guy can be and his hunger for the spotlight, including at our expense, but winning does matter even in that scenario. And in the clusterfuck that was November 2008, he still gave us the best chance of winning. I wish Fred Thompson had gone all in from the beginning, but he didn't.

Posted by: AD at February 27, 2016 05:51 PM (QWY55)

37 I'm all in favor of voting for the candidate you actually like in the primary. We still have eight months of soul searching to do before we're faced with the decision of which shit sandwich to choke down in November (Hugh Hewitt: the republican nominee is a solid B+).

Posted by: Jake at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (cS6ts)

38 Krakoa is right, though. Its easy to start fooling yourself in elections but in the end what's the difference between Democrats who promise to do what we don't like then do some of it...and Republicans who promise to do what we like then go along with the democrats to do what we don't like? Other than that stabbing pain in the spine.

If the Republicans are just going to do what the Dems want anyway, what the hell difference does it make who you vote for? And if the GOP never faces punishment for its continual, predictable, and incessant betrayal, what's their motivation to change?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (39g3+)

39 Methinks Romney is making a play to get the nomination at a brokered convention. Third time's the charm!

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 27, 2016 05:46 PM (rs5De)

Yes, but rest assureds, this time, Mittens will be electable!

Posted by: Hrothgarace at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (wYnyS)

40 TRUMP IS A FREAKIN' DICTATOR.
Wants to sue if anyone says anything negative about him.
Makes me think he's hiding crap. Sure can dish it out but is too thin skinned to take it.
He is really scaring me.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (7GQM/)

41 assured

Posted by: Hrothgarace at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (wYnyS)

42 Wow! How do I change my font sizes on the fly?


Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at February 27, 2016 05:53 PM (1ijHg)

43 Today has been a Bernie fest of ads on TV. Tuesday can't get here fast enough, I've heard about all the nonsensical rantings of his I can stand.
Of course her majestic pantsuit has run the same ad over and over about how she will punish American companies like Johnson Controls for moving overseas.

Gah Bernie is on for the second time while I've been typing this.

Posted by: Aviator at February 27, 2016 05:53 PM (c7vUv)

44 and hah!

Posted by: Hrothgarace at February 27, 2016 05:53 PM (wYnyS)

45 Trump being self-funded is a big deal to me. I can no longer trust anyone who'd need Chamber of Commerce money to win; I now find that a bigger black mark on a candidate than some past flip-flops on a few issues.

Ted Cruz would need lots of other people's money to have any shot at winning the general election. And that money tends to come with strings attached.

Maybe Cruz can just take out an unsecured $100 million dollar loan from Goldman Sachs and then pay it back using the President's $400k salary somehow, but I highly doubt it.

By comparison, Trump recently demanded that the RNC stop using his name in their fundraising letters and emails. And they did.

You guys saying Trump is "establishment" and Cruz isn't would do well to remember that "free" money has a way of changing people.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 05:53 PM (0OG8D)

46 Well said, I agree.

Posted by: BuckIV at February 27, 2016 05:53 PM (CLfqv)

47 "Ted Cruz would need lots of other people's money to have any shot at winning the general election. And that money tends to come with strings attached."

Setting aside that Trump is collecting donations and has indicated that he would do so in the general, look at the sidebar. Ted's money in Super Tuesday is coming from small donors.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 05:55 PM (t5zYU)

48 >>Posted by: Barzini in Miami at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (zmZ2x)
================================================

What do you call yourself now?
Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree

--------------

My body man.

Posted by: Marco at February 27, 2016 05:55 PM (c7vUv)

49 So, Trump = Let it Burn?
Check please.

Posted by: Donna; Seriously? at February 27, 2016 05:56 PM (of67s)

50
Worth repeating:

Dr. Ruth Westheimer

Following elections can lead to high blood pressure which leads to erecile problems so for sake of your sex life, don't follow elections

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 27, 2016 05:56 PM (iQIUe)

51 Posted by: Marco

Who the hell is this "Marco"?

Posted by: Mario Rufio at February 27, 2016 05:56 PM (zmW4B)

52 Wow! How do I change my font sizes on the fly?




Posted by: Grampa Jimbo
****

First, take it off the fly and place it on a computer screen.
Hit the ctrl button and the + button at the same time

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at February 27, 2016 05:57 PM (hVdx9)

53 "Maybe Cruz can just take out an unsecured $100 million dollar loan from Goldman Sachs and then pay it back using the President's $400k salary somehow, but I highly doubt it."

I'm sure you know that Cruz's Senate loan was a "margin loan" secured by holdings in his brokerage account.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 05:57 PM (t5zYU)

54 As I think Grammie pointed out, if we only have self-funding people, only billionaires will be able to run. Cruz has run his campaign with mostly small donations and has spent the money wisely and frugally.

Posted by: mustbequantum at February 27, 2016 05:57 PM (MIKMs)

55 It's long past time for a third party. I've been saying it for a long time, but we really do need one. As long as the Establishment controls the Republican Party, there's simply not a chance of making any sort of useful difference. And as Ronald Reagan used to joke about the Soviet Union and its single-party system, I have a feeling that once a third party crops up, we'll be back to a two-party system shortly after.

Nobody wants what the DC Republicans are selling. We're all tired of failure theater. They need us a lot more than we need them, a council of chiefs without a tribe is just a bunch of crazy men in big headdresses.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 05:58 PM (HalrA)

56 Sit down and shut up!

Posted by: Bill in Chappaqu at February 27, 2016 05:58 PM (m0JA3)

57
well said, to whoever that was. I can't participate in an orchestrated farce either. AND I reserve my right to bitch about it too.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 27, 2016 05:58 PM (ODxAs)

58 Long way to go yet and plenty of time for things to shake out. I don't know yet what I will do but the idea of writing in Cruz or just staying home seems to be where my head is. Trump is a democrat and a schoolyard bully. I won't vote for him. Hillary and Bernie would be disastrous, but I also believe Trump would be a disaster as well. So what's a fella to do? Either you write in or you sit out.

But as Ace eluded to yesterday, it's very possible that Trump gets stopped by not having enough delegates come convention time and the party ends up putting their wonder boy Rubio in anyway. Won't that be a shit show.

Either way, this whole thing is both the most interesting political race I've seen and the most ridiculous at the same time.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (pUDQf)

59 #40: That was a tactical move. The so-called Mississippi Seven, who orchestrated a scorched-earth campaign against Chris Daniels and his supporters in order to keep the mummified remains of Thad Cochran animated for one more Senate term, had just announced that they're going to start a similar scorched-earth campaign against Trump.

A big part of this campaign would be using the media to help get their smears out. And Trump just fired a warning shot at the media; maybe now they'll be a little more cautious about what they take in and pass on about him.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (0OG8D)

60 Someone remove the 'font size' option from this guy.

Posted by: Guy Who Thinks Things are Worse than Hitler at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (/opVo)

61 Putting aside the question of what state Rubio will win, forgive me if I don't believe the electability argument for Rubio is on as solid ground as the pundits would like us to believe. They have called Trump's demise about 101 times since summer, so I doubt they have much of a pulse of the electorate, nor have much of a feel for how things will look 7 days from now, let alone 7 months.

Posted by: Dave S. at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (mhkbv)

62 OK..... lets say by the Grace of God (which it will take IMO)... Cruz DOES get elected... past all the Dual Citizen Lawsuits... past all the dirty tricks.. past his own dirty politics.

He has never run anything in his life except Lawsuits and a small Office of Lawyers.

He has no real friends or big base of support in Washington...

So... who picks his staff? K Street? GOPe? WALLSTREET? (I'm sure his Wife has a few friends there...)...

You will get a President with all the Principals you want... who can't get anything done...

One of the Largest Problems we have in this country is that NO ONE is actually running the Federal Government. Its unaccountable and out of control. Obama has not only allowed, but encouraged, illegal activity by our own Government...

There are a LOT of Federal Employees who just plain need to be fired for incompetence.

I don't see Ted Cruz being enough of an executive to be able to FIX it...

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (RK8AH)

63 It's long past time for a third party.
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party

I'd be happy just to have a second party.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at February 27, 2016 06:00 PM (zmW4B)

64 I have never voted because I felt I "owed" someone a vote. It has never even occurred to me that I should "support the party."

I look at the choices and pick the lesser of evils. That's all. I don't see this as "bargaining with my principles."
If I have to choose between broccoli and Brussels sprouts, neither of which I particularly like, I choose the broccoli. I'm not making a grand statement. I'm expressing a preference.

Sometimes, on VERY rare occasions, I get to vote for someone I really like, someone who shares my principles as much as any politician can. But after decades of voting, I find that to be quite unusual.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 06:00 PM (T/5A0)

65 If we had McCain, we wouldn't have had Obamacare.
If we had McCain, we wouldn't have bailed on Iraq.
If we had McCain, the Iran deal wouldn't have happened.
If we had McCain, we wouldn't have move to normalize relations with Cuba.
If we had McCain, I'm not confident we would have put good justices on the Supreme Court, but they would have at least been merely squishes, not Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

I totally get people hating what asshole the guy can be and his hunger for the spotlight, including at our expense, but winning does matter even in that scenario. And in the clusterfuck that was November 2008, he still gave us the best chance of winning. I wish Fred Thompson had gone all in from the beginning, but he didn't.
Posted by: AD at February 27, 2016 05:51 PM (QWY55)

Excellent and right on point!

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 27, 2016 06:00 PM (ej1L0)

66 But then they and their Leftist brethren will own all that, and they will have to enforce it.
At some point, the states will either reclaim their constitutional
authority, or... well, the people will claim it for them and it will be
far uglier before it gets better.
---

There's another option: people just accept everything. There IS no rebellion at all. Ever.

As long as people get their freebies, have their i-gadgets and cable tv, all will be well.

America will become a combination of "1984" and "Brave New World."

/and remember, leftists don't mind enforcing things if they are in charge. Obama is spying on all of us right now, and the left is fine with it.


Posted by: shibumi who is awaiting SMOD at February 27, 2016 06:01 PM (7FH+T)

67 Ugh this is not an argument for a Saturday night.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (DUoqb)

68 This post is a ringing endorsement for having Hillary replace Scalia. Pretty pathetic stuff.

The best part is that if Cruz were winning, and the Trump supporters who don't like him--and there are a number, though I haven't quite figured out *why* they don't like him--were writing posts like this, the blogger who wrote this would be singing a different tune. And we know it. And there's no need to pretend otherwise.

Here's the deal--you want someone who believes in everything you believe in? Then get out of politics until you grow up. The way you do this is with coalitions.

We've had establishment hack after establishment hack. And they don't want to power share with the plebes. They, like the blogger who wrote this post, also don't believe in operating within a coalition. To them, a coalition means that we vote for them so that they can get the stuff they like and we can get none of the stuff we like. So, I could *maybe* see not voting for Rubio(1), but there's no reason to not vote for either Trump or Cruz. We've never had anyone quite like Trump, so he deserves a shot at leading the coalition.

End of story. And if you disagree, it's about class and ego for you, not "principles."

(1) Really though, Scalia's death destroys that option too. Patriotic Americans *who are serious* (not all are) should vote for the nominee, be it Trump, Cruz, or Rubio.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (/CcMm)

69 It is amazing to me that some people would gladly have a extreme leftist that they know will continue to destroy the country rather than someone who might have had some liberal positions in the past.

Unreal. This is the reason we have Obama.

Posted by: Sho Nuff at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (CWImE)

70 If we had McCain, we wouldn't have had Obamacare.
If we had McCain, we wouldn't have bailed on Iraq.
If we had McCain, the Iran deal wouldn't have happened.
If we had McCain, we wouldn't have move to normalize relations with Cuba.


I'm not confident all of that is true. He'd have signed congress' ACA. And because he did, a bunch of Republicans would have gone along. He would have probably invaded Iran by now so I'm not sure that would be any better. And Cuba, for that matter. While Nuking China.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (39g3+)

71 36 If we had McCain, we wouldn't have had Obamacare.

If we had McCain, we wouldn't have bailed on Iraq.

If we had McCain, the Iran deal wouldn't have happened.

If we had McCain, we wouldn't have move to normalize relations with Cuba.

If we had McCain, I'm not confident we would have put good justices on the Supreme Court, but they would have at least been merely squishes, not Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

I totally get people hating what asshole the guy can be and his hunger for the spotlight, including at our expense, but winning does matter even in that scenario. And in the clusterfuck that was November 2008, he still gave us the best chance of winning. I wish Fred Thompson had gone all in from the beginning, but he didn't.


Yeah I agree with all of those points. The primary fight isn't the election, and isn't supposed to be.

Posted by: BourbonChicken at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (VdICR)

72 49
So, Trump = Let it Burn?
Check please.


Posted by: Donna; Seriously? at February 27, 2016 05:56 PM (of67s)


Trump is just flipping the bird at the people who made the burn inevitable. There is no letting it burn or preventing the burn. There will be a burn, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it, and even the best preparations will be futile when it finally hits the fan.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:03 PM (HalrA)

73 Stay at home and Hillary gets her DOJ and SCOTUS and well...everything.

Where are your principles then.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:04 PM (qUNWi)

74 The best of the top three, at least to me, is Cruz. To say that there is no difference between these guys and Hillary is ridiculous. That vile woman will take this country where we don't want to go. If she wins, the fed will be so powerful, there will never be a third party. She will use the full force of the govt to destroy her enemies.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at February 27, 2016 06:05 PM (kTF2Z)

75 You have to have a place to have principles.

With Hillary you won't have that place.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:06 PM (qUNWi)

76 I voted for McCain to die. He has yet to perform this basic constituent service. Apparently I'm not one of his constituents.

It's looking like I'll need a "For the LULZ" t-shirt to vote Trump come Nov.

Posted by: DaveA at February 27, 2016 06:07 PM (DL2i+)

77 Trumpbots and Obamabots no difference. Deaf, Dumb & Blind.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:07 PM (7GQM/)

78 >>>>>Stay at home and Hillary gets her DOJ and SCOTUS and well...everything.

Where are your principles then.
___

Nowhere, but it isn't about principles for these people. It's about butthurt, class, and ego.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:07 PM (/CcMm)

79 Hhrummmph,Hhrummmph!
But yes Hildabeast winning is the end, every leftist court case will go the the leftist Supreme Court, 2nd A- goodbye.

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (fizMZ)

80 It is amazing to me that some people would gladly have a extreme leftist that they know will continue to destroy the country rather than someone who might have had some liberal positions in the past.

Not sure if you are talking about Hillary v Trump or Hillary v Rubio, just remember this: Paul Ryan just gave the Leftists a budget deal of their dreams that the could not have gotten even if they were in charge. Who is the leftist there?

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (ODxAs)

81 If we had McCain, we might not have had all those things. More likely they'd have just been delayed by 4 years. And on top of that we would have amnesty. Because for all the bullshit of Republican candidates claiming that "Its the democrats that don't want to solve the illegal immigration issue," blah blah blah, its bull shit. They want to solve it. They just want the cover of Republicans also pushing it. And having a Republican president would have satisfied that need.

Posted by: buzzion at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (zt+N6)

82 Vote against Hillary or your principles are moot.

Necessary but insufficient is a thing.

Posted by: DaveA at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (DL2i+)

83 There's another option: people just accept everything. There IS no rebellion at all. Ever.


This is the most likely option. Nobody thinks anything is worth dying for, let alone freedom. They're more than willing to give up little freedoms and even big ones, as long as they keep getting goodies.

The left his figured out how to seduce people into voluntarily giving up everything on the assumption that someone else will pay for it... and then just run up eternal debts bigger than all the money in the history of the world up to 10 years ago combined.

But that cannot continue. Eventually, like it or not, the burning times are coming upon us, whether we fight for it, against it, or not.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (39g3+)

84 My biggest concern about Hillary winning isn't really SCOTUS, we've all seen how those can turn out and - in theory - the Senate could reject her appointments.

What worries me is that if we run a nominee that depresses conservative turnout, we'll lose not just the WH - again - but also the Senate and weaken the House.

That said, I honestly don't know what I'll do in November. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (t5zYU)

85 Agree 100 percent.

Cruz deserves support because he followed through on his campaign promises. If we want more principled conservative folks to run for office and do the same, we should support him to the end.

Posted by: Cooldawg at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (GEo5Y)

86 77
Trumpbots and Obamabots no difference. Deaf, Dumb Blind.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:07 PM (7GQM/)

Ahhh.... way to influence those you are going to try to talk into voting for YOUR candidate...
/shakes head...

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (RK8AH)

87 Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:07 PM (7GQM/)


So you actually think President Cruz would wave a magic wand and fix everything, instead of get shut down by the Democrats and the Democrats with R's after their names the instant he stepped into office.


Even if we do get a real leader, we're hosed. The weasels control too much of the process.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:09 PM (HalrA)

88 I do wonder about the senators who represent states with substantial land owned by the Feds. Do they represent their State or the Feds?

Posted by: mustbequantum at February 27, 2016 06:09 PM (MIKMs)

89 "get a President with all the Principals you want... who can't get anything done...
"

If he does absolutely nothing but nominate conservative SC justices, he'll be the best president we've ever had.

Posted by: Lauren at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (rrG3v)

90 I'm not confident all of that is true. He'd have signed congress' ACA. And because he did, a bunch of Republicans would have gone along. He would have probably invaded Iran by now so I'm not sure that would be any better. And Cuba, for that matter. While Nuking China.

Why do you think he would have signed the ACA?

Invade Iran? Yeah, that's definitely possible--at least attacking it--though there was a point when that would have actually accomplished something.

Come on, Cuba and nuking China are a stretch.

Posted by: AD at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (QWY55)

91
I could easily skip the general election - Pennsylvania has been a blue state for decades and so my vote hardly counts. But this is a crazy year.

There's no reason for me to vote for Rubio because he'll never win PA. And I refuse to support the GOPe candidate.

I'd vote for Cruz just to give the GOPe the finger, but he also doesn't have a chance to win PA.

There are enough idiots in PA for Trump to win the state. My fantasy is for Trump to win a lot of traditionally blue states, clearly repudiating both Hillary and the GOPe.

You'll never hear it from the media, but very few people want more of the last eight years. I could see a preference cascade, led by disgruntled voters, giving Trump 40 states. Would Trump govern well? I doubt it. But, unlike Hillary, at least he wouldn't actively try to make our country worse.

Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (RcpcZ)

92 This is like saying the German Jews shouldn't have voted for the other guy because of principles and just let Hitler win because he and his Nazi brethren "will own all that". We all know how well that worked.

This is the dumbest thing ever. Just go Vote for Bernie or Hillary like you want to anyway.

This has just become people taking their ball and going home because their guy isn't winning. So you will let your own bitterness help destroy the country?

You are the reason this country is the mess it is in. You refuse to fight against the enemy and just chose not to fight because you don't like the General in charge.

Pathetic!!

Posted by: Sho Nuff at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (CWImE)

93 88
I do wonder about the senators who represent states with substantial
land owned by the Feds. Do they represent their State or the Feds?


Posted by: mustbequantum at February 27, 2016 06:09 PM (MIKMs)

They represent whatever special Interest helped buy their election...
Not the People....

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (RK8AH)

94 Here is a plea for civility. If you would rather see Hillary win than any of the R's, that is certainly your right. I disagree with you, but I will not insult you.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (kTF2Z)

95 #47: Imagine the optics of billionaire Trump refusing your grandfather's $20 donation. That's why he accepts small donations.

Well, that and his campaign swag was being made by American Apparel, which went tits-up recently. That might be a factor, as well; I don't remember seeing a Donate button when I first went to his campaign site; just a Shop button.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (0OG8D)

96 TRUMP IS A FREAKIN' DICTATOR.
Wants to sue if anyone says anything negative about him.
Makes me think he's hiding crap. Sure can dish it out but is too thin skinned to take it.
He is really scaring me.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM (7GQM/)


Who's paying you? Are you and redbanzai a tag team? What's the significance of the "red" descriptor? Is that so the bots that track your posts can find you, and total up the payments correctly?


I wouldn't be saying this if you and the other red had any presence whatsoever on this blog other than preaching doom about Trump.


I'm not a Trump fanboi, nor am I really a partisan for any of the others. As a Canadian, I don't have a vote. I'm just calling out what I see as dishonest behavior on your part.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (afR/C)

97 I like the varying sized fonts in this essay.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (rwI+c)

98 Great work with a fatal flaw.

You don't know what Trump will do or whether he will break the assholes' hold on power on big issues. I'd say, let the brutish idiot (not my opinion) bull loose in their bone china shop. Maybe he will break enough dishes in the beginning they be divided to seek their own and will make "deals" with him on those as he makes deals so they hang on to something. He has the likes of Sessions, Giulani and Laffer in his kitchen cabinet and will dance with those that brung him, Americans that want to see the country great again. What you want. At least roll the dice rather than say "here, take what's left of my chips, I am not even going to take a chance." 1% chance of positive/winning beats 0%, no?

Using your logic, with all due respect, why not vote for Hillary and speed up the process? Not voting or writing in someone establishes nothing. The MSM ignores it and the sheeple don't think or care and it delays the apparent inevitable.

Finally, SCOTUS. The 2nd should not be so forfeited. We will all be dead and gone before 30-40 years of Hillary appointees finish the job with like time for the big swing back so your end dreams will never be witnessed by you or any of us. That POS Barky has been a dictator for 8 years and I would rather Trump betrays his voters (I don't think he will) as a dictator --which speeds up your vision of the end result-- than continue this slog. Write-ins/not voting does nothing. Absolutely nothing.

That the GOPe"establishment" and 'Rats/MFM (same thing) are coalescing around beating Trump is the best sign to me that they fear the unknown price they will pay because, Trump. I would rather they pay something with Trump in office than for us to of like mind with simply roll over with an inconsequential protest vote where there is 0% chance that Lois Lerner sees justice, Hillary and her minions see justice and many more innocents suffer as the 'rats continue their crime spree with the help of the GOPe.

Just saying.

Posted by: oddnot not liking these times at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (g1MTt)

99 "Trumpbots and Obamabots no difference. Deaf, Dumb & Blind."

I can think of some differences. Most of the former category voted for Romney in '12 (as did Trump) and don't want a leftist on the Supreme Court. Also, they don't want to keep importing the 3rd world.

So, there are those incredibly obvious differences. Also, about 1,000 others. But those are just the ones off the top of my head.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (/CcMm)

100 Tim I've been reading and bouncing on three threads all afternoon

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (fizMZ)

101 This article reads like it came from a battered spouse who just can't seem to leave the choking warm embrace of her abuser. After all, who else would love her?

Cruz has the same donors as Rubio and Hillary. What else do you need to know?

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (w/bVh)

102 Nonsense. Its their vote and that is fine. But spare us the bullshit on their so-called justification because there isn't any.

