Posted on 04/13/2015 2:45:56 PM PDT by ObamahatesPACoal
If that's not worse than Romney, I have no idea what could be, so I still beg to differ.
Hillary is worse. He should run with Hillary, that would be his best chance of winning.
Or, Jeb will win with 15% of the vote while the rest of the field gets 14% max.
Our greatest fear is the amalgamation of Cruz (who I prefer), Walker, who I find a close second to Cruz, then there is Perry, or Santorum, or Rubio (who I find totally unacceptable because of his immi stance), or Ryan, or Jindal, or heaven forbid, Christie, and a few others.
I believe our best shot at not only winning, but also actually changing direction is a combination of Cruz/Walker (my preference), or Walker/Cruz. Just pray that the huge amount of candidates doesn't bring us the one who is worse than Romney. IMHO Jeb is the only one who could actually lose to the Hildabeast this time around.
So sorry to hear you are struggling with health issues. May you get better and rejoice with a victory of the ticket I suggested.
I might give that plea short shrift coming from anyone other than you, but due to the deep respect and admiration you've earned in this community, I will honestly take your admonition to heart.
SO GLAD to have Black Elk back! Prayers doubled up in thanks!
And thanks for Windflier ... kindred as usual, I think. Windy ... *sigh* ... God puts a gift -- Cruz -- on a shining platter in front of us -- a guy we know, someone we've been watching and cheering for years now, who confirms that he means business by declaring his candidacy early and straightforwardly. A distinguished, eloquent Constitutionalist who's stated plainly his RIGHT positions on -- and solutions to -- Obamacare (repeal it), ethanol subsidies (no!), global warming (he's a "denier"), Common Core (repeal it), the IRS (disband it), gay marriage (respect Christian rights of refusal), Israel (support it) --
-- and we start having second thoughts!!! We start looking for a better deal! A better GIFT!
With less than two frickin' years to find it via a primary protocol more screwed up than Hogan's Ghost, for the love of Pete!
*sigh* I watch with a sinking heart as Republicans do what they've always done and hang themselves with their own rope.
Black Elk, whom I cyber-hug with joy, what someone like me sees as a simple statement of fact -- for example, that Walker's entering the race now would ONLY serve to harm Cruz's chance to win the nomination, and if Walker had entered first the same could certainly and rightly be said of Cruz -- others would regard as a "vitriolic comment." When I pointed out reasonable red flags in Walker indicating a propensity to "more cowbell," so to speak, it's called vitriolic.
That I already know because he has stated them, Cruz's fundamental principles confirmed in his stance on issues, that he's for sure in the race and says so, makes him better already than any other Republican still pussy-footing on when to announce and what to say about Common Core, environmentalism, and Obamacare.
We have less than two years to land this on a stacked deck primary. The approach looks like it's auguring in early.
Black Elk, I guess I just think that "business as usual" in the primaries this time is very bad business as played out so repeatedly over the decades. It just seems that in 2016, we need to take our own advice of the past and coalesce EARLY -- as in, NOW -- behind a candidate. The more we encourage others to jump in there and strut their stuff so "we" (actually, a small group of Republicans and Democrat open primary voters doing the major weeding out) can pick the best one, the more we sabotage the chance of getting any one as good as Cruz. Elk, Cruz wouldn't suggest having welfare recipients drug-tested. He'd suggest doing something about the welfare subsidizing the drug habit!
But maybe that's vitriolic. I don't know.
I regard any other Republican declaring in the primary, as a spoiler to Cruz, and it's also obvious to me what while some other Republicans may be as promising as Cruz, NONE of them is more promising in terms of demonstrating what I consider the most fundamental grasp of what I mean when I say, "limited government conservatism."
Now, maybe that sounds vitriolic, maybe it doesn't. To my mind, though, I would best like ALL of these candidates if this historic time, this 2016-most-important-presidential-election-ever, would remember that "he who hesitates loses," as my dad used to paraphrase Bill S., the "he" being AMERICAN LIMITED GOVERNMENT CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES. They -- we -- stand way, way too much to lose just to salve the vanity of a bunch of Republicans who want to run in the primary. I'd love it and America and the MSM would roil in shock and awe, if Republicans had the gumption to say, "we're throwing our support to Cruz and waiting until 2020 for the good of the nation."
I know. I always wanted a pony, too.
Black Elk ... [[[[[[[cyber hug]]]]]]]]]!!!!!!!
Well, you’re going to have to cut me some slack for the lack of specifics, because as you can see for yourself reading FR, conservatives around here are already fully engaged for another round trip on the GOP Express. And to point out certain facts about where those train tracks inevitably lead amounts to personally standing in front of a moving train shouting “Stop!”
