Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 10, 2016, 11:54:12 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
92638 Posts in 2300 Topics by 1080 Members
Latest Member: Tedbo
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 150
51  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Holocaust survivors on: January 29, 2016, 05:39:30 PM
Hitler analogies are easy to make and almost never appropriate since the compared party has rarely murdered 6 million Jews.

Mentioned previously, my Dad was present at the holocaust liberation, FWIW.
God Bless these people if they are Holocaust survivors, but Trump and Cruz bear no resemblance to Hitler nor are they likely to mass murder Jews or Muslims.

We don't have open hostility to Muslims in this country, and how crass to say that we do while Muslim countries are openly murdering Jews and Christians.

We have every right to demand scrutiny of new arrivals during this time where they have declared war on us.
52  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 29, 2016, 05:20:32 PM
Fla primary, Tues March 15.

"Rubio got elected in a divided state"  [Cruz was elected in one of the most conservative states]

The last poll I looked he is being trounced and pummeled into the pavement by Trump in Florida.

True.  Rubio led Bush, now Trump leads both - on the GOP side

Current delegate score among the top 3 is 0-0-0.
53  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 29, 2016, 12:00:05 PM
Krauthammer uses the term conservative rather broadly here.  For Example I think Cruz would describe himself more as a constitutional conservative like Mark Levin would.

Christie Fiorina and to a lesser extent Rubio are certainly not strict constitutional conservatives. 

They are also more likely deal makers.

Kasich for example is one of those "fiscal conservative" "social liberal" guys.   I don't understand people who use these terms together.  You cannot be a social liberal while calling yourself conservative in my view.   Oh yea one could say freedom for gays, equal rights for women but what about social liberal policies that include the welfare state?   That alone precludes the concept of fiscal conservatism.

And Krauthammer confuses the concept of the Republican Party and conservatism.  The two are not the same.  If he wants to talk about the people he lists as saving the party I agree.  If he wants to talk about conservatism  he is mistaken.   They are compromisers.  Big time.

Stipulating the big difference between Cruz and Rubio on the past immigration reform episode and stipulating that prior to and during that time you and many others have put that issue first and paramount...  otherwise, Rubio and Cruz have nearly identical voting records.  That will actually be used against Rubio in the general election.

I have other issues with Rubio, the sugar subsidy thing is stupid, but there is something to getting elected.  Rubio got elected in a divided state, Cruz in one of the most conservative state.

Rubio can make one constitutional conservative promise that Cruz can't, he can appoint Cruz to the Supreme Court where he can do the most good.   )
54  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 29, 2016, 11:50:44 AM
I thought Rubio did the best last night.  

Ultimately I think his current position on border defense, immigration, and what to do about those here already (discuss it with the American people once we have shown them we have control of borders/immigration) positions him AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY well.

While I have great sympathy for Cruz's "just enforce the fg law" position, it will cost the Reps HEAVILY for decades to come with the Latino vote.  Rubio is a great hope for the Reps to become competitive for the Latino vote.

Here in CA there probably is no greater single factor to explain the one party state we have become than the initiatives (Prop 187 was it?) that we the people passed but the Dems parlayed into universal and unconditional Latino support for the Dem party.

Rubio has far superior ability to Ted in calling to the middle, independents, Latinos, and women.  Apparently not only young, single women are a MAJOR voting block this time around but the female demographic tends to respond not so well to Ted.  For example, my wife can't stand him.

Great post, well expressed.  

I would note as G M has, that in CA, the problem was the border opening that led to the demographic shift, not necessarily the response to it.  Same for America and maybe it can't be walked back, but still, our response to it can't be to attack the people who who aren't going to be sent back, and we need to take our best shot at reaching all people and all groups with an inspiring, optimistic, positive, conservative message.  Whoever can do that best.

Rubio right now has the softer image to represent conservatism, but if he is the nominee, he will suddenly (in the media) be the the most extreme far right guy to ever seek the office.  His adeptness at surviving all the current attacks against him indicate he can conceivably overcome the future ones as well.  In a different way than Cruz or Trump, he doesn't let the questioner control the premise of the question.