Self-righteousness....the downfall of the conservative right and the nation as we know it.

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (WnCSK)

103 Trump is just flipping the bird at the people who made the burn inevitable. There is no letting it burn or preventing the burn. There will be a burn, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it,

This is the thing people don't seem to quite get. We've passed the point where we can fix this republic. Its too late for the right guys in office to make it work.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:12 PM (39g3+)

104 So you actually think President Cruz would wave a magic wand and fix everything, instead of get shut down by the Democrats and the Democrats with R's after their names the instant he stepped into office.
---

President Cruz wouldn't have a magic wand -- he'd have a baseball bat.

Presidents have a buttload of power, especially over the people in their own party.

If Cruz won, we'd certainly retain both houses of Congress and it'd be a whole new ballgame. How long do you think Mitch McConnell would last, for example? That alone should be motivation to vote for Cruz.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:12 PM (t5zYU)

105 If he does absolutely nothing but nominate conservative SC justices, he'll be the best president we've ever had.





Posted by: Lauren at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (rrG3v)

And in 4 years would have presided over the death of America.
Things need to get DONE.... not just PROMISED to get done... like the GOPe has promised the last few elections.

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 06:12 PM (RK8AH)

106 Trumpbots and Obamabots no difference. Deaf, Dumb Blind.
Posted by: redridinghood


Sure play a mean pinball.

Posted by: Who Dunnit at February 27, 2016 06:13 PM (FkBIv)

107 I was sick and tired of the "But the Democrats are WORSE!" attempted brow beating to vote for shitty establishment toadies long before Trump was ever even thinking of running.

Posted by: buzzion at February 27, 2016 06:13 PM (zt+N6)

108 Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 06:00 PM (T/5A0)

Very well said.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 06:13 PM (/tuJf)

109 I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (t5zYU)

Well just be careful you don't drive over that Bridge with a Kennedy or any other liberal

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 06:13 PM (DUoqb)

110 If you don't vote Republican, you are voting for Hillary and you can suck.on your "principles"
Amazing that it's THIS election you suddenly decide you have them.

Posted by: zzBottom at February 27, 2016 06:14 PM (aHUpC)

111 one thing to be able to look back at and smile...

remember all those bundlers for the soulless-ghoul-hill last election cycle?
i think they're still in jail.

Posted by: concrete girl at February 27, 2016 06:15 PM (0KgAM)

112 "But then they and their Leftist brethren will own all that..."

The problem with this view is the built-in assumption that once the Left ruins the country, everyone will wake up and it will get better.

The hard historical fact is that damn few Leftist (or other totalitarian nations) have ever collapsed without considerable outside influence being applied. Not war, but just the existence of an opposing ideology.

The Soviet Union and other totalitarian states fell because the United States existed as a free nation. If the U.S. goes down that road, you have an entire planet that is East Germany, with no world on the other side of the wall to show your population what's possible.

When you think about it, without the United States and the West in general, the collectivist nations of the 20th century would not have had the abundant wealth and technology to draw on and feed off of. Imagine the everyday life of the Soviet Union without anything that was created and developed by the West.

For that matter, go down the street of any large city in the Eastern Hemisphere, socialist or not, and count the widely-used technologies of the past fifty years that were invented in that country.

If the U.S. ends up a socialist craphole, there is no place else to go. In one, at most two generations, nobody will know anything else is even possible.

Posted by: TB at February 27, 2016 06:15 PM (UXEYz)

113 Well just be careful you don't drive over that Bridge with a Kennedy or any other liberal
--

Like Trump, you mean?

I think what separates me from a bunch of folks is that I don't see Trump as a Republican (he's an occasional Republican, at best), let alone a conservative.

I really hope I'm not going to be faced with the prospect of having to vote for him in the Fall, because I think he's mentally unstable, frankly.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:16 PM (t5zYU)

114 >>>>>I was sick and tired of the "But the Democrats are WORSE!" attempted brow beating to vote for shitty establishment toadies long before Trump was ever even thinking of running.
____

Eh. It's different. And the difference isn't even hard to see. Problem with Establishment is that they don't share power with the rest of the coalition. We don't quite know what Trump would do if he were leading the coalition.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM (/CcMm)

115 Top 20 Contributors to Campaign Cmte
Rank Contributor Hires lobbyists? Lobbying firm?* Lobbyist(s)
give to
member? Total Indivs PACs
1 Club for Growth $705,657 $705,602 $55
2 Senate Conservatives Fund $315,991 $305,991 $10,000
3 Woodforest Financial Group $112,500 $112,500 $0
4 Goldman Sachs $69,350 $64,350 $5,000
5 Morgan Lewis LLP $67,550 $67,550 $0
6 RE Janes Gravel Co $60,600 $60,600 $0
7 Sullivan & Cromwell $58,900 $58,900 $0
8 Baker Botts LLP $45,413 $37,913 $7,500
9 Jones Day $44,500 $44,500 $0
10 Wapiti Energy $43,150 $43,150 $0
11 Bartlit, Beck et al $39,050 $39,050 $0
12 McCombs Enterprises $37,350 $37,350 $0
13 Moncrief Oil International $36,500 $36,500 $0
14 Jackson Walker LLP $36,399 $36,399 $0
15 Mason Capital Management $34,000 $34,000 $0
16 Credit Suisse Group $33,435 $30,935 $2,500
17 Avalon Advisors $32,900 $32,900 $0
18 Mansefeldt Investment $32,600 $32,600 $0
19 Scot Industries $31,700 $31,700 $0
20 Hunt Companies $31,400 $31,400 $0


Sorry for the format explosion but a vote for Cruz is a vote for these people. The reality is, these same people already own the government. You'll just be reelecting them to another term.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM (w/bVh)

116 Good post, krakatoa.

In 2008 I happily and enthusiastically voted for Sarah Palin. I didn't care that McCain was at the top of the ticket, and at the time I didn't have the contempt for him that I do now.

During the 2012 primary season, I swore up and down that I would never vote for Romney. I didn't like him or thought he could win to begin with, but there was one particular incident that really turned me against him.

Newt Gingrich gave a speech on his ideas for space exploration. He has been a longtime space geek and is quite passionate and knowledgeable about it.

A couple of days later, Romney gave a speech in response. It was painfully clear that he didn't know jack shit about it, or care. He ended with a tear-jerking story about a Boy Scout troop flying an American flag aboard Challenger. It was such transparent emotional manipulation that it enraged me. It had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with space policy here and now.

But I swallowed my pride and voted for him in the general election.

Today in 2016? I will either vote for someone I can tolerate or not at all. I will no longer take a bite out of the shit sandwich. The GOP is walking on very thin ice.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM (sdi6R)

117
It looks like American Apparel has taken a lesson from Trump:

Clothing retailer and manufacturer American Apparel LLC said Friday it has emerged from Chapter 11 as a private company after successfully implementing its plan of reorganization.

The plan had been approved by the U.S. Bankruptcy court on Jan. 27, after several days of testimony from company executives and a last-ditch effort by former CEO Dov Charney to return to the company he founded.


http://tinyurl.com/h2n679l

Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM (RcpcZ)

118 I don't have the heart for full-throated de-Trumpism tonight, but I can muster the mild version.

Let's consider the tax returns. Trump says "tax returns don't show your wealth", which is accurate in a manner. Also, "I won't show them until the audit is done", while guessing varyingly that he has two or four or so years of audits outstanding.

Here's thing I learned a long time ago. My company was supposed to merge with certain holdings of Barry Diller, but not all of them. Boss asked me to look into what was up and how our (international) group might fit in if it went through.

Diller had an intricate and complex set of holdings in related companies. He'd have special voting rights, he'd have entities controlled by related entities, in the analysis he controlled many many companies while holding 2-8% interests in them.

(Also, I had no idea until then. QVC or whichever his TV shopping franchise was made all the money. I had no idea people bought that shit).

So, my theory about Trump is that he has control or influence over a $ billion or so in assets. When he did his ridiculous FEC filing he attributed $3 bn of his purported $9 bn value to his brand name.

He does manage to live large. The lifestyle is probably financed by the companies.

I believe that if he were actually transparent about his actual ownership interest in the various Trump properties he's not even a billionaire.

I think his tax returns would show a modest for a rich guy income.

I think it's Potemkin Trump all the way down, and if it is ever allowed the light of day his "successful" braggadocio will be shown to be hollow.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (1xUj/)

119 I really hope I'm not going to be faced with the prospect of having to vote for him in the Fall, because I think he's mentally unstable, frankly.
Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:16 PM (t5zYU)

So do I, but if push comes to shove, I will vote for him before any Democrat unless you intend to dig up Scoop jackson

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (DUoqb)

120 >>Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM

The irony of a Trump-backer using campaign donations to knock a solid conservative like Cruz is giggle-worthy.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (t5zYU)

121 I'm voting for Kodos.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (oVJmc)

122 The AOQ Motto:

"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats."

Sounds like quite a few folks around here being tempted to wash their hands of it all, hoist the white flag and soil their pants.

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:19 PM (WnCSK)

123 And on topic, I'm 9/10s of the way to Cruz or no one. I'll vote for Ted next Tuesday.

I thought that I could maybe vote for the Northeastern Liberal Republican, or Centerist Democrat or whatever Trump is, but now I'm thinking no. Can't do it. I'm a single issue prolife voter and I think Trump is lying on that issue.

On the bright side for the Trumpster, Alabama will vote for the Republican nominee whoever, so my vote isn't important. And if Trump wins and actually does some good, I will freeload off that, without the taint of the bad he will do.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:19 PM (rwI+c)

124 If Cruz gets the nom--and I'm voting for him Tuesday, make absolutely no mistake about that fact--I'll take that as a sign that enough sanity remains in this fallen republic to make a last stand by sending him to the White House.

If it's Trump, I'll take that as a sign that it's time to put this suffering creature out of its misery, and I'll pull the lever for him as the closest thing I can get to the "self-destruct" button.

If it's Rubio, it's so far gone there's no bothering, so far as I'm concerned.

That's where I stand.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, hither and yon at February 27, 2016 06:19 PM (D0J8L)

125 AOS....

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:19 PM (WnCSK)

126 2nd A- goodbye.

Then the shooting, then oops our bad.

Posted by: DaveA at February 27, 2016 06:19 PM (DL2i+)

127 If I won't vote for Hillary or Bernie on principle, then why would I vote for Trump and go against the same principles?

There is no guarantee Trump is the answer to beat Hillary. Personally, I think he's going to get shredded against Hillary. He's a walking lawsuit and the Dems will trot out endless streams of people who've been evicted by the guy, bankrupted by the guy, lost jobs because of the guy, lost money at Trump U, so on and so on. It will be a shit show simply because there won't be an end to it The media will protect Hillary like always and focus like a laser on Trump. So I don't buy that voting for Trump stops Hillary at all.

I have serious doubts about Trump being able to do anything he promises on the trail. I also believe once Trump were in office, he's going to show his true colors and fuck every one of you over. He simply wants to be President. He doesn't want to make America anything. He wants to Make Trump President.

He'll get four years, his name on the list of Presidents, he'll destroy his enemies and enrich his family. You don't go looking to an egotistical narcissist like Trump to help the common man remove the yoke from his back. Trump cares about Trump. He's been that way since he first came onto the scene. What kills me most is that people seem to have forgotten there are decades of proof of exactly what this man's character is.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 06:20 PM (pUDQf)

128 I was sick and tired of the "But the Democrats are WORSE!" attempted brow beating to vote for shitty establishment toadies long before Trump was ever even thinking of running.

Yeah I've had my fill. Other people can do what they want but you should consider this. How many more times are you going to let the GOPe put that knife in with the same scare tactics?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:20 PM (39g3+)

