Posted on 03/05/2016 3:03:33 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Folks, we need to keep our eye on the prize and settle down. We are going to have a great pro-America candidate whether it's Cruz or Trump, and we're going to crush the godless America-hating Marxist/fascist felon, Hillary Clinton, in the general election! And that's just a fact.
And that's the bottom line.
We are finally going to secure our borders and start helping repatriate the illegal aliens to Mexico or where ever they came from. And we're going to tighten up and start enforcing our immigration laws, including ending sanctuary cities and possibly ending anchor babies. Both of our leading candidates agree on that.
And we're going to repeal Obamacare, cut taxes, cut spending, cut regulations, cut the government, cut the debt, cut the global balonyism, cut the P/C crap. We're going to cut the EPA, cut the education dept, cut a whole lot of unconstitutional stuff out of the federal government and let the states control education and other issues that the constitution reserves to them. Both of our guys agree on that.
We're going to pay more attention to trade deals and get better deals for American industry and American workers for a change. We're going to bring back capital, bring back manufacturing, bring back jobs! Cutting taxes, cutting government, rolling back regulations and replacing socialism with capitalism will see to a booming Reaganesque economy and that will generate prosperity and jobs. Cruz, Trump and all of us agree on all of that.
We also agree that we want pro-life, pro-family, pro-constitution, pro-America judges. Both our candidates agree with us on that.
We also want to rebuild our military and make it the most powerful force for peace and defense on the planet. We emphasize peace through strength and do not use our military for nation building or social engineering. We understand it's for blowing the crap out of terrorists and war mongers who wish to do us harm. And both of our candidates are on board for that.
Hillary stands for the exact opposite on all of the above!!
This primary is going to be over soon and we're all going to have to make a decision. No matter whether Cruz gets it or Trump, we must unite behind OUR candidate and the AMERICAN side and do all we possibly can to get him elected and send the unindicted felon and all around America-hating, liberty-hating traitor, Hillary Clinton to her well deserved next term--in jail.
I say we drop the vitriol against each other and against our leading candidates as of now. We're only serving to harden the hearts of our natural allies against us and from this point forward, the hit pieces will not change minds or votes, but will possibly feed the enemy propaganda machine.
Lighten up and bring some joy back into our lives and peace on our board.
We're among friends here.
Thank you all very much.
God bless.
I love your whole post, Guenevere! Felt like I was right there, too.
Thank-you so much!!!!
Agreed. This place is crawling with paid shills all trying to start a FReeper civil war. It's time to cut off the bugs' oxygen supply.
I’ll bite my tongue and do my best...
This place is crawling with paid shills all trying to start a FReeper civil war.
What evidence do you have?
It has struck me as odd how so many have been estimating a contest between Hillary and Donald (and calling it for the Cankles) without even taking into account what they are likely to argue, or how.
I feel kind of sorry for Hillary. Donald will bluster, but his blusters will be uncomfortably accurate. He won’t even need to exaggerate although being the hyperbole meister he is, he probably will anyhow. This will lead to Hillary sorely nit picking and majoring in minors.
From your lips to God's ears..
Shenanigans at the convention would be the death knell of the GOP. I hope Reinhold "Rience" Priebus recognizes that.
I'm with you, dear brother xzins -- I'll vote for anyone if it stops Mrs. Clinton from being elected president, including your hound dog.
I held my nose and voted for Romney last presidential election cycle, as the "lesser of two weevils." Much good it did me. My overriding concern then was to deny Barack Obama the ability to appoint SCOTUS and appeals court judges. Romney "choked," as The Donald put it. And so we got stuck with Kagan and Sotomayor, two unfit justices of zero judicial temperament or accomplishment with a politicized judicial philosophy.
While it seems incomprehensible to me that Hillary can win, what with all her baggage and legal difficulties, if the Republicans don't elect the next president, whatever Democrat that gets the nomination of his or her party and wins the election will have the ability to nominate multiple SCOTUS justices and other Article III judges. This would result in a transformation of our system of governance that would be irreversible. Kiss America goodbye at that point.
When I hear people like ex-governor Christie Whitman et al. declare that they would vote for Hillary rather than vote for Trump, all I can say is: These people must be insane. Their vanity is positively terminal. They would rather see America go down if they can't get their way. Sick, and sickening....
I will vote for the presidential nominee of the Republican party, no matter how determined, even if I have to hold my nose to do it (again). Period.
The stakes are so high, and we may not get another chance to restore order in this nation.
So, not only am I "#NeverClinton." I'm #NeverDemocrat.
You are correct that 12 to 16 years of democrats will end this nation as we know it and finish the push toward socialism. It is an HONEST opinion, Sister Betty, that doesn’t try to gloss over reality.
I will add one caveat to my #NEVERclinton. If someone (TRUMP) can ACTUALLY show a viable 3rd party path to victory AND take into account the reality of the constitutional election process, then I will consider that as an alternative to a brokered convention candidate whose name is not CRUZ or TRUMP, the apparent top 2 vote getters of this primary season.
I must be legitimate. It must acknowledge the reality that a 3rd party MUST win a MAJOORITY of the electors to win at the electoral college. Otherwise, it goes to Congress by states, and we know how that will turn out.
Good to hear he's more impressive in person!
I've seen that video. The people who produced it have zero footprint on the Web, Wiki and others haven't heard of their company. It's tailor-made professional oppo for Donald Trump.
The setup is a one-on-one comparo between Trump and Cruz (no Rubio, no Yeb, no Christie, no Carson, no Kasich, no nobody) ..... and yet they spend all their time trashing Cruz and his wife.
