Posted on 04/03/2016 8:34:32 AM PDT by Hojczyk
As Capitol Hill aides have explained, amongst Washington’s GOP political class Ryan is regarded as the “Republican Jesus.”
Indeed, National Review, which helped put the third world migration enthusiast Paul Ryan into the Speaker’s office, seemed to embrace the idea of nudging him into the Oval Office. National Review’s deputy managing editor penned a piece entitled,
“Paul Ryan for President!” writing: “One can imagine a case where Trump and Cruz control 60 to 70 percent of the vote between them, and neither one will budge, and no other candidate or boss will consider helping either one. Then it will be time for a respected and inoffensive candidate to offer a contrast to all the strong personalities in the Republican race, and Ryan is nothing if not Mr. Acceptable.”
“Speaker Paul Ryan is emerging as the Republican’s biggest counterweight to Donald Trump,” The Hill wrote in January.
Since Trump’s philosophy is so opposite of Ryan’s, if Trump were to win Wisconsin, it would be seen as a wholesale rejection of Ryan Republicanism. Losing Wisconsin would be politically devastating for Ryan and would make it exceedingly difficult for him to emerge out of the contested convention. As such, Wisconsin is a must-win for Ryan via a proxy of his policy viewpoints, Ted Cruz.
Paul Ryan and corporate media have sought to frame the GOP Civil War of voters versus donors and donor proxies (i.e. Fox News, Republican publications, and various corporate-owned radio networks) as a battle waged over something as frivolous as candidates’ “tone” rather than the substantive policy divisions between the electorate and the Party’s corporate funders.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
always answer this question. Why would a Cruz or Trump delegate vote for the rule change. It has to be approved on the floor by a majority of the delegates. That will not happen. Two men will be nominated under Rule 40b. Only two men qualify. If anyone knows how they avoid floor majority ratification, let me know.
I personally don’t think that either Trump or Cruz can win in November and if neither gets the nomination on the first ballot then I’m fine with looking elsewhere. But not Ryan (or God forbid Romney). To my mind there are a number of people who could be chosen that could unite the party (currently dangerously divided) and win in November.
Here a few names that come to mind in no particular order if we end up with a brokered convention...
Sen Jeff Sessions of AL
Sen. John Thune of SD.
Former Sen. Tom Coburn of OK (I have always really liked him.)
Sen. Tim Scott of SC (the only African American Republican in the Senate)
Gov. Nikki Haley of SC (not a personal favorite but I could pull the lever for her in a pinch.)
Gov. Greg Abbott of TX (I REALLY like him.)
Former Gov. Haley Barbour of MS (He is conservative to the core but also has cordial relations with the GOPe which some here would consider disqualifying.)
I know there are a lot of people here who desperately want to tell all of the moderate Republicans and establishment types to F-— off. But we can’t tell half the party where to go until after we have their votes. Not unless you really want Slick Hilly as our next President.
More like Ryan/Cruz...that way they can blame the conservative Cruz for the loss.
“Why is it ted cruz created? If trump had enough votes it wouldn’t be an issue.”
In a contest where the rules dictate that a simple first place finish isn’t enough, and that a candidate must reach some arbitrary number of delegates to clinch the nomination, a second place candidate can act as a spoiler, by taking just enough votes to keep the clear winner from achieving the magic number.
Ted understands that the mathematical odds of him taking 80%+ of the remaining delegates are overwhelmingly against him, but that’s what he needs to do to win this fair and square.
So the question poses itself: just what is his objective, at this point? Does he believe that he can force a contested convention, and that the party insiders will give him the nomination when the people did not? If Ted intends to win without the support of a clear plurality of voters, does he really believe he’ll garner enough support to win the general? Are you kidding me? The party will fracture beyond recognition if they try that.
So why is Ted still in it? Is he really willing to be the tool that shatters the party, and hands the election to the Dems?
The American people still retain an innate sense of fair play and right vs wrong. They’re not going to react kindly to the GOP establishment if they sense that the process has been corrupted with skulldugery and cheating in order to rob the clear winner of his rightful prize.
I will NOT, I reiterate, NOT in any way, shape or form vote for Ryan. I will write in Trump/Cruz or I will sit home as an Independent.
I don't HAVE to vote R.
Convention as Nominee Dominate Wisconsin
Long article if it is true Ryan has to be the number one RINO
In 2013, Ryan joined forces with open-borders advocate Rep. Luis Gutierrez
to campaign for Sen. Marco Rubio amnesty agenda. Gutierrez has previously said, “I have only one loyalty… and that’s to the immigrant community.”