129 Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 05:52 PM
~~~~~

*sniff, sniff*. I smell troll.

Just saying.

Posted by: oddnot not liking these times at February 27, 2016 06:20 PM (g1MTt)

130 Burn the witch.

Joe Gravel gave $60K.

Gotta do a little better.

Posted by: Golfman at February 27, 2016 06:20 PM (48QDY)

131 The 800 lb gorilla in the room is that you can't have a republic when half the population are illiterate peasants who are wholly dependent on the government teat. Look at Russia and China. When the Tzar and Emperor were overthrown, there were lots of smart, well-meaning people who wanted to set up an America-like system, but the vast majority of the country were peasants. The communists went to them promising a "living wage", to "fix income inequality", and "lots and lots of free shit", and we all know how that turned out. Since the 60s we've been importing a million such peasants a year, as well as turning many of our native-born population into them through the welfare state. What can't continue won't.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at February 27, 2016 06:21 PM (zmW4B)

132 Voting is a civic duty. Horrid as our choices have been for the past 30 years, I have answered a compulsion to vote; to vote something. I have voted out of duty; I have voted out of wrath; I have voted out of resignation; I have voted out of protest; I have even been embarrassed by my vote. In none of these have I ever voted out of pride, or even out of joy.

After the escalating series of disasters being presented to me, I have come to realize the for me to uphold my civic duty, society must also uphold its civic responsibilities. I don't see it happening, not this cycle. Henceforth, I join you in voting my principles. Show me yours before I'll show you mine.

The Whigs imploded; the Republican party formed out of the besotted trash. This newly formed Republican Party did not win the next election; instead the Republicans won the ensuing election with a candidate counted as 2nd only to Washington. The Republican Party went on to dominate the political landscape for the next 40 years.

It is quite true that the nomination of Donald Trump will be the destruction of the GOP. The nomination of Rubio might not spell doom, but it isn't promising, either. That too, might lead to the destruction of the GOP. The destruction of the GOP is not to be feared. It will be the removal of a loathsome leech from the body politic.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 06:21 PM (O4NI/)

133 I also believe once Trump were in office, he's going to show his true colors and fuck every one of you over. He simply wants to be President. He doesn't want to make America anything. He wants to Make Trump President.

I don't see Him winning the Presidency.....I hope I'm wrong because it sure looks like He'll be the nominee...

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:21 PM (/dSsq)

134 >>>>Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (t5zYU)

So you don't mind Cruz having these minders? These are the same people who have been pushing open borders, NAFTA, TPP, Muslim migration, and wars in the middle east. And you have confidence that Cruz is going to tell these people that he will not do their bidding?

Like I said, you suffer from battered-wife syndrome.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (w/bVh)

135
As a Canadian, I don't have a vote. I'm just calling out what I see as dishonest behavior on your part.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (afR/C)


Doesn't that make you eligible to vote for Cruz?

Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (RcpcZ)

136 Things need to get DONE....

I'd rather a lot of things get UNDONE.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (FkBIv)

137 If..

if...

if....

if....

if....

Only one tiny problem. none of those 'ifs' happened.

Posted by: Eric Clickone at February 27, 2016 06:23 PM (w03YA)

138 I have heard that there will not be a straw poll for the presidency at the Colorado caucuses.

Usually, there is a vote for president which is nonbinding. That is the vote that they report even though the delegates really aren't awarded until the state convention which is a couple months later. Apparently the Republican Party wants to prevent Trump from getting credit for Colorado by canceling the straw poll.

FWIW. I'm not sure what it's worth.

Posted by: L, Elle at February 27, 2016 06:23 PM (2x3L+)

139 Sorry for the format explosion but a vote for Cruz
is a vote for these people. The reality is, these same people already
own the government. You'll just be reelecting them to another term.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:17 PM (w/bVh)
________
A few of those are Texas firms and have been supporting Cruz for quite a while. Some of the other big names I recognize and they have a policy of splitting support roughly equally amongst all substantial candidates.

Posted by: mustbequantum at February 27, 2016 06:23 PM (MIKMs)

140 If the U.S. ends up a socialist craphole, there is
no place else to go. In one, at most two generations, nobody will know
anything else is even possible.

Posted by: TB at February 27, 2016 06:15 PM (UXEYz)


There's nowhere to run to, unless we start colonizing Mars before they've completed erecting their perfect totalitarian prison planet. We have to win this, there simply no other option, there's no way out but through.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:23 PM (HalrA)

141 Sorry for the format explosion but a vote for Cruz is a vote for these people.

Those are pretty tiny contributions to buy a candidate. And it's mostly from individuals, which means $2500 max. The company PAC component is really tiny, or nonexistent.

The big money seems to be in nonafflicated support. Or issue advertising. Or uncoordinated advertising in support of stuff.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:24 PM (rwI+c)

142 I am gong back and forth between this thread and a 70 odd page US Navy instruction and I am not sure which is more depressing. Sigh

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 06:24 PM (DUoqb)

143 test.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:25 PM (qUNWi)

144 134 >>>>Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (t5zYU)

So you don't mind Cruz having these minders? These are the same people who have been pushing open borders, NAFTA, TPP, Muslim migration, and wars in the middle east. And you have confidence that Cruz is going to tell these people that he will not do their bidding?

Like I said, you suffer from battered-wife syndrome.
Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (w/bVh)

Cruz, unlike Trump, has a public record of accountability, both as a U.S. Senator and as Solicitor General of Texas. I'm quite satisfied with his record.

Trump's record on "accountability" involves welshing on his debts.

But more importantly, his history of donations shows he was not merely a registered Democrat but an enthusiastic liberal one.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:25 PM (t5zYU)

145 #110: No, it's every election. "Sure, he's not the candidate you wanted, but now you have to get in line and donate you money and time as well as your vote, because otherwise we'll get a Democrat!"

But even if the Republican wins, we still get Democrat policies.

Because ultimately, the two parties are just playing a game of good cop/bad cop, and we're the ones sweating it out in the perp chair.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 06:25 PM (0OG8D)

146 Cruz has been more responsive to his voters than anyone I recall in quite a while. This primary is not a difficult choice for me.

Posted by: Dave S. at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (mhkbv)

147 Awful lot of new nics to be ignore_user()'d this thread.
Try again with a new hash and let us know how much it pays.

Posted by: DaveA at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (DL2i+)

148 >>>>Some of the other big names I recognize and they have a policy of splitting support roughly equally amongst all substantial candidates.

And why would they do this? Of course, they want to own whoever gets elected. They are transnational. They don't give a shit about the American people or the sovereignty of any nation.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (w/bVh)

149 We're going to have a wall.....and Vicente Fox is going to pay for it. It will be a thousand miles long and taller than anything you've seen before. It will have a big, beautiful door so we can let in the Good Ones......if we want to.

Posted by: Major Rage at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (e8iK4)

150 If Cruz loses his bid, then he go back to the Senate and show them what a pissed off Conservative is like.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (O4NI/)

151 >>>>Those are pretty tiny contributions to buy a candidate.

Sad, isn't it, that our so-called representatives can be purchased for such a small amount of money?

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (w/bVh)

152 Rubio?... NEVER. NEVER. NEVER.

I'll continue to vote for Cruz, but if my November choice ends up being Trump vs. Frump, I'll vote for a whole sack of chaos and hand-wringing.

In other words, I'll put on a Slim Pickens hat, I'll straddle my VW beetle, and I'll vote for Trump.

We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Posted by: NickieGoomba at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (xz0xR)

153 Here are my thoughts on the candidates, such as they are:

Cruz is my guy. He checks all of the boxes. He may not be the best presentation of those ideas, but at least he checks off on the substance. One of the most annoying critisisms I have seen of him is the "No one likes him!" However, I hate everyone in Washington that hates him! Now that does not say anything except that I can at least admire him for his choice of enemies.

Trump. He is a giant question mark to me. I have no idea what he really stands for. Has he made a truthful conversion? I dunno. Is he a closet liberal? Past history says yes, but so were a lot of people on the right, including our host. I do not like his broad generalities in addressing policy, but that could also be his way of trying to reach a broad audience. The news about him considering Gingrich to be on his team speaks well of him if true. However, he is still a gigantic question mark to me.

Rubio. He is an amnesty guy. If he did not have that one thing, I could see supporting him. He is not a bad guy, but he has a blind spot in this one area, and that is a big minus for me. Historically, nations that cannot control their borders do not survive. Case closed. Combine that with the GOP congress' natural inclination to want some form of amnesty and it is a done deal.

TL;DR

Cruz will do what we say we want a president to do.

Trump will do something, but I have no idea what.

Rubio WILL do a big bad thing.

Still, any of them would be better than Hillary! or the Bern, because we KNOW they will not just do amnesty, but a whole host of other bad shit if they were elected. And this is without the supreme court in the mix.

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (iHjB5)

154 And why would they do this? Of course, they want to own whoever gets elected. They are transnational.

Which one's concern you?

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (rwI+c)

155 So we will have a dream candidate from the Dims to run against with a Supreme Court vacancy baked in, and a bunch of a$$holes want to sit it out because they may not have someone who aligns perfectly with their "principles".

Damn if this doesn't make me want to join the left when they come after all these "principled" idiots when the purges start. Enjoy Hell, because you will have helped create it.

Posted by: Dogbert at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (9XAsr)

156 And why would they do this? Of course, they
want to own whoever gets elected. They are transnational. They don't
give a shit about the American people or the sovereignty of any nation.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:26 PM (w/bVh)


Worse than that, they actively want to replace both with something of their own devising, because they are egoists who believe they are so much better and smarter than everyone who came before. They think they can create a perfect world.

Utopian fools, but I repeat myself.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM (HalrA)

157 How the hell did We get here? A year ago I was optimistic that We would take back the WH.... Now, look where We are... How did it get so screwed up?

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:28 PM (/dSsq)

158 Found this over at Insty. It explains a lot.

http://tinyurl.com/jm6rj9f

Posted by: Pete Seria at February 27, 2016 06:28 PM (/pOl7)

159 Sad, isn't it, that our so-called representatives can be purchased for such a small amount of money?

Heh. Non-falsifiability is the chief marker of a delusion.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (rwI+c)

160 Keep one thing in mind: The Constitution cannot be overturned by a vote in Congress or a Supreme Court decision.

The Second Amendment means what it says, and it was specifically written for this contingency.

If the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branches attempt anything of the sort, they will have declared themselves to be outside the law.

Then it's up to us.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (sdi6R)

161 Hillary is the enema.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (qUNWi)

162 Its a pretty obvious GOPe attack to claim that someone is owned by minor donors, especially while ignoring the donors to every other candidate.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (39g3+)

163 or a chief marker really.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (rwI+c)

164 Like I said, you suffer from battered-wife syndrome.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (w/bVh)

No different than calling a Trump supporter a Trumpbot.

Please go away.

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 06:29 PM (WVsWD)

165 I've never voted for anyone. I've always voted against potential disaster.

"Vote your principles! Reagan II will arrive after Obama's first term. Just stay home or write in a True Conservative."

Brilliant stuff, Bobby Fischer.

Now its "blah blah blah liberty blah blah blah difficult blah blah blah."

Obama was almost a god damned catastrophe. But it is all okay as long as True Conservatives feel good about their votes.

What do you think your wish-based contingency thinking will look like after Hillary or Bernie Panders slithers into office because of these mythical True Conservative Principles?

Reagan II wouldn't give a damn about most of the crap True Conservatives (MPBUT) bitch about.

All this from someone that probably voted FOR George W twice. Yeah, what a conservative W was...

Posted by: Howie Feltersnatch at February 27, 2016 06:30 PM (ZedYY)

166 "It will get better..."
I don't think so.
It will be Detroit.

Posted by: Trumpsters at February 27, 2016 06:30 PM (9HJf4)

167 >>>>>But even if the Republican wins, we still get Democrat policies.

Because ultimately, the two parties are just playing a game of good cop/bad cop, and we're the ones sweating it out in the perp chair.
_____

I keep reading these kinds of comments--I DID IT FOR MCCAIN BUT I AIN'T DOIN' IT FOR TRUMP!--but as I've explained, the situations aren't comparable. Trump is not of the party. The party is in the midst of trying to stop him. So, your predictions of what he'd do shouldn't be based on experiences of being burned by the establishment. We haven't had a guy like Trump before.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:30 PM (/CcMm)

168 And why would they do this? Of course, they want to own whoever gets elected.

I've been cheated I guess. I've given the max to candidates on a couple of occasions. Bush wouldn't even give me a phone call.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (rwI+c)

169
Excellent article.

Principles are fine, and good, and necessary.

But it's February 2016, and the next election for President is in about 8 months.

If not Trump, then who?

We've seen the performance of the Dog-Eater-in-Chief; it's a series of failures and mediocrities, obviously wrong decisions and disloyal actions, massive damage to the country. More people do not work than work.

We got the Dog-Eater-in-Chief partly because of principled voters who ... stayed home? cast protest votes?

It seems clear that Bernie The Bum, Hillary!!! and Dondi the Rubio will effectively end the US as we know it. Perhaps we could recover, but it would be to a point of economic, cultural, political and military strength less than where we are today.

I see no reason to open the doors to my home to the world, to come and spend my money as they please.

If not Trump, then who?

Trump may not be the last chance, but there are not too many more chances.

Posted by: Batman at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (FlRtG)

170 What I learned from 8 years of Obama is that a candidate has to motivate the base to win. If McCain and Romney didn't excite partisans like me, how were they going to fire anyone else up? They were not so electable when voting day arrived. Obama, on the other hand, had school kids singing songs about him.

Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary a drunk at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (ZufZo)

171 Have any of you been here long enough to remember 'FUCK IT-- MCCAIN!'?

That was when Ace threw in the towel and just agreed to vote for that calcified old fart.

A similar process went down in 2012 with Romney.

Two bad candidates that the establishment resolutely pushed into the nomination and to the general until we had no choice, because the Democrats were just so, so bad.

And they lost.

And the GOP spent the intervening years pissing in our faces.

Well, no more 'Fuck its.' I vote for someone I actively want or not at all.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (oVJmc)

172 Y'all should look at the comments on Reason.com where they are tearing Amash a new hole for endorsing Cruz and the pro Trump people are winning.

This is what happens when you run down the path of purity. It ends at Masada or in chains.

I am voting for Cruz the week after next if he doesn't blow Texas. It doesn't hurt that he has been my guy since he beat Dave Dewhurst. Otherwise I am voting for whoever is most likely to stop Trump.

Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (DSwhx)

173 157 How the hell did We get here? A year ago I was optimistic that We would take back the WH.... Now, look where We are... How did it get so screwed up?

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:28 PM (/dSsq)


The cynicism and distrust created by decades of staggering and inexplicable betrayals by those we've sent to represent us has left us unable to trust anybody, or each other. The result is a circular firing squad. This also pleases them, we're doing their work for them.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (HalrA)

174 And why would they do this? Of course, they want to own whoever gets elected.

And they donate to all the candidates.

All of them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (39g3+)

175 >>Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:27 PM

I concur with most of that.

The thing with Rubio is that he lied to us. He lied before Gof8, during Gof8, and after. He's told multiple lies about what his intention was with Gof8 and attempted to smear Cruz in the process. Like Romney with socialized medicine, he's a true believer and they are very dangerous.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (t5zYU)

176 This whole "I won't vote if" schtick is as childish as the dopes who promise to leave the country. Grow up and be an adult. Sit out and pout if you want, but don't be surprised if you get left by the wayside.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (1YhYj)

177 Principles are great, but remember that "convenience" is also a principle...

Everyone acts on principle, all of the time. It's just that most everyday principles do not have a clear-cut global hierarchy, where one always trumps the next, no matter the circumstances. It is the way human minds are wired.

Stop worrying so much about global principles, and focus instead on figuring out what will work.

Note: I am not saying "vote establishment," I am saying "your argument is not effective, because that isn't how people think." Give me a better argument.

Posted by: Piercello at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (RXfvh)

178 Rubio is the new McCain.

Trump and Cruz are two rejections of McCain-type folks.

They are different sorts of rejections but they are both rejections.



Posted by: eman at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (8GEo9)

179 #128: To have the mask ripped from your eyes and still think, "Oh, I want Cruz but, yeah, I guess I can vote for Rubio instead, because Hillary..." is to make a conscious choice to go back to letting the GOPe pee on you and tell you it's raining.

This will never stop until we make it stop. Path of least resistance. It's basic human nature.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (0OG8D)

180 >>>>Which one's concern you?

Frankly, the Vampire Squid. You know, the company which former employees are central bankers all over the globe, lead the list of treasury secretaries in the US. Not to mention Cruz's wife is on leave from her position there during the campaign. Then, there is the Club for Growth which seems to be a staunch proponent of open borders and amnesty.

But, I'm sure all of them would like some representation in a Cruz administration above and beyond that enjoyed but the voting public.

Posted by: Hayao at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (w/bVh)

181 Y'all should look at the comments on Reason.com

Good lord, why?

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (rwI+c)

182 Cruz and only Cruz. I won't vote for a 3rd W term or Trump. I want to vote for a conservative for the first time since the '84 election.

Our primary isn't until May 10th. If he's not on the ballot I'll write his name in. Same for the general. If I can't write his name in, I'll sit this one out.

Posted by: The Central Scrutinizer at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (2D2IN)

183 I will vote for whomever is running against Hillary. That's it. I don't care who it is. I don't like Trump, but he CAN win. I don't think Rubio or Cruz can win. Rubio has really degraded himself in the past few days with his third-rate comedy routine against Trump--and he's Mr. Amnesty. I think if he's the nominee, the media will destroy him. Cruz is principled and smart but he comes across as smarmy and smug and he just looks odd. I can't see him winning. The media will also destroy him.
Trump is terribly flawed--both as a person and as a candidate. But he has a couple things going for him. He clearly sees that the country is going in the wrong direction; and he can pull Democrats and non-voters to the polls to vote for him. The media will try to destroy him. But I don't think they can. And he CAN beat Hillary.

Posted by: JoeF. at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (Asn7d)

184 176 This whole "I won't vote if" schtick is as childish as the dopes who promise to leave the country. Grow up and be an adult. Sit out and pout if you want, but don't be surprised if you get left by the wayside.
Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (

Or{fill in the Candidate} is just as bad as Hillary! or Bernie....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (/dSsq)

185 Hillary is an existential threat.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (qUNWi)

186 Otherwise I am voting for whoever is most likely to stop Trump.





Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (DSwhx)


Vote for whoever's most likely to stop Rubio. Rubio is an unprincipled con-artist who weaseled his way into the Senate on the Tea Party ticket, then sold out everybody who put him where he is in order to hitch his wagon to the party machine.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:34 PM (HalrA)

187 185
Hillary is an existential threat.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (qUNWi)


So is Amnesty.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:34 PM (HalrA)

188 So, the 28 people from GS who donated a total of $69,350? That's your worry?

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:34 PM (rwI+c)

189 Trump also offers the chance, however unlikely, for maximum irony. Just picture it: he's elected, a (possibly unrelated) economic boom kicks off and lasts for a decade, and the 2040 issue of National Review rips on all the Republican hopefuls for failing to live up to the example set by Trump.

Posted by: Jake at February 27, 2016 06:34 PM (cS6ts)

190 I've been astounded at how people took to their candidates so early and so ferociously this season. Really, it's mind-boggling. In this cluster of crap each found a nugget to hold and to and declare "THIS IS MY CANDIDATE AND I CANNOT BE MOVED!"

really. Really? *tilts head*

I only came to toss my support to Cruz, like, yesterday.

Perhaps I am old fashioned in this sense, but the concept of Democracy, and the privilege we have to exercise our right to vote, still make me dew-eyed. I don't take it lightly and, this year, I just couldn't find anyone to fully support.

That said, Cruz is not perfect, and no candidate will be, but he meets the core tests required of him: 1. Believes in and fights for the Constitution and 2. Is willing to take on the old guard in doing so.

You've gotta know what you stand for.

I'll be voting for Ted Cruz come March 15.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 06:34 PM (8PbKi)

191 Hillary is an existential threat.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (qUNWi)


So is Amnesty.



Well You can really count on Hillary! to extend that....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (/dSsq)

192 So you actually think President Cruz would wave a magic wand and fix everything, instead of get shut down by the Democrats and the Democrats with R's after their names the instant he stepped into office.


Even if we do get a real leader, we're hosed. The weasels control too much of the process.
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:09 PM (HalrA)
---------------
We've got to start somewhere. I trust Cruz more than any candidate running to appoint a true Conservative(s) to the SCOTUS.
I try to talk myself into liking Trump and I did at one time, but it's like everyday his true mask is slipping off and he is truly scaring me. He appears to be a wolf in sheep's clothing. He can't take any criticism. When the people that voted for him want to criticize him if & when he goes down the Liberal path... then what?
Is he going to after the FIRST AMENDMENT. Are bloggers etc. going to face lawsuits?

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (7GQM/)

193 That's not fair to Detroit.
Or, rather the good citizens of Detroit.
It was a great place in it's day, thanks to them but Detroit and it's citizens got sold out.

It will be like Chicago.

Posted by: Trumpsters at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (9HJf4)

194 The R candidates are nowhere NEAR as bad as Hillary.

None of them.

Not by miles.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (qUNWi)

195 Cruz voter. I try to think about what each candidate would be like in the post with all of the swirling egos, positions, and forces in play. It has always seemed to me that Cruz would utterly expose the Establishment.

Obamacare - How many think the GOP Establishment believes it's just swell ? We would find out. They either put up or shut up. Their choice.

The argument that no one likes him is actually a point in favor of him IMO for not bending to the bastards. If they like you in DC, there's a reason why.

My short .02 dollar



Posted by: jsg at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (VHRk+)

196 Posted by: Batman at February 27, 2016 06:31 PM (FlRtG)

What evidence is there that regular voters stayed home? From the evidence I've seen, the less constant voters just didn't get out of bed that day. I don't know anyone who protest voted against McCain and Romney. We just sucked it up and did the best we could with some flawed candidates.

Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary a drunk at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (ZufZo)

197 176 This whole "I won't vote if" schtick is as childish as the dopes who promise to leave the country. Grow up and be an adult..."
Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (1YhYj)

Mega Dittos

Posted by: Howie Feltersnatch at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (ZedYY)

198 194 The R candidates are nowhere NEAR as bad as Hillary.

None of them.

Not by miles.


Yet We hear this crap over and over again....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (/dSsq)

199 Trump is terribly flawed--both as a person and as a
candidate. But he has a couple things going for him. He clearly sees
that the country is going in the wrong direction; and he can pull
Democrats and non-voters to the polls to vote for him. The media will
try to destroy him. But I don't think they can. And he CAN beat Hillary.

Posted by: JoeF. at February 27, 2016 06:33 PM (Asn7d)


This is also my appraisal. This is why he's my second choice after Cruz. And if he does jailbreak some people from the Democrat plantation, they may be useful in forming a real third party later on. A lot of the best people I've ever met used to be Democrats.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (HalrA)

200 >>What I learned from 8 years of Obama is that a candidate has to motivate the base to win. If McCain and Romney didn't excite partisans like me, how were they going to fire anyone else up? They were not so electable when voting day arrived. Obama, on the other hand, had school kids singing songs about him.

Do you really have to get excited to perform your most basic civic duty? I find that whole blame the candidate for me not voting to be crap.

If you don't want to vote then don't. But the only one to blame for that is you. Nobody ever said you get the perfect candidate every cycle.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (/tuJf)

201 As a Canadian, I don't have a vote. I'm just calling out what I see as dishonest behavior on your part.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (afR/C)

Doesn't that make you eligible to vote for Cruz?

Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (RcpcZ)


I respect the guy, and I really don't think he is unqualified by reason of birth. I also respect Trump, and Carson, but have little or no brief for the GOPe candidates, because the GOP elite has fucked over their base so badly.


