Wrongly Crying Foul for Political Gain

It's one thing to be upset with the so-called Republican establishment for failing to stand up to Barack Obama and his destructive policies, but it's another for a GOP presidential candidate to exploit that anger illegitimately against a fellow anti-establishment candidate.

Many of us have been critical of the GOP leadership for opposing conservatives in GOP primaries, not backing conservatives in office trying to do the right thing, always advising that Republicans dilute their message to attract independent voters and not sufficiently recognizing the threat President Obama represents to this nation and opposing his agenda.

From the beginning, grass-roots conservatives, based on abundant warning signs, warned that Obama would be an extremely progressive president, and we were right. Despite Obama's empty promise to be bipartisan and conciliatory, we knew what a rabid partisan he would be. We took him seriously when he announced he would fundamentally transform America, and he has done just that, probably even more than we feared.

I wrote two books chronicling Obama's destructive agenda, and those were before the past two years, when he has been even worse -- across the board. He has increased spending and taxes and refused to reform entitlements, thus doubling our national debt to exceedingly dangerous levels. He has deliberately downscaled our military, also to perilous levels. He has unilaterally pulled us back from the war on terror, being more concerned about not offending Muslims than with defending American citizens. He has chosen not to enforce our borders. He has systematically abused his executive authority, flouting the Constitution. He has engaged in a war on conventional energy sources and promoted failed alternative energy sources. He has grossly expanded the administrative and regulatory state. He has orchestrated the corruption of the IRS and enabled the gunrunning operation "Fast and Furious." He has engaged in a war on religious liberty, exclusively against Christians. He has precipitously

withdrawn from Iraq, thus squandering our work and betraying our lost lives and treasure. He has pushed a liberal social agenda, from increasing federal funding for abortion to ramrodding the legalization of same-sex marriage. He has led from behind in all aspects of foreign policy, alienating our allies, including Israel, and coddling our enemies -- especially facilitating Iran's quest to obtain nuclear weapons and fund global terrorism. He has reversed welfare reform and its progress in restoring the nuclear family and freeing people from its insidious clutches of dependency. He has severely damaged our health care system, and he has divided the nation more than any previous president along the lines of race, gender and income. And so much more.

I don't want to write a third book on Obama, though he's not finished doing his mischief. He would love, for example, to replace Justice Antonin Scalia with an activist liberal judge and issue more lawless executive orders granting benefits to people here illegally and promoting environmentalism. People have a right to be very upset, not just with Obama but with the GOP establishment for not doing enough to stop him.

Though we must keep fighting Obama, we also must turn part of our focus away from him and toward electing the Republican candidate best-equipped to reverse the damage Obama has done, reignite economic growth, secure our defenses, rebuild our foreign alliances and stand for life and American families.

Seventeen candidates originally threw their hats into the ring for the Republican presidential nomination, and the field has narrowed to three, though the third -- John Kasich -- has no earthly chance and can only be considered as a spoiler or a brand builder or as positioning himself to be vice president.

Trump holds himself out as an outsider because he's never held office before. Ted Cruz is an outsider, in the sense that he has openly battled the establishment elements of his own party since he came to the Senate.

Most GOP elected officials have still not endorsed either Trump or Cruz, but as much angst as establishment types have for Cruz, most fear Trump far more, not because he's an outsider but because they think he could be a disastrous president.

Trump wants to establish himself as the sole outsider and is strenuously trying to paint Cruz as an insider, citing a few recent high-profile Republican endorsements and the effort of Mitt Romney and others to stop him. Trump supporters say Cruz has sold out to the establishment for these reasons and because he is the most likely beneficiary of the "Never Trump" movement.

Trump has also wrongly charged that Cruz colluded with the establishment to "steal" Colorado. In this way, Trump hopes to seal his claim to be the sole aggrieved outsider. He says that working together, they cheated and disenfranchised millions of voters.

Trump knows full well that Colorado wasn't stolen and that he began there on a level playing field with Cruz, but he didn't do the necessary groundwork to compete. But he also knows that his supporters will believe otherwise and become more entrenched if he cries foul loudly enough. He hopes to draw supporters away from Cruz and woo the undecided in upcoming states by leveraging these allegations in service to establishment/Cruz conspiracy theories.

Trump is now laying the groundwork to support the narrative that unless he is chosen at the convention, the nomination will have been stolen from him. Trump knows that long-standing rules require that a candidate win more than half the delegates, before or during the convention, yet he's demanding, in essence, that the candidate with a plurality of delegates going in must be anointed, which has never been the case.

Many of us have been fighting the establishment for years, but let's not lose our heads and make it the scapegoat for everything, including the claims that it is stealing votes and disenfranchising voters. Trump is pursuing a reckless path, because he is inflaming the passions of people who are already fit to be tied, partially for legitimate reasons. He is setting the table for post-convention antipathy, which would inhibit reunification of the party should Cruz get the nomination -- and even if Trump were to get it.

If there were actual cheating going on, I would decry it from the highest mountain, but it is just as wrong to allege cheating when it isn't occurring for your own political benefit. Could we please dispense with these ridiculous allegations and get on with this process without further enraging the voters?

South Carolina isn’t a winner take all state.

It just so happens the winner took all the delegates due to his dominating victory.

Maybe if you spent less time bashing a candidate you don’t like and more actually following the election you would of known that.

It's a valid retort though not necessarily on the mark.

