George Will: Walker's internal polls show him ahead of Trump in Iowa-1st choice of 2 time goers

September 15, 2015 | Vanity

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Just watched last night's round table on Special Report.

Democrat A.B. Stoddard declares Walker's campaign dead.

George Will [paraphrasing] "Since I'm sleeping with the campaign I might as well give some inside information. Their polling shows that of those Republicans who showed up at the last caucus Walker is ahead of Trump, and for those Republicans who showed up at the last 2 caucuses, Walker is in the lead.

Charles Krauthammer agrees with Will. Walker's campaign is not over.

[Berlin_Freeper]

The Audacity of Trump

[fieldmarshaldj]

Ludicrous.

[Yosemitest]

George Will is a DemocRAT who got SO OFFENDED by the DemocRATS, that he couldn't tolerate being associated with all those "CRAZIES" .
Now for a deeper understanding of just WHO George Will IS:

The word "neocons" is ONLY used by LIBERALS, trying to insult Conservatives.
The is no such thing as a "NEW" Conservative.
Conservatives ARE Conservative, plain and simple.

But read this"
Liberals, Conservatives, and Neocons — Learn the Difference!
March 12, 2014

Almost everybody is confused about the word "neoconservative" and its shortened form, "neocon."
I find that liberals/Democrats seem to use it as a sort of disrespectful form of "conservative,"
and probably have no idea the the words have distinct meanings.
On the other hand, I know of some conservatives who define it as "new conservatives,"
meaning people who were formerly something else, but have converted to conservatism.
Both are wrong.
As near as I can tell, "neo-" doesn't apply to any other word that way —
formerly not X, but having become X.
No, "neo-" almost always refers to an ideology that is different from the root word in a significant way.
Neoconfederates are not people who want to secede and become a separate country.
They want the ideals of the Confederacy to be applied to modern politics, more or less, but not all of them.
Neoliberal is a more vague term,
but it specifically applies to people who may have SOME of the attributes of liberals,
but who contradict liberalism in their advocacy of free trade and privatization
and other ideas usually thought of as conservative.
And, finally, neoconservatives are mostly those moderate cold war LIBERALS who defected to the Republican party when the Democrats got totally flaky with McGovern and his ilk.
Their ultimate origin, however, is not the Democratic party but the Trotskyite movement.



Jack Kerwick elaborates.

Read this:
Most "Conservatives" Are Secretly Neoconservatives
12 March, 2014, by Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.

A colleague of mine has drawn my attention to a Washington Post blog post — “Why Most Conservatives Are Secretly Liberals” — by a Professor John Sides, a political scientist at Georgetown University.

Sides agrees with fellow political scientists Christopher Ellis and James Stimson, co-authors of Ideology in America.
Ellis and Stimson CONTEND that
America is, at bottom, a “center-left nation,”
for while “30 percent” of self-described “liberals” are consistent in endorsing “liberal” policy prescriptions,
the same sort of consistency can be ascribed to only “15 percent” of “conservatives.”
And another “30 percent” of “conservatives” actually advance “liberal” positions.

In short, Americans may TALK the talk of “conservatism,” but they WALK the walk of “liberalism.”
That is, they favor Big Government.

Sides, Ellis, and Stimson, it seems clear to me, are “liberals.”
It doesn’t require much reading between the lines to discern this.
That they associate “liberals,” and “liberals” ALONE, with such virtues as “consistency” and such lofty ideals as “a cleaner environment” and “a stronger safety net” is enough to bear this out.
Yet in peddling the ridiculous, patently absurd notion that
“conservatives” see the media as PROMOTING “conservatism,”
the verdict regarding their “liberalism” is seen for the NO-BRAINER that it is.

There is, though, another CLUE that unveils Sides’, Ellis’, and Stimson’s ideological PREJUDICES:
They equate the term “liberalism” with a robust affirmation of Big Government.
They treat “liberalism” synonymously with its modern, “Welfare-Statist” incarnation.
There is no mention here of the fact that, originally, “liberalism” referred to
a vision that attached supreme value to individual liberty,
a vision in which government played, and had to play, a minimal role in the lives of its citizens.
And there is no mention of the fact that, if “liberalism” is now “an ugly word,”
it is because the very same socialists who made “socialism” an ugly word hijacked “liberalism” when it enjoyed a favorable reception
and visited upon it the same fate that they secured for “socialism.”