I also don't think Donald Trump is any kind of a conservative. He is a classical liberal, who happens to share conservative opinions on a couple of hot-button issues. Thing is, because he is not an ideologue, and indeed prides himself on being a deal maker, he could be open to persuasion to do the right thing. Which means, if he becomes President, conservatives will have to pressure him relentlessly. Because you know the Left will be.


But perhaps electing Trump will allow a few Conservative goals to be achieved. Maybe electing the "wrong guy" will get the "right thing" done in some cases, whereas losing the general with the "right guy" means you lose the whole enchilada.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (afR/C)

202 "I will only vote for my guy and no one else."

Sounds like a Trump voter.

Posted by: Amerigo Chattin at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (Ws3y8)

203 I've been astounded at how people took to their candidates so early and so ferociously this season.

Yeah, its gotten very odd. Especially after last time seeing how things turned out.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (39g3+)

204 End of story. And if you disagree, it's about class and ego for you, not "principles."

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:02 PM (/CcMm)


Not really. More the a Cloward-Piven strategy; not bringing about the change desired, but compelling the change desired. And, no, it will not be gentle.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (O4NI/)

205 "If I can't write his name in, I'll sit this one out."

So that means you will go away then right? I mean, if you are throwing in the towel and not voting then why should you have the right to remain a part of the conversation. No one wants to hear you bitch and moan when it goes to shit.

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (WnCSK)

206 Cruz is un-electable, pure and simple. If he's the nominee, it will be Hillary in a landslide--even if she's under indictment.

Principles, schminciples. We can have all the principles in the world, but we'll be holding them--along with our dicks--when Hillary runs away with it.

It shouldn't be that way, but it is.

Posted by: JoeF. at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (Asn7d)

207 OK..... lets say by the Grace of God Cruz DOES get elected... past his own dirty politics.

He has no real friends or big base of support in Washington...

So... who picks his staff? WALLSTREET? (I'm sure his Wife has a few friends there...)...

You will get a President with all the Principals you want... who can't get anything done...

I don't see Ted Cruz being enough of an executive to be able to FIX it...

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 05:59 PM (RK8AH)


Well, Don, your concern is duly noted. And, fwiw, I'd rather have a President w Principles instead of Principals. Have a nice day.

Posted by: olddog in mo at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (Dhht7)

208 Well You can really count on Hillary! to extend that....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:35 PM (/dSsq)


Agreed. I was just saying that Hillary! isn't the only existential threat on the field. We can lose by winning, too.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (HalrA)

209 Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:25 PM (t5zYU)

Cruz helped GW with the legal foundation of the Compassionate Con view on Immigration when he worked as the Legal Advisor to GWs campaign.

And as someone who was a Dual Citizen himself..... do you really think he will take a hard line on immigration issues?

Posted by: Don Quixote at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (RK8AH)

210 No one wants to hear you bitch and moan when it goes to shit.

New to these part, I see.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:38 PM (rwI+c)

211 Yet We hear this crap over and over again....


Hillary is corrupt to the core of her soul.

None of the R candidates are even remotely that bad.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:38 PM (qUNWi)

212 I will vote for ANYONE over the Bitch of Benghazi.
ANYONE.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 06:38 PM (T/5A0)

213 211 Yet We hear this crap over and over again....


Hillary is corrupt to the core of her soul.

None of the R candidates are even remotely that bad.



Agreed...

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:38 PM (/dSsq)

214 "I will vote for ANYONE over the Bitch of Benghazi.
ANYONE."

+1

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:39 PM (WnCSK)

215 212 I will vote for ANYONE over the Bitch of Benghazi.
ANYONE.


Me too....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:39 PM (/dSsq)

216 #167: I agree, and that's a huge part of why I support Trump.

Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler... Ask not for whom The Donald Trumps. at February 27, 2016 06:39 PM (0OG8D)

217 Cruz is my man. Absolutely. But. Trump over Hillary. Even though I have not a clue as to what he might do. But I do know what she will do. And what Trump might do can't be worse. In this case, better the unknown than the known.

Posted by: Skookumchuk at February 27, 2016 06:39 PM (/WPPJ)

218 "I will only vote for my guy and no one else."

Sounds like a Trump voter.

Posted by: Amerigo Chattin at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (Ws3y


Sounds like a lot of non Trump voters too.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 06:40 PM (qUNWi)

219 135
As a Canadian, I don't have a vote. I'm just calling out what I see as dishonest behavior on your part.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:11 PM (afR/C)

Doesn't that make you eligible to vote for Cruz?
Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:22 PM (RcpcZ)



LOL. And that's why I keep coming back here.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:40 PM (sdi6R)

220 What worries me is that if we run a nominee that depresses conservative turnout, we'll lose not just the WH - again - but also the Senate and weaken the House.

Posted by: Y-not (@moxiemom) at February 27, 2016 06:08 PM (t5zYU)


Difference between staying home vs. not voting the top of the ticket. I expect the turnout will be there. I also predict that the difference between, say, the total votes for the House candidates vs. the total votes for the Presidency will be embarrassingly large.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (O4NI/)

221 So Hillary! is already parading out Trumps "victims." This should go well....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (/dSsq)

222 I'll vote for Cruz enthusiastically.

No ifs ands or buts.


Trump - eh, okay fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine. i'll vote for him.


Rubio - Nope. Go fuck yourself. I won't actively vote for someone who will destroy my children' future.


Any weasel the GOPe pulls out of a deadlocked convention cuz of Romney and GOPe horseshit-

Oh, hell, no. Double go fuck yourself. If you weren't willing to play the game, but want a freebie handed to you, I've got zero use for you.

Posted by: naturalfake at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (KUa85)

223 A vote for Cruz in the primaries is hammering your shit into the door of the Republican Party. Voting for Cruz in the primaries is voting your principles. But he won't be the nominee barring a miracle. A vote for him also helps shield him from being scapegoated when a Trump is the nominee. But the GE is a different story. You can vote FOR a candidate or you can vote AGAINST the other candidate. Staying home or voting for a hopeless cause is your right, but don't be surprised if it further marginalizes your POV.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (1YhYj)

224 ""THIS IS MY CANDIDATE AND I CANNOT BE MOVED!"
really. Really? *tilts head*"

yeah there is some of that maybe .. I went from Walker to Cruz to Trump.

I listened to Cruz this afternoon, a clip of him with a few folks at the end of Cavuto. I bothered to transcribe it because "this will end Trump" if he really said it. But surely it is Cruz doing his "extrapolating on an extrapolation" and turning it into a quote. And it irritates me because Cruz does this all the time.

Ted Cruz:
"at that debate Donald explicitly argued with me and he said "Ted you've got to be willing to cut a deal with the Democrats on the Supreme Court, you've got to be willing to cut a deal with the Democrats on religious liberty.

(looking serious) I will not cut a deal giving away your religious liberty I will not cut a deal giving away the second amendment. And Donald Trump is telling us that's what he intends to do"

Ted Cruz Saturday with a small crowd

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (eUbDe)

225 The Solutions going forward are no longer political, they are personal. It simply doesn't matter if Cruz or Trump or even Rubio gets into office, they are only one man standing against an entire political scheme that is unraveling the nation. The true problems in this country originated from our culture. The Conservatives ceded territory in the culture war for the past 30 years, and the result is a bunch of stage 1 thinking sub-morans that are motivated primarily by emotional stimuli . Promise them anything, make them compliant and dependent, and you guarantee their vote for life. No one person, or even a group of people, can reverse the damage that's been done to our culture for 60 years.
If you really want to accomplish change, you must do so in your individual lives with the people that you move and sit with. If you claim to be as principled as you are, you will live those principles everyday, teach those principles to your children, and enforce those principles in the people that you deal with on a day to day basis. Expecting any politician to fight for your principles borders on lunacy.

Posted by: Saltydonnie at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (/lLfc)

226 What I learned from 8 years of Obama is that a candidate has to motivate the base to win.

Yep. Obama didn't win the middle, he didn't get almost any votes from the right, especially the second time. He won because he pulled so many in on the left and guys that didn't ever used to vote that he got it close enough to cheat a win. That was his only trick, his only skill is organizing. And if he can be motivated to do it for Hillary again, she can get the same kind of win.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (39g3+)

227 Imma repeat one of my broken record blebs. Please do not stay home or leave the President slot blank if the GOPe gets Rubio in or its Trump and you can't vote for him. Vote for constitution party or Libertarian or write in Scott Walker or Cruz or Jindal/ or zombie Reagan but do register your dissension because all the jerks in the system WILL take silence as consent.

Posted by: PaleRider at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (chkUd)

228
I still believe in and hold allegiance to my country as it was created.

Nothing will ever change that in ANY manner.

As many of you here did, I swore an oath to protect and defend her.

That oath has no expiration date.

The issues we face WILL be resolved, because the bedrock is yet solid.

That bedrock I call the Trinity.

It is the Declaration of Independence--the WHY.

Next is the Bill of Rights--that which is inalienable.

Third, the Constitution--the blueprint.

Hewing to these precepts has allowed us to flourish and become the most exceptional country and people on the planet.

We still are. What needs doing is to cleanse the layer of filth from our land laid on us by the left.

It IS doable and it will entail an enormous amount of effort.

We WILL prevail in this task,because we are Americans, and as such are denied the option of failure.

Rant off.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (P/8aq)

229 The thing with Trump is that he will not justbe substantially the same as Hillary, it is that he will teach the GOP that there is nothing wrong with crony capitalism as long as you have the right figurehead. The every other pol is a corrupt morally bankrupt swine but they need to feel that there are places they can't go. Trump just amplifies and justifies their contempt.

The thing about burn it all down is something comes after, and some will have to live with the consequences, unless you intend to murder humanity off or commit mass suicide you have to live in the world after defeat. And history's arc is long and uncertain and the money is running out. The real crisis is yet to come, prepare for that.

Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (DSwhx)

230 Okay. So, Horde Principles:

1. Anyone but Hillary.

2. Cruz or Trump.

3. Trump or Cruz.

4. Son of a son of a mailman.

5. Go fuck yourself with a cactus, Mario.

6. FEEL. THE. BERN!

7. Still not Hillary.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (HalrA)

231 Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (/tuJf)

Maybe I wasn't clear. I voted for McCain and Romney. But, there are a lot of marginal voters who did not. Because they sucked and were centrists. No one gets excited by centrists. That's why Obama got ten million more votes than any democrat before. That's why people gather in the thousands for Sanders. Motivating the base is the candidate's job.

Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary a drunk at February 27, 2016 06:44 PM (ZufZo)

232 EXACTLY what I would say if I was smart and could write worth a shit. Thanks for putting this out there for those of us less limber of tongue (finger?). It very well captures my own thoughts and experience.

Thing is, at this point I'm more sad than mad.....a populace who truly understood the stakes of the game at this point would be making wholly different decisions on BOTH sides of the aisle.

The beatitudes say "Blessed are those who mourn: for they will be comforted." I could use some comfort, cuz I know I damn sure mourn

Posted by: FITP at February 27, 2016 06:44 PM (giq4g)

233 I agree, vote your conscience.

You have to sleep with your conscience. You don't have to sleep with Trump.

Posted by: chemjeff - PuppyMonkeyBaby '16 at February 27, 2016 06:44 PM (uZNvH)

234 Well, Don, your concern is duly noted. And, fwiw,
I'd rather have a President w Principles instead of Principals. Have a
nice day.

Posted by: olddog in mo at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (Dhht7)

Well Dog.... ...Sorry if my spelling mistake offends you.... well.... no.... not really....If you dismiss an opinion so readily, it speaks more to your mindset, than mine.
Typical leftist crap... to dismiss without thought... with a bit of sarcasm thrown in....
Funny.... this used to be a place where we could voice opinion without the usual crap.... sadly that changed recently....

Posted by: Don Quixote, ex BB Wolf, Ex Romeo13 at February 27, 2016 06:44 PM (RK8AH)

235 Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 06:36 PM (/tuJf)

Maybe I wasn't clear. I voted for McCain and Romney. But, there are a lot of marginal voters who did not. Because they (the candidates) sucked and were centrists. No one gets excited by centrists. That's why Obama got ten million more votes than any democrat before. That's why people gather in the thousands for Sanders. Motivating the base is the candidate's job.

Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary a drunk at February 27, 2016 06:45 PM (ZufZo)

236 I wonder how many pro-lifers here are not going to vote if they don't get "their"candidate. These were always the biggest hypocrites. The Erik Ericksons and the like. Its all about the left has blood on their hands over abortion but then they won't vote Trump or Rubio or whoever because of their so-called principles. So which principle is it that is more important than pro life?

Hillary will guarantee government mandated abortion in all health plans (and much more) and abortions will increase 3 fold at least. Whose hands will the blood be on then?

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:45 PM (WnCSK)

237 Three are things the Democrats would not try like amnesty because it would cost them big time in the next election.

It was only the loss of Eric Cantor that kept the GOPe from attempting amnesty II.

Democrats also will not come for our guns with elected officials. They'll need the courts for that and good luck enforcing a court-ordered gun grab.

Elected GOPe officeholders have been much more successful jerking the country to the left.

Posted by: Valiant- Hot Air Suicide Watcher at February 27, 2016 06:45 PM (2bqlb)

238 230 Okay. So, Horde Principles:

1. Anyone but Hillary.

2. Cruz or Trump.

3. Trump or Cruz.

4. Son of a son of a mailman.

5. Go fuck yourself with a cactus, Mario.

6. FEEL. THE. BERN!

7. Still not Hillary.
Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (HalrA)

Still seems too pro-Hillary!

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:45 PM (iHjB5)

239 Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (P/8aq)


Thread winner, irongrandpa. Amen to that a million times.


We're on death ground here. The only way out is through.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:45 PM (HalrA)

240 I hear ya brother. There is no way that I would vote for The Rube or The Canadian either based on principles.

I can handle 8 years of Hillary or Sanders too until the perfect candidate finally rolls up into my principled zone who can actually be elected in the general.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (6Xbsz)

241 Whose hands will the blood be on then?

The people who voted for Hillary. Maybe I should repost my comment on Single Issue vs Primary Issue voters. I'll go dig it up.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (rwI+c)

242 President Trump would not be the end of this nation. President Hillary would. President Rubio would.

I've found my principles.

Posted by: iforgot at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (5o5ek)

243 Only Cruz for me. I will not attempt to drag another lame candidate across the finish line again.

Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary a drunk at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (ZufZo)

244 This whole "I won't vote if" schtick is as childish as the dopes who promise to leave the country. Grow up and be an adult. Sit out and pout if you want, but don't be surprised if you get left by the wayside.
Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 06:32 PM (1YhYj)
----------------
This is coming from both sides... mostly the Trump supporters. If they do't get their way they are going look like Donald's pout and sit out.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (7GQM/)

245 Look vote for whoever you want in the primary. But if you don't vote for the Republican (or just stay home) you really are voting for the Democrat. Nice for you to state lofty principles but that is the reality.

Posted by: Zogger at February 27, 2016 06:47 PM (wwKtS)

246 227 Imma repeat one of my broken record blebs. Please do not stay home or leave the President slot blank if the GOPe gets Rubio in or its Trump and you can't vote for him. Vote for constitution party or Libertarian or write in Scott Walker or Cruz or Jindal/ or zombie Reagan but do register your dissension because all the jerks in the system WILL take silence as consent.
Posted by: PaleRider at February 27, 2016 06:43 PM (chkUd)


^^This. I would never, ever not vote.

There are always downticket races to consider, and if you dislike the choices for President, then vote third party or write in Cthulhu. (Why vote for the lesser evil?)

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:47 PM (sdi6R)

247 I am retired from a highly, and I mean very highly, regulated business. I personally lobbied, and met with dems and repubs and publicly appeared to agree with anyone that had power over our businesses. The livelihood of our hundreds of employees and our families came first. And in our industry lobbying group, our outward face seldom matched what we believed, for most of us. So Trump's past statements are a very poor guide to his beliefs, since they reflect only what he was willing to say to stave off the regulatory hammerfalls. Most of the regs. that affect us come from Moscow on the Colorado (Austin) and DC, and ask Rick Perry if you don't believe me how seriously evil those people are...



I don't know what to think about what Trump believes, but doubt that his public statements are a reliable guide to his beliefs. I worry that he is too soft on Israel v. the Arabs. I worry that he is not willing to consider expelling the Muslims, that have been imported here by the State Department under the UN refugee resettlement agency agreements, and believe me, it will come to that. The muslims are 10 thousand times more dangerous to us than all the Mexicans and Central Americans. I worry that I don't have any clear idea how he will nominate agency heads and judges, but have a feeling that he will be less vulnerable to pandering and influence than Rubio or Cruz.


I've watched Sen. Cruz closely, since he ran for senate and I enthusiastically supported him and donated to his campaign. As his years in office have passed, I have come to a totally different opinion of him. I don't like him, I don't trust him. He is a pure litigator and a massively ineffective person, totally weird. If he were alone in a room, I seriously doubt that he could persuade himself to follow himself. He reminds me of descriptions of Soviet Commisars - always haranguing and expecting farmers or soldiers or factory workers to see the light and produce for the motherland... He has never worked even a single day for a for profit, at-risk-of-firing-or-bankruptcy business in his life. A proper government lapdog.



Sen. Rubio strikes me as a completely spineless, immoral and vain nancy boy. Shallow, preening, and highly vulnerable to pandering. Like Cruz, he has never worked even a single day for a for profit, at-risk-of-firing-or-bankruptcy business in his life. Another proper government lapdog, except vain and easily manipulated, see Schumer, Chuck, Gang of 8.



On Trump, he is definitely full of sharp quills, one hell of a dangerous porcupine. Some comments about what Rubes has been saying about him since Thursday.

- The people he hired a Mar a Lago, were here legally, with proper papers, and worked for peak season jobs.

- about the Trump Tower illegals... I have hired contractors that hired subcontractors that hired ilegals. All we, the owners, can do is verify that the contractors and subs documented I-9s. We are not allowed, meaning it is a crime, literally, to ask for additional paperwork to verify eligibility. And yes, it is so difficult to fight charges of conspiracy that his lawyers probably advised him to settle, is my guess, I have no knowledge or evidence other than my own life.

Anyway, we are in a fine pickle, as Ollie used to say...

Posted by: Houston-Nica at February 27, 2016 06:47 PM (YreNt)

248 The thing that makes me feel best is that right at least, it really does not look like Rubio will win, and Jeb is already out. I call that a win for all of us.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:47 PM (39g3+)

249 206 Cruz is un-electable, pure and simple. If he's the nominee, it will be Hillary in a landslide--even if she's under indictment.

Principles, schminciples. We can have all the principles in the world, but we'll be holding them--along with our dicks--when Hillary runs away with it.

It shouldn't be that way, but it is.
Posted by: JoeF. at February 27, 2016 06:37 PM (Asn7d)
------------------------
So Rubio it is then? Or maybe Kasich?

Because if Cruz is "unelectable," what can we say about Trump? Do you not realize how many people out there detest him? They find him angry, nasty, clownish, and embarrassing.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 06:49 PM (T/5A0)

250 "I agree, vote your conscience.

You have to sleep with your conscience. You don't have to sleep with Trump."

Sound like a millenial....me, me, me, me...

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:49 PM (WnCSK)

251 Where the hell is all this money Cruz is supposed to have?
Why isn't he putting up Fraud/Conman memes on the internet.
Why aren't there any funny Youtubes mocking Trump? Cruz can be very funny, and he does a spot-on Billy Crystal.
Why isn't he leveraging the intertubes?

While I'm hoping Cruz can pull it off, I'm turning my attention down ticket. We get enough of our guys in congress and the Senate, they'll give a President Trump what we want him to sign. And hopefully flush out the McCain/Grahmnesty wing while we're at it.

If Cruz doesn't win, I'll hold my nose and vote Trump or Rubio. I hold out hope that maybe the Rubio who trashed Charlie Crist will be resurrected. I will never vote for a Dem. As far as I'm concerned the Democratic party has been engaged in a war to destroy our country since before the Civil War. And they've never been held to account.

Posted by: Iblis at February 27, 2016 06:50 PM (rP2JJ)

252 "Ted you've got to be willing to cut a deal with the Democrats on the
Supreme Court, you've got to be willing to cut a deal with the Democrats
on religious liberty.
------------------------------

I've been reading "The Art of the Deal." When Trump says "you've got to cut a deal," what he means is "you've got to negotiate your way to getting what you want."

Posted by: iforgot at February 27, 2016 06:50 PM (5o5ek)

253 So Hillary! is already parading out Trumps "victims." This should go well....
Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:42 PM (/dSsq)

Good...let's get it on. Trump needs to parade all of Billy Jeff's rape victims and Hillary's fired for doing your job victims. Maybe even roll out Ambassador Steven's dead, bloody corpse for effect to Queen's "Another One Bites the Dust".
Lock N Load baby.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 27, 2016 06:50 PM (ej1L0)

254 45 Trump being self-funded is a big deal to me.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Anyone who still believes this oft debunked malarkey at this late date probably deserves to be ruled by Trump.

He is not self-funding.

He never has been.

He doesn't have enough liquid assets to be self-funding even if he wanted to be.

Sheesh, like who you like, but facts are ornery things. At least make their acquaintance first.

Posted by: Weirddave at February 27, 2016 06:51 PM (N8hFs)

255 "what can we say about Trump? Do you not realize how many people out there detest him? They find him angry, nasty, clownish, and embarrassing. "


And???? Many on the left feel the same way about Hillary but they will still line up and vote for her. At least they understand how to win.

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:52 PM (WnCSK)

256 "45 Trump being self-funded is a big deal to me.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Anyone who still believes this oft debunked malarkey at this late date probably deserves to be ruled by Trump.

He is not self-funding.

He never has been.

He doesn't have enough liquid assets to be self-funding even if he wanted to be.

Sheesh, like who you like, but facts are ornery things. At least make their acquaintance first."

I like it that he is self funding also. That's a big deal to me even though he doesn't think so so much.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 06:52 PM (6Xbsz)

257 Do you not realize how many people out there detest him? They find him angry, nasty, clownish, and embarrassing.





Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 06:49 PM (T/5A0)
----------------------------------I find him all these things, but I'll vote for him. Don't mistake favorability for electability.

Posted by: iforgot at February 27, 2016 06:52 PM (5o5ek)

258 Would Trump govern well? I doubt it. But, unlike Hillary, at least he wouldn't actively try to make our country worse.
Posted by: Ed Anger at February 27, 2016 06:10 PM (RcpcZ)


The only thing that Trump can or will do deliberately is self-promo ego-feed. Inconsistently hop-scotching to his next most personally favorable policy moment will be a political whip-sawing of irreparable violence. "Loose canon" doesn't begin to cover the damage that he could wreak.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (O4NI/)

259 FYI

Anyone saying that Trump, Cruz, or Rubio is "unelectable" needs to take a gander at the RCP averages--both nationally and by state. Hillary doesn't even have a 3-point GE lead on Trump in the general.

If we'd just unite and stop naval gazing and boo-hooing, we'd realize we're about to take back the damned White House.

Get it together for Chrissakes.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (/CcMm)

260 This is coming from both sides... mostly the Trump supporters. If they do't get their way they are going look like Donald's pout and sit out.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (7GQM/)


Really? Project much, honey? Most of the actual Trump supporters here have said they would be fine with Cruz (or one of the others) but favor Trump because they feel he can win the general.


And you still haven't answered me as to who is paying you. You know, you and redbanzai, and petunia are just so batshit-crazy anti-Trump, that I wonder if maybe he is paying you all to post crazy nonsense, thereby smearing his legitimate opponents by association.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (afR/C)

261 QUESTION for the Trump supporters- Are you going to try and keep The Senate and Congress Republican or are you going to reach across the aisle and vote for the Dems.???

Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (7GQM/)

262 He doesn't have enough liquid assets to be self-funding even if he wanted to be.

Well, given how little money he's spent so far, I could practically afford to run for president but yeah. He's not impossible to corrupt and he's relying on a lot of money for his lifestyle from others, like the multiple times he's been bailed out by Saudi princes.

For guys like Trump, there's no such thing as "enough money." How much is enough? More.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:54 PM (39g3+)

263 Posted by: Weirddave at February 27, 2016 06:51 PM (N8hFs)

"He doesn't have enough liquid assets to be self-funding even if he wanted to be. "

Like you would know. Who the hell are you...his financial advisor? What do you do for a living that gives you such insight? You saw his books? Or do you get your news from Media Matters. You are the one who has the issue with facts.

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:54 PM (WnCSK)

264 "And???? Many on the left feel the same way about Hillary but they will still line up and vote for her. At least they understand how to win."

But,but,but they are voting against whatever feeble principles that they have.