But, I have a habit of doing that, so in the days ahead I’ll find the time to explain to you in detail what I’m talking about.
I only have five minutes, literally, this morning before I have to walk out the door.
For now this short statement will have to suffice:
Virtually the entire field supports legislation that encodes permission in the statutes to kill babies, all of them, as long as the killing is done on schedule, and by their arbitrary rules. This is an immoral, unconstitutional violation of the most important obligation of the sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution, which absolutely requires equal protection for every person.
Virtually the entire field thinks states can allow “gay marriage” if they want to, in violation of the laws of nature and nature’s God.
Virtually the entire field is unwilling to deport invaders of our country, which means that in the end, they support some form of amnesty.
Virtually the entire field are judicial supremacists, which destroys our constitutional form of republican self-government.
Virtually the entire field supports the continuation of unconstitutional spending, agencies and programs, including the centerpieces of Roosevelt’s New Deal and Johnson’s Great Society.
Any of those things should be disqualifying to conservatives.
Gotta go.
I once favored the immigration but Obozo's outrages have cured me. I understand what damage Rubio did to himself with many conservatives by his Gang of Eight blunder. Maybe he will never be nominated nationally but his optimism and charisma should be arrows in our quiver. I voted for Santorum last time because he was Romney's last breathing opponent. I must admit that if he cannot be elected Senator, he has no business seeking to be POTUS. What he brought to the last race is brought more eloquently by many other candidates this time.
Perry is out of his league and needs to be ignored. Ditto Paul Ryan who is vastly overrated. Christie should be encouraged so as to split Jeb's vote. I don't think Jindal is running. He would be the perfect HHS Secretary to deconstruct Obozocare. He can also be useful on the campaign trail since he can be a quite cutting critic. He should apply his flamethrower to the Medusa.
If the ticket you propose wins, then I will be among the happiest here in my celebration.
While holding off and not narrowing the field now, seems like a great idea because it allows us to know all the candidates well, this HAS NEVER served us well.
The group mentality works like this. I like Rand. You like Ted. Someone else likes Walker. Some people like Bush.
Okay great. That’s the way it should work alright. And so we merrily move along to the primaries and caucuses, and everyone votes for their favorite. Around April everyone wakes up to the fact that the moderate (read that most Leftist Republican) has more delegates than anyone else.
One reason is because Democrats have been allowed to help us select our nominee. Much more important is the following dynamic.
How do we think Dole, Bush, McCain, and Romney wound up our nominee?
They wound up being our nominee because folks fixated on one person because they liked one or two things they did well. When others came around trying to tell them to look at the larger picture and base their support on an across the board evaluation, they tuned out. “Oh, you’re just mad because I didn’t settle on your guy!” No, I’m upset you settled on a person that wasn’t well grounded across the board. I’m upset because your guy IS NOT a fire in the belly Conservative across the board. I’m upset because you can’t grasp that a no amnesty amnesty is still an amnesty. I’m upset because a man like John McCain doesn’t deserve one delegate much less the majority of them.
So here we go headed into another primary season, and we’re poised to do the same thing all over again. And if we do it, Jeb Bush will wind up our nominee as certainly as McCain did and Romney did.
The GOPe and RNC have been gaming us to the point we’re almost irrelevant. Can’t we as a group of Conservatives recognize the best Conservative early on and coalesce behind them before it’s too late?
If not, what the sam hell are we doing here?
Whether we like it or not, we have RNC and GOPe operatives working here on this forum. We have to grasp that fact and try to spot them, and not let them play us like a Stradivarius, AGAIN!!!!!
We must be diligent picking a person that is a fire in the belly Conservative on almost every subject.
“Freeperis Emeritus”, (the newly coined title for Freeper *Black Elk, thanks to *onyx) has somewhere here posited that prior to delegate time, conservatives should coalesce around the leading conservative.
The first votes come in February, 2016, reportedly. So, my question is, if cohesion among a herd of cats is even possible, what day, or week, or event should be our signal?
RitaOK, that’s a fair question, but it has to be before the primaries and caucuses even begin. We do not want to give McCain/Romney types even one delegate we can avoid letting them have.
The Left will help them out of the gate. If we’re not ready to help our side out of the gate, we lose.
Now, since human nature is what it is, we can’t say, “Okay, let’s wait until the first primary or caucus to solidify our stance.”
If we’re not ready before that time, we lose.
People will have declared by November of 2015, and by the end of the year, we should know who is the best Conservative out there.
At that point, folks who think of themselves as Conservatives need to suck it up, and coalesce behind one man.
