Posted on 03/03/2016 10:45:08 AM PST by Jim Robinson
I think you are right.....
His unpretentious manner is a key to his success
How did THAT People’s Choice do in the 1964 General Election?
Let's just cut to the chase - do you believe that whomever Obama nominates to replace Scalia would go the other way on Heller and Citizens United?
Burger, Kennedy, O'Connor, and Roberts, all have/had their flaws, they still sided with other conservatives more often than not. Again, both Roberts and Kennedy were on the right side of Heller and Citizens United even if Kennedy was wrong on gay marriage, and Roberts wrong on Obamacare.Let's just cut to the chase - do you believe that whomever Obama nominates to replace Scalia would go the other way on Heller and Citizens United?
Yep. As I said, all the (D)ummycrat appointees are evil, period. He cannot be allowed a confirmation no matter who it is, well, unless he picked Ted Cruz! ( BTW, that's a good test of whether they actually desire or fear Trump in the general election, you know? ).
But I believe that looking for the bright side of those miserable 11 out of 16 total (R) appointees is gilding the lily. Mathematically it means we always have a minority of reliable conservatives, at most three sitting at once.
There is not enough lipstick in the world to fix up Burger or Kennedy, O'Connor is only a tad better. And while Roberts is still "new" the few that he bungled were so gigantic that he has already caught up to the worst of them.
Both Scalia and Thomas choked on a few to be sure, but at least for a pending case we are not shi!tting bricks like we are with all the others.
The problem here is this. If those 16 appointments were all Constitutionalists, not just 5, the entire course of the country would be different today and mostly righteous. The missed opportunity here is devastating. Like I said, we know all the (D)ummycrat Justices suck, that is a given, and we don't ever even challenge them. Yet they crucify some of ours, even blocking a couple, and have taught us to become gun-shy and appoint safe non-controversial choices. Heads they win, tails we lose.
There is no bright side here to salvage. We are discussing the single most catastrophic failure in FedGov and our country, and it is mostly self-inflicted. Our Supreme Court appointments and their treasonous behavior towards the Constitution and original intent is almost incalculable.
Not long ago, we had 5 sitting Justices ( O'Connor, Ginsburg, Breyer, Stevens, Souter ) that publicly admitted to looking at foreign law to judge the Constitutionality of our own laws. Hardly an eyebrow was raised. No possible stretch of the imagination of the Founders could rationalize that situation. It is the literal definition of treason - for that particular job. All five would have been impeached and removed, in the early days of the Republic and I suspect even John Marshall would have led the effort. Personally I think they should have been dropped out of plane on their way back from one of their international jaunts, but even that lets them off easy for the crime.
You say that he’s a strong second amendment supporter. But he was previously a strong gun control proponent. That’s the problem with him. He says he’s conservative now. But two years ago he was a liberal Democrat. I can more readily accept Romneys claim that he flip flopped on abortion than I can Trumps claim that he flip flopped on practically every issue.
Trump is a life NRA member. Trump was not previously a “strong gun control proponent.”
Too many of your "bible thumpers" will not hold their noses and vote for Trump.
As a result, some of your presumed red states will go blue.
Life Member (since when? he is all things to all people) or not, it wouldn't be up to Trump.
It would be up to the SCOTUS.
If Trump's the nominee, I'm sure a great many of us would be much more likely to hold our noses and vote for him if he were to name his originalist Supreme Court nominee(s) before Election Day.
He wrote in one of his books that he supported the assault weapons ban. That’s gun control.
Jim, it really looks like scorched earth. But if we unite and vote Trump in, are you going to be tolerant of his NY Republican social policies? Trump is no ideologue.
The states that love bible thumpers are already "red" and would be presumably heldToo many of your "bible thumpers" will not hold their noses and vote for Trump.
As a result, some of your presumed red states will go blue.
Nice try. But which ones could you possibly be referring to?
Trump is clobbering Cruz in the deepest "red" states so far, except for TX ( his and Bushies home state ) and OK ( the only surprise to me so far ). All the polls for MS, AL, LA, TN, KY and the results for SC and AR are evidence against your very point. His "southern firewall" crumbled, haven't you heard? What else you got?
Listen, you just need to consider what you actually said: "As a result, some of your presumed red states will go blue." You mean, they will vote for a Hillary over Trump, even though they already voted previously for McCain or Romney over Dumbo? They are not "red" if they are likely to go to "blue". Why don't you instead concentrate on the 12 purple ones. That is where the election occurs and what matters.
BTW, Bible Thumpers is not an insult to me. The point here is that you must put yourself in the shoes of the more secular people in the purple states to understand the problem we Constitutionalists and Conservatives have in getting any of those states. Keyes and Huck and Cruz *are* Bible Thumpers to them. Now name me a Bible Thumper who got elected to anything, let alone the Office of the President?
Here is what Levin and Rush and Cruz and his sycophants don't want to understand ... to get elected in the 12 swing states in the ON-YEAR election you are required to have F-117 stealth capabilities. The (D)ummycrat enemy will slice and dice every sermon that a Keyes or Cruz gives and shoot ads out to scare away every (D)ummy voter alive and dead.
This is wishful thinking for a more fair and generous electorate circa 1984 or 1988. That was 90 million less total people ago and when *we* were a majority of the population, not the 3rd world invaders of today. We have got to win this thing or it's all over. So let's stop screwing around and stop the dreaming and wishful thinking.
Trump is clobbering Cruz in the deepest "red" states so far, except for TX ( his and Bushies home state ) and OK ( the only surprise to me so far ). All the polls for MS, LA, KY and the results for SC, TN, AL, GA, AR are evidence against your very point. His "southern firewall" crumbled, haven't you heard? What else you got?
