As an opponent of Donald J. Trump, these polls on the surface are rather disappointing as they almost all show him in the lead and at 50% in Massachusetts.
But there are caveats that are a glimmer of hope if you, like me, oppose the Donald.
For one, John Kasich has some splainin' to do since he is not leading in his home state. The Donald has a five-point lead with 31% to 26% for Gov. Kasich. The rationale for the Kasich candidacy seems to be falling apart if he can not lead in his home state.
That is not a problem for Sen. Ted Cruz as he has a comfortable eight-point lead in his home state of Texas. Sen. Cruz has a solid 37% to the Donald's 29%. Sen. Cruz is also leading in New Mexico but only by one point and it is a bunch at the top three.
Even Sen. Marco Rubio has some good news as he is leading in Utah by two percent. The interesting thing here is that the Donald is in third place with 18% of the vote.
Now there are eight states that have polling regarding next Tuesday's Super Tuesday primary.
So play along to note something.
If you add the percentages of the eight polls here, the Donald averages a solid 31%. If one combines Sen. Cruz averaging 21% and Sen. Rubio averaging 18%, the two leading anti-Trump candidacy with 37% of the vote. And if Gov. Kasich and Dr. Ben Carson were to drop out of the race and their support was distributed evenly, the anti-Trump forces still lead 42% to 37%.
So is it possible that someone may see the handwriting on the wall and drop out before next week? It is unlikely but possible depending on tonight's caucus in Nevada. It appears that Sen. Rubio is now getting a huge boost of elected members of congress supporting him. The Donald just has to hold steady and hope the bleeding on the right continues.
My guess is that by next Wednesday both Gov. Kasich and Dr. Carson will suspend their campaigns. For Gov. Kasich, he needs to be running a national campaign and he is not. For Dr. Carson, He is not gaining but losing support and even his most ardent supporters will ask him to leave with a modicum of dignity.
We shall see a lot more polling and who will come out with a chance to be the anti-Trump. My guess is that will be Sen. Rubio. Then it will be Mano a Mano.
Showing posts with label 2016 GOP field. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2016 GOP field. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Christie, Fiorina Drop Out
As expected, GOP presidential candidates Gov. Chris Crispy, er Chirstie, and former Hewlett-Packard CEO, Carly Fiorina, have "suspended", re: ended, their quests for the presidency.
Both candidates finished near the bottom in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Gov. Christie went out literally kneecapping Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) during last Saturday's presidential debate. He ran a poor campaign that never caught fire with much of anyone. By kneecapping Sen. Rubio he raised some serious doubts about the junior senator's ability to think on his feet. Gov. Christie thought that would help him gain some traction. What it did do was a double whammy by clearly affecting voting for Sen. Rubio but also to Gov. Christie. The man spent 70 days in New Hampshire trying to mix it up with voters. for all his effort he got a whole seven percent of the vote.
On the other hand, Mrs. Fiorina had a proven business record and did run in 2010 in California against Sen. Barbara Mamm Boxer. She did lose that race in a good Democrat year in California. Hell, they are all good Democrat years here in the once Golden State. But Mrs. Fiorina brought a very broad depth to the issues facing the nation. She should have been in the last presidential debate but the reality is that it would not have helped her out all that much.
What will be interesting is to see who, if anyone, they will support.
My guess is that Gov. Christie would throw his support to the former Florida governor, Jeb! Bush. Gov. Christie is pretty establishment, whatever that means, and I would not expect him to go out of the way to change that. I think that Mrs. Fiorina could throw her support to Sen. Rubio. Foreign policy is important to her as to Sen. Rubio and while some think that she is also an establishment type, I think that she straddles the fence enough that she could be a big catch for Sen. Rubio.
Now if only Dr. Ben Carson would read the writing on the wall . . .
Both candidates finished near the bottom in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Gov. Christie went out literally kneecapping Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) during last Saturday's presidential debate. He ran a poor campaign that never caught fire with much of anyone. By kneecapping Sen. Rubio he raised some serious doubts about the junior senator's ability to think on his feet. Gov. Christie thought that would help him gain some traction. What it did do was a double whammy by clearly affecting voting for Sen. Rubio but also to Gov. Christie. The man spent 70 days in New Hampshire trying to mix it up with voters. for all his effort he got a whole seven percent of the vote.
On the other hand, Mrs. Fiorina had a proven business record and did run in 2010 in California against Sen. Barbara Mamm Boxer. She did lose that race in a good Democrat year in California. Hell, they are all good Democrat years here in the once Golden State. But Mrs. Fiorina brought a very broad depth to the issues facing the nation. She should have been in the last presidential debate but the reality is that it would not have helped her out all that much.
What will be interesting is to see who, if anyone, they will support.