Of course they win and the Republican held Congress(that is packed with principled, redefined conservatives) gives them every single thing that they want and then some but in the end. It was, you know, the principle of the deal.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (6Xbsz)

265 257 Do you not realize how many people out there detest him? They find him angry, nasty, clownish, and embarrassing.




You're right.... How did We end up with such F**ked up Candidates? I don't like any of them..... It's pains Me to have to vote for any of them, but I will to keep hillary! out.... I just don't see Her losing....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (/dSsq)

266 " He's put his core team from 2012 back together including at an event earlier this week."

so, Mittens is up to his usual tricks... running hard to beat conservatives, just so the GOPe can lose in November...

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (5PGBa)

267 261 QUESTION for the Trump supporters- Are you going to try and keep The Senate and Congress Republican or are you going to reach across the aisle and vote for the Dems.???

Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (7GQM/)


I CAN'T HEAR YOU! YOU SHOULD HAVE USED MOAR CAPS!

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (sdi6R)

268 This is coming from both sides... mostly the Trump supporters. If they do't get their way they are going look like Donald's pout and sit out.
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (7GQM/)
so you are stating you are voting Trump, if Cruz and rubio fail?

Posted by: willow at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (L1+sh)

269 Trump had his two sons with him after Nevada, both NRA and hunters. And Donald carries. No way he's appointing a gun grabber.

But Cruz supported Roberts (yeah he was not in the Senate), while Coulter warned us about Roberts as a stealth candidate. She seems to be a better judge of such character.

I'm not sure what makes Trump a leftist in his history, on POTUS issues that count. In House Committee testimony in 1991 one rep thanked him for understanding how our jobs were being exported. R's and D' both hung on his every word on tax policy to help slow housing. He said it could be slowed later if it sped up, but they accelerated rather than slowed.

At that time he also noted the stock market bubble (before Greenspan spoke of irrational exuberance) and that tax policy pushed money into markets rather than other ventures. Volcker had been Fed' Chairman under Reagan, then we got Easy Al Greenspan and all the bubbles started, and continue now.

On the important things I look at, Trump has a long history as an America First conservative.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 27, 2016 06:56 PM (eUbDe)

270 Posted by: Weirddave at February 27, 2016 06:51 PM (N8hFs)

He's spent so little and raised so little (and contributed so little of his own money) so far that it's hard to tell.

As for how liquid he is? Who knows?

Posted by: Amy Schumer at February 27, 2016 06:56 PM (AkOaV)

271 /off horrible comedian sock

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (AkOaV)

272 QUESTION for the Trump supporters- Are you going to try and keep The Senate and Congress Republican or are you going to reach across the aisle and vote for the Dems.???

Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?

Answer, paraphrasing a bit.

Chuck Todd to Ted Cruz; Will you work with Nancy Pelosi.

Ted Cruz to Chuck Todd; Absolutely.

I say we get a bit of Reagan/O'Neil action going where the Republicans aren't capitulating on the entire deal.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (6Xbsz)

273 "But yes Hildabeast winning is the end, every leftist court case will go the the leftist Supreme Court, 2nd A- goodbye."

no: then you'll see why the 2nd Amendment was put into place.

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (5PGBa)

274 Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (7GQM/)

I CAN'T HEAR YOU! YOU SHOULD HAVE USED MOAR CAPS!
Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (sdi6R)



WHAAAAAAT?

THE TV'S ON TOO LOUD!!!

Posted by: naturalfake at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (KUa85)

275 If Cruz loses his bid, then he go back to the Senate and show them what a pissed off Conservative is like.

Last time that was filibustering in vain and unable to get a second on his proposals.

Cruz should cut a deal soon for Supreme Court or VP with Trump.

Otherwise, the GOPe is going to shove Rubio or a brokered convention pick like Romney on us. The rumor is already going around that Romney is in if when Rubio loses his home state of FL.

Posted by: cool breeze at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (ckvus)

276 Posted by: iforgot at February 27, 2016 06:50 PM (5o5ek)


Making deals, to a person like Trump, means "I get what I want, and throw you a bone. Anyway, there's a bone involved somehow. But long story short, I get what I want. Now pray I don't alter the deal any further."


He's surrounded himself with good people, so he has the benefit of the doubt as far as I see it. I simply don't think Jeff Sessions would lead us astray (and if he were running for President, he'd probably be my choice.)

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (HalrA)

277 Right there with you, IronG.

Posted by: Lincolntf at February 27, 2016 06:58 PM (2cS/G)

278 Look at the comments from Reason because the purity I hear here sounds just like them.

This is a country of 320 million people, and Ihave to compromise to get what I want in just one state. Compromising on the candidate who terrifies Harry Reid and Lindsay Graham the most hardly feels like it at all.

Now if you want purity how can one want Trump?

If you want someone to validate your anger, Cruz does that too, listen to the man he is a true believer. The only thing Trump believes in is his id.

But when Trump enacts campaign finance reform, appoints his sister to the supreme court, and tells the IRS they are free to go after everyone on the right who doesn't follow Trump, you can poibt to the Wall.

And when he falls and our civili liberties are gone and conservatism is ruined, Kamala Harris will pick up the pieces, and let the wall crumble.

Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 06:58 PM (DSwhx)

279 Great news! The rumor is Romney may be jumping in soon. So all you Trump haters now have someone to vote for. A 2-time loser who woundn't stand and fight. Sounds like he's just your speed. Principles, principles....

Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:59 PM (WnCSK)

280 260 I think a corollary to the old saying about "Do not ascribe to malice what can be easily explained by stupidity" should have an update for the web: "Do not ascribe to people being 'bought' what can easily be explained by people being people."

People have a tendency to like the candidates they want, and dislike the guys running against them. When people disagree with them, their positions harden and they become even more fervent.

I am not saying no one is, but I think most of the stuff on display here can easily be described by "people being people."

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:59 PM (iHjB5)

281 This CNN election coverage is hilarious.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (AkOaV)

282 Vote dem. Let's get this inevitable burn over with.

Posted by: Drill_Thrawl at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (YtbIl)

283 Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:59 PM (iHjB5)


My other corollary to that saying is "nor automatically ascribe to stupidity what can be explained as well by malice." Keep your options open. Sometimes it's both.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (HalrA)

284 Winning SC is a "staggering, staggering victory" for Hillary.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (AkOaV)

285 I don't think I like most of the newbies. I hope they don't hang around after the election. They're too ... caffeinated.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (rwI+c)

286 Winning SC is a "staggering, staggering victory" for Hillary.


At least that gave Me a good laugh...

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (/dSsq)

287 On the important things I look at, Trump has a long history as an America First conservative.


Posted by: Illiniwek at February 27, 2016 06:56 PM (eUbDe)

Like single payer, supporting planned parenthood and amnesty? All conservative principles. Late term abortion was another conservative position he took.
I wish people would actually look at his record and not what he says today on the campaign trail. Why do you think he was threatening to sue Cruz for his ad? Because he knew it was true and damaging. The only way to combat what he actually said was to insinuate that Cruz was lying and therefore likely to end up in court.
He's NOT a conservative.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (pUDQf)

288 285 I don't think I like most of the newbies. I hope they don't hang around after the election. They're too ... caffeinated.
Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (rwI+c)

They're election-season drive by posters, I doubt they intend to hang around.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (AkOaV)

289 Hi,

Hope to being seeing you soon.

As I lay down like a dried up old dog turd and do nothing like I did with Obama.

Don't you just love reruns?

Posted by: Mitt Romney at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (KUa85)

290 And when he falls and our civili liberties are gone
and conservatism is ruined, Kamala Harris will pick up the pieces, and
let the wall crumble.

Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 06:58 PM (DSwhx)


Logical error. GIGO effect detected.

Conservatism has already been ruined by the Boehner, McConnell, and Ryan crowd.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:02 PM (HalrA)

291 "staggering, staggering victory" for Hillary.


She usually is staggering....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:02 PM (/dSsq)

292 Posted by: Houston-Nica at February 27, 2016 06:47 PM (YreNt)

What he said. I run a small business and I have seen these things, too. Trump's so-called inconsistent positions are completely understandable if you run a business.

Posted by: Avogadra at February 27, 2016 07:02 PM (UDMos)

293 At least that gave Me a good laugh...
Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (/dSsq)

CNN has this narrative all set up. I'm laughing watching it.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:02 PM (AkOaV)

294 I've been reading "The Art of the Deal." When Trump says "you've got to cut a deal," what he means is "you've got to negotiate your way to getting what you want."

Posted by: iforgot
------------------

And yet, when I hear that, I hear "I'm ready to compromise."

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 27, 2016 07:02 PM (9mTYi)

295 I missed voting for Reagan by months. I have never, not once, been able to vote FOR someone. It's always been the lesser of two evils. If you're waiting for the perfect candidate, he ain't coming. Vote for whoever is closest to you in the primary, then do it again in the general.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at February 27, 2016 07:03 PM (kTF2Z)

296 Hhahah, Romney may jump into the race?

Was that the stooge who didn't get the principled vote the last time out and lost an unlosable race?

I think it was.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 07:03 PM (6Xbsz)

297 >>>>> Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM
-----
This is why Ace said you're a dick.
I SAID ACE YOURE A DICK!!!!
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW??????

Posted by: L, Elle at February 27, 2016 07:03 PM (Hr+ZL)

298 295 I missed voting for Reagan by months. I have never, not once, been able to vote FOR someone. It's always been the lesser of two evils. If you're waiting for the perfect candidate, he ain't coming. Vote for whoever is closest to you in the primary, then do it again in the general.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at February 27, 2016 07:03 P


Why? That makes too much sense....

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:03 PM (/dSsq)

299 My mom sued the condom factory and won


I laughed out loud.

Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 07:03 PM (rwI+c)

300 I am not saying no one is, but I think most of the stuff on display here can easily be described by "people being people."

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 06:59 PM (iHjB5)


If the posters in question had any presence on this blog whatsoever, other than to spread FUD about Trump, I'd agree with you. I'm not painting with a broad brush here, no way.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 07:04 PM (afR/C)

301 Cruz going back to the senate goes back with power and status, not "junior senator from Texas." He's a serious contender for the presidency, and even if he doesn't win, he took a state and came in 2nd in another (two others, mathematically). Each state he does well in gives him more power in congress when he goes back. If the Dems win, it won't matter because the GOP will presume the country loves the left. But if a Republican wins, yeah. Cruz comes back with clout, or as the President.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:04 PM (39g3+)

302 282
Vote dem. Let's get this inevitable burn over with.

Posted by: Drill_Thrawl at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (YtbIl)


Never, ever, ever vote for the Clinton Criminal Enterprise.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:04 PM (HalrA)

303 CNN wants Bernie to "shut it down" after his resounding defeat in SC.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (AkOaV)

304 I know for a fact that Hillary will sic the IRS on the right.

I know for a fact Hillary will sic the EPA on the right.

I know for a fact Hillary will sic the FCC on the right.

I know for a fact Hillary will sic the DOJ on the right.

I know for a fact Hillary will sic the everyfed thing on the right for 8 years.

Hillary is the enemy.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (qUNWi)

305 CNN wants Bernie to "shut it down" after his resounding defeat in SC.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (AkOaV)


Was He ever "really" running, or was He just giving cover to Hillary!?

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (/dSsq)

306 When Hillary lost by 20 pts in NH -- no big deal.

When Bernie loses (apparently by 20 pts, according to exit polls) -- SHUT IT DOWN, BERNIE!

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (AkOaV)

307 275
Otherwise, the GOPe is going to shove Rubio or a brokered convention pick like Romney on us. The rumor is already going around that Romney is in if when Rubio loses his home state of FL.
Posted by: cool breeze at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (ckvus)


And if the DNC forces Hillary! as the nominee, the young Bernie voters will be mightily pissed off.

Then things could get "sporty" as the Brits say.

The best thing that could come out of this election is if both parties split.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (sdi6R)

308 There's nothing quite as glorious as a swinging banhammer. Never fails to bring a smile to my face.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (HalrA)

309 One bright spot I noticed as a Cruzer, come next year, Ted will still be in public service, Angry Marco not so much.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 27, 2016 07:06 PM (rwI+c)

310
Was He ever "really" running, or was He just giving cover to Hillary!?
Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (/dSsq)

I don't know, I'm more commenting on the media and their narratives than anything else.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:06 PM (AkOaV)

311 I don't think I like most of the newbies. I hope they don't hang around after the election. They're too ... caffeinated.
Posted by: Grump928(C) opines at February 27, 2016 07:01 PM (rwI+c)


Newbs? A lot of the regulars have gone batshit, too.

MUMR's starting to look level-headed.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 07:06 PM (oVJmc)

312 If Mitt gets back in, MUMR is going to go China Syndrome not knowing which one to "mirror."

Posted by: Country Singer, Psalm 144:1 at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (GUBah)

313 Christopher my dream would be to see Cruz ,if He can't be our Winner candidate that who wins advocates for Him for Scotus.

a girl can dream .

Posted by: willow at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (L1+sh)

314 There's nothing quite as glorious as a swinging banhammer. Never fails to bring a smile to my face.

Who got banned this time?

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (qUNWi)

315 Hillary is the enemy.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (qUNWi)


Hillary is the enemy without. The enemy within is just as dangerous. If we're left with a vote of enemy without vs. enemy within, we're just plain screwed.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (HalrA)

316 >>The rumor is already going around that Romney is in if when Rubio loses his home state of FL.

That rumor is being spread by Roger Stone, a long time Trump operative, and he's doing it on InfoWars because he's been banned from most cable channels. I don't think I'm going to spend a lot of time considering possibility.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (/tuJf)

317 Great news! The rumor is Romney may be jumping in soon. So all you Trump haters now have someone to vote for. A 2-time loser who woundn't stand and fight. Sounds like he's just your speed. Principles, principles....
Posted by: Skeezix at February 27, 2016 06:59 PM (WnCSK)

Can't stand the guy.....boring, wooden, no flash, no bang. He's like a warm, flat beer after a hot summer day. Romney needs to go retire already and leave us alone.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (ej1L0)

318 I don't know, I'm more commenting on the media and their narratives than anything else.


I know, but it just seems "suspicious" that He really never went after Hillary! even when She "stole" His delegates...

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (/dSsq)

319 In truth the feckless principles that these redefined conservatives are talking about are crocodile tears, shed by those who just simply didn't have what it took to win the race.

That being said, if you can handle 8 years of Hillary or Sanders, I can too and at the end of that 8 years. I'll be back to back another candidate that does not require a purity test to support.

Posted by: Drider at February 27, 2016 07:08 PM (6Xbsz)

320 Who got banned this time?

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (qUNWi)


Just a MUMR getting clobbered, probably for the usual drivel.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:08 PM (HalrA)

321 Romney would be a bigger joke than he was last time.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 07:08 PM (oVJmc)

322 And you still haven't answered me as to who is paying you. You know, you and redbanzai, and petunia are just so batshit-crazy anti-Trump, that I wonder if maybe he is paying you all to post crazy nonsense, thereby smearing his legitimate opponents by association.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (afR/C)
-------------------------
Nobody is paying me.
Trump scares me because I don't trust him. I can't stand Hillary and Bernie and believe it's too important NOT to vote... even if it's not my preferred candidate.
I will vote for anyone other than Hillary or Bernie... even if I have to hold my nose.
Too much is at stake. I don't believe on "burning it to the ground" "let it burn" either (wow-tough words) because too much is at stake, especially this election.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (7GQM/)

323 I'm only sorry I won't live to see the enslavement of Chris Mathers grand children.

Posted by: Jack at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (/haNQ)

324 Vote dem. Let's get this inevitable burn over with.

Posted by: Drill_Thrawl at February 27, 2016 07:00 PM (YtbIl)


i hoestly entertained that idea for several hours. and decided i just couldn't force the burn.
and even though Bernie wouldn't be near as malicious, once More people got a tatse of Everything is deserved no need to earn.
we'd definately be finished.

so i couldn't even as mad as i am.

Posted by: willow at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (L1+sh)

325 CNN wants Bernie to "shut it down" after his resounding defeat in SC.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (AkOaV)



Meh.

Bernie never really goes after Hillary! or Obama for that matter.

i think he's a stalking-horse set up to give the Super Leftard Loonies of the Dims a chew toy, then-

at some point he'll shovel all of his support to Hillary!


That way, Hillary! can maintain some reasonably centrist lies for the rest of the campaign.

And if Rubio wins the nom, she can run to the right of him on immigration.

Triangulation, Baby!

That's the Clinton game.

Posted by: naturalfake at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (KUa85)

326 309
One bright spot I noticed as a Cruzer, come next year, Ted will still be in public service, Angry Marco not so much.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 27, 2016 07:06 PM (rwI+c)


That is definitely a bright spot. We'll still have Cruz for the future.

Trump is an option we only get once due to his age, and because of his potential to do some serious damage to the Democratic coalition (possibly breaking off the Blue Collar workers from them), he's not one we should ignore lightly. He's not the most likeable candidate ever, but the strategic implications of doing that kind of damage are enormous.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:10 PM (HalrA)

327 Clinton has won SC. Check the DDHQ for info

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:10 PM (8PbKi)

328 Agree 100%.

I'm done with the lesser of evils.

Posted by: Talon at February 27, 2016 07:11 PM (7pVXE)

329 We spend a lot of time talking about our own messed up party but what about the Democrats?

I have to believe a lot of Bernie's supporters will not vote for Hillary in the general. A lot of his people don't like her much. I doubt she can rally the base. Aren't they as likely to move towards Trump than her?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 07:11 PM (pUDQf)

330 322
Trump scares me because I don't trust him.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (7GQM/)


I don't trust Trump. I don't trust Cruz either.

None of the others are even remotely acceptable.

So here we are.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 07:12 PM (sdi6R)

331 I'm done with the lesser of evils.

It's not the lesser of two evils.

It's a human being v Hillary.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (qUNWi)

332 srsly, is Romney really going to jump in?
what does He have to offer now? His fighting spirit that we saw in 2012?
fgs no-no.

Posted by: willow at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (L1+sh)

333
Y'all know, if the nominee is one you absolutely CAN'T vote for you can do a write-in and then vote your choices down ticket.

Don't be sittin home, that down ticket vote is every bit as important as the one for president.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (P/8aq)

334
The best thing that could come out of this election is if both parties split.
Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (sdi6R)
Insert Iran/Iraq quote here.

Posted by: Colorado Alex at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (fC9RO)

335 Trump scares me because I don't trust him.

I trust Hillary will be the worst thing ever.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:14 PM (qUNWi)

336 Clinton has won SC. Check the DDHQ for info


(a) I'm showing no results at DD. Is there another url other than decisiondeskhq dot com?

(ii) What is the point of DD anyway?

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 07:14 PM (1xUj/)

337 Don't be sittin home, that down ticket vote is every bit as important as the one for president.


Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (P/8aq)


That is true, and a great point. The downticket vote can invalidate the one at the top, if the wrong one gets in.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:14 PM (HalrA)

338 The one thing I'll give to Trump that past Republican candidates didn't have. He's got the will to win. He doesn't give a shit what it takes, he'll do it. And after so many years of GOPe not giving their all to win, it is refreshing.
That's why I think he'd beat Hillary!.
Cruz and Rubio will beat her because she's an unlikable drunken brain damaged zombie.

Posted by: Iblis at February 27, 2016 07:15 PM (rP2JJ)

339 Three phone calls later - I see we're still beating people over the heads with baseball bats. Speaking of - isn't the first pre-season game this week?

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:15 PM (dFi94)

340 I don't believe on "burning it to the ground" "let it burn" either (wow-tough words) because too much is at stake, especially this election.

That's because you haven't yet figured out that its already burning and we're past the point when elections were about what's at stake. We've crossed that bridge already; nobody we elect will fix this. The only difference in who is elected is how fast, not if.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:15 PM (39g3+)

341 I trust Hillary will be the worst thing ever.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:14 PM (qUNWi)


If Hillary wins, the day after she wins, I become a Texas Secessionist.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:15 PM (HalrA)

342 Tom Baker Dr. Who on RetroTV.

I love my antenna.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 07:16 PM (oVJmc)

343 Same with me and DD as Bander said. I'm showing 0's on totals like nothing has come in

Posted by: L, Elle at February 27, 2016 07:16 PM (Hr+ZL)

344 318 ---- it just seems "suspicious" that He really never went after Hillary! even when She "stole" His delegates...

Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:07 PM (/dSsq)
-------------
If he were a serious contender, he would have hit her on the e-mails and conflict-of-interest corruption.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at February 27, 2016 07:16 PM (T/5A0)

345 I have to believe a lot of Bernie's supporters will not vote for Hillary in the general.

I suspect a lot of Bernie's supporters would not vote for Bernie, either.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:17 PM (39g3+)

346 Remember all those principled conservatives? The ones that turn into squishes in office? Yeah a vote for Cruz is a vote for one of those. Cruz wouldn't even talk immigration if he could get around it. He is getting establishment money and working with the establishment candidate to beat Trump.

Do you really think Goldman Sachs would have given his wife a 5 million dollar loan for his senatorial campaign, if he was anti-establishment?

It's an election and Im trying to stay out of the political posts but I'm distressed at how little attention people are paying to these things.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 27, 2016 07:17 PM (Lqy/e)

347 We've crossed that bridge already; nobody we elect will fix this.
=============================================


Annnd ... Bingo.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:17 PM (dFi94)

348 That is true, and a great point. The downticket vote can invalidate the one at the top, if the wrong one gets in.

Sure vote down ticket.

Do that at least for fucks sake.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:18 PM (qUNWi)

349 The only difference in who is elected is how fast, not if.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:15 PM (39g3+)


And of course, how much is left when the damage is done, and who's in charge of the rubble.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 07:18 PM (HalrA)

350 I gotta think this FBI investigation has to break one way or the other before the democratic convention.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 07:18 PM (DUoqb)

351 LegalInsurrection has pictures of the pony/ unicorn story from yesterday

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 07:18 PM (fizMZ)

352 I've heard some crazy shit this election season, but the craziest is the notion that Ted Cruz is establishment.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 27, 2016 07:18 PM (jVGvd)

353 What he said. I run a small business and I have seen these things, too. Trump's so-called inconsistent positions are completely understandable if you run a business.
Posted by: Avogadra
---------------------

Except in this case, the 'business' is not providing services based consumer appeal. It is performing those duties assigned to it by The Constitution.

The performance and responsibility of those duties should not be perceived of as making 'deals'.

If Trump had devoted a tiny fraction of his bluster to the primacy of The Constitution, I might perceive him as other than I do, i.e., P.T. Barnum, dressed as Perot, in a suit Made in Mexico.

He is a man without principle. Trump has been doing with his life exactly what Hillary has been doing with hers, just in the private sector (with its ironically greater accountability) rather than the public sector.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at February 27, 2016 07:19 PM (9mTYi)

354 Do you really think Goldman Sachs would have given his wife a 5 million dollar loan for his senatorial campaign, if he was anti-establishment?

She worked for Goldman. She was required to go to them for a loan due to conflict of interest rules.

The loan was secured by all of their investments. There isn't a bank in the world that wouldn't have made that loan.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 07:19 PM (1xUj/)

355 ..."Don't be sittin' home, that down ticket vote is every bit as important as the one for president."
-Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (P/8aq)

^This^

Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1) (T) at February 27, 2016 07:19 PM (OQ9R7)

356 There's an article linked on Drudge that confirms what I speculated about: Mitt Redux.

Big donors including the Koch Bros who don't like Trump have funded Rubio through Florida. If he doesn't win there, Romney steps in.

They plan to go heavily negative on Trump with $100 million. They're also pressing Cruz and Kasich to drop out.

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 27, 2016 07:20 PM (rs5De)

357 (a) I'm showing no results at DD. Is there another url other than decisiondeskhq dot com?

(ii) What is the point of DD anyway?

***

1. Thank you for asking. Why, yes. You can follow the frivolity at http://bit.ly/1RbcBYE