While stumping for amnesty with Gutierrez, Ryan repeatedly made the case for open borders, declaring that: “America is more than just a country… It’s more than our borders. America is an idea. It’s a very precious idea.”
This statement is significant because, while a country has borders, “ideas” do not. If America is an “idea” rather than a “country,” then recent refugees from Somalia have as much of a “right” to a job in the United States as do children whose ancestors fought in the American Revolution.
Article probably true—jibes with other comments Ryan has made...
Though I didn’t find video with reference to Somalia refugees, I did find a couple interesting things:
I believe this is the video referred to in Breibart article:
Hour long video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeJP21d7liE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4y4iXUN7h0
Particularly when they just did the for Speaker.
No disrespect to the author, but currently Rubio has just under 7%, Kasich under 6% and I doubt he'll boost that much, and all the rest 1%. I think it's likely Trump and Cruz will have about 80% between them, more if Kasich wins his 5% to 6% of the remaining delegates. IMO that leave only two viable candidates, presuming Trump doesn't get a majority on the first ballot. Could Rubio and Kasich hold out forever, I suppose, but their delegates will be free agents, they'll all have to hold out as well. The likelihood is that Trump will need either Rubio or Kasich, Cruz might need both. For all his flip flops, one thing Trump has been consistant on is his status as the deal maker of the century, if not the millennia. Putting together a coalition under these circumstances should be a no brainer for Trump if that's true. If he's not the master of the deal, Cruz will get the nomination. IMO they're the only legitimate candidates. I'd vote for Ryan over Hillary, but he'd illegitimize the process.
I should note I consider the process, requiring a majority of the delegates, a legitimate one, and consider George Bush a legitimate President. I know many disagree, and feel nomination should now be based on a plurality of cast votes. Consistancy requires them to have supported the election of President Gore.
Breitbart should be banned. It’s equally one-sided to Red State.
This is not Cruz-created. It’s Trump created. He was a hot property and won a lot of early delegates.
He’s now a cold property and in danger of not getting the required number.
Why is that Cruz’s fault?
Winning requires a majority of delegates, not a plurality. Do you consider George Bush, who failed to win a plurality or majority an illegitimate President? For the system to be legitimate, did we need a President Gore?
It always does. See McCain and Romney. Neither got much love during the primary season, both were supported in the general.
-- Cruz supporters have already been booted for stating they would not vote for Trump. --
I suspect the reason given was pretextual. In other words, the booting was precipitated by more factors than just that one. Promising to support the winner, no matter who it is, is not a condition for maintaining posting privileges here, although of course it is a preference.
Call it posturing. Even today there are plenty of posters in the Cruz/Trump wars who claim they will sit out if the other guy gets the nomination. From what I've observed, if they don't obsess over that position and generally irritate the forum, they are allowed to remain.
At any rate, I expressed the two beefs I had with your post. One being your claim that the good health of FR depends on the republican winning the general election, and the other being your insinuation that it's the voters' fault when the party nominates a turkey. I don't agree with either of those contentions.
I didn't have any point other than to express disagreement, meaning I'm not aiming to persuade you to change your mind or expressing an interest in debate or discussion.
Why are there so many anti-trump votes?
If Cruz is so unlikable, why is he getting them?
Ross Perot gave us Clinton.
Why would you be a party to something like that?
You want another Clinton?
Again. Do not blame Cruz because he is currently more popular than Trump.
Trump is responsible for his own demise. He has done so many stupid and unpopular things in the last few weeks, one would think he was running the NeverTrump group.
But, But, I thought the National Review loved Cruz.
The truth is ... you can’t handle the truth.
Your guy has blown it all by himself.
Using terms like Cruzbots and Bushbots is silly.
And why BRAG about them being anti-Trump.
I am pro-Cruz. I think Cruz will make a great president.
If Trump cared about the country as he claims, he could step out and let Cruz have the nomination.
Breitbart and Ann Coulter ... all that TRump has left and Coulter bolted.
Like it or not, political skill is an asset for an elected official, or a candidate who want's to be elected. You are correct, it's not Cruz's fault. And Trump has the ball. All he has to do is become a "hot property" again, and bring over voters who are not already strident supporters. Since they're a minority of Republicans and larger minority of the electorate. While Cruz can't realistically win a majority, Trump needs to win around 53% of the remaining delegates. If he can't do that, he'll have to rely on his superior deal making. And we should worry about the fate of a divisive candidate who can't garner the votes of half his own party in the general election. That's going to be a concern whether it's Trump or Cruz.
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.