But Ted has been setting up this run since he entered office. It was wise political maneuvering, and I don't know why more 'conservatives' in the congress didn't move that way, but it was grandstanding, building a foundation, accomplished nothing - he wasn't able to rally enough support to actually get anything done ... but let's say Ted is totally sincere - that he really thought he could accomplish something, rather than just make a name for himself reading Green Eggs and Ham.

The desire to change is not equivalent to the ability to change. Ted has only been effective since he married the establishment against their will. Without them, no Wisconsin, no Colorado. They need each other. The bad side of that equation is that Ted needs the establishment - he's dependent on the enemy.

So I get where you are coming from, but I don't buy it - I think Ted plots for himself first, America second, if at all. I think he might believe he's doing wonderful things for everybody. Certainly he's arrogant enough to believe that.

Give him time to mature as a politician and reveal himself, and for America and him to figure out who he's really for. Or not, of course.

"This is how you get people riled up over something they don’t understand."

I'm not riled up, merely observing. I promise you I understand.

"because it would deny you of your “Trump wuz robbed” meme"

If you can find where I said 'Trump was robbed' I'll donate 100$ to FR. I didn't say that. I said the voters were robbed of their vote by ERepublicans in Colorado.

"That’s why every poll has him losing to Hillary. Every one."

As they all had Reagan losing ... hate to throw a cliche at you, but you threw one at me, so you can have it back.

You're going to go have to find someone else to try to stick your 'meme' stuff onto (meme - recently fashionable and overused word - so you tell me something about yourself by throwing it about - why do people use it? To sound politically astute?) and 'trump supporters are dumb' and 'your bubble' stuff ... doesn't work here, not logically ... but also it's very easy to throw poop. It's what monkey's do naturally. There's a meme for you.

You’re going to go have to find someone else to try to stick your ‘meme’ stuff onto (meme - recently fashionable and overused word - so you tell me something about yourself by throwing it about - why do people use it? To sound politically astute?) and ‘trump supporters are dumb’ and ‘your bubble’ stuff ... doesn’t work here, not logically ... but also it’s very easy to throw poop. It’s what monkey’s do naturally. There’s a meme for you.

Trumpers do live in bubble. A very tight and secure one at that.

>> South Carolina isn’t a winner take all state. It just so happens the winner took all the delegates due to his dominating victory <<

Mr. Trump won 32.5% of the vote in SC, yet he gets 100% of the delegates.

You can call it whatever you want, but I call it “winner take all.”

Anyway, I’m waiting for you to explain to me exactly how this outcome was fair to the 77.5% of SC voters who voted for somebody else.

We are seeing trumpers who refuse to face even a glimmer of reality about their candidate while supporting every lie he tells. It’s scary.

I don't think it's scary. It is challenging the opposition to state their stands on issues. If that is bothering, then it's a tough life for some.

They had this thing called a primary.

Everyone of age and eligible to vote had the opportunity to do so.

That’s fair enough for me. Too bad for you if you don’t feel that way.

And a winner take all primary is where the person who gets the most votes in the state gets all the delegates.

South Carolina was by congressional districts. Trump won them all. That’s a lot harder to do.

You’re definition of winner take all is wrong and you refusing to admit it doesn’t change that fact.

>> They had this thing called a primary <<

Yes, and the outcome was that the forty-plus per cent of the voters who voted for either Cruz or Rubio got absolutely zero delegates, while the 32.5$% of voters who went for Mr. Trump got 100% of the delegates.

You’re telling me that’s fair?

Of course it’s “fair” — because it’s favorable to Mr. Trump.

Oh, now I understand. Thanks for the wisdom.

Quite the contrary, and both you and I know it. Of Cruz and Trump, the one who will cajole, make deals and get along with the gopE is Trump.

He has told you this is what he'll do and it is what Trump has done his entire life. The art of the deal.

It is to cry .....

I am saddened to see purported conservatives arguing a la mode liberal. You have restated “Trump is not a member of our degenerate political class” to read “Trump is as pure as the driven snow.”

These two propositions are far from equivalent. Not even close. However, it is easy to go Alinsky on “Trump is as pure as the driven snow,” but impossible to argue that “Trump is not a member of our degenerate political class.”

This dishonest liberal debate stratagem consists in taking a proposition you don’t like but can’t rebut, restating it as something you think you can rebut, having a shot at the substitute proposition, then pretending that you have rebutted the original proposition.

Things like this are the reason I came to FR, where liberals are, in the main, not suffered. Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to crap on the board and strut around like it won anyway.

>> “Trump is not a member of our degenerate political class.” <<

Of course he’s member — a long-time member in good standing. Who’s kidding whom?

It’s just that instead of being on the receiving end of political bribery, Mr. Trump has been on the giving end — as his donations to Pelosi, Reid and the Clinton “Foundation” demonstrate in spades.

Remember this: There can be no receivers of political payoffs if there are no givers, no enablers like Mr. Trump.

Anyway, you’re always free to support Mr. Trump if you wish. You may even tell me that “it takes a thief to catch a thief” — or that it may take a “briber” to catch a “bribee.” If you honestly hew to that Credo, I won’t waste time to belabor the point.

But at the same time, please don’t think for a even a minute you can persuade me that Mr. Trump is not a member of the very same “degenerate political class” you have mentioned.

“But at the same time, please don’t think for a even a minute you can persuade me that Mr. Trump is not a member of the very same “degenerate political class” you have mentioned.”

War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.

Faced with a willingness to deny the self-evident and insist on the ridiculous, I decline to engage the tar baby.

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.