Posted on 02/02/2016 4:20:09 AM PST by IBD editorial writer
The people who suddenly love Rubio seem to forget history....like when Rubio teamed up with Grover Norquist and his immigration lawyer chief of Staff Cesar CONDA who used SPLC talking points to try to destroy anyone who opposed the gang of 8 amnesty! ‘Bitter Enders’ is what they called all of us!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3006017/posts
True. John Quincy Adams, the same guy who dreamed up the Civil War (as a "cure" for slavery, you understand .... nothing but the highest motives, tut tut), fought a personal crusade to keep Texas cash-starved and out of the Union. It was John C. Calhoun <hissssss!!> who got Texas a serious loan that allowed something like a non-barter economy to start up in the state and eventually secured Texas entry to the Union as one of the few States that, like Vermont and Hawaii, that were States before admission to the Union.
To Yankees like Adams, continuation and extension of New England's political power was more important than expansion of the United States to the Pacific (Oregon was different, of course: it was settled by transplanted Yankees) or, in 1859-1861, simply keeping the peace and avoiding an internecine War Between the States.
The motto of New Hampshire is "Live Free or Die". That of Massachusetts has always seemed to be, "Ruat caelum, We Must Rule".
Rubio was the winner as he did much better than expected.
Cruz and Trump were within the margin of expected error. Not a win for either of them but certainly a confirmation that they both have support.
I’d say the bickering between Cruz and Trump meant more support went to Rubio. Just my opinion.
Texas was a Republic from time of the Revolution.
Yes, it acquired a huge block of land. Which was bartered into entry into US in return for statehood. But it paid off the Texas debt. It was still a slow trudge into what it is today. One of my ancestors was born in TX during the Republic. Others came during the evil days of “Reconstruction” (occupation). Headshake.
It was a very very long time before that was put behind in the memory of Texans. (and Okies)
More recently, yes. For decades, New Hampshire was a pretty reliable bellwether for the eventual President.
Well what Iowa really did show is that a first time newbie who is not the son of the preacher man came in a strong second in Iowa. Shocking actually.
It also showed some possible character flaws in the actual winner. Not one other GOP candidate that I know of has been reprimanded in writing by the the Sec of State of Iowa and accused of dirty tricks by another candidate. Its somewhat troubling especially since we are talking about the son of the preacher man. And it does speak to character.
And SC is a bellweather state for sure.
Think about this trend.
Pack your bags, Wall Streeters: Your jobs are moving to Nashville
http://www.businessinsider.com/ubs-on-low-cost-locations-2016-2
Who can argue with the cost of operation away from the NE US?
Imagine Wall Street jobs being moved to the South? hee hee hee
Manufacturing did it long ago.
Yeah, the new Southern manners ..... yaaah, fuhgeddaboudit!!
I will go along with the notion that Cruz is anti-establishment, but I don't know who else at least that is viable.
If it is Rubio v. Sanders, however, we are going to have our first communist president.
Not that so much.
More like, Chittagong wages and Sag Harbor prices.
The only other truly anti-Establishment candidate with a pulse is Dr. Carson. He'd need some serious help to be viable, but he is arguably a far better man than anyone else save Cruz and the certifiably pulseless Rick Santorum.
I never cared much for CW history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.