My guess is that Gov. Christie would throw his support to the former Florida governor, Jeb! Bush. Gov. Christie is pretty establishment, whatever that means, and I would not expect him to go out of the way to change that. I think that Mrs. Fiorina could throw her support to Sen. Rubio. Foreign policy is important to her as to Sen. Rubio and while some think that she is also an establishment type, I think that she straddles the fence enough that she could be a big catch for Sen. Rubio.
Now if only Dr. Ben Carson would read the writing on the wall . . .
Tuesday, December 01, 2015
If I Am Against Donald Trump, Who Am I For?
I don't think that it is a secret that I support Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) for the GOP nomination for president in 2016.
But I also strongly oppose the campaign that one Donald J. Trump has been and continues to run for the same GOP nomination.
A thought came to me when I was on a Republican site on Facebook.
A gentleman was making the case that many of us that oppose the Donald seem to beat up on the guy and do not boost the candidate that we support.
The gentleman was and is right.
Thus I took his challenge and explained why I support Sen. Rubio over any other candidate. As it turns out, the gentleman is a Rubio supporter as well.
But his point was spot on.
One of the aspects of Trump supporters is the fact that they are always on defense because of the many wild things the Donald says. In their zeal, they are mocking and demeaning those that oppose their candidate. And we who oppose the Donald end up feeding this and forget we support some other candidate.
If someone that criticises the Donald does not support another candidate at this point in time, then it is nothing but dumping on Trump and I don't support that.
A candidate like the Donald comes around once a generation. Yes, he is tapping into a certain group of people. Not all are a bunch of racists and or bigots. Not all think the United States is in such a state that we need to Make America Great Again. What does animate many is the fact that the promises that the GOP leadership has made over the last five years have fallen far short. That the leadership has ridden the Tea Party and their agenda only to not support it when it counts. Sure, we're not able to win every battle but at least we put the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats on the record on any given issue. At least most could say that the leadership tried. Maybe there will even be a stronger negotiating point as well. What the Donald does is sound like a Tea Party candidate because he says the GOP establishment sucks. Yet on many an issue, he is not a Tea Party candidate in the least.
That is why I oppose the Doanld's candidacy.
But why I support Sen. Rubio is because of the fact he actually took on the GOP establishment and won. Many seem to forget that. All that some can remember is that Sen. Rubio tried to cut a deal on illegal immigration. Something that I oppose and think that the junior senator from Florida realizes was a huge mistake. I remember that Sen. Rubio took on now Democrat Charlie Crist and defeated him handily in a GOP primary. Had Mr. Crist won that race and the subsequent election in 2010, that would have been a sure vote for so-called comprehensive immigration "reform". As it turned out Crist was such a loyal Republican, he became an Obama Democrat and a loser in running for his old job in 2014.
Sen. Rubio has a solid conservative record in the senate (American Conservative Union lifetime rating 96% as of 2014. A Conservative review lifetime rating of 80%. Both well north of 50%.). And before people scream that he has missed senate votes, his record on that is quite a lot less than that of the last two senators to run for the presidency, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and the Dear Leader, President Obama.
When righteously criticizing the Donald, we must make the case for our candidate as well and that needs to be at all times. Just writing the latest wild comment and dumping on it shows us to be tearing down and being not much better than what we say about the supporters of the Donald.
It's not just about what we are against but what are we for.
But I also strongly oppose the campaign that one Donald J. Trump has been and continues to run for the same GOP nomination.
A thought came to me when I was on a Republican site on Facebook.
A gentleman was making the case that many of us that oppose the Donald seem to beat up on the guy and do not boost the candidate that we support.
The gentleman was and is right.
Thus I took his challenge and explained why I support Sen. Rubio over any other candidate. As it turns out, the gentleman is a Rubio supporter as well.
But his point was spot on.
One of the aspects of Trump supporters is the fact that they are always on defense because of the many wild things the Donald says. In their zeal, they are mocking and demeaning those that oppose their candidate. And we who oppose the Donald end up feeding this and forget we support some other candidate.
If someone that criticises the Donald does not support another candidate at this point in time, then it is nothing but dumping on Trump and I don't support that.
A candidate like the Donald comes around once a generation. Yes, he is tapping into a certain group of people. Not all are a bunch of racists and or bigots. Not all think the United States is in such a state that we need to Make America Great Again. What does animate many is the fact that the promises that the GOP leadership has made over the last five years have fallen far short. That the leadership has ridden the Tea Party and their agenda only to not support it when it counts. Sure, we're not able to win every battle but at least we put the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats on the record on any given issue. At least most could say that the leadership tried. Maybe there will even be a stronger negotiating point as well. What the Donald does is sound like a Tea Party candidate because he says the GOP establishment sucks. Yet on many an issue, he is not a Tea Party candidate in the least.
That is why I oppose the Doanld's candidacy.