In other words, if Sides himself wanted to be bluntly honest, he’d have to admit that “liberals” are secretly socialists.

Still, though their premises are bogus, Sides and his colleagues draw the correct conclusion that
most “conservatives” are NOTHING OF THE KIND.
The truth of the matter is that
the vast majority of contemporary “conservatives” are neoconservatives.

Now, “neoconservatism” is a term that hasn’t the best reputation.
It has ALWAYS BEEN CONTROVERSIAL,
and most of its proponents have DISAVOWED IT to the point of, preposterously, condemning it as an “anti-Semitic” SLUR.
But George W. Bush and his party inflicted potentially irrevocable damage upon the label.
“Conservatism” is a more marketable label.

Nevertheless, the reality is that neoconservatism is indeed a distinct school of political thought.
Beyond this, it is fundamentally different in kind from classical conservatism.
Irving Kristol, the so-called “Godfather” of neoconservatism, an appellation that he readily endorsed, ADMITS this in noting both
that neoconservatism exists
and that “conservative” “can be misleading” when used to describe it.

Neoconservatism, you see, is THE INVENTION OF LEFTISTS like Kristol himself.
When the Democratic Party began veering too far to the Left in the 1960s, Kristol and more moderate leftists began turning toward the Republican Party.
So as TO DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES FROM traditional conservatives, they coined the term “neoconservatism.”

Neoconservatives, Kristol asserts, are “not at all hostile to the idea of a welfare state” —
even if they reject the “vast and energetic bureaucracies” created by the Great Society.
Neoconservatives ENDORSE “social security, unemployment insurance,” and “some kind of family assistance plan,” among other measures.
But what’s most interesting, particularly at a time when ObamaCare has DIVIDED the country, is that Kristol reminds us that
neoconservatives SUPPORT “some form of national health insurance.”

In all truthfulness, however, neither a degree in political science nor an IQ above four is required to know that
neoconservatism has always championed Big Government
for it is its foreign policy vision more than anything else that distinguishes it from its competitors.
For neoconservatives, America is “exceptional” in being, as Kristol puts it, “a creedal nation,”
the only nation in all of human history to have been founded upon an “ideology” of equality, of “natural rights.”
The U.S.A., then, has a responsibility to promote this ideology throughout the world.

And it is by way of a potentially boundless military — i.e. Big Government — that this “ideological patriotism” is to be executed.

Had the foregoing political scientists been looking in the right places, they would BE FORCED TO CONCLUDE that most “conservatives” are secretly neoconservatives.

So, you see that those WHO THEY CALL "neoconservatives", are really nothing more than the old moderate side of the DemocRATS.
It's just THAT SIMPLE .

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I know it’s a winner when you SPAM a thread.

bttt!

[silverleaf]

Whatever, he just killed his campaign by trying to carve out a niche as a union killer

He’ll get no democrat crossovers, no minority voters and very little interest from folks who see us living in a dangerous world where taking on open borders, ISIS, China, Russia, internal terrorists like BLM and the Potemkin village world economy are compelling issues that require strong unequivocal leadership which Walker has failed to convey
Not ready for prime time player

[Yosemitest]

It really IS quite revealing the the LIBERAL George Will and the LIBERAL ATHEIST Charles Krauthammer are BOTH SELLING Scott Walker.

See, there's NO DOUBT that Walker has been BOUGHT and PAID FOR by the "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS", if their puppets in the LAME Stream Media are blowing polls to the public about Walker.

What a bunch of baloney !

[Cincinatus' Wife]

May 2, 2015: With membership now voluntary, Wisconsin AFSCME forced into big cutbacks

"Governor Scott Walker and the GOP-controlled state legislature freed government employees from involuntary forced union membership, enabling them to choose or not choose to pay dues. The results have shown that roughly two-thirds have not chosen union membership when given the opportunity. And that has meant big cutbacks for the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), one of the most left wing and biggest political contributors to Democrats among American unions.......

[SNIP]

.....Keep in mind that AFSCME [American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees] was founded in Wisconsin, the state that was the birthplace of the Progressive political movement. Thus, the rejection of forced union membership is doubly painful. And it is already painful for the union bosses:........"

....No mention is made of political donations by the unions, but in the past AFSCME has been a major source of money and manpower for the Democrats. That racket is now ending for workers in Wisconsin, and one of Scott Walker’s strongest appeals will be to extend these reforms nationwide."