After all we've been through, this is a country where Obama has a near even approval, Bernie leads Trump, and Cruz is admittedly the furthest to the right in his own party, not reaching to the middle.  This is no time to be over-confident and think whoever we choose will win.  As Pat has pointed out, the term electable has been used wrongly with weak candidates that failed.  That doesn't change the Wm F Buckley wisdom that we need to choose the most conservative candidate that can win.  Whoever that is.
55  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Krauthammer also endorsing Marco Rubio, sort of... on: January 29, 2016, 11:13:37 AM

(Charles Kraiuthammer) ... My personal preference is for the third ideological alternative, the reform conservatism that locates the source of our problems not in heartless billionaires or crafty foreigners, but in our superannuated, increasingly sclerotic 20th-century welfare-state structures. Their desperate need for reform has been overshadowed by the new populism, but will make its appearance this year in Congress in Speaker Ryan’s promised agenda — boring stuff like welfare reform, health care reform, tax reform and institutional congressional reforms such as the return to “regular order.”

Paired with a President like Rubio (or Chris Christie or Carly Fiorina, to go long-shot), such an agenda would give conservatism its best opportunity since Reagan to become the country’s governing philosophy.

Unless the GOP takes the populist leap. In which case, a conservative restoration will be a long time coming.
56  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Unreported conflict of interests on: January 29, 2016, 11:05:30 AM
While conflicts of interest happens frequently in medical publications it is considered very unethical not to report upfront those conflict of interests and that those conflicts be published with the piece being published.  (Not that everyone does as they should, but just saying).  

IMO the following is VERY unethical to say the least.
If Luntz or Fox were totally ethical they would have reported this.
Fox has lost respect from the left day #1, but I do believe they have lost some respect from at least some righties including me these past 6 months.  I am not interested in their personalities such as Kelly.  I want the news.  I don't really like her.  She is aggressive which is good but that said it is way too much about HER:

Agree with you about Luntz if these facts are true, but Breitbart should also disclose their report was written by Trump.    wink
57  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: January 29, 2016, 10:44:51 AM
(ccp from Rubio thread)

"Rubio is the most likable , but I still cannot see him as leader of the country but then again may be best to beat the Democrats.
Cruz's positions are best for me but there is something about him that he is not warm and fuzzy.  Not many think he would be great to beat Democrats.
Trump is really losing me.  I am beginning not to like him much at all but he is best on some of the positions by far, but then again has very high negatives.
Kasich is likable, talented and probably could beat any Democrat but his policies are way to leftist.

In conclusion a Presidential race that should be a blowout for us is leading down to the wire."

I would post more from around the internet,  but this is the best analysis I have seen.   )

"BTW as for the debate I watched for about 10 to 15 minutes and got bored.  Not because T wan't there but because it was a lot of the same old questions and answers.  Just getting tiring and redundant to me.  Did you hear anything new perhaps that I missed?"

I listened to the whole thing on the radio as an excuse to keep working into the evening and that question stumped me.  I thought it was a very good and substantive debate but maybe I didn't hear anything new.  All in all, they did a nice job of attacking the Obama agenda and showed some restraint attacking each other.  People were given chances to clarify past positions and make a stronger emphasis on the main points they want to leave with their audience, either in Iowa or NH.  It is probably good that we get to a point where nothing new comes out.

From the bottom, Rand Paul had a good night.  Didn't go after anyone real hard.  I think he clarified that people who agree with him particularly on foreign policy should support him.  He already has that and shouldn't move up.  His defense of his father paled as it followed JEB calling his own father the greatest man alive.  Jeb also had a good night but probably won't move up either.  He was the only one to seriously challenge Trump, which was fine but I thought the other strategy of silence about the missing man was better.  A serious Presidential debate on issues and leadership went on just fine without him.  

Nothing new to say about Christie.  He would make a strong general election candidate and President if not for the others running.  He sometimes is a jerk, but DT already has that lane.  He is a strong personality, executive experience, but other Governors have better records of accomplishment.  He would prosecute Hillary very well in a general election debate if given the chance, but others can do that and I would rather have our candidate lay out our vision and why their policies are wrong than just tear down their messenger.  He tried jumping in again after a re-run of Rubio-Cruz debating what happened in the Senate and didn't really pull it off.  His experience in a Governor's mansion in a Dem state with a Dem legislature where no conservatism gets done is not that much different that their experience in the Senate where nothing good got done either.  Presumably that's why they all are running for higher office.

Kasich was Kasich.  Answered his questions well.  Seems to be in the race in case 6 others stumble, or he believes in the lanes theory, but he doesn't attack or compare with Bush or Christy, so maybe he is running for VP.  Kasich is doing pretty well in NH, still a number of them need to get out after NH.

Ben Carson had an off night and won't move up either.  He had moments that were great, another where he seemed to lose his track.  At the beginning they seemed to ignore him, then a gave him a tough foreign policy question which is where he had shown weakness previously.  Another question was all asked and then the questioner said out of the blue, Dr. Carson, that one was for you.  He sounded surprised like being called up from the audience.  Like I said, I was listening, I wonder how that looked.  Carson made a valid point about ethanol.  Govt subsidies are bad policy, but people have made investments relying on them so the ending must be done with care.