I expect Trump will also collect WV, AZ, ID, MT, ND, SD, MO, and probably UT, KS and NE, though the last three there might go Cruz if he stays in the race.
Why would the GOP want Hillary to win?
Ed
Jim, it really looks like scorched earth. But if we unite and vote Trump in, are you going to be tolerant of his NY Republican social policies? Trump is no ideologue.
Mr. Robinson can answer for himself, but you should understand something ... if Trump cannot deliver on blocked amnesty, the wall, reduced or a moratorium on naturalizations, then nothing else will really matter. Social this, social that, whatever, the republic will die and here's why ...
Put simply, the (D)emocratic-Socialist party has through immigration and naturalization ( see this ) jacked up the population +100 million over 1980, put 95 million people out of work, and successfully elevated themselves up to about 250 electoral votes out of 270 needed at the very start of the campaign. If they make any more states "blue", especially Texas, it is all over and they have elections won before they ever start. That brings us in line with Venezuela or Cuba or Nicaragua. Do you really want to waste a minute of your time fretting over anything else?
They have just about locked us out of nation-saving last-resort Constitutional Amendments by nearly turning the minimum 13 states dark "blue", at which point they would have the ability to block us from getting 38 ratifying states. It would mean we're at the mercy of FedGov forever. It means no term limits, no decentralized power, let alone any repeal of the income tax or any remotely useful change. This is a historic benchmark and we are right at that line.
Needless to say they already co-opted the major and minor news media, Hollywood, much of celebritydom and sports and entertainment, and have infected every level of local government right down to appraiser and dog catcher. They are within inches, no, make that microns of their ultimate victory - European Union style centralized control without any possible recourse from the peasants via the states or individual citizens. We are truly in dire straits. The very nightmare of the Founders expounded on in their countless writings. So I ask again, worry about social policies? That is truly whistling past the graveyard.
The only good news I see is that people are waking up. A broad swathe of disconnected factions are possibly uniting. I just read this blog linked from a commenter at CTH. Accurate and highly recommended ( but just one of many pertinent essays appearing all over the landscape ) ...
Cloud People vs the Dirt People
( I pinged a few FReepers from above in this thread who might like this. It kinda ties in to this topic and is a good way to close it out IMHO ).
I already knew the practical aspects, but you provide the theoretical impetus.
As a Trump-like initial blustering off-the-cuff response, I'd suggest that the Republican party (the DC apparatus, the movers and shakers behind the official power structure) are those who support and benefit from trusts -- though the Dems colour them as oligarchs. The oligarchs -- Buffets, Gates, Murdochs, Silicon Valley script kiddies -- are in actuality Democrats. Oh, because Soros.
Trump is the kind of “Republican” who’ll convince “bible thumpers” to stay home. When that happens, Democrats win.
That’s why Trump is the only R who can’t beat the Hildebeast.
Meanwhile, take a look at how many delegates Trump has, compared to Cruz+Rubio (the two “bible thumpers”). The conservative base anti-Trump vote is real. You’ll see.
I would go off and analyze which red (purple) states will go blue if I gave a **** about it. But, I don’t. Let it burn. Bring on the conservative revolution.
Trump is the kind of “Republican” who’ll convince “bible thumpers” to stay home. When that happens, Democrats win.That’s why Trump is the only R who can’t beat the Hildebeast.
Meanwhile, take a look at how many delegates Trump has, compared to Cruz+Rubio (the two “bible thumpers”). The conservative base anti-Trump vote is real. You’ll see.
I would go off and analyze which red (purple) states will go blue if I gave a **** about it. But, I don’t. Let it burn. Bring on the conservative revolution.
First of all, it was you who said Trump would turn "red" states "blue". I asked which ones. Your answer is missing. And I don't blame you because its ludicrous.
Your quoted response there resembles the fact-free wishful thinking we get from political non-analysts like Mark Levin and Rush, who have not the slightest comprehension of the electoral map and all previous elections.
Your dominant point, that Trump would do the worst in the general is absurd ( only topped by the allegation that Rubio is a bible thumper ).
I'll just cut to the chase here ... if you want to kill conservatism stone cold dead, there is a surefire way. Nominate a constitutionalist conservative bible thumper and send him against Hillary on the current electoral map. When he loses by the same or worse margins in the 12 swing states ( McCain/Palin got 0, Romney/Ryan got just 2 ) and the electoral result is 338-200 or worse, here is what will happen ...
You may have noticed that the GOPe is our enemy correct? Well they will have their Goldwater and they will immediately make Cruz a curse-word synonym for Goldwater and purge every last constitutionalist conservative bible thumper like they did after 1964. They will have their perfect scapegoat and they will ram him right up our bunghole.
This entire primary season we are witnessing of modified rules and delegate spoiler candidates was designed NOT for Trump ( they never saw him coming ), but for people like Cruz, self-appointed Reagan pretenders who arrive to liberate the party from the (R)epublicrat hacks who stole it in Reagan's 2nd term and beyond. Cruz was the target and would already have been toe-tagged if Trump had never arrived. These snakes managed to destroy the potentially great George Allen with a single word ( macacca ), and Cruz/Santorum/Huck/Gingrich/Carson/Cain all were marked for termination in favor of their chosen ones.
You really must face facts, because you have miscalculated nearly everything in order to get to the point that imagines Cruz winning the general election. I could go through every detail, but why bother? Cruz already told you what I just did. He said 'Trump wins open primaries and he ( Cruz ) wins closed ones'. He is telling you to your face that he is toast against the (D)ummies. The general election is not just (R) and (C), it invites in (D) and (L) in massive numbers. The only way to win now is to get them to crossover.
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.