But why I support Sen. Rubio is because of the fact he actually took on the GOP establishment and won. Many seem to forget that. All that some can remember is that Sen. Rubio tried to cut a deal on illegal immigration. Something that I oppose and think that the junior senator from Florida realizes was a huge mistake. I remember that Sen. Rubio took on now Democrat Charlie Crist and defeated him handily in a GOP primary. Had Mr. Crist won that race and the subsequent election in 2010, that would have been a sure vote for so-called comprehensive immigration "reform". As it turned out Crist was such a loyal Republican, he became an Obama Democrat and a loser in running for his old job in 2014.
Sen. Rubio has a solid conservative record in the senate (American Conservative Union lifetime rating 96% as of 2014. A Conservative review lifetime rating of 80%. Both well north of 50%.). And before people scream that he has missed senate votes, his record on that is quite a lot less than that of the last two senators to run for the presidency, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and the Dear Leader, President Obama.
When righteously criticizing the Donald, we must make the case for our candidate as well and that needs to be at all times. Just writing the latest wild comment and dumping on it shows us to be tearing down and being not much better than what we say about the supporters of the Donald.
It's not just about what we are against but what are we for.
Thursday, September 24, 2015
NR's Rich Lowry Drops A Bomb On The Donald
It's been a while since I wrote anything about Donald J. Trump, so why not write about this bomb dropped by National Review's editor-in-chief, Rich Lowry?
Don't you love it?! I do. It may be a bit too "adult" in language, but it has the Donald in a tizzy.
And it is worth watching!
Now I believe that the Donald is threatened by strong women and thinks that he can bully them the way that he does pretty much to those who are under him.
Thus this is the line Mr. Lowry said that is a truth bomb:
"He knows that he insulted and bullied his way to the top of the polls. No one was able to best him ever, except for this tough lady on that stage. And it must kill him. He must be simmering about it to this night."
The highlighted area is what counts. That the Donald was able to vanquish Rick Perry and Scott Walker into dropping out of the race. But he was left praising the appearance of one Carly Fiorina rather than doing his usual shtick.
Needless to say, the Donald took to Twitter:
.@FoxNews owes me an apology for allowing clueless pundit @RichLowry to use such foul language on tv. Unheard of!
Incompetent @RichLowry lost it tonight @FoxNews. He should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him.
Good Lord!
Really, you want to censor someone because he spoke the truth? You were punked and by a gal at that! Mr Lowry told it in the bluntest but truthful of ways.
I just want to see the Donald actually talk issues and not get into these childish, schoolyard games.
But until then I like to see a bomb dropped every now and then.
Don't you love it?! I do. It may be a bit too "adult" in language, but it has the Donald in a tizzy.
And it is worth watching!
Thus this is the line Mr. Lowry said that is a truth bomb:
"He knows that he insulted and bullied his way to the top of the polls. No one was able to best him ever, except for this tough lady on that stage. And it must kill him. He must be simmering about it to this night."
The highlighted area is what counts. That the Donald was able to vanquish Rick Perry and Scott Walker into dropping out of the race. But he was left praising the appearance of one Carly Fiorina rather than doing his usual shtick.
Needless to say, the Donald took to Twitter:
.@FoxNews owes me an apology for allowing clueless pundit @RichLowry to use such foul language on tv. Unheard of!
Incompetent @RichLowry lost it tonight @FoxNews. He should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him.
Good Lord!
Really, you want to censor someone because he spoke the truth? You were punked and by a gal at that! Mr Lowry told it in the bluntest but truthful of ways.
I just want to see the Donald actually talk issues and not get into these childish, schoolyard games.
But until then I like to see a bomb dropped every now and then.
Monday, September 21, 2015
The Next GOP Casualty Is Scott Walker
According to The New York Times, the Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, will be the second candidate to drop out of the presidential race as he will make the announcement a formality today at 4:00 pm, PDT.
This may have been prompted by the latest CNN/ORC poll which puts Mr. Walker in asterisk territory. Not good for a campaign that should be much better than it is.
Another factor was two rather weak debate performances. Let's face it that it was pretty hard for anyone to get in words edgewise against the current front runner, Donald J. Trump. But that is no excuse. When Mr. Walker spoke it was mostly about his tenure, an excellent one, as the governor of Wisconsin. But really nothing that set him apart from say someone like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. To be blunt, Mr. Walker seemed to be not ready for the big game.
That does not mean Mr. Walker does not have a future in Republican politics. After all he is only 50 years old and can now finish his term as governor. There is always another presidential run or a more realistic run for the United States senate.
Good luck to Gov. Scott Walker.
This may have been prompted by the latest CNN/ORC poll which puts Mr. Walker in asterisk territory. Not good for a campaign that should be much better than it is.
Another factor was two rather weak debate performances. Let's face it that it was pretty hard for anyone to get in words edgewise against the current front runner, Donald J. Trump. But that is no excuse. When Mr. Walker spoke it was mostly about his tenure, an excellent one, as the governor of Wisconsin. But really nothing that set him apart from say someone like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. To be blunt, Mr. Walker seemed to be not ready for the big game.