**********************************

..... On Monday [Sept 15, 2o15]...the Wisconsin governor released his plan to strangle unions, titled “My Plan to Give Power to the People, Not the Union Bosses.”

Sept 14, 2015: Scott Walker to propose abolishing unions for federal workers - ABOLISH NLRB

[Cincinatus' Wife]

What union are you in Yosemitest?

[Yosemitest]

No unions for me.
RETIRED Southern REBELS like me, despise Unions !

[TexasFreeper2009]

lol

right.

I didn’t even know Walker was still in the race!

[Yosemitest]

So you really support "OPEN BORDERS" Scott Walker ?

Your PRO-AMNESTY Candidate, Scott Walker, is PROVED to be TALKING OUT OF BOTHS SIDES OF THE ISSUE ( you CAN NOT TRUST him ! ).
Watch the videos and READ the article from HOT AIR, most certainly not on your list of band-sources.

... Two points.
One: He says he’s not for amnesty, his citizenship stance notwithstanding, but that’s not a new soundbite for Walker.
“Amnesty” means many things to many people;
to the Gang of Eight, for instance, the fact that illegals would be forced to meet certain requirements (paying back taxes, etc) before qualifying for citizenship meant that their plan wasn’t “amnesty.”
Walker’s been insisting for more than a year that he doesn’t support “amnesty” either
even though he does support citizenship and liberalizing the rules for legal immigration.

Two: He’s quick to tell Raddatz that he’ll lay out his own immigration plan eventually if he becomes a candidate,
which is his way of saying “don’t ask me anything too specific right now.”

Listening to him here, you would think he didn’t have firm opinions on immigration
yet beyond some basic principles like “secure the border.”
But that’s not so.
Watch him field a question on immigration from 2013 in the second clip below
and note what he says about border security at around 1:30.
For Walker, securing the border is less a matter of building a fence or hiring 10,000 new Border Patrol agents than it is about RELAXING THE RULES for legal admission to the U.S.
His view seems to be
that if you want to come here to work, IT SHOULD BE VERY EASY FOR YOU TO DO SO —
easy enough that you wouldn’t even think of crossing the border illegally, as the legal route would be just as simple.
...


Scott Walker Non-Committal on Immigration ( 0:53 ) by National Review

Let's keep LOSER Walker in his home state.
We don't need any more SELLOUTS in Washington D.C., and especially in the Oval Office!

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Beating Union Bosses and giving workers their money and rights has always been a big part of Walker's appeal and a main ingredient of his campaign.

Scott Walker: My Plan to Give Power to the People, Not the Union Bosses [PDF].

Walker's putting out plans [with more in the pipeline].

Obamacare [which MASSIVELY grows government and union clout].

Scott Walker: Day One Patient Freedom Plan [PDF]

[100American]

I would venture a guess that you thil Walker has the temperament to run this country and stand for us in the world...

Nice guy, nice try but you do not have what it takes. And we do not ave time to let you become ready

No Sale, Walker is NOT the man for the Presidency IMHO...

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I guess this news is a homerun for Walker!

TWO SPAMS and the thread is still young.

[scrabblehack]

Back in 1980 they were more accurate than the public polls.
It’s a bit hard to believe they could be *this* far off though.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Even Gov. Scott Walker’s opponents and the msm report that his temperament is very good - that he is always polite to them (it’s just that then he goes forward and beats the pants off of them).

[Yosemitest]

Walker's dead meat. Nobody believe anything coming out of the LAME STREAM MEDIA, anymore .
If Rush, or Mark Levin, or Glenn Beck notice him, Walkout might have a "last gasp" of air let in him feeble campaign.
But I seriously doubt it.
At best, he's selling himself to be Jeb "La Raza" Bush's running mate.

[ConservativeMind]

So, what do you think about internal polls?

Anytime you ask everyone in your campaign who they'd vote for, you will get a lot of them saying they plan to vote for their employer.

[USS Alaska]

So, what do you think about internal polls?

By definition, they are slanted.
Paid for by the candidate, what kind of results will keep the polling company in business for the next poll?

I like Walker, he was my third choice, but Wifey, you know that he rolled over for his big donor on the anchor babies kerfuffle.

I'm for it, no, I'm against it, no, I have no position until further orders from my money master.

[Vendome]

Liar and push polling for his wife

Just plain dishonest