2. Why, sir, the purpose is to bring democracy back to the democratic process. It is a concerted, volunteer effort to bring the unvarnished truth to the people. DDHQ, unlike those fancy pants-wearing folks at the AP, don't believe in the dramatic of reporting election results, but in getting the information into the hands of the people as fast, and as accurately as possible.

I'm glad you asked.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:20 PM (8PbKi)

358 CNN wants Bernie to "shut it down" after his resounding defeat in SC.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (AkOaV)


Was He ever "really" running, or was He just giving cover to Hillary!?
Posted by: donna at February 27, 2016 07:05 PM (/dSsq)



I think it was the latter. Poor Bernie SJWs. If they only knew their hero is just there to take a dive. If not, he's a complete chump to not know that the fix is in.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 27, 2016 07:20 PM (45oDG)

359
If Hillary wins, the day after she wins, I become a Texas Secessionist.


I agree and everything but that's sub optimal.

We could all just vote against her in the first place.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:20 PM (qUNWi)

360 "Like single payer, supporting planned parenthood and amnesty? All
conservative principles. Late term abortion was another conservative
position he took." alabama
yeah we all know all those talking points of the Trump haters, always embellished.

He liked single payer once, said it worked in Canada. He now says make more competition for private plans, repeal and replace. He got bashed for saying he like the tax/penalty on those that don't have plans. But R's say they want "previous conditions covered". So if my plan has to pay for those that jump in late, I want everyone to jump in early. How else do R's pay for the previous condition thing?

He was not "pro-abortion", he said he was against it but didn't want a law against abortion. That was a long time ago.

Planned parenthood yes but not the abortion part, and if they can't be separated then none of it. But that helps him in the general election.

We know your talking points ... those don't make him "not a conservative" on every point. Trade and immigration, and America First ... on those issues he is the MOST conservative. But labels are handy for the haters. Prioritizing the issues is more important to most.

Posted by: Illiniwek at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (eUbDe)

361 Do you really think Goldman Sachs would have given his wife a 5 million dollar loan for his senatorial campaign, if he was anti-establishment?


At market rates! Cruz just isn't the deal maker Trump is.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (rwI+c)

362 Don't be sittin home, that down ticket vote is every bit as important as the one for president.


Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 07:13 PM (P/8aq)

My down ticket choices are "The Right Honorable Senator" From Illinois Mark Kirk and boehner sycophant Representative Rodney Davis.

Advice?

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (WVsWD)

363 refresh the browser at DDHQ

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (8PbKi)

364 Just curious: if it's Trump/Cruz vs. Romney/Rubio/Ryan, how do you vote?

Posted by: cool breeze at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (ckvus)

365 i]Don't be sittin' home, that down ticket vote is every bit as important as the one for president.

I have to sit home. There are no voting booths in Oregon, its all vote by mail. Expect a big push for that nationwide soon, its worked great for the Dems in Oregon. Since that started, no Democrat has won the governor and the Republicans in the legislature have dropped to single digits.

Coincidentally.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (39g3+)

366 I gotta think this FBI investigation has to break one way or the other before the democratic convention.

Well....okay.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (qUNWi)

367 Tom Baker Dr. Who on RetroTV.

I love my antenna.

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 07:16 PM (oVJmc)



Damn, that's the one classic TV channel I don't get.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (45oDG)

368 2. Why, sir, the purpose is to bring democracy back to the democratic process. It is a concerted, volunteer effort to bring the unvarnished truth to the people. DDHQ, unlike those fancy pants-wearing folks at the AP, don't believe in the dramatic of reporting election results, but in getting the information into the hands of the people as fast, and as accurately as possible.


I was there, as you know.

I don't get it.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (1xUj/)

369 Last candidate I voted FOR was Reagan and the closest candidate to Reagan today is Cruz. Whom I already voted early for. A vote for Trump of Rubio in November is the same as a vote for McCain or Romney. And I believe the election has already been stolen by Hillary, anyway. That is my opinion.

Posted by: Eromero at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (zLDYs)

370 Bizarre conspiracy theory of the day: The RNC conspired to nominate McCain over Romney in 2008, and then conspired to nominate Romney over... who? Perry? I don't even know... in 2012. Because... they want to win or something? I can't even understand this.And now the RNC is conspiring... for Trump? Against Trump? I'm sure it doesn't matter, because whatever happens will be called a conspiracy regardless.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (TF/YA)

371 Big donors including the Koch Bros who don't like Trump have funded Rubio through Florida. If he doesn't win there, Romney steps in.

How does Romney 'step in?' Isn't it too late to get on the ballots?

Or is it at a brokered convention?

Posted by: Pappy O'Daniel at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (oVJmc)

372 Advice?

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (WVsWD)
=======================================

You're surrounded by losers. Might as well take in a Cubs game.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (dFi94)

373 I was there, as you know.

I don't get it.

***

I know. I thought you were being a smartass.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (8PbKi)

374 "My down ticket choices are "The Right Honorable Senator" From Illinois Mark Kirk and boehner sycophant Representative Rodney Davis.
Advice?
"
-Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:21 PM (WVsWD)

Beer, Pretzels, Liquor. Not necessarily in that order.

Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1) (T) at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (OQ9R7)

375 This is off topic, but I am in a decent mood right now. I finally found a particular performance of a song I had on CD a while back on youtube. I was able to track down the cd online and then put the info into youtube and found it.

This age has a lot of shit, but there is a some good stuff mixed in there too.

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (iHjB5)

376 There's an article linked on Drudge that confirms what I speculated about: Mitt Redux.

Big donors including the Koch Bros who don't like Trump have funded Rubio through Florida. If he doesn't win there, Romney steps in.

They plan to go heavily negative on Trump with $100 million. They're also pressing Cruz and Kasich to drop out.
Posted by: Ignoramus at February 27, 2016 07:20 PM (rs5De)

Yeah BUT that is link for INFoWars or whatever it is called, so....

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 07:23 PM (DUoqb)

377 When it comes to who I vote for in November I will wait and see. One thing I know is that Donald Trump is currently as far to the Right right now as he will ever be.

Once he has gained the nomination he will move to the spot where he can peal off as many of Hilary's white progressive voters as he can along with as many Hispanics as he can.

And it may even be that Hilary Clinton ends up to his right, but most likely it will be indistinguishable.

Posted by: RoyLC at February 27, 2016 07:24 PM (DSwhx)

378 FWIW

Already early voted for Cruz (Primary Tuesday).

Will vote for Trump in the general if he's the nominee.

Will absolutely not vote for Rubio because of amnesty.

I have no doubt Rubio would have been the next President but he sold his soul for amnesty and threw his chance away.

DNGAF what the party shills say or think about me or my choice. DNGAF

Posted by: weirdflunkyonatablet at February 27, 2016 07:24 PM (hufXH)

379 Do you really think Goldman Sachs would have given his wife a 5 million dollar loan for his senatorial campaign, if he was anti-establishment?
She worked for Goldman. She was required to go to them for a loan due to conflict of interest rules.
The loan was secured by all of their investments. There isn't a bank in the world that wouldn't have made that loan.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 07:19 PM (1xUj/)

Correct....we need to leave Cruz's wife alone. If I can get a loan or my spouse get's a loan great. Judge the man on his merits and what he does, leave his old lady out of it. Cruz strikes me as an honest guy.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at February 27, 2016 07:25 PM (ej1L0)

380 I gotta think this FBI investigation has to break one way or the other before the democratic convention.

Well....okay.
Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (qUNWi)

What I mean is either she is indicted or more than a few FBI Agents walk ( from what is being reported) or more than a few of her aides are indicted. Either way that can destroy the bitch

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 27, 2016 07:25 PM (DUoqb)

381 Re the votes already cast for the candidates. Don't you worry that the candidate will drop out and you won't have the opportunity to vote for a candidate who remains on the ballot?

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:26 PM (8PbKi)

382 Look, its okay to just say "Trump says he'll protect the borders and is smart on immigration," you don't have to try to pretend he's some grand conservative. Being nationalistic and strong on borders doesn't mean conservative.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:26 PM (39g3+)

383 I have to sit home. There are no voting booths in Oregon, its all vote by mail. Expect a big push for that nationwide soon, its worked great for the Dems in Oregon. Since that started, no Democrat has won the governor and the Republicans in the legislature have dropped to single digits.

Coincidentally.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:22 PM (39g3+)


But mail-in balloting is much more ecologically sound! It allows the Dems to stuff the ballot boxes without having to use smelly Diesel buses to bring in all the out-of-district "voters".

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (afR/C)

384 275
Last time that was filibustering in vain and unable to get a second on his proposals.

Posted by: cool breeze at February 27, 2016 06:57 PM (ckvus)


That's called 'probing.' I expect that, if he wanted to, he could give the Senate Parliamentarian a lot of sleepless nights while tying up Senate procedure. Hope he picks his battles wisely.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (O4NI/)

385 Where are all these conservative messiahs who will easily win elections but somehow can't even win a simple GOP primary? Rick Perry is the best example, and he wasn't even popular enough to stick around for more than a month.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (TF/YA)

386 Will absolutely not vote for Rubio because of amnesty

But look at the nice boat I got!

Posted by: Marco Rubio at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (ckvus)

387 When Trump does his tack to the left that even his most rabid supporters will not be able to ignore, when can we start mocking them and what type of punishment do they deserve?

Posted by: JROD at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (wnwJC)

388 "You're surrounded by losers. Might as well take in a Cubs game.

Beer, Pretzels, Liquor. Not necessarily in that order.

Nice. Finally some useful advice from the HQ.

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (WVsWD)

389 382 Look, its okay to just say "Trump says he'll protect the borders and is smart on immigration," you don't have to try to pretend he's some grand conservative. Being nationalistic and strong on borders doesn't mean conservative.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:26 PM (39g3+)

Great point. I have wanted to point that out a few times myself, but could not figure out a way to not sound like an asshole. Too much anima getting tossed around here as it is.

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (iHjB5)

390 "staggering, staggering victory" for Hillary.





She usually is staggering....


Posted by: donna


So.....she's drunk again?

What a victory. Onward! (thud)

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....tortured American at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (+1T7c)

391 Speaking of voting down ticket, I had a nice young man come to my door this afternoon. He's running for County Supervisor. He asked me to make sure I vote. I told him I always vote. He gave me some literature about himself and asked me to read it over and consider voting for him. I told him I would do that. His bio tells me that he is a former professor of theater at UW-Madison. I did not read past that point. He was polite though.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (dFi94)

392 Awesome. Hillary will be in court for her email server during the general and Trump will be in court for scamming people at Trump U.

Has that ever happened in the history of this country??

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 07:28 PM (pUDQf)

393 I was embiggened there for a moment then compacted back down.

R2 stop playing with the Trash Compactors.

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:29 PM (WVsWD)

394 Lots of people on the right keep saying that eventually the people will revolt because they want freedom and liberty and the rest. That would be true for a contry made up of people from places that have experienced freedom and liberty. But it's not any longer. A significant - and quickly growing _ % of the population is from 3rd world shitholes that have NEVER known basic democracy, let alone the principles of American liberty. These people don't give a fuck about anything other than getting their freebies. Freedom? What the hell's that? Where's my check bitch?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 27, 2016 07:29 PM (jVGvd)

395 391 Speaking of voting down ticket, I had a nice young man come to my door this afternoon. He's running for County Supervisor. He asked me to make sure I vote. I told him I always vote. He gave me some literature about himself and asked me to read it over and consider voting for him. I told him I would do that. His bio tells me that he is a former professor of theater at UW-Madison. I did not read past that point. He was polite though.
Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (dFi94)

But he could be a rabid traditionalist! Lol. I had trouble even tying that without laughing. It COULD happen though.

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 07:29 PM (iHjB5)

396 "But then they and their Leftist brethren will own all that..."

Cool. I'm fine with sentencing my daughter to live in slavery so I can complain about how it's not my fault.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:29 PM (TF/YA)

397 Someone wrote, ( I read to much all over to remember ) this is the most conservative you will ever see from Trump, as soon as the general election and he goes to the middle

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 07:30 PM (fizMZ)

398 381 Re the votes already cast for the candidates. Don't you worry that the candidate will drop out and you won't have the opportunity to vote for a candidate who remains on the ballot?
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 27, 2016 07:26 PM (8PbKi)


I don't have to worry about that. The Pennsylvania primary is April 26, and if past experience is any guide, it will be pretty much over by then.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 07:30 PM (sdi6R)

399 Hillary's win in SC confirmed the obvious: Blacks won't vote for an old Jew from a Snow State. But how did Black turnout compare to 2008?
CNN calls for Bernie to quit the coronation charade. Amazing while the FBI has had 100-150 agents on her case for months.

Posted by: Ignoramus at February 27, 2016 07:30 PM (rs5De)

400 One thing I know is that Donald Trump is currently as far to the Right right now as he will ever be.

Sure, and I think even his most die hard supporters know that. He's already tried to peel off a few times and has to backtrack because it was too early.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:30 PM (39g3+)

401 What I really want to avoid is anything that introduces super delegates to the Republican primary process. If you think Trump is bad, remember Democrats are getting Hillary shoved down their throat - and turnout and excitement will be down. Without super delegates it might be exciting, with them it would have been Jeb or Rubio. If you throw a tantrum after the primaries, you may as well go third party because the smart guys will say "we need super delegates to avoid another shit show like this".

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at February 27, 2016 07:31 PM (1YhYj)

402 What's the farthest right Hillary has ever been?

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (qUNWi)

403 Ridiculous self-righteous back-patting. "America is now a slave state, but hey, I told you this would happen. Can't blame me. Everyone look at how principled I am! I'm so brave! I'm so courageous!"

Whatever.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (TF/YA)

404 I'll state this. No matter who your preferred Candidate is, the Republican Party had no intention of winning this election.

That is all.

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (WVsWD)

405 I suppose I'm "for" Cruz, but I admit that I'd check the ballot for Rubio or Trump as an anti-Hillary or anti-Bernie vote. I cannot imagine NOT doing that much to stop the loony left from gaining even more power.

Posted by: PabloD at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (GoSi3)

406 @ 362

Drink heavily or primary them.

Not really being facetious, I live in New York.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (P/8aq)

407 Trump scares me because I don't trust him. I can't stand Hillary and Bernie and believe it's too important NOT to vote... even if it's not my preferred candidate.
I will vote for anyone other than Hillary or Bernie... even if I have to hold my nose.
Too much is at stake. I don't believe on "burning it to the ground" "let it burn" either (wow-tough words) because too much is at stake, especially this election.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 07:09 PM (7GQM/)


Well, perhaps if you ratchet down the rhetoric a little, I will take you seriously. That, and develop a presence on this blog distinct from being a Voice Of Doom re: Trump. Join in a pun thread, or comment on issues, instead of personalities.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (afR/C)

408 No Republican has won a state wide election since Washington went 100% mail in vote either. Merely a coincidence, just like in Oregon.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 27, 2016 07:32 PM (jVGvd)

409 Posted by: JROD at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM

And when Cruz turns out to be a responsibility-evading, go-along-to-get-along, short-on-principles Career Politician instead of a Mighty Defender of the Constitution (which I personally believe he will), when do we mock his supporters, and what punishment will they deserve?

You Trump-haters just looooove to put erroneous statements and beliefs in his mouth, and do so as if they were Gospel truth. Fact of the matter is: you have no freeking idea if anything you assert is true. And you don't care. You're just flinging poo.

Posted by: MrScribbler at February 27, 2016 07:33 PM (D+xyy)

410 I'll state this. No matter who your preferred Candidate is, the Republican Party had no intention of winning this election.

That is all.


Fuck the republican party. You stay at home you vote for Hillary.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:34 PM (qUNWi)

411 Nood, Bill's Clinton being a ass

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 07:34 PM (fizMZ)

412 >>Sure, and I think even his most die hard supporters know that. He's already tried to peel off a few times and has to backtrack because it was too early.

I don't think some of them do know it. His position on illegals, for example, is not much different from Rubio's but I see a lot of people saying they could vote for Trump but never Rubio because of his position on illegals.

That makes no sense to me.

Posted by: JackStraw at February 27, 2016 07:35 PM (/tuJf)

413 You stay at home you vote for Hillary.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 07:34 PM (qUNWi)


Speaking of poo flinging.....The smell. The smell.....

Posted by: Tim in Illinois. Blah, blah,blah at February 27, 2016 07:36 PM (WVsWD)

414 Someone wrote, ( I read to much all over to remember
) this is the most conservative you will ever see from Trump, as soon
as the general election and he goes to the middle


Posted by: Skip


That would have been Ace at AoS HQ, and that would have been.....yesterday. You may have heard of that blog.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....tortured American at February 27, 2016 07:36 PM (+1T7c)

415
There is no letting it burn or preventing the burn. There will be a burn, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it, and even the best preparations will be futile when it finally hits the fan.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at February 27, 2016 06:03 PM (HalrA)

****

I've been feeling this way for about a year. I've tried to figure a way out of this, but I've come up short.

It's kinda sad . . . .

Posted by: Elinor, Who Usually Looks Lurkily at February 27, 2016 07:36 PM (NqQAS)

416 Rick Perry is the best example, and he wasn't even popular enough to stick around for more than a month.

Perry and Walker were my favorites, but they both ran horrible campaigns and had the dignity and honesty to bail instead of staying in forever with 1% polling like too many other candidates.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:37 PM (39g3+)

417 His bio tells me that he is a former professor of theater at UW-Madison. I did not read past that point. He was polite though.
Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:27 PM (dFi94)
---
"I directed the Bloody Unicorn Puppet Theatre production of Marat-Sade*, and won great acclaim as the giant papier mache head Mammon in the silent protest ballet version of Annie."

*hat tip to Tom Servo

Posted by: All Hail Eris, Literate Savage at February 27, 2016 07:38 PM (jR7Wy)

418 This is going to be a dead thread, but could we at least finish the current episode of "We sharpen our knives on each other" before we start the next season?

Posted by: Aetius451AD at February 27, 2016 07:38 PM (iHjB5)

419 Or ARE YOU JUST GOING TO VOTE FOR POTUS?
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:53 PM (7GQM/)

I CAN'T HEAR YOU! YOU SHOULD HAVE USED MOAR CAPS!
Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (sdi6R)

--------------------------------------------------------

In my best Katy Perry singing voice:

ROAR-
You held me down, but I got up
Already brushing off the dust
You hear my voice, you hear that sound
Like thunder gonna shake the ground
You held me down, but I got up
Get ready 'cause I've had enough
I see it all, I see it now
I got the eye of the tiger, a fighter, dancing through the fire
'Cause I am a champion and you're gonna hear me roar
Louder, louder than a lion.........

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 07:38 PM (7GQM/)

420 But then they and their Leftist brethren will own all that, and they will have to enforce it.

Or the GOPe will just then assume that the country wants a greater level of socialism/statism and adjust to accomodate that.

This idea of the Left 'owning' their policy disasters is wrong because the GOP ends up accomodating and protecting the policies once enacted either through vain attempts at horse-trading or hitting economic potholes - which only further the call for more government programs and further problems.

CIP: W. He accommodated the Left on almost everything except abortion and guns. Medicare D, No Child Not Leftist, etc.

He played the tune while the Left kept marching through the institutions in the hope they'd play along with correcting other programs like Freddy/Fanny and SocSecurity reform

How'd that turn out? The Left promptly turned on their MSM-fueled shit-cannons and never let up.

So short an absolute implosion by Trump which seemed likely a year ago and completely unlikely now, Cruz is finished. He can't win a 3 man race with Trump Rubio.

Sorry, that's too conclusionary to serve as reasoning. Cruz's the only one other than Trump with a 1st place win. Rubio has yet to win one.


Oh, and millions of illegals will be voting this election mostly because the GOP did nothing to stop it.

Sun-eee daaays - are heeere - aagain. Ooo, ooo, oooooooooo~!

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 27, 2016 07:39 PM (A/3fN)

421 What's the farthest right Hillary has ever been?


Posted by: eleven


Allegedly she was a "Goldwater Girl" back in the '60's.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....tortured American at February 27, 2016 07:40 PM (+1T7c)

422 Not voting against Hillary will get you lots of things that go against your principles.



We need your help.



Vote against Hillary or your principles are moot.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:38 PM (qUNWi)

He is talking about the primaries.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 07:42 PM (NPofj)

423 Perry and Walker were my favorites, but they both
ran horrible campaigns and had the dignity and honesty to bail instead
of staying in forever with 1% polling like too many other candidates.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 07:37 PM (39g3+)

But I thought their being conservative would make them overwhelmingly, landslidingly popular without any of that politicking stuff. Because America is so hungry for conservatism that the most popular GOP candidate is a completely unprincipled used car salesman.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:42 PM (TF/YA)

424 On the bright side, the future will be what it will be and there's really nothing anyone can do about it. So there's really no point in getting all hot and bothered over it.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 27, 2016 07:44 PM (TF/YA)

425 Allegedly she was a "Goldwater Girl" back in the '60's.


Posted by: Bossy Conservative....tortured American at February 27, 2016 07:40 PM (+1T7c)
============================================

She was indeed. Came from the Park Ridge Protestants contingent, I believe.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:44 PM (dFi94)

426 How the hell did We get here? A year ago I was optimistic that We would take back the WH.... Now, look where We are... How did it get so screwed up?

Posted by: donna


The GOPe's arrogance. There is no other explanation needed.

They shat on the single most dynamic conservative movement in decades because of arrogance.

They continue to ignore a huge portion of the lower and middle classes who experience the connection to defacto open borders and wages, crime, and disaffected policing.

Presumption, arrogance, contempt for a base of voters - call it what you want - it cannot result but in disaster.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 27, 2016 07:46 PM (A/3fN)

427 I'm Governor Walker's 7th biggest fan . I also was one of the first ones to say that he would make a very poor candidate, and that I hoped he would not run. Even though he is the type of man we need.

Posted by: grammie winger, watching the fig tree at February 27, 2016 07:47 PM (dFi94)

428 This is coming from both sides... mostly the Trump supporters. If they do't get their way they are going look like Donald's pout and sit out.
Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 06:46 PM (7GQM/)
so you are stating you are voting Trump, if Cruz and rubio fail?

Posted by: willow at February 27, 2016 06:55 PM (L1+sh)
-------------
Yes. In the end we have 2 choices. I believe you have to vote even if it's the lesser of two evils because the election is a lot more than POTUS. For me SCOTUS is far more important than POTUS since it's a lifetime position, therefore you have to vote for a POTUS.
So, yes I will hold my nose, roll the dice and vote for ITrump. then I'll pray everyday.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 07:47 PM (7GQM/)

429 "too much is at stake, especially this election"

The same mantra repeated every four years.

Why do I get the feeling that even more will be at stake in 2020, and 2024 will be the most important election ever. Of course that'll be nothing compared to when 2028 rolls around.

I'm pretty sure this is simply a result of bad faith negotiations in political coalitions. Rather than simply say: support our guy this time and we'll be glad to support your guy next time (or x issue or y concern), the establishment tactic seems to be: if your don't vote our guy it'll be the end of the world! Hold your nose and pull the lever, or else!

Posted by: Sjg at February 27, 2016 07:53 PM (gDSJf)

430 Burn it down

Trump 2016

Posted by: Dusty Bottoms at February 27, 2016 07:58 PM (QBXdZ)

431 So who is the Ronald Reagan of the new millenium? Let's write him in.

Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: Fritz at February 27, 2016 08:00 PM (BngQR)

432 We have vote by mail in WA state too. We also have a law that the top two in the primary, regardless of party, go to the general. So we can have Dem vs Dem!

Cruz's wife worked as an aide to Condaleza Rice. Then she moved to Treasury and on to Goldman Sachs. She contacts potential donors for Cruz and I'm not talking about $20 donations. In fact, it sounds a bit like that twofer we got with Bill and Hil. So yeah, it's fair to talk about this, in the same way that it's fair to talk about Rubios funding.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at February 27, 2016 08:00 PM (Lqy/e)

433 "too much is at stake, especially this election"

The same mantra repeated every four years.

Why do I get the feeling that even more will be at stake in 2020, and 2024 will be the most important election ever. Of course that'll be nothing compared to when 2028 rolls around.