That does not mean Mr. Walker does not have a future in Republican politics. After all he is only 50 years old and can now finish his term as governor. There is always another presidential run or a more realistic run for the United States senate.
Good luck to Gov. Scott Walker.
Friday, September 11, 2015
Rick Perry, We Hardly Knew Ye
The first casualty of the GOP 2016 presidential nomination field has "suspended" his campaign and that is the former Texas governor, Rick Perry as he made the announcement today in St. Louis.
In Mr. Perry's announcement, in a clear swipe at the current GOP front runner, Donald J. Trump, he spoke of the conservative grassroots,
"We have a tremendous field of candidates . . .so I step aside know our party is in good hands. As long as we listen to the grassroots, listen to that cause of conservatism, our party will be in good hands."
Hmm, as I write it, to me it is also a swipe at the so-called GOP "leadership" in Washington, D. C.
The reason that Mr. Perry is dropping out is the age-old problem of a candidate that can not even draw more than 2.5% does not get any money. And Mr. Perry was burning through what money he was getting trying to breakthrough a field of 16 other candidates.
As the article points out, when Mr. Perry ran in 2012, it did not turn out so well and he was seen as a lightweight in being unable to fully name three cabinet departments that he would eliminate. I personally do not think that people were thinking about that as much as that there are other candidates that in many ways saying the same thing this time around.
The issue that should have put Mr. Perry in the top tier, illegal immigration, was taken by the Donald. Somehow, people do not trust a border governor that took on the current occupant of the White House in regard to illegal immigration over a bloviator that talks a good game.
Mr. Perry was in my top five of candidates to look at carrying the torch of conservatism but when you can't be taken seriously by so many with bad poll numbers, it does not matter.
I leave you with this quote taken by Allahpundit over at Hot Air from the former Texas governor:
"For me the message has always been more important than the man. The conservative movement has always been about principles, not personalities. Our nominee should embody those principles. He - or she - must make the case for the cause of conservatism more than the cause of their own celebrity."
I can tell you who will not be getting any endorsement from Rick Perry.
In Mr. Perry's announcement, in a clear swipe at the current GOP front runner, Donald J. Trump, he spoke of the conservative grassroots,
"We have a tremendous field of candidates . . .so I step aside know our party is in good hands. As long as we listen to the grassroots, listen to that cause of conservatism, our party will be in good hands."
Hmm, as I write it, to me it is also a swipe at the so-called GOP "leadership" in Washington, D. C.
The reason that Mr. Perry is dropping out is the age-old problem of a candidate that can not even draw more than 2.5% does not get any money. And Mr. Perry was burning through what money he was getting trying to breakthrough a field of 16 other candidates.
As the article points out, when Mr. Perry ran in 2012, it did not turn out so well and he was seen as a lightweight in being unable to fully name three cabinet departments that he would eliminate. I personally do not think that people were thinking about that as much as that there are other candidates that in many ways saying the same thing this time around.
The issue that should have put Mr. Perry in the top tier, illegal immigration, was taken by the Donald. Somehow, people do not trust a border governor that took on the current occupant of the White House in regard to illegal immigration over a bloviator that talks a good game.
Mr. Perry was in my top five of candidates to look at carrying the torch of conservatism but when you can't be taken seriously by so many with bad poll numbers, it does not matter.
I leave you with this quote taken by Allahpundit over at Hot Air from the former Texas governor:
"For me the message has always been more important than the man. The conservative movement has always been about principles, not personalities. Our nominee should embody those principles. He - or she - must make the case for the cause of conservatism more than the cause of their own celebrity."
I can tell you who will not be getting any endorsement from Rick Perry.
Thursday, September 10, 2015
Is The Donald's Mouth Going To Finally Run Him Out Of The Presidential Race?
Good Lord in heaven, these posts about Donald J. Trump pretty much write themselves.
But in the Donald's latest salvo, check that salvos, against fellow GOP candidates is it finally too much for most people?
To the Trumpettes, nope.
To the Trumpettes, nope.
To them the Donald is speaking truth. Weird truth to most people, but to the Trumpettes it's truth.
The Donald took on not one "fellow" Republican presidential candidate but two in the persons of fellow outsiders Dr. Ben Carson and former Hewlitt-Packard CEO, Carly Fiorina.
In an article from the Rolling Stone magazine, the Donald, as is his wont, did not take on Mrs. Fiorina on substantive policy issues but, I can't believe that I am writing this, her face. Directly from the Rolling Stone article on the Donald:
Trump's expression sours in schoolboy disgust as the camera bores in on Fiorina. "Look at that face!" he cries. "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of the next president?!" The laughter grows halting and faint behind him. "I mean, she's a woman and I'm not s'posdta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?"
So let me say that yes, I sure would vote for Mrs. Fiorina for president. And not based on her face for crying out loud but because I think she is strong without being annoying. She has expressed conservative thinking clearly.