Not exactly offered in the spirit of this thread, YMMV.
HASHMI: A Clinton staffer was granted immunity by the Department of justice. I can see an indictment happen around the convention time on Hillary Clinton, of Hillary Clinton.
BUCHANAN: It’s a good prediction, John.
(LAUGHTER)
CLIFT: Yes.
BUCHANAN: Don’t let me interrupt you.
Good get, amigo, thanx for the post. Interesting that Eleanor Clift, always a hardcore Hillary drone, seems to agree.
From your keyboard and Hashmi's lips to God's ears.
Interesting, dear brother in Christ. Something to think about.... I could warm to that idea.
But how would we know who the Electors are pledged to, when the Third Party did not exist at the time of the primary/caucus season when the electors themselves were elected (or apportioned)?
I'm wondering about the mechanics here. Or is my question just silly?
If the election gets decided by Congress, failing a majority in the Electoral College on the appointed date, we could be opening a real Pandora's box. I call your attention to the word "qualified" in Amendment XX, Section 3. What does this word mean? It seems to mean something more than "eligible" (as in the Article II eligibility requirements -- i.e., natural born, 35 years old, 14 years a resident of the U.S.).
I've consulted my usual sources, and so far, none point to a meaning of presidential "qualification" that differs from "eligibility." But then, if the two words mean the same thing, why complicate matters by using the second word, as Amendment XX, Section 3 does?
I'm scratching my head. What if the Congress does not find the elected president is "qualified?" According to my reading of Amendment XX, Congress would then be empowered to appoint an acting president for some indeterminate period of time until the "qualification" issue is cleared up.
Do I worry about nothing?
Whatever the case, the RNC would be foolish to go to a brokered convention that nominated a candidate without a majority or near majority of electoral votes as determined in the primaries/caucuses. The RNC then wouldn't just be dissing a person (say, Donald Trump). It would be dissing every person who voted for him the the primaries. To say this would be grossly undemocratic is an understatement.
In Trump's case, the folks being dissed are mainly working and middle class people. How does one win elections without such folks?
What is clear is, should the RNC proceed with such folly, it would clearly reveal itself as the party of the elites, the well-connected, the monied interests, the intellectuals, the ideologues....
But NOT the party of "average" Americans....
With Cruz, yes. I just don't trust Trump on these issues. I don't think he'll curb the over regulation.
I don’t recall resistance to trade deals as being a big point for Cruz, but I could be wrong. And I’m sure Trump has suffered under stifling regulations so will naturally be against them.
But when I look at the data, it’s clear to me that if I entered the race, I could not win. I believe I could win a number of diverse states -- but not enough to win the 270 Electoral College votes necessary to win the presidency.In a three-way race, it’s unlikely any candidate would win a majority of electoral votes, and then the power to choose the president would be taken out of the hands of the American people and thrown to Congress. The fact is, even if I were to receive the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, victory would be highly unlikely, because most members of Congress would vote for their party’s nominee. Party loyalists in Congress -- not the American people or the Electoral College -- would determine the next president.
As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience. http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-07/the-2016-election-risk-that-michael-bloomberg-won-t-take
He recognizes that any 3rd party candidate must win a majority of the electors to have any hope of success. Moreover, anything less than a majority win goes to Congress where each state congressional delegation gets one vote for president. Most state delegations are republican, so the winner would be republican, but would it be Trump or Cruz. There's no guarantee of that.
Amendment 12: "...The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. — The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States....
So, if Clinton is the democrat candidate, a brokered convention gives us Bush, and Trump runs an independent campaign and no candidate receives a majority of the elector vote, then it goes to a republican House of Representatives, moreover one in which the state delegation is majority republican in a majority of states. They will poll the state, and their one vote will be cast. The republican representatives will vote the for the republican candidate, Bush.
So, in one sense, a Trump independent run guarantees a republican win. It is a Trump win only with a majority. Some would call that a win-win, if the republican were not Bush.
Couldn’t agree more, Mr. Robinson. Trumpbots, Trumpkin, Cruzios, Hitleresque, these are all invectives we’ve hurled at each other, totally ignoring Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment (Thou shalt not disparage a fellow Republican). By the time the convention finally gets here, the intraparty malice will make the Hatfields and McCoys seem downright tame in comparison.
People, let’s not do Hillary’s job for her. Whether Trump or Cruz or whomever the people (not the party) choose as their candidate, let’s get behind him whole-heartedly and never lose sight of the ultimate goals, winning back the White House and beginning the fumigation of the GOP. Let’s also pledge that if the “candidate” we end up with was chosen by other than the people (a brokered convention), we will forever repudiate this rotted carcass the GOP has become and find a new way to make our voice heard.
P.S. I kinda like the Trumpkin tag. “We represent the Lollypop Guild...”
Thanks, Jim! Things around here had crossed the line from hard-nosed competition to just nasty bickering.
Or would it be Romney or Ryan? Or somebody else that no one voted for in the primaries/caucuses?
Whatever. "The Stupid Party" will have once again proved beyond a reasonable doubt that it is, indeed, fatally stupid. Why bother to hold elections, when the GOP can finagle a way to select its preferred winner with impunity?
And that winner must, of course, be someone of whom the party approves ideologically; and, even more important, someone they can control.
The American citizen/voter can just go stuff it.
Thanks for the bucket of cold reality and upbeat optimism thrown over the hot heads. . .thank you.
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.