I'm pretty sure this is simply a result of bad faith negotiations in political coalitions. Rather than simply say: support our guy this time and we'll be glad to support your guy next time (or x issue or y concern), the establishment tactic seems to be: if your don't vote our guy it'll be the end of the world! Hold your nose and pull the lever, or else!
Posted by: Sjg at February 27, 2016 07:53 PM (gDSJf)
---------------------

If there is less damage done it is a lot easier to fix
The last 7+ years have been pure hell.

Fight!

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:01 PM (7GQM/)

434 Burn it down

Trump 2016
Posted by: Dusty Bottoms at February 27, 2016 07:58 PM (QBXdZ)
---------------
Chris Christie

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:02 PM (7GQM/)

435 I would urge everyone to vote for Cruz (of course... he is the ONLY one talking in a believable fashion about the things we have been bitching are wrong for years) but I would also urge people to not give up and lose hope because things are bumpy.





This race is uglier for Trump being in it, it will likely stay ugly but he would be an utter disaster as President so now is not the time to throw up our hands in disgust and give up (or worse yet, vote Rubio). I say this EVEN THOUGH Trump did perform a valuable service by slapping down PC bushwa. He deserves our gratitude but not our country. He has been a progressive all of his adult life and his eleventh hour conversion is not believable. He is pro abortion (including partial birth abortion) and pro big government (because small government offers insufficient opportunity for graft). He doesn't value my civil rights and, as non-PC as he talks, he would sell my religious liberty to the the gay marriage lobby in a second. Whatever he is saying about the second amendment NOW he was all for an assault weapons ban before he decide to run for office. And on his biggest issue, immigration, he is usually for touch back amnesty.





Trump also lacks good character. Ignoring what he has done to his wives and the fraud he is accused of committing against customers of "Trump University" and his willingness to use the government to steal property from other people, he is lying his way through this campaign. The latest of these lies was against Alito (and trying to excuse him naming his liberal sister as someone who would be good on the Supreme Court). Character matters. It matters way more than we as a nation have admitted for decades. As a result, we elect politicians ignoring their character (and being downright hostile toward their Christianity) and then we act shocked and dismayed when it turns out they lie to us and betray us. But we don't then demand good character in the next politician we elect. The thing is, most of the time their action are foreseeable if you look at their words and deeds in the past.





So yes this race is ugly, but it is far from over. And yes this may go to being decided at the Convention where most think Rubio would have the edge. That will really depend on the delegates sent though. Rubio is not slated to win anything so he should be weaker going into the Convention. Local R's are still in the process of choosing delegates so, if you are involved in the party, put your own name in the mix and try to go to the Convention yourself as a delegate. The more strong conservatives that are there, the less chance that the GOPe actually wins.





I too am done supporting candidates who do not embody my ideals. I don't trust Trump. I don't trust Rubio. I won't vote for either.





Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 08:14 PM (NPofj)

436 This is kind of screed that makes me embarrassed to have ever called myself a conservative.

Posted by: Barzini in Miami at February 27, 2016 05:49 PM (zmZ2x)

At least you've never been embarrassed by actually being one.

Posted by: SDN at February 27, 2016 08:17 PM (NG7bb)

437 Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:01 PM (7GQM/)

What I meant to get at was more that the problem is not voting for someone else in your political coalition, it's that excuses are made for why you absolutely must vote for candidate X without ever having to offer any concessions to the other parts of the coalition.

The whole "Hold your nose and vote" thing relieves the candidate and their supporters of any need for quid pro quo offers to the rest of the coalition. They're never accountable because they weren't forced to promise anything in the first place. Imagine a hypothetical Rubio vs Clinton and Republicans telling all the conservatives: "you have no choice but to vote Rubio, the alternative would be disastrous". Voters who are concerned about illegal immigration would then have zero recourse under a Rubio administration because they couldn't even get Republicans to give them a concession like "vote for Rubio and we'll support x measures to secure the border".

Posted by: Sjg at February 27, 2016 08:18 PM (gDSJf)

438 How I see it:

Voters want to stick it to the establishment and have chosen Trump for that, much like they chose Newt last time around.

GOPe bloggers complain their choice isn't conservative enough and pick 'X'.

'X' has to drop out of race leaving GOPe bloggers to 'reluctantly' support establishment favorite over voters chosen pick for the good of the party.

GOPe bloggers throughout campaign pretend to be on the side of the voters in order to gain street cred so that in the end they can push establishment candidate through.

I will patiently await this blog to endorse Rubio over Trump for the good of the country...after Cruz drops out. Just like last go around.

Posted by: doug at February 27, 2016 08:25 PM (lNlF6)

439 How I see it:

Voters want to stick it to the establishment and have chosen Trump for that, much like they chose Newt last time around.

GOPe bloggers complain their choice isn't conservative enough and pick 'X'.

'X' has to drop out of race leaving GOPe bloggers to 'reluctantly' support establishment favorite over voters chosen pick for the good of the party.

GOPe bloggers throughout campaign pretend to be on the side of the voters in order to gain street cred so that in the end they can push establishment candidate through.

I will patiently await this blog to endorse Rubio over Trump for the good of the country...after Cruz drops out. Just like last go around.
Posted by: doug at February 27, 2016 08:25 PM (lNlF6)
----------------------------

The Dems. win. Full blown amnesty.
Goodbye SCOTUS
Goodbye USA

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:31 PM (7GQM/)

440 Rubio is better than Hillary.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:31 PM (7GQM/)

441 Carson is better than Hillary.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:32 PM (7GQM/)

442 I find myself down in the dumps

and kinda wanna vote for Trump

They tell me will surely lose

and then I wanna vote for Cruz

They tell me I should do better

But I won't vote for a weasley sweater

Posted by: seamrog at February 27, 2016 08:33 PM (ZNQKE)

443 Kasich is better than Hillary.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:33 PM (7GQM/)

444 A sweater is better than Hillary.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:35 PM (7GQM/)

445 Mario will surely conspire

with gang of 8, and heavily perspire

an "honest" man would keep his cool

no way I'll ever vote for this fool.

Posted by: seamrog at February 27, 2016 08:37 PM (ZNQKE)

446 This is a deeply personal matter. Ultimately, everyone needs to make a choice about what they can best live with. I'm okay with either Cruz or Rubio. While I agree with Rubio more on foreign policy, I find Cruz's straightforward constitutional conservatism more appealing and I think the base would support him more. [I say this as a pro-choice social moderate/fiscal conservative/national security hawk.] Cruz's campaign made some bone-headed moves, but I don't think he's a liar or a cheat. Rubio's Gang of 8 participation angered me greatly, but my personal impression is he's gotten the message not to do it again. Ace and others have a different impression. Rubio is conservative enough for me.

I loathe Donald Trump. His grating personal style, his lack of deep policy knowledge, his refusal to do his damn homework on it, the cheap shots on the other candidates, the long history of flip-flops, and the fact I don't trust a word out of his mouth combine to leave me appalled he's this close to the nomination.

I'm going to pray for a miracle in the next 2.5 weeks. If Cruz catches fire again, I'm going with him. If he doesn't and Rubio shows signs of life, I'm going with Rubio. If Rubio is going to get blown out, I may just vote Cruz on principle. If Trump gets the nomination, I'm going to take an Aleve, grit my teeth, vote for the unmitigated bastard, and hope for the best.

Hillary Clinton's actions with the unsecured server, the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One, etc. and decades of corruption are too dangerous for me to ignore. She should have been indicted by now not grinding along towards her party's nomination. Trump is a BS artist and probably a crook, but I don't yet see signs he's committed actions that betrayed his nation's best interests.

After '92 I've resolved to vote for my party's nominee as long as that person wins according to the rules in place at the time. Sometimes I'm happy with the outcome and sometimes I'm not. This election season had such wonderful promise, and to see it descend to the level of practically hoping for SMOD '16 is so darn depressing.

Posted by: Jill v2 at February 27, 2016 08:41 PM (1+uyO)

447 429
The same mantra repeated every four years.

Why do I get the feeling that even more will be at stake in 2020, and 2024 will be the most important election ever. Of course that'll be nothing compared to when 2028 rolls around.

I'm pretty sure this is simply a result of bad faith negotiations in political coalitions. Rather than simply say: support our guy this time and we'll be glad to support your guy next time (or x issue or y concern), the establishment tactic seems to be: if your don't vote our guy it'll be the end of the world! Hold your nose and pull the lever, or else!
Posted by: Sjg at February 27, 2016 07:53 PM (gDSJf)


Yes, every four years it's "This is the most important election ever! Vote R or else!"

Sorry, I'm not buying it any more.

Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 08:42 PM (sdi6R)

448 the other side, it gives me pause

there's Hillary above ALL laws

and a socialist waiting his turn

to make all the U.S. feel his bern.

Posted by: seamrog at February 27, 2016 08:43 PM (ZNQKE)

449 Hear! Hear!

Posted by: Alinsky at February 27, 2016 08:45 PM (JDdCu)

450 I early voted for Cruz in Texas and for the most Conservative judges etc. on the ballot.
If Cruz doesn't win I will shed a lot of tears, but I will pull myself up and vote for the most Conservative candidate in the general election.
Hillary will not get my vote.
All our candidates will be better than her.
For anyone to not vote your basically waving a white flag and surrendering to the Dems.
FIGHT FOR YOUR COUNTRY!
No one said this was going to change overnight.
McConnell isn't going to be around forever.
SCOTUS a lot longer.


Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:54 PM (7GQM/)

451 414- yeah maybe now you mention it I might have stumbled across it.

Posted by: Skip at February 27, 2016 08:54 PM (fizMZ)

452 we've nigh 8 years of bama's posse

all conservatives are neo Nazis

the commiencyclopedia

is now the modern media

so vote for the bitch of benghazi

Posted by: seamrog at February 27, 2016 08:55 PM (ZNQKE)

453 103
Trump is just flipping the bird at the people who made the burn
inevitable. There is no letting it burn or preventing the burn. There
will be a burn, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it,



This is the thing people don't seem to quite get. We've passed the
point where we can fix this republic. Its too late for the right guys
in office to make it work.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 27, 2016 06:12 PM (39g3+)


I think there is some slim possibility that having "the right guy" in office might help bring the lawless bureaucrats to heel -- but it would require saying, "You're Fired!!!" to at least half the Federal work force.

Where might we find someone who'd be comfortable saying that?

Posted by: cthulhu at February 27, 2016 08:55 PM (EzgxV)

454 I think there is some slim possibility that having
"the right guy" in office might help bring the lawless bureaucrats to
heel -- but it would require saying, "You're Fired!!!" to at least half
the Federal work force.

Where might we find someone who'd be comfortable saying that?


Posted by: cthulhu at February 27, 2016 08:55 PM (EzgxV)


Not the guy you think... Government is not reality TV and Trump is very comfortable with government as it is. Also, he is a tremendous YUGE liar.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 09:17 PM (NPofj)

455 Dudes! My thoughts on McCain, Romney and 2016's candidates exactly. And it's good to know that I'll be in great company if I choose not to pull that lever this year. I'm forever the optimist but my confidence in the Republican party, and many running as Republicans is pretty much shot. I hope I'm wrong. Never thought I'd think this but not pulling that lever seems more and more the most patriotic action I can take.

Posted by: Michael Hill at February 27, 2016 09:19 PM (p+OAo)

456 But...but...OB, Trump has Ponies! and Free Candy for everyone! He SAYS so. He won't say where it is, or where he's going to get it, or how he's going to give it out, but it's absolutely there and it's YUGE!

Posted by: richard mcenroe at February 27, 2016 09:22 PM (Kucy5)

457 If Cruz doesn't win I will shed a lot of tears, but I
will pull myself up and vote for the most Conservative candidate in the
general election.

Hillary will not get my vote.

All our candidates will be better than her.

For anyone to not vote your basically waving a white flag and surrendering to the Dems.

FIGHT FOR YOUR COUNTRY!

No one said this was going to change overnight.

McConnell isn't going to be around forever.

SCOTUS a lot longer.







Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 08:54 PM (7GQM/)

It is likely that Trump will not choose SCOTUS candidates that are in any way different than Hillary would.


Rubio's might be slightly better BUT he is still going to choose people who support his prefered policies (amnesty, for instance).

I WILL NOT vote for Trump or Rubio. If Hillary gets in because of that... well the Trump people will get their burning times even faster or the GOPe will have no one to blame but themselves.,

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 09:23 PM (NPofj)

458 After reading the first few dozen posts here, I've had enough. As someone else said, this is no way to spend a Saturday night.

God always gives us a second chance; His blessings are sometimes difficult to take, but if you work through them, they are seen in retrospect as the hand of Providence.

If, by doing the right thing, you are afraid of a bad result, know that "bad" result could end up being the cornerstone of a new era of America. You aren't going to get a good result by doing the wrong thing. Follow your heart and to hell with the naysayers.

All conservatives understand the concept of unintended consequences. Don't vote for, say, Mario because it seems to buy your kids a few more years of "safety" - raise your kids to cope with the coming storm, because no matter who wins, the storm is coming and all you morons know that.

Posted by: Miley's Tongue dba Ylva of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy at February 27, 2016 09:32 PM (odjaN)

459 //It is likely that Trump will not choose SCOTUS candidates that are in any way different than Hillary would.//

Trump says he wants to appoint judges like Sykes and Pryor. Hillary says she wants to appoint progressives.

In light of that, could you provide a rational basis for your opinion that Trump wants to actively appoint progressives to the Supreme Court? I'm pretty sure you can't.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:33 PM (RPsRI)

460 When someone suggests that libel lawsuits should be expanded in favor of plaintiffs, what sort of person do think we're dealing with here? SJW Snowflakes top that list, and we all know it.

This is who Trump is at his core - a fascist in favor of nothing but himself. Which is the equivalent of the SJW Snowflakes because the liberal/conservative divide is an artifact of myopic thought and tribalism. The true divide is Liberty vs Totalitarianism. Trump is the latter, and more dangerous to our future because it ties a fascist to the proponents of liberty under the delusions of tribalism.

You don't want Hillary because of the Supreme Court and a bit of paper that doesn't mean anything if 60% of the country says it doesn't. Most ardent anti-Trumpers don't want Trump because he will be the SMOD to the principles that this country lives or dies on - both politically and ideologically.

That's the long view that Erik, Ace, and others are looking at. That's the future we'll end up with if Trump isn't a lot better and different than who he has been and continues to portray himself as - which is just another fascist with a fragile ego and vindictive soul seeing his opportunity in the wretched husk of the GOPe.

PS: You SMOD types really need to learn some history and grow up. SMOD is what we did to the Iraqi political system once Obama pulled us out, and ISIS was the result. Same for the rest of the Middle East. Same could be said for the French Revolution until Napoleon pulled their asses out of the fire (by institution a more benign dictatorship under himself, and then going to war with the rest of the world). If Trump turns into the SMOD of American Politics, who's going to be our Napoleon? Hillary?

We sure as hell ain't going to get another Washington when the mien of almost half of this country is the twitter profile of the Kardashians, especially when Trump will be held as the shame of the other half.

Posted by: RoanKai at February 27, 2016 09:35 PM (hf0HT)

461 Trump will never be President. A fraudster like him will never get enough votes. Either we destroy him now for his Trump University scam or the dems will in the election.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432010/trump-university-scam

Posted by: Servius at February 27, 2016 09:36 PM (RkFBY)

462 For those of the opinion: if you don't vote for Rubio or Trump in the general, you're the reason we're where we are and the country will burn because of you.

I voted for McLame and Romney. I've always voted Conservative in primary and R in the general.

No more. We're where we are because conservatives have adhered to that rule of thumb for a very long time. We're here because the corruptocrat GOPe has counted on us to do exactly that.

C3bio will not get my vote, period. Trump may if he stops calling conservatives who question his past liberal positions liars. Try on some integrity Donald. Be an adult. Explain the whens/ whys for your change of position! I've had enough narcissism and dishonesty the last 7 years.

At some point, we must have a seat at the table to bring about change. Whether that be influencing the GOPe by convincing them we DEMAND a voice- or 3rd party.

Doing the same thing and expecting a different result equals voting for Rubio. The burn is probably coming regardless. Might as well try something different.

Posted by: Cooldawg at February 27, 2016 09:38 PM (JITGV)

463 //It is likely that Trump will not choose SCOTUS candidates that are in any way different than Hillary would.//



Trump says he wants to appoint judges like Sykes and Pryor. Hillary says she wants to appoint progressives.



In light of that, could you provide a rational basis for your
opinion that Trump wants to actively appoint progressives to the Supreme
Court? I'm pretty sure you can't.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:33 PM (RPsRI)


The fact that when personally pressed TWICE (that last just Thursday night) about what judges he would appoint, his liberal sister was the only name he mentioned... he then proceeded to lie about Alito. Also the fact that Trump is a progressive makes me think he will appoint progressive judges.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 09:39 PM (NPofj)

464 Vote how you want. I will vote for Dems this year as I have every year for 20 years.

Posted by: zombies, illegals and fraud at February 27, 2016 09:39 PM (3Rr8K)

465 I think there's a large contingent on our side that just likes to lose and complain. I mean, with McCain I *kind of* got it, but Trump?

No reason in the world we shouldn't vote for Trump. At least, no substantive reason. His immigration plan, as detailed on his website and in his Sessions Pledge comments, are great.

Trump's a great guy. No good reason to not enthusiastically support him.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:41 PM (RPsRI)

466 #462 Cooldawg - I was for Trump/SMOD, but something just broke that when he pulled the "Bush lied" meme out of his left buttock.

No.
Way.
Trump.

Posted by: Miley's Tongue dba Ylva of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy at February 27, 2016 09:42 PM (odjaN)

467 Trump's a great guy. No good reason to not enthusiastically support him.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:41 PM (RPsRI)

I have first-hand knowledge that he is a scumbag. Is that a good enough reason?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 27, 2016 09:45 PM (Zu3d9)

468 //The fact that when personally pressed TWICE (that last just Thursday night) about what judges he would appoint, his liberal sister was the only name he mentioned... he then proceeded to lie about Alito. Also the fact that Trump is a progressive makes me think he will appoint progressive judges.//

Well, a couple problems here. First, he didn't mention his sister at the debates. Second, she's only liberal on abortion. (You should read her dissent in an immigration case called Galarza v. Szalcyzkzyk.) Third, he has specifically named Pryor and Sykes as judges he'd like to appoint. Fourth, what "lie about Alito" are you talking about? Fifth, Trump is not a progressive. This is stupid. Progressives don't build border walls and talk about banning Muslims from entering the country. The man is not ideological enough to be a progressive.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:50 PM (RPsRI)

469
I think there's a large contingent on our side that just likes to lose
and complain. I mean, with McCain I *kind of* got it, but Trump?



No reason in the world we shouldn't vote for Trump. At least, no
substantive reason. His immigration plan, as detailed on his website and
in his Sessions Pledge comments, are great.



Trump's a great guy. No good reason to not enthusiastically support him.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:41 PM (RPsRI)


If you don't see it, you are not looking. Trump has almost 70 years of history that is a whole lot more dispositive about what he will actually do that statements on a website are. His entire history up until he chose to run for President shows he is a progressive. Sessions helped him with his immigration stance... great... but it means nothing when the man is not even consistent NOW about what he will do (touch back amnesty for instance) and his entire history says that is not what he really believes.


How many times has he been fined for hiring illegals?

How many times has he been sued by the illegals he hired for unpaid wages?


And then there is his character... he is lying his way through this primary season and may be even more thin skinned and narcissistic than TFG.


And then there is the Constitution. So far he has shown no instinct to protect the 1st amendment (either free speech or religious freedom) or the 4th amendment. No matter what he says now, he supported assault weapons bans in the past. I do not trust Trump to protect my inalienable rights any more than I trust Hillary to do so.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 09:53 PM (NPofj)

470 //I have first-hand knowledge that he is a scumbag. Is that a good enough reason?//

Not unless it means he's going to appoint the kind of people Hillary would to the court and support Gang of 8 after a year and a half of running against it.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:53 PM (RPsRI)

471 Yes, Cruz's ego doesn't take a backseat to anyone else's"
I'd really like to know where the hell this idea comes from. I've been a Cruz supporter since the guy made it to the Senate. I've read a lot of articles about the guy. I read another one just last night that detailed the scene backstage at the debate. It described how Ted Cruz went up to everyone there and greeted them and shook their hands, then he and sat down and spent a few quiet minutes by himself. Does that sound like a guy with an overblown ego? I'm just going to call this what it is: total bullshit.

Posted by: Nunya Bizness at February 27, 2016 09:56 PM (LbSNW)

472 466 yep, that was over the top.

Maybe he's just one step ahead of us. Tacking to the left because he thinks he's got the nomination all sewn up.

The brashness doesn't bother me at all. Anything anti-PC is refreshing. That's where he's getting his support.

But calling others flat out liars? Because what, he thinks he can replace people like me with blue dog democrat voters, or because he's intellectually lazy and dishonest to boot?

It's one thing to bend on principles, but quite another to be asked to support a guy who is on a mission to destroy others that have them.

Posted by: Cooldawg at February 27, 2016 09:58 PM (JITGV)

473 //I do not trust Trump to protect my inalienable rights any more than I trust Hillary to do so.//

Well, then you're not very rational. Your argument is that Trump is inconsistent, and, therefore, you don't trust him. Notwithstanding the fact that abandoning his entire platform would not be in his interest if elected, your conclusion still doesn't follow from the premise, because in Trump's case, there is, at least, a question of fact due to inconsistency. In Hillary's case, there is no such question of fact. So, the logical choice is to go with Trump.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:58 PM (RPsRI)

474 "It's one thing to bend on principles, but quite another to be asked to support a guy who is on a mission to destroy others that have them."

How's about just asking a guy to support someone who won't destroy the Supreme Court and support Gang of 8?

Shouldn't be hard. This is an easy choice.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:01 PM (RPsRI)

475 Well, a couple problems here. First, he didn't
mention his sister at the debates. Second, she's only liberal on
abortion. (You should read her dissent in an immigration case called
Galarza v. Szalcyzkzyk.) Third, he has specifically named Pryor and
Sykes as judges he'd like to appoint. Fourth, what "lie about Alito" are
you talking about? Fifth, Trump is not a progressive. This is stupid.
Progressives don't build border walls and talk about banning Muslims
from entering the country. The man is not ideological enough to be a
progressive.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 09:50 PM (RPsRI)

First, yes he did mention his sister at the last debate... she was THE ONLY judge he mentioned when asked about SCOTUS. He then went on to (falsely) say that Cruz was lying about his sister being progressive because, he said, Alito signed on to the same defense of partial birth abortion as she did. He demanded Cruz apologize to his sister which Cruz refused to do. Guess what, Trump lied about Alito joining in that opinion just as he has lied multiple, multiple times about almost everything to do with Cruz and many things that have nothing at all to do with Cruz.


Conservatives do not support partial birth abortion as both Trump and his sister do. Liberals do. Liberals like Trump also support abrogating people's religious liberties if they conflict with progressive thought about gay marriage. Liberals like Trump think that people have a right to healthcare paid for bu the government. Other that building the wall, most of Trump's inclinations are liberal. Trump is plutocrat with progressive instincts and trying to portray his as a conservative rings false.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 10:06 PM (NPofj)

476 Mr. Estrada, if you convince a single individual on this thread to vote for Trump with your transparent cheerleader b.s., I would be amazed.

Posted by: Miley's Tongue dba Ylva of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy at February 27, 2016 10:12 PM (odjaN)

477 Mr. E:

Trump is still a general election possibility for me, but he needs to take ownership of his past and provide more depth of understanding/ disclosure of policy.

But the fact that the MSM and GOPe has largely succeeded in convincing people Cruz is unelectable is maddening.

The Hilldabeast is very vulnerable, and I think Cruz might make a dent in the growth of big bloated government.

But I do like him where he is in the senate as well.

Posted by: Cooldawg at February 27, 2016 10:20 PM (JITGV)

478 Redbanzai, I really appreciate the level headed, informative posts. I wish I were as good as getting such points across. I just hope some supporters on the fence can be swayed. Sadly, I've seen very little to suggest that's possible.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at February 27, 2016 10:21 PM (pUDQf)

479 I loathe Donald Trump. His grating personal style, his lack of deep policy knowledge, his refusal to do his damn homework on it, the cheap shots on the other candidates, the long history of flip-flops, and the fact I don't trust a word out of his mouth combine to leave me appalled he's this close to the nomination.

I'm going to pray for a miracle in the next 2.5 weeks. If Cruz catches fire again, I'm going with him. If he doesn't and Rubio shows signs of life, I'm going with Rubio. If Rubio is going to get blown out, I may just vote Cruz on principle. If Trump gets the nomination, I'm going to take an Aleve, grit my teeth, vote for the unmitigated bastard, and hope for the best.

Hillary Clinton's actions with the unsecured server, the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One, etc. and decades of corruption are too dangerous for me to ignore. She should have been indicted by now not grinding along towards her party's nomination. Trump is a BS artist and probably a crook, but I don't yet see signs he's committed actions that betrayed his nation's best interests.

After '92 I've resolved to vote for my party's nominee as long as that person wins according to the rules in place at the time. Sometimes I'm happy with the outcome and sometimes I'm not. This election season had such wonderful promise, and to see it descend to the level of practically hoping for SMOD '16 is so darn depressing.
Posted by: Jill v2 at February 27, 2016 08:41 PM (1+uyO)
---------------------------------------
Yes, it is really depressing.
I agree with what you posted. Common sense and reality.