But the Donald, he was not done by a long shot.
Dr. Ben Carson was asked a question about the Donald's faith and he answered this way:
"By humility and a fear of the Lord are riches and honor and life. And that's a very big part of who I am, humility and fear of the Lord. I don't get that impression with him (Trump). Maybe I'm wrong but I don't get that impression. Probably the biggest thing is that I realized where my success has come from. And I don't in any way deny my faith in God. And I think that is a big difference here.
So, Dr. Carson in his understated way somewhat finally said something critical of the current GOP front runner.
"But I don't know Dr. Carson, perhaps-you-know-and okay doctor . . .we're not talking great-he was an okay doctor. And now because he is a doctor and hired one nurse, he's going to end up being president of the United States? For him to read the Bible from memory, it looked like he memorized it about two minutes before he went on stage. Look at his faith and your not going to find so much. And you look at his views on abortion and they were horrendous, and that's why I'm leading with all the evangelicals. I'm leading Ben Carson by a lot I'm almost double his numbers."
WOW! Where, oh where do I start to dismantle this pant load of crap from the Donald.
Let's see, this okay doc was a professor of neurosurgery, oncology, plastic surgery and pediatrics. And the okay doc only specialized in traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries and several other things that I have never heard of. And the highlight of Dr. Carson's career, an okay career, was separating conjoined twins at the back of the head.
Not too bad for an okay doc who probably hired a nurse.
As far as Dr. Carson and his faith, he has been a committed Christian for quite a while now. And he at least can cite a biblical verse. The Donald can not cite one. Not even the most well known of all, John 3:16. Unlike the Donald, Dr. Carson is a student of the Holy Bible.
Yes, Dr. Carson did some things in regard to fetal tissue research that he truly regrets (which means that he, unlike the Donald, asked the Lord for forgiveness of what he came to recognize as a sin).
And what awesomeness has the Donald done? Use the government to throw people off their property by eminent domain to buttress his real estate fortune.
Yeah, that was a wee bit sarcastic. But the point is if the Donald is comfortable in his own skin, he does not need to answer any or perceived slight by his opponents. Run on the record. Oops! My bad! The Donald does have a record that he is trying to run away from.
So I read Ace's view over at Ace of Spades and, remember this is Ace so there is colorful language and imagery, and he pretty much nails the reasons that the Donald may have or is about to peak. Ace reminds us, much to the chagrin of the Trumpettes, that we are not so angry that we would actually elect Donald J. Trump. Maybe, and I do not concur, the Donald can win the GOP nomination, but not the general election.
Allahpundit over at Hot Air points out that the Fiorina comments will hurt more among women. Like it or not, the Donald has to win some women over among a lot of other groups. If he keeps looking at women as bimbos or ugly, what support he does have among women may begin to break.
Which leads to this conclusion of your humble blogger.
While according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls has the Donald at about 30%, how much of that will actually vote for the Donald? I think that is probably a lot softer than anyone realizes. There is a difference with liking the idea of the Donald and the reality that even on his signature issue, illegal immigration, he will be hamstrung by a reluctant congress and an overtaxed federal court system. His overall incoherence on issue after issue will also hurt unless he really starts talking policy. Then he will bore people to be honest. Which is probably why, as the Rolling Stone article says and the former Trump strategist, Roger Stone said, he is not really interested in policy.
The reality is that yes, the Donald's mouth is going to eventually either run him out of the GOP race or to crushing defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire at the hands of the best ABT-Anyone But Trump-candidate or candidates. And it can't come soon enough.
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Ann Coulter And John Kasich Mock Pro-Life
Before I explain why I think both conservative diva Ann Coulter and Republican presidential candidate Gov. John Kasich of Ohio seem to have a problem with pro-lifers, there needs to be an explanation.
For some reason these days conservatism has been ghettoized, mostly by other conservatives. We know that there are the three stools of modern conservatism. That would be domestic policy, foreign policy and social policy. There are subgroups in there, but that is the conservative coalition. And like it or not, the political vehicle for that is the Republican party.
I consider myself a practioniner of the three stools. No one is more or less important to conservative thinking and or ideas.
But since the end of the Bush 41 presidency in particular, there are those that want to rid one part of the stool or another. Some want to have a more government policy, albeit a conservative one with supposed conservative outcomes. Some do not like what they think is an overly muscular foreign policy and would like almost nothing more than to have a Fortress America world outlook. And of course there are those that want to purge the conservative movement of the icky social conservatives and their outdated view of the culture and the world.
The debate about illegal immigration is somewhat hard to categorize. I would put that under a very important concern of social conservatives. But there are some foreign policy hawks that have legitimate, righteous concerns about unfettered illegal immigration. Especially in the age of world-wide jihad. And even some domestic/economic conservatives that believe there is a serious cost in illegal immigration.
