...and you will never understand why merely 'being right' is not what reality cares about, because reality operates within total reality, not the narrow little sandbox in which you construct your debate. ...
Posted on 05/29/2016 7:26:15 AM PDT by Brookhaven
owa radio host Steve Deace -- who was one of Ted Cruz's most important backers in the first primary state and who has a nationally syndicated radio show -- recently asked his followers on Twitter whether they want Senator Ted Cruz to publicly endorse Donald Trump.
The results show that 83% say no, while only 17% say they want Cruz to use his political capital to help Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
That should have said crs.
I hate autofill. Tricks me every time
At this point, to hell with his endorsement.
No, you're not. If you're not supporting the GOP nominee, you need to get the hell out.
Bye.
Keep in mind that the Rules for the 2016 Convention haven’t even been prepared as of yet.
The 112 member Rules Committee will meet the week or so before the Convention to develope
the Rules which will be presented to the Convention for adoption. I’m not sure of the
process to change, delete, etc the Rules that are presented. Remember the Rule was
changed in 2012 on the number of states needed to place a name in nomination. It was
raised to eight states to keep Paul’s name out of nomination.
It will be interesting to see if this is a smooth process or a very continious convention.
Wake up from your arrogant intellectual dream state! Leadership, which is what the country needs, is not about winning the debate. That's why it's called 'LEADERship' and not 'DEBATORship.'
You should all give up politics for 3 years and go actually build something, start a business, learn basic sills of connecting with other human beings, and then come back and tell how you see things differently.
Within your narrow context of thought, where you have set up, studied, practiced, rehearsed the framework of facts, where you have chosen the architecture and context of that about which you will argue, all things which all of us dumb Trump supporters already understand (you socio-emotional retard!) you are completely right (much of the time), and you will never understand why merely 'being right' is not what reality cares about, because reality operates within total reality, not the narrow little sandbox in which you construct your debate.
So Croos-girl, understand this about your argument and your candidate and your small intellectual-only-on-paper-only world - a fact of reality (rather than a fact in your intellect) about which there is no debate:
You are right, dead right.
...and you will never understand why merely 'being right' is not what reality cares about, because reality operates within total reality, not the narrow little sandbox in which you construct your debate. ...
Bless your heart. I might agree with you except that the person(s) I originally replied to asked about the conscience clause and the answers given were incorrect. If I know the answer to a question I will answer it, and if I don’t I will either say I don’t know or I won’t comment to begin with. In this case I gave a correct information along with the link I got the information from. Everyone is welcome to read and critique with references of their own to refute. I can’t help it nor do I care if people don’t like the answer. Have a good weekend.
Yeah, exactly ... on paper ... you were right.
What else, not on paper, was included? Part of why your candidate is so unpopular can be found in the correct answer to that question. But the answer to that question can not be found on paper.
Stretch yourself Roos ... there is something for you to learn in this. Bless your heart back.
I have no idea what you’re talking about. There was no discussion about popularity. It was just a discussion of the process. I’m an engineer, not a politician. I talk in facts and figures, not feelings. I appreciate frank discussion. I’m not in to guessing or reading meaning in to what other people have written. I write what I mean as best I can. If you don’t like blunt conversation then you should discuss with someone else.
There was a question. I provided an answer. Like I said, I don’t care if people don’t like the answer. I am simply the messenger.
You said it well.
I think I will stay. Someone has to be a voice of sanity for the lunatics like you.
GFY.
You have a lack of self-control. A feature of lunatics and democrats.
How does the Constitution presently read. 'Natural born', because NO judge or act of Congress can make anyone a 'natural born' US citizen... YES, this nation played dumb and allowed obama to hold the office, and the 'republicans' calling themselves conservative went underground. Conservatives would never ever subvert the Constitution... I have know since the late 60's what the founders intent was when they require only a 'natural born' US citizen was eligible to hold the office of president. And Cuban Canadian born Ted Cruz is not now nor will he ever be a 'natural born' US citizen. He knows what the framers original intent was, but he is a diabolical narcissist and believes that he is entitled.
Even after Ted Cruz, carried Mitch the Senate's water, Mitch the Senate refused to 'resolve' that Ted Cruz was eligible to hold the office of president like the Senate did for lord McCain. Cruz is a fraud.
I apologize for my nasty comment. Hope you can forgive.
Forgiven.
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.