This is shallow and obvious to say about Dr. Carson, but having him black and still among the GOP leaders has temporarily shut down the false criticism by the shallow left of conservatism being for whites.  Carson's support comes largely from whites and it is genuine.  I would love to see him continue on in some role where he is able to reach more demographics with his and our message.

Rubio had his best night.  He raised up his energy and oratory to higher level, clips you will hear in ads...  A few moments not so.  Cruz beat him on one immigration point and his attack on Cruz was overly harsh, Cruz will say anything to get elected.  When they used film to corner Rubio on immigration, he had promised not to offer blanket amnesty and all the deals entered were clearly not blanket amnesty so that attack failed in one sense but conservatives who don't forgive him for Gang of 8 are once again reminded of it.  For those not following old Senate business, Rubio is very strong now on border security and stopping ISIS from coming in.

With Trump gone, Cruz took arrows from various directions.  He did fine, not great.  Beat Rubio on one immigration point.  (paraphrase)  'In our campaigns, Marco and I made the same promise.  I kept mine; he didn't.'  As G M has pointed out, Cruz showed backbone on ethanol.  And as I suggested, he put it in the context of ending the whole practice of government picking winners and losers.  Amen to that.  That could play at least neutral in Iowa and makes a strong setup for a conservative and populist argument general election argument against team crony-Solyndra.
58  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 28, 2016, 11:19:20 PM
Frank Luntz ✔ @FrankLuntz
23 of 27 #GOPDebate focus groupers tonight say @MarcoRubio won the debate.
I also noticed that John Hinderaker of Power line and Center for the American Experiment endorsed Rubio.
59  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: January 28, 2016, 12:14:38 PM
It is a combination of standard Clintonliespeak and Grannie Clinton's unresolved medical issues.

Honestly, that was my reaction too.  It is hard to believe she didn't use to be sharper than this.  Also hard to believe she was not expecting the question.  It's only come up a thousand times.

Waaaaay off limits, but even her weight makes her look like a person lacking the discipline to run for this position.  It is hard to make millions a day and still be sharp and hungry for the next job. 

She thought the Sec State job was a possible stepping stone to the Presidency.  But instead it was a test to see if she might make a good or great President and she failed miserably.

Now we are down to a Stalinist Sandinista versus a government takings advocate.
60  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Hillbillary Clintons long, sordid, and often criminal history on: January 28, 2016, 12:04:32 PM
From the previous post regarding the choice of using an unsecured private server to handle the classified communications that come with be Secretary of State:

"I had no intention of doing anything other than having a convenient way of communicating"

Shouldn't that be, I had no intention of doing anything other than handling America's secrets, intel and communications with the utmost care to follow all established laws, rules and procedures set up for national security?

Truth is, she had no intention taking the job other than to co-mingle the foreign policy of the United States with the financial interests of the Clinton crime family foundation.

What this pathetic housewife can't say out loud is that she trusted all the planning, thinking and judgment on this important matter to her cheating, impeached, disbarred husband, didn't seriously question him on it, and shockingly, his judgment was wrong.

The rambling paragraph demonstrates how she has none of his ability to wiggle out of these things.
61  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillary Clinton, Smartest woman in the world on: January 28, 2016, 11:49:52 AM
“I first met Clinton, then Hillary Rodham, in 1978. I was struck by her directness and that she spoke in perfect paragraphs.”—Jill Abramson, Guardian (London), Jan. 24

Quoting the smartest woman in the world this week:
“Well, I think that they’re—you know, look, I was delighted to get the [Des Moines] Register’s endorsement. And it was a very generous one. And yes, I think that’s a fair criticism. You know I had no intention of doing anything other than having a convenient way of communicating, and it turned out not to be so convenient. So again, we’ve answered every question and we will continue to do so. But you know maybe being faster, trying to scramble around to find out what all of this means, I probably should have done that quicker. . . . No. I’m not willing to say it was an error in judgment because what—nothing that I did was wrong. It was not—it was not in any way prohibited. And so . . . Well, apologizing sooner, as soon as you can. But part of the problem, and I would just say this as, not an excuse but just as an explanation. When you’re facing something like that you got to get the facts. And it takes time to get the facts. And so when I said hey, take all my emails, make them public. That had never been done before, ever by anybody. And so we’ve been sorting our way through this because it is kind of a unique situation. I’m happy people are looking at the emails. Some of them are you know, frankly a little embarrassing. You know. You find out that sometimes I’m not the best on technology and things like that. But look, I think it’s great. Let people sort them through. And as we have seen there is a lot of—you know a lot of interest. But it’s something that took time to get done—Hillary Clinton, CNN, Jan. 25

Hat tip: James Taranto, wsj

Can anyone figure out what the question was that this drivel pretends to answer...
62  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Burn fossil fuel to get wind energy on: January 28, 2016, 11:36:56 AM

The entire rationale for wind turbines is to stop global warming by reducing the amount of CO2 being returned to the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels.