I consider myself very much a pro-lifer. I do not believe in abortion on demand and especially all the way to the ninth month. I do believe in the political reality that if we are to at the very least place restrictions on late-term abortions, there will have to be the exception for incest and rape. Science is in fact and indeed proving that a baby is very developed at the 20th week of a pregnancy. And with the video revelations of the group Center For Medical Progress and the cavalier manner of essentially selling aborted babies as body parts and tissue, it makes this tweet from Ann Coulter very disturbing.
Miss Coulter is a huge supporter of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and especially his seemingly hard-line on illegal immigration. A separate post for another time. But in Miss Coulter's zeal to make illegal immigration the issue of the upcoming presidential election, this is what she was willing to give up:
I don't care if @realDonaldTrump wants to perform abortions in the White House after this immigration policy paper
Really? Why would you tweet such a thing, Ann? Are you saying the wholesale murder of babies at the hands of the Abortuary Industrial Complex is OK as long as we build that wall and round up all illegal aliens and ship 'em home (only the "good ones" can come back in a expedited process).
The visual of what Miss Coulter tweeted is revolting.
Putting that aside, this is a huge problem of single-issue candidates and their supporters. They are so focused on the one issue that they do not see the forest through the trees.
Mr. Trump is suspect in so many areas of importance to conservatives and even Republicans and especially on abortion, there is no doubt that he really has not given any serious thought to the issue. And make no mistake, it is an issue of importance to many conservatives beyond social conservatives. Especially the fact that the federal government grants over $500,000,000 annually to Planned Parenthood, a private, non-profit organization. Oh, and Planned Parenthood is not supposed to use the money to perform abortions. But if you really think that there is some accounting of that federal, re: taxpayers, money, there is sure as hell no viable proof of it.
I would expect Miss Coulter to mock the other side as in liberals, leftists and the like. But to casually tweet such a sentiment, on a Sunday no less, shows something unbecoming of one that I have liked over the years for her clear-eyed view of the world.
But Miss Coulter is simply a supporter of a candidate and based on one position.
Ohio Republican John Kasich is an actual candidate for president. And it appears that he does not like that the Republican party talks too much about abortion.
Now to his credit, Gov. Kasich has made it harder for the Abortuary Industrial Complex to do business in Ohio. And when he served in congress, he was a very good congressman on abortion issues.
But the dirty secret is that the dude who is running Team Kasich is named John Weaver, a GOP consultant class loser if there ever was one. Mr. Weaver hates the conservative base that is the GOP. He really believes in somehow gaining respectability by narrowing and not expanding the field. After all, the greatest failure of Mr. Weaver's illustrious career was that of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain in 2000. Yeah, like any other political consultant, he can point to a success or two. Notably he did help Michigan GOP governor, Rick Snyder, win in 2010. But overall, Mr. Weaver is a weasel and a proven loser.
So, maybe this is why Mr. Kasich, again noted to be pro-life, felt a need to say the following:
I think (abortion) is an important issue, but I think there's many other issues that are really critical. Early childhood. Infant mortality. The environment. Education. I think we focus too much on one issue, and now that gay marriage is kind of off the table, we're kind of down to one social issue.
Where oh where does one start?!
Look, abortion is an important issue because it determines overall what kind of society we are. If we look at babies as nothing, then all the other issues that Gov. Kasich rightfully pointed out are not all that important. The whole reason of being that there is the Republican party is the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And that all are created equal. Not equal outcomes in life, but created equal. That is why the GOP was so against slavery. And in a similar vein, why since Ronald Reagan it has taken the righteous position of being pro-life.
Had Gov. Kasich actually made it a part of his litany rather than something separate, it would make the abortion issue a part of rather than a separate issue. For all of the issues are extremely important that he mentioned in his rip on pro-lifers.
And worst of all is that he falls into the leftist trap (and consultant-class Republicans) that there have only been two social issues that animate GOP voters. Abortion and same-sex marriage.
In fact and indeed, GOP voters look at early childhood development, infant mortality and education as equal social issues. Throw in criminal justice and prison reform and there is more than just abortion and same-sex marriage.
Conservatism and by extension the Republican party is a coalition. And for the most part there is agreement on issues. But it is tiresome to see when trying to push a certain agenda conservatives seem to like to mock those of us that are pro-life and that we are too focused on that one issue. It is why I am not a one-issue kinda guy. If I were I would sit out more elections than participate in. The one issue to me is the United States moving in and beginning a conservative Renaissance. Short-shifting our partners in coalition is not going to help us get there.
For some reason these days conservatism has been ghettoized, mostly by other conservatives. We know that there are the three stools of modern conservatism. That would be domestic policy, foreign policy and social policy. There are subgroups in there, but that is the conservative coalition. And like it or not, the political vehicle for that is the Republican party.
I consider myself a practioniner of the three stools. No one is more or less important to conservative thinking and or ideas.
But since the end of the Bush 41 presidency in particular, there are those that want to rid one part of the stool or another. Some want to have a more government policy, albeit a conservative one with supposed conservative outcomes. Some do not like what they think is an overly muscular foreign policy and would like almost nothing more than to have a Fortress America world outlook. And of course there are those that want to purge the conservative movement of the icky social conservatives and their outdated view of the culture and the world.
The debate about illegal immigration is somewhat hard to categorize. I would put that under a very important concern of social conservatives. But there are some foreign policy hawks that have legitimate, righteous concerns about unfettered illegal immigration. Especially in the age of world-wide jihad. And even some domestic/economic conservatives that believe there is a serious cost in illegal immigration.
I consider myself very much a pro-lifer. I do not believe in abortion on demand and especially all the way to the ninth month. I do believe in the political reality that if we are to at the very least place restrictions on late-term abortions, there will have to be the exception for incest and rape. Science is in fact and indeed proving that a baby is very developed at the 20th week of a pregnancy. And with the video revelations of the group Center For Medical Progress and the cavalier manner of essentially selling aborted babies as body parts and tissue, it makes this tweet from Ann Coulter very disturbing.
Miss Coulter is a huge supporter of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and especially his seemingly hard-line on illegal immigration. A separate post for another time. But in Miss Coulter's zeal to make illegal immigration the issue of the upcoming presidential election, this is what she was willing to give up:
I don't care if @realDonaldTrump wants to perform abortions in the White House after this immigration policy paper
Really? Why would you tweet such a thing, Ann? Are you saying the wholesale murder of babies at the hands of the Abortuary Industrial Complex is OK as long as we build that wall and round up all illegal aliens and ship 'em home (only the "good ones" can come back in a expedited process).
The visual of what Miss Coulter tweeted is revolting.
Putting that aside, this is a huge problem of single-issue candidates and their supporters. They are so focused on the one issue that they do not see the forest through the trees.
Mr. Trump is suspect in so many areas of importance to conservatives and even Republicans and especially on abortion, there is no doubt that he really has not given any serious thought to the issue. And make no mistake, it is an issue of importance to many conservatives beyond social conservatives. Especially the fact that the federal government grants over $500,000,000 annually to Planned Parenthood, a private, non-profit organization. Oh, and Planned Parenthood is not supposed to use the money to perform abortions. But if you really think that there is some accounting of that federal, re: taxpayers, money, there is sure as hell no viable proof of it.
I would expect Miss Coulter to mock the other side as in liberals, leftists and the like. But to casually tweet such a sentiment, on a Sunday no less, shows something unbecoming of one that I have liked over the years for her clear-eyed view of the world.
But Miss Coulter is simply a supporter of a candidate and based on one position.
Ohio Republican John Kasich is an actual candidate for president. And it appears that he does not like that the Republican party talks too much about abortion.
Now to his credit, Gov. Kasich has made it harder for the Abortuary Industrial Complex to do business in Ohio. And when he served in congress, he was a very good congressman on abortion issues.
But the dirty secret is that the dude who is running Team Kasich is named John Weaver, a GOP consultant class loser if there ever was one. Mr. Weaver hates the conservative base that is the GOP. He really believes in somehow gaining respectability by narrowing and not expanding the field. After all, the greatest failure of Mr. Weaver's illustrious career was that of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain in 2000. Yeah, like any other political consultant, he can point to a success or two. Notably he did help Michigan GOP governor, Rick Snyder, win in 2010. But overall, Mr. Weaver is a weasel and a proven loser.
So, maybe this is why Mr. Kasich, again noted to be pro-life, felt a need to say the following:
I think (abortion) is an important issue, but I think there's many other issues that are really critical. Early childhood. Infant mortality. The environment. Education. I think we focus too much on one issue, and now that gay marriage is kind of off the table, we're kind of down to one social issue.
Where oh where does one start?!
Look, abortion is an important issue because it determines overall what kind of society we are. If we look at babies as nothing, then all the other issues that Gov. Kasich rightfully pointed out are not all that important. The whole reason of being that there is the Republican party is the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And that all are created equal. Not equal outcomes in life, but created equal. That is why the GOP was so against slavery. And in a similar vein, why since Ronald Reagan it has taken the righteous position of being pro-life.
Had Gov. Kasich actually made it a part of his litany rather than something separate, it would make the abortion issue a part of rather than a separate issue. For all of the issues are extremely important that he mentioned in his rip on pro-lifers.
And worst of all is that he falls into the leftist trap (and consultant-class Republicans) that there have only been two social issues that animate GOP voters. Abortion and same-sex marriage.
In fact and indeed, GOP voters look at early childhood development, infant mortality and education as equal social issues. Throw in criminal justice and prison reform and there is more than just abortion and same-sex marriage.