There is a gamble with every Republican candidate, but we will have to try and push (fight) them to move further to the Right. I see Trump as moving to the Left. If he is the nominee I hope we can push him to the Right, maybe with the right advice he can since he will have to answer to some of the Evangelicals that helped him get elected.
Regarding Hillary, we know what we're getting a crooked Liberal that will appoint Alinsky Liberals, Obamacare will continue and small businesses will no longer be able to afford stay open.

I will be voting for the Republican nominee for POTUS (if it's Trump I'll probably be taking a Xanax) and the most Conservative Judges etc. running for office.
Cruz 2016

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:22 PM (7GQM/)

480 First, yes he did mention his sister at the last debate... she was THE ONLY judge he mentioned when asked about SCOTUS. He then went on to (falsely) say that Cruz was lying about his sister being progressive because, he said, Alito signed on to the same defense of partial birth abortion as she did. He demanded Cruz apologize to his sister which Cruz refused to do. Guess what, Trump lied about Alito joining in that opinion just as he has lied multiple, multiple times about almost everything to do with Cruz and many things that have nothing at all to do with Cruz.//

1: He mentioned his sister, but he did not say he wanted to appoint her to SCOTUS, and did not mention her in conjunction with which judges he would appoint to SCOTUS, as you originally claimed. In fact, he's said he's not going to appoint his sister. So, this is not true.

2: It's a stretch to say Trump was lying. He was correct that in the sense Alito concurred in the judgment, that is, he concurred with Trump's sister that the partial-birth abortion ban had to be struck down. He merely did it on different grounds. So, the "lied about Alito" talking point is itself an exaggeration. (Incidentally, Trump's sister testified for Alito when he was nominated by W.)

//Conservatives do not support partial birth abortion as both Trump and his sister do. Liberals do.//

You're begging the question.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:29 PM (RPsRI)

481 Yes, every four years it's "This is the most important election ever! Vote R or else!"

Sorry, I'm not buying it any more.
Posted by: rickl at February 27, 2016 08:42 PM (sdi6R)
-----------------
Look at all the damage OBAMA has done!

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:30 PM (7GQM/)

482 //Mr. Estrada, if you convince a single individual on this thread to vote for Trump with your transparent cheerleader b.s., I would be amazed.//

Eh, I wouldn't. I keep it civil.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:32 PM (RPsRI)

483 " I owe no allegiance to an organization that treats me with such contempt, and has demonstrated no remorse over lying to me repeatedly."

Posted by: sarge2909 at February 27, 2016 10:33 PM (+OcJ/)

484 Estrada,


It is not a stretch at all to say Trump was lying because he was, in fact, lying. As he has been lying every time he falsely screamed to the rafters that Cruz was a liar. As he was lying when he said Cruz was responsible for Roberts.



You do not see what Trump is because you want him to be otherwise... that doesn't make it so.






Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 10:36 PM (NPofj)

485 If the Senate and Congress had a majority this last election it would have been a thousand times worse. EPA, another SCOTUS, global warming etc. all would have been pushed down our throats.
People are ticked off and the MSM is actually reporting that fact.
Look at the big picture. Change doesn't happen overnight... it takes time.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:41 PM (7GQM/)

486 It is not a stretch at all to say Trump was lying because he was, in fact, lying. As he has been lying every time he falsely screamed to the rafters that Cruz was a liar. As he was lying when he said Cruz was responsible for Roberts.



You do not see what Trump is because you want him to be otherwise... that doesn't make it so.






Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 10:36 PM (NPofj)

-------------------
Trump owes Cruz an apology. I am still so angry about this.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:45 PM (7GQM/)

487 //It is not a stretch at all to say Trump was lying because he was, in fact, lying.//

I'm sorry, but Alito concurred in the judgment. That's a fact. He reached the same conclusion about the partial-birth abortion ban that Trump's sister did. His reasoning was merely different. You want to say it's a lie? Fine. But it's a stretch and requires some mighty fine parsing. And evidence of knowledge and intent. I'd be surprised if Trump even knows there's a such thing as a concurring opinion, and, if so, what exactly it is. So, no, Trump didn't "lie about Alito." No fair person would characterize it as such.

"As he has been lying every time he falsely screamed to the rafters that Cruz was a liar. As he was lying when he said Cruz was responsible for Roberts."

Eh. These are opinions, not lies.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:46 PM (RPsRI)

488 I would not be surprised if there is another attack like 911 after Obama is out of office. If Trump is POTUS will Obama keep important information from him. Who will the blame go to?

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:52 PM (7GQM/)

489 Of course, it never ever occurred to you that most people just don't agree with you - it's always the fault of those all-powerful others which can apparently control all events about your life, this country, etc. Grow up cry-baby and run your own life.

Posted by: Carlito at February 27, 2016 10:53 PM (MUJMq)

490 Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:46 PM (RPsRI)
-----------------
Without a doubt Cruz would nominate a more Conservative judge to the Supreme Court than Trump... unless Trump were to nominate Cruz.

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 10:58 PM (7GQM/)

491 //Yes, every four years it's "This is the most important election ever! Vote R or else!"

Sorry, I'm not buying it any more.//

Yeah, but it's basically true every four years.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:59 PM (RPsRI)

492 I'm sorry, but Alito concurred in the judgment.
That's a fact. He reached the same conclusion about the partial-birth
abortion ban that Trump's sister did. His reasoning was merely
different. You want to say it's a lie? Fine. But it's a stretch and
requires some mighty fine parsing. And evidence of knowledge and intent.
I'd be surprised if Trump even knows there's a such thing as a
concurring opinion, and, if so, what exactly it is. So, no, Trump didn't
"lie about Alito." No fair person would characterize it as such.



"As he has been lying every time he falsely screamed to the rafters
that Cruz was a liar. As he was lying when he said Cruz was responsible
for Roberts."



Eh. These are opinions, not lies.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 10:46 PM (RPsRI)


Since Trump said Alito agreed with his sister, when he in fact specifically declined to agree with her, Trump did lie. Saying Cruz was responsible for Roberts (and saying how bad Cruz must feel to have been responsible for him) was a lie not an opinion. Cruz did not choose Roberts... George W Bush did. Nor did Cruz vote to confirm him as he wasn't in the Senate then. So when Trump says he is responsible he is lying as that is not a matter of opinion.


Trump is attempting to win by lying which, in my view, means he is a man of poor character.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 27, 2016 11:01 PM (NPofj)

493 //Without a doubt Cruz would nominate a more Conservative judge to the Supreme Court than Trump... unless Trump were to nominate Cruz.//

Possibly. Possibly not. The choices are limited, and it doesn't get much more conservative than Pryor. BUT, I'm not here to tear down Cruz. I like Cruz. I gave money to Cruz when he was fighting Dewhurst. He'd make a great president and a great SCOTUS Justice.

My point is just that any candidate--and it looks like it's going to be Trump--on our side would be preferable to Hillary in this regard.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 11:03 PM (RPsRI)

494 I gave money to Cruz when he was fighting Dewhurst. He'd make a great president and a great SCOTUS Justice. Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 11:03 PM (RPsRI)
-------------
I gave money too. I was absolutely ecstatic when he beat Dewhurst!

Posted by: redridinghood at February 27, 2016 11:11 PM (7GQM/)

495 //Since Trump said Alito agreed with his sister, when he in fact specifically declined to agree with her, Trump did lie.//

He did agree with Trump's sister--on the result. So, not a lie. To show it was a lie you have to show he meant that he agreed with her *as to the reasoning* instead of the result.

//Saying Cruz was responsible for Roberts (and saying how bad Cruz must feel to have been responsible for him) was a lie not an opinion.//

A lie is a knowingly-told falsehood. Are you saying it's impossible that Trump believes that Cruz helped move Roberts' forward with his opinion piece? How can we know that? C'mon. It's opinion.

//Cruz did not choose Roberts... George W Bush did. Nor did Cruz vote to confirm him as he wasn't in the Senate then. So when Trump says he is responsible he is lying as that is not a matter of opinion.//

You'd be as bad at understanding libel law as Trump is.

Just because Cruz didn't nominate him or vote for him doesn't mean he can't be responsible for him. Trump's position--which I disagree with, btw--is that Cruz lobbied for him either before or after he was nominated(1), and thus played a role in getting him on the Court, and is, in that sense, responsible for him being there. Calling this a silly opinion is fine. Calling it a lie is, well, a silly opinion.

//Trump is attempting to win by lying which, in my view, means he is a man of poor character. //

You must be all broken up about Rubio's lies then.

(1) Cruz's piece came after Roberts was nominated, though it isn't clear Trump knows that. Not a lie either way.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 11:16 PM (RPsRI)

496 You know what? This is an excellent post. As someone currently backing trump, my initial instinct was to be defensive because in the last 48 hours on this site it's been "incoming" from all directions. But I don't disagree with a thing in this post and truthfully, if Trump can't or won't take positions that can make you comfortable voting for him, than he doesn't deserve your vote and you should do what your conscience and instincts tell you. There are good, deeply patriotic people that post here and the dialogue on this blog had been one of the true "great" things left about politics in my life. I suspect open blogger and I agree on 95% of the major issues and I bet it's 90% with most people who post here.

As someone currently for Trump, I can tell you I will 100% vote for Cruz if he wins the nomination. I don't know if I can do Rube's and it's less him personally than the failure, elitism and petty vindictiveness of those that are behind him. But, ya know what - shutting my brain off and failing to keep an open mind makes me no better than those that are trying to silence anyone who would even consider Trump as racists and traitors to the republic.

So I will keep an open mind and extend an open hand and I hope you will too. We are so much closer to turning the page on the disaster of the last 20 years than most realize. People are engaged and they are paying attention. People that haven't voted in decades are showing up to caucus and primary. Not all is yet lost.

I've volunteered, donated, fundraiser and worked at the state and national level for years. I've never seen anything like this.

So I'm not going to say #never "candidate" about anyone because that means I don't have the respect and courtesy to listen to your thoughts and legitimate concerns. And that's BS, because as disappointed or upset as I might be - I do give a shit about the thoughts and concerns of those who post, many of which are quite legitimate. And as much as parts of the system very much need some "let it burn" - complete scorched earth will impact some who don't deserve it.

No doubt there will be some difficult days and choices ahead, do what you think is right - fight for the candidate you think best - and at the end, if you need a drink...may you drink with me.

Thanks for a great post, God bless and and a great weekend to all.

Posted by: CastleP at February 27, 2016 11:23 PM (7+oeE)

497 6
Not voting against Hillary will get you lots of things that go against your principles.



We need your help.



Vote against Hillary or your principles are moot.

Posted by: eleven at February 27, 2016 05:38 PM (qUNWi)
Ok, two pictures of the future unfold.
EITHER Trump or Hillary gets us an authoritarian big government nightmare that trashes the country. For the next few decades everyone remembers the idiotic party who put them in charge.Does it benefit the country more to have the GOP be the party that tanks for decades?
I'm not sure why my Principles should be that the death of the GOP and Conservatism is something I should work toward and not oppose.
OR why my principles should be to push for a decade or more of liberal rule after a Trump fiasco that will be YUUGE.What principles do you think I have again?
I believe you've misread me, the situation; or perhaps both.

Posted by: gekkobear at February 27, 2016 11:47 PM (aS5WI)

498 My principles include never under any circumstances turning this country over to a corrupt. racist, lunatic.

Trump's corruption and Hillary's corruption are equal. Trump has bribed every politician in DC. Trump gave to the corrupt Clinton Foundation. And Trump is hiding corruption with his taxes and his wealth, and his flat out con artist businesses. Trump's corruption is endless and unknowable in it's vastness.

Plus, Trump is a Democrat corruptly telling Republicans what they want to hear. He does that, in his book he tells how he does it... figures out what people want and exploiting that thing.

We know for sure Hillary is corrupt. It is a finite corruption. We know it, we've lived through it so far. There isn't anything unknown.

This nation is safer in the hands of Hillary Clinton, than Donald Trump.

The court is gone. Abortion is already legal, it's not getting more legal with Hillary. Gay marriage is already legal. It's not getting more legal with Hillary. It's already done.

Trump is as bad as any other Democrat on the Constitution. Except he is a lunatic who could do anything. And nothing good.

My conscience will be clear voting to keep Trump out of the Whitehouse. Trump is the clear and present danger to America.

I don't vote for the letter R. I vote for the most conservative candidate in the race. And if the nominee is Trump, the most conservative candidate is Hillary.

Lunacy is not conservative. Racism is not conservative.

It will be Rubio/Cruz.... or there is no choice.

The Republican Party is over. Trump killed it.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 12:30 AM (VoCyE)

499 Someone earlier in this thread spoke of the need to "dig up" Scoop Jackson. Best minds think that it's Andy you should be looking at.

Posted by: President Andrew Jackson at February 28, 2016 12:38 AM (MwEHu)

500 I believe that if he were actually transparent about his actual ownership interest in the various Trump properties he's not even a billionaire.

I think his tax returns would show a modest for a rich guy income.

I think it's Potemkin Trump all the way down, and if it is ever allowed the light of day his "successful" braggadocio will be shown to be hollow.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at February 27, 2016 06:18 PM (1xUj/)

__________________

Yes, I've seen it broken down like that by the financial magazines... Trump is broke by his own standards!!!

Of course he started high enough that it doesn't stop his lifestyle that much, but he is not anywhere close to being worth 10 billion as I've seen him claim.... or 5 billion or 3 billion, all numbers I've seen him use.

But those numbers seem minor movement, rounding errors... look again, the magnitude of the difference between 10 billion and 3 billion? All salesmen do that, they blur the numbers to lure you in. Con artist's do it really well.

What kind of loosy goosy math is that? If he was in charge of the government that is the kind of math we could expect! It's all smoke and mirrors now.

Our govenment's not getting solved at all by Trump's kind of business skill. The balance sheet would be re- arranged... the way Trump does now to hide his lack of wealth.

Trump is a lunatic. Only a lunatic could tell lies that big.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 12:41 AM (VoCyE)

501 @Petunia

Read my post @496. You are one of the folks I am talking about. I don't doubt your sicerity and will keep an open mind to your arguments and concerns. Let's take it easy on all the "never" statements and name calling. I'm quilts as well...working on it.

Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 12:50 AM (7+oeE)

502 * sincerity
* guilty

Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 12:51 AM (7+oeE)

503 For you Cruz folkks... I have forgiven Iowa. It was cheap you never owned up to the full thing, but it is so minor compared to Trump... so minor.

In that same spirit, I would ask you to examine Trump's record as though he were someone else. Don't give him any benefit of the doubt hold him say to the same standard that you held Romney too.

What do you see? Not a conservative by your own measures. Not even close! So how could your choices be Cruz, or Trump? Those are polar opposites!

There is nothing principled about voting for Trump under any condition.

I ask you too, to consider that Rubio is not as bad as you have spent so much time and energy trying to make him.

I can get past my revulsion to Cruz... I think you can put aside your months of hating on Rubio and see him for who he really is.

I dont' think it does any good to fight over it though.

Trump will win. The party will split and I will be voting down ticket Republican, for my state's sake and voting to try to keep the Senate and House to slow Hillary down.

Hillary is going to win this election.

Because Trump.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 12:52 AM (VoCyE)

504 Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 12:50 AM (7+oeE)

I say, completely not in anger. That what I saw at that debate on Thrusday, and then on Friday morning was a lunatic. I felt that way when he attacked GWBush, then he acted all calm the next day... I decided it was an anomally.

But I saw it again on Thursday and Friday. I will not be voting for Trump. And indeed I will do all I can to keep him from winning.

Even at the cost of the Supreme Court.

This isn't just a policy problem. This is a sanity problem.

Plus, the Trump University, the break down of his finances by expert after expert... he lost a libel suit in court when he sued someone for calling him a millionaire... he was force to show his taxes, they were all redacted!!!! Redacted!!! Just like Obama and Hillary!

He isn't who he claims to be.

That video ad he did for Trump University is exactly what he is saying in the campaign... huge promises of wealth. Repeated in a hyponotic way.

Trump is a lunatic con artist.

And I've had run in's with his racist friends on line, and I will not be a party to that.

I will never be a member of a Party run by Donald Trump. Ever.

Sorry, if that is what it means to be a Republican, I'm out.

I've past that rubicon a couple of days ago, and I'm not coming back.

The Party is done. It will not survive this.

I don't even want it to survive this. this is not the Party of Reagan that I joined in 1980. This isn't the Party of Lincoln. I am ashamed to be associated with this.

The Trump racists alone make this not a home for me or for mine. I can not abide racism.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 01:02 AM (VoCyE)

505 "For you Cruz folkks... I have forgiven Iowa. It was cheap you never
owned up to the full thing, but it is so minor compared to Trump... so
minor."




petunia, you repeating what can charitably be described as Trump's less that factual analysis of Iowa does not help your point. Cruz did not lie... Cruz's people did not lie. They tweeted out the link to a CNN news report. In no sense of the word was that a lie. When Carson said the article was untrue, Cruz called him and apologized for the misunderstanding.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 28, 2016 01:04 AM (NPofj)

506 Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 27, 2016 11:16 PM (RPsRI)


You sir are engaging in sophistry.




Your candidate is a liar. Period. Full stop.




The funny thing is, even though I have supported Cruz from the start of this, I was curious and willing to consider Trump if Cruz didn't get the nomination. Then Trump started lying which did two things: 1) it made me realize his character and 2) it made me do the research on him that I hadn't done before. As a result of those two things I cannot and will not vote for Trump... not in the primaries and not in the general.

Posted by: redbanzai at February 28, 2016 01:15 AM (NPofj)

507 Posted by: redbanzai at February 28, 2016 01:04 AM (NPofj)

I saw two different journalists spell it out step by step next to a timeline. STep by step... it was purposeful, it was stealing votes... and that flyer was big brother watching.

Cruz lied and cheated. The fact that you and he will still not acknowledge it is what turned my away.

But... I am not going to hold it against him any longer. But it is what I say, and not what you just did.

Keep it up. Because it has taken a long time to get to this point, to decide that I can live with the fake sincerity in his voice...because his politics are right, he is just insufferable as a person.

But... that is so minor compared to a lunatic.

I also think Rubio and Cruz have some kind of deal... and Rubio is taking the brunt of Trump to push Cruz over the line.

If Rubio likes Cruz, he must be okay. And he must be the only person on the planet who knows Cruz and likes him.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 01:15 AM (VoCyE)

508 @Petunia

Should "the party" survive this? What legislative or ideological victories has it delivered? How has it made the country better since 1994? I'm not being facetious, I'm honestly asking?

Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 01:23 AM (7+oeE)

509 Attacking Trump and supporters as racist lunatics has not worked very well to this point. One of the great myths that those opposed to him tell themselves and each other is that he hasn't really been criticized yet....if we just reall attack him and his supporters....then, THEN we will win!

If you want to end the Trump phenomenon it's really simple, tell me how you're guy is going to be a better vehicle to address the concerns, sense of betrayal and future aspirations of those currently supporting Trump then Trump will? As I said, I will keep an open mind.

Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 01:32 AM (7+oeE)

510 Petunia, you were out 4 years ago with your deep love and affection toward Romneycare. Since Trump is the culmination of the Anyone But Romney vote - I can understand your hatred towards everything Trump. You and your uniparty establishment can go vote for Hillary like most of you are threatening. The GOPe, the party of Romneycare and the DEMe, the party of Clinton, are one in the same anyhow, and the crazy response of the GOPe when it comes to Trump just goes and shows it.

Posted by: doug at February 28, 2016 01:50 AM (RzVKH)

511 Should "the party" survive this? What legislative or ideological victories has it delivered? How has it made the country better since 1994? I'm not being facetious, I'm honestly asking?

Posted by: CastleP at February 28, 2016 01:23 AM (7+oeE)

________

No child left behind? :-) Joke!

Good grief I'm not prepared to argue all that.

I do believe that they have run things in a progressive way... but I think they have slowed it.

Which is all they can do in a pluralist country. We are a varied group of people with competing interests.

It is impossible to live as libertarians want to live. Or say they want to live.

I think you are wrong to think Reagan was not progressive as well. History is progressive.

I think government has uses. Roads, dams, schools, mail, monitoring safety on medicine, food and airlines... I am also glad for pollution laws that got all that litter off the roads and made the air cleaner.... I remember when you could not breathe in LA at all. There are legitimate things that the government should do. We have just gotten carried away and tried to control everything... we need to roll it back.

I think it is okay to have national goals. They should be agreed upon and voted for. And that is often a slippery slope in the end. And I think there must be someway for that to become stoppable.

We live in a country with a whole lot of people in it, and they all have differing Ideas about things.

And majority rules, most of the time lately I'm in the minority. But I still believe in democracy, even if it doesn't agree with me.

ACtually, the answer to your question is: I don't think of victories or losses. I think of fast or slow. But the statism can't be stopped completely.

Slowing down statism is all we can do in a free society. Because no two people agree on everything, and you will never get enough people to just stop being progressive completely.

Eventually the creeping statism will become centralized power, but the more people you refuse to work with, the faster it will happen.

That is happening now, refusing to work with people who don't agree fully, has sped up the process. With the parties completely at odds, you are pushing us toward more statism, not less.

That is why there are no "victories" you insist on purism. So they win, you fail.

The idea of burning it down will not work.

Remember the Roman Republic only lasted a couple of hundred years, they were only really a free country for that long, but the Roman Empire lasted many centuries. AS corrupt as it was, it was efficient and durable. Centralized and durable.

The more centralized the power, the harder it is to go back. So the idea that you can do any more than slow down the statism it flawed. At least with a human population. It is human nature.

Sorry... I wrote a book.

Posted by: petunia at February 28, 2016 01:55 AM (VoCyE)

512 Way to condescending champ.

Posted by: ChocoCheese at February 28, 2016 05:49 AM (rGlsL)

513 Way to condescend* stupid phone...

Posted by: ChocoCheese at February 28, 2016 05:50 AM (rGlsL)

514 I love reading article's where the foundation is built on the weakest of Americans. The pick up the toys and go home Americans while at the same time they stick their heads in the sand and repeat naa-naa-naa-naa over and over again in an attempt to shirk the responsibility of helping elect a woman who is directly responsible for the deaths of our people in Libya and who would run the IRS and health care to the degree that will make Obama look like the rank rookie that he is.

Picking a word out of the dictionary to use as reasoning for not fighting the good fight is not only unacceptable and dismissed as the total, weak dodge that it is but also shows the entire world that yeah. There are certain weak willed Americans that allowed their country to be taken over without a shot being fired.

Posted by: Drider at February 28, 2016 06:25 AM (6Xbsz)

515 While there is a lot of hand wringing about who to vote for and media bias over candidates this discussion won't come close to resolving anything unless the root cause is identified and attacked. That is the "money trust" that has exerted its influence on government for its own interests throughout our history but mostly since it was given the air of legitimacy with the passage of the federal reserve act of 1913. The other creation of these private bankers is the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), a private entity, that has directed policy since its creation and includes media moguls in its membership. Note that many past and current media moguls were/are members including Fox News and membership includes both D and R. Wondering why McCain questions suddenly got easier? It's because he was their guy, the one they knew would allow Odoofus to win. Romney too. Why did neither of them attack him with legitimate issues? You guys should be writing investigative pieces exposing the "money trust" and it's corruption of our government. Until we take these conspirators out of the equation our government will continue to spin us toward socialism regardless of what party is in charge. I am talking about the ultra rich, the .0000001% who actually desire socialism. If you doubt this, just ask yourself what changed in terms of policy, budget and spending under Odoofus when both houses flipped to R? Nothing, zippo.

Posted by: KauaiGoneGin at February 28, 2016 08:22 AM (njH3C)

516 //You sir are engaging in sophistry.//

Nope. Just making important distinctions.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 28, 2016 08:56 AM (RPsRI)

517
I understand the idea of not bargaining with your conscience but lets face it the Republicans have not had a good track record of putting up good conservative candidates ina long time. Huckabee? Santorum? Hell no. Those guys were awful. Maybe nice neighbors but not politicians. Gingrich? Way too much baggage. Who havethe Republicans put upthat we could be proud of?
I like Cruz but something about him creeps me out. Can't put my finger on it but I don't get a good feeling about him. I would vote for him but would probably feel the need to take a shower soon afterwards.
I admire Trump for what he's done as a business man but I'm fully aware that his words have no credibility. He's just saying what he believes people want to hear.
So I ask you folks other than amnesty what bothers you about Rubio?

Posted by: JW at February 28, 2016 09:00 AM (H6sl7)

518 Petunia, you sound tedious and unhinged.

Posted by: Mr. Estrada at February 28, 2016 09:05 AM (RPsRI)

519 I decided after 2012 that if there wasn't a principled candidate to vote for, I wouldn't vote. But since then I've come to my senses: This year, I'd sooner vote for Sanders, to hasten the burning.

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at February 28, 2016 12:58 PM (Q+qgm)

(Jump to top of page)






Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0702 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0269 seconds, 528 records returned.
Page size 357 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.



MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!

Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat