Posted on 02/02/2016 1:33:06 PM PST by jimbo123
National Review's editor Rich Lowry is thrilled Donald Trump didn't win in Iowa on Monday, and he thinks January's special issue of the magazine, titled "Conservatives Against Trump," had something to do with it.
The conservative publication came out with an editorial and essays from 22 prominent conservatives, effectively declaring war on the Republican Party's poll leader just days before GOP primary voters cast their first ballots of the 2016 election cycle.
Lowry began by thanking those who had participated in the issue and other anti-Trump conservatives, like super PAC founder Katie Packer, just after Cruz's win was announced on Monday night via Twitter:
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Especially since Cruz cheated. His campaign apologized to Dr. Carson today but that's meaningless. Dr. Carson had a good chance of placing 3rd before the Cruz rumors of him dropping out.
Can somebody photoshop Hillary’s face into this?
... on the day their hit piece...
Actually, no it wasn't. But polling is almost meaningless for the Iowa caucuses and always has been, something a few of us have been pointing out to all the Trump premature celebrators promising to wallow in our misery come last Monday. Rich Lowry and National Review taking credit is even worse.
I am lapping with them.
What’s he going to say if Trump wins big in NH?
If I am NRO I have to be asking myself why, despite the feverish support they spun out for Cruz and "greatest ground game in Iowa History", Cruz won by less then 6000 votes and has exactly 1 more delegate coming out of Iowa then either Trump or Rubio.
Hillary is rapidly approaching that look, voluntarily.
* Believe it or not, she only weighs 120 pounds.............she's HOLLOW!
Everyone has gone insane.
They make zero sense. They did their ‘job’ and now it will be on to propping up their real choice Rubio.
I’m going to lmao when NR turns on Cruz and the bellyaching floods the threads.
The entire game was revealed in one quick moment for me today, when Rush claimed Rubio was like Reagan and stating that Rubio is not GOPe.
A great example is the 2014 MS Senate primary between Thad Cochran and Chris McDaniel. I remember the names and faces of those that aided Cochran, and I'm not forgetting, or forgiving.
They are coming for you, know your enemy.
But how is Rich Lowry not part of the Washington Establishment?
Lowry goes on and on about being against the Establishment, and seems to be utterly unaware that to most people Establishment is exactly what he is.
People need to see Rush for what he really is, and he is an elitist.
and the fact Cruz was the most overtly religious in a state Santorum & Huckabee won. A case could be made Cruz could have won more votes, given how many pluses he has on paper.
Give credit where credit is due. You do know that Rubio is the only person in DC to actually accomplish throwing a monkey wrench into Obamacare. Ask the Health Insurance industry what they think of Rubio, considering Rubio putting a cap on the amount of subsidies they can receive from government to cover their Obamacare losses. They are losing their shirts because of Rubio, thus not getting the government largesse they were counting on when they signed on to Obamacare.
Unless Cruz or Trump wins the GOP will lose
Well perhaps Rich Lowry of NR fame has made a good point and did in fact play a big part in Trump’s failure to win the Iowa Cauc... I can’t even type it it sounds so unclean.
Anyway, Trump may be in his rights to post a bounty on MR. Rich Lowery and give us all something to do for the next seven days.
I see they let you back in.
Quite a flameout you had Saturday.
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.