In the attached picture, recently taken in Sweden, freezing cold weather has caused the rotor blades of a wind turbine to ice up bringing the blades to a complete stop.

To fix the “problem” a helicopter is employed (burning aviation fuel) to spray hot water (which is heated in the frigid temperatures using a truck equipped with a 260 kW oil burner) on the blades of the turbine to de-ice them.

The aviation fuel, the diesel for the truck, and the oil burned to heat the water, could produce more electricity (at the right time to meet demand) than the unfrozen wind turbine could ever produce. (Before it freezes up again).
63  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Islam in Europe, Sweden to expel 80,000 on: January 28, 2016, 11:28:10 AM

Sweden sends sharp signal with plan to expel up to 80,000 asylum seekers

We need a humanitarian territory set up in Syria.  Maybe Trump can get Mexico to pay for it.
64  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process on: January 28, 2016, 11:24:42 AM
We know most of them ain't goin' to vote for Cruz Rubio or any other.

True because you wrote most, not all.  Now that I qualify for programs, O'care and FAFSA come to mind, I can tell you that designation makes me angry, not needy.

I 'spend' more on TAXES than on food, shelter, clothing, transportation combined, by far!  And now I need 'help' from the government.  Good grief.
65  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 28, 2016, 11:09:29 AM
I too saw him on FOX (it was recorded and waiting for me when I got home last night) and agree.  He continues to hone his game.  I continue to think he should be declaring himself to be the front runner, not Trump, because he does best against Hillary.

His best chance may come when some of the other candidates begin to drop out.

Instead of declaring himself the frontrunner, vulnerable to losing that in the next poll, he seems to be playing a game of survival and managed expectations.  With Trump and Cruz so strong, it is odd that the largest negative advertising in Iowa is aimed at Rubio, yet he seems to be surging in a third place sort of way.   In NH, Christie is trashing Rubio ruthlessly; does he not know Trump is the frontrunner?  Everyone is buying the pundit language of running lanes while the real score is measured in delegates won. If Kasich, Christie and Bush can't beat Rubio in NH, then he gains further strength going into SC and NV.  It is hard to see Bush drop out ever if he can't reading the writing on the wall now and does Kasich hang in there to win Ohio or drop to make partnerships for the country and for the future.  Rubio-Kasich would be an interesting Florida-Ohio combination, and also perhaps Kasich's best chance of ever becoming POTUS with gravitas but limited charisma.

Everyone who thinks a Trump or Cruz nominee will fail had better give serious thought SOON about uniting behind someone else.  The logical choice if not the first or second place candidate doesn't go much below third place, the only other one in double digits and the one scoring best in general election matchups - did I mention that already? 

Instead, nearly everything in this race so far has been about the ego of each candidate, not about the party, the country or winning.

Behind Marco Rubio's survival strategy  - Politico
The senator’s below-radar approach has been questioned for months. But it may be about to pay off.
Marco Rubio has drawn the most negative fire from his fellow Republicans, especially the team backing his longtime friend and Miami-area neighbor, Jeb Bush.
DES MOINES-- Marco Rubio won’t finish first in Iowa's caucuses six days from now, but he and his allies have increasingly positioned him to make a third-place showing look like the victory they always wanted.

Like a contestant on a Republican version of “Survivor,” Rubio has long been content to hang with the pack and avoid elimination. For months he has been playing the expectations game—and hearing a chorus of conservatives carping about his campaign’s cool, confident approach. But now, with Donald Trump taking the lead back from Ted Cruz in Iowa, Rubio’s team says the caucuses are setting up to give their candidate the boost he needs to sideline rivals in New Hampshire.

“Marco’s goal all along has been to survive, wait for other people to get kicked off the island and pick his moment – and that’s what you’re seeing in Iowa,” said one Republican familiar with the campaign’s approach. “The only thing that has changed is the staying power of Donald Trump. And that might be a good thing for Marco.”

Indeed, Rubio’s campaign