Conservatism and by extension the Republican party is a coalition. And for the most part there is agreement on issues. But it is tiresome to see when trying to push a certain agenda conservatives seem to like to mock those of us that are pro-life and that we are too focused on that one issue. It is why I am not a one-issue kinda guy. If I were I would sit out more elections than participate in. The one issue to me is the United States moving in and beginning a conservative Renaissance. Short-shifting our partners in coalition is not going to help us get there.
Friday, June 05, 2015
SCANDAL! Marco Rubio Has . . .
Careless driving!
Driving through red lights!
Speeding tickets!
And all over a course of 17 years!
If you have not figured it out by now, Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla) has had some driving problems over the years.
But guess what?
Jeannette Rubio, Sen. Rubio's wife, has the worse record of the two.
And where do we find all of this scandalous information from?
The Ol' Gray Lady herself. The so-called newspaper of record, The New York Times.
Unreal. Unfrickingreal!
Amazingly, this was found out by two by-lined "reporters" and a researcher. That between Jeannette and Marco Rubio, they have 17 traffic tickets over the course of 17 years.
Oh, did I forget to mention that Sen. Rubio has four traffic tickets over the above mentioned time frame? Which means about once every four and a quarter years, Sen. Rubio has had a traffic ticket. Leaving the other 13 tickets to Mrs. Rubio. Including one for sideswiping another car with her Ford F-150 SUV.
Wait a minute?!
I did not know that Ford made an F-150 SUV?
BECAUSE THEY DO NOT MAKE A FORD F-150 SUV! IT'S A DAMN TRUCK!!!!!
Remember, two "reporters" and a "researcher" worked on this scandalous tale.
One would think that the thrust of the story, how Mrs. Rubio is a lousy driver, would get right what vehicle she was driving in her worst traffic violation.
But could it be because the Ol' Gray Lady really did not get the info they claim to have from a researcher but a pro-Hillary Clinton group known as American Bridge? And that American Bridge is a front group started by Clinton Butt-guy David Brock?
The Washington Free Beacon has the apparent goods on the fact that all the records were pulled not by a New York Times researcher but representatives of American Bridge.
Here is a real fact, my friends.
This is a huge waste of time and money and truly beneth the Newspaper of Record. It is also a bad thing if a so-called researcher used information supplied by a known left-wing political action committee to buttress a case that basically, the Rubio's driving sucks.
At least Sen. Rubio knows what the driver's side of the car looks like personally. The Democrat front-runner for the nomination, Hillary Clinton, has not been on that side of the car since about 1996.
So I'm kinda glad to know that Sen. and Mrs. Rubio are not the best drivers in the United States let alone the state of Florida.
If that is the worst an extensive media onslaught can produce, Sen. Rubio is an even better candidate than I thought.
Now can the Ol' Gray Lady tell us if Scott Walker picks up his own dog's poop? I really want to know.
Driving through red lights!
Speeding tickets!
And all over a course of 17 years!
If you have not figured it out by now, Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla) has had some driving problems over the years.
But guess what?
Jeannette Rubio, Sen. Rubio's wife, has the worse record of the two.
And where do we find all of this scandalous information from?
The Ol' Gray Lady herself. The so-called newspaper of record, The New York Times.
Unreal. Unfrickingreal!
Amazingly, this was found out by two by-lined "reporters" and a researcher. That between Jeannette and Marco Rubio, they have 17 traffic tickets over the course of 17 years.
Oh, did I forget to mention that Sen. Rubio has four traffic tickets over the above mentioned time frame? Which means about once every four and a quarter years, Sen. Rubio has had a traffic ticket. Leaving the other 13 tickets to Mrs. Rubio. Including one for sideswiping another car with her Ford F-150 SUV.
Wait a minute?!
I did not know that Ford made an F-150 SUV?
Remember, two "reporters" and a "researcher" worked on this scandalous tale.
One would think that the thrust of the story, how Mrs. Rubio is a lousy driver, would get right what vehicle she was driving in her worst traffic violation.
But could it be because the Ol' Gray Lady really did not get the info they claim to have from a researcher but a pro-Hillary Clinton group known as American Bridge? And that American Bridge is a front group started by Clinton Butt-guy David Brock?
The Washington Free Beacon has the apparent goods on the fact that all the records were pulled not by a New York Times researcher but representatives of American Bridge.
Here is a real fact, my friends.
This is a huge waste of time and money and truly beneth the Newspaper of Record. It is also a bad thing if a so-called researcher used information supplied by a known left-wing political action committee to buttress a case that basically, the Rubio's driving sucks.
At least Sen. Rubio knows what the driver's side of the car looks like personally. The Democrat front-runner for the nomination, Hillary Clinton, has not been on that side of the car since about 1996.
So I'm kinda glad to know that Sen. and Mrs. Rubio are not the best drivers in the United States let alone the state of Florida.
If that is the worst an extensive media onslaught can produce, Sen. Rubio is an even better candidate than I thought.
Now can the Ol' Gray Lady tell us if Scott Walker picks up his own dog's poop? I really want to know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)