Posted on 01/25/2016 1:18:38 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry is endorsing Ted Cruz in the Republican presidential primary, Perry told POLITICO in an interview Sunday night.
Perry, who also sought the GOP nomination before dropping out in September, said he now sees the race as one that is between Cruz, a fellow Texan, and Donald Trump. Through phone calls and during a December day spent driving around his Round Top, Texas, home in his truck with Cruz, Perry said he found the senator to be a good listener who respects the Tenth Amendment, "knows what he does not know" and is more conservative than Trump.
"Of those individuals who have a chance to win the Republican primary, at this juncture, from my perspective, Ted Cruz is by far the most consistent conservative in that crowd," Perry said. "And that appears to be down to two people."
Perry, who is famously skilled at retail politics, will campaign with Cruz Tuesday across Iowa, and will join Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King to stump for Cruz again Wednesday. Perry and King will both join Cruz at a Des Moines rally Wednesday night.
The endorsement gives Cruz the blessing of the longest-serving governor in Texas history, just as the senator faces intensifying heat from other veteran politicians, including from his colleagues in Washington, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Well I see you have your gun ready loaded for bear, and I’m just a chipmunk.
But my recollection was that the Constitution required that LEGISLATURES developed procedures to determine electors in ADVANCE of the election. In Florida, 2000, the state supreme court (NOT the LEGISLATURE) determined procedures during/after (NOT in ADVANCE of) the election. That does not accord with the US Constitution. Should one corrupt state supreme court monkey around with the rules after the fact to choose their man for President of all 50 states?
Your attempts to bait posters into personal attacks belong on DU, not FR.
I’m surprised, I figured Perry would be more likely to endorse Rubio.
Excellent. That is a great endorsement for Cruz.
The Constitution does not mention elections.
Elections are not required by the Constitution for State Legislatures to perform their function of appointing electors.
So, since elections are superfluous, the timing of when and how the Legislature does the appointing is discretionary.
No, but the rulings of SCOFLA were void of authority or importance.
The MOST SCOFLA could have done was to order Katherine Harris to send a slate of Gore electors to Congress. Since the Legislature was prepared to appoint a slate of Bush electors, and since the Special Joint Session had a GOP majority, the worst that could have happened was to not count any votes from FL and have the House (voting by states, and split 30-20 GOP) elect Bush.
Wow, why don't you post that to Jim?
Comments like that are what is bringing this site down to gutter level.
Not one of your finer posts.
“The Constitution does not mention elections.”
What?
US Constitution, Article 2 Section 1:
The President and Vice-President “be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress”
"Ad exposing how Trump has used eminent domain to bulldoze an elderly woman's home to create a limo parking lot"; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 22, 2016
I’m sure a lot of people at FR like, or have liked, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and others associated with conservatism. It is sad that any, or all, of these people come under vitriolic attack for their current endorsement. This war of slander is very unbecoming to the slanderers, and reflects badly on their candidates.
"You are his useful idiots."
"Trump people are slow thinkers so work on it."
"I am worn out by his nonsense and the idiocy of his insane uninformed duped ridiculous supporters."
"Or in an expression you and your so eloquent candidate can understand: STFU"
"If you are a Trump supporter, however, you really have nothing to say anyway. But thanks for being a pseudo-Conservative with no principles, moral fiber or balls."
Dude/chick needs a padded cell
Yes, the “electing” referred to in the Constitution refers to the process whereby electors (currently 538 of them), 535 appointed by State Legislatures and 3 appointed by Congress, choose the President.
The idea that persons residing in the states should choose the electors by voting is neither required nor forbidden by the Constitution.
If my home were a bulldozer target, I was having to spend for lawyers to protect what should be MY castle, I was being harassed by the construction next door -- she claims they dropped stuff through her roof -- I'd be well and truly pissed long before the bulldozers got there. Doing this to an elderly widow, trying to gain more limo parking for a casino, Trump's for the little guy??! Now I'm not saying Trump and friends did anything illegal, as I presume Gov. Christie could confirm. Using eminent domain for private rather than public purposes seems to be legal in his state. I'm saying it SHOULD BE illegal and most Americans agreed with me when Kelo made it otherwise. I trust those that think otherwise now are enjoying their nice, warm, frog pond.
If Trump tries to defend this, the way his supporters have been defending it, in Thursday's debate, I look forward to seeing him lose again.
Why ignore the fact Ted tweeted a lie?
“The idea that persons residing in the states should choose the electors by voting is neither required nor forbidden by the Constitution.”
OK.
The Florida legislature established a method for determining electors, through elections. There were time-tables, choice of ballots, a provision for a recount, etc. Florida state law. These procedures were followed, overseen by Katherine Harris. The upshot was Bush was set to take the state, playing by the rules.
The problem came when team Gore worked hand-in-glove with the Florida Supreme Court to cherry pick counties for recount, alter time-tables, etc, to hand the election to Gore. They had no business doing this, and the US Supreme Court stepped in.
By the way, Florida was not the only close state. Another state (PA?) went narrowly for Gore. Of course, team Gore had no interest in overturning that close race. The Bush team had the grace to concede there rather than drag the country through the mud by contesting the result.
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.