None of this fanboy crap about my home state’s favorite son counts this year. The earlier we get behind one guy, the earlier he gets all the funding and can go up against the GOPe and RNC drone.
If we want to capitalize on having the Repubican Party in control on Capital Hill, we need to act like it.
Had a browser glitch.
God knows I could not agree with you more! What you said is the whole point— the critical delegate game is the ballgame. As in Florida, it begins or possibly ends. Period.
What is wrenching for deciders is the feeling of throwing their heart’s throb over board in order to be pragmatic and coldly controlled to do the deed.
So, of the conservatives who are funded at all (and that is another subject) who will it be that can win outside of our choir and take the general election voters him?
We have an awful lot of talent to put up against Hillary’s machine. She needs a machine because she has no talent. It’s scary for picking, and I’m no clairvoyant either.
I am hearing a lot about Walker, because as a governor he was able to perform independently and has already performed virtual miracles against Marx! Cruz is such an easy good bet to be an extraordinary performer doing the same, but in the structured environment of the senate these senate candidates of ours can not be single handed in getting anything done.
Thanks for narrowing the calendar view down for me. I appreciate it.
The biggest problem we had in 2012 was we had no good candidate. Palin did not run. Santorum was one dimensional. Cain was a fling. Newt was his usual bipolar self, sometimes great, ofttimes bizarre. Perry self destructed. Romney won.
This time we have two very good conservative candidates, and we have yet to see who will catch fire. Picking one now, before they debate and make their case should not be done.
Jeb is not a good candidate, he’s not going to overshadow both of our conservatives. I think we can wait until New Hampshire to make this decision. It will require a concerted effort on all of our parts, an agreement beforehand that we go with the one who is winning and polling best. Obviously, if Jeb is vanquished and the other two are neck and neck, we need the flexibility to let them go
through Florida.
What is important is we agree on this site, as much as is possible, to get behind one candidate to avoid Jeb.
I prefer Cruz, will put forth the case for him, but will get behind Walker if he catches fire.
let’s keep this dialog going, this is important for us to wade through this with sanity before it gets hot and heavy.
Now, now, now. Let's give credit where credit's due. That title was bestowed upon our esteemed fellow Freeper by little ol' me :-)
I think we have a little caucus going, sharky. I too am for CRUZ, but am not opposed to Walker.
I am disheartened that MONEY rules outcomes, but seriously it seems to. This means that the ability to raise big money has to be part of the equation against Hillary, whose goal is to raise one billion dollars, and she is starting now supposedly. One report said she can lay her hands already on 2 Billion! These have to be global resources, don’t they?
Of course, we will never see the emails on that dang server that might prove such a thesis. I think she needs big money far worse than our field, because she is a lousy candidate, a dead end personality, a climber, entitled and as Fiorina said, she has virtually no accomplishments and noting that flying a gazillion miles as SOS is not an accomplishment. Then come the scandals, Benghazi under her watch costing her ambassador his life, the mismanagement of State documents with her destruction of evidence, her appearances before investigative committees, the fact that her own media is not devoted to her as Obama, she has a place for a billion dollars to prop her *$$ up in the polls.
Back to our side, I believe Black Elk and DoughtyOne get the picture on the accumulation of delegates and the prevention of a fracture occurring there. Divided delegates come from a divided, balkanized conservative base. I pray that can be avoided this primary cycle. Rita
YIKES!! Mea Culpa, mea culpa! OMGosh! It was such a brilliant title that you deserve all due credit! Thank you for the correction! I thought that post I saw was by *onyx.
Sorry, onyx. I really, really flubbed against Windy!
Oh, hush :-)
It was just a little thing, and not that big a deal. I was just proud to be able to do something to welcome our good friend, BlackElk, back home.
As an amateur wordsmith, it was the best I had to offer :-)
The entire GOP field of contenders are amnesty gang. Not one, zero, zip, nada of the candidates running in 2016 will deport every law breaking illegal.
If illegals are allowed to stay, it is a FORM OF AMNESTY.
Yes, he has reached massive Nomentum!
.
Rand Paul knows he’s not running for the top of the ticket.
They all dance around the amnesty issue to varying degrees, but Rubio has been the most pro-active in supporting it. We’ll have to wait and see how their various positions flesh out over the next year.
But talk of deportation gives the Dims a loaded term that is too easy for them to demagogue. Some Republican needs to simply take the stance that they will enforce all immigration laws. If that were done we would see self-deportation and a drop in illegal entries.
I agree 100%. No need to give the Rats another issue to demagogue. However as far as I know, solid majority of voters in the country are not against deporting violators of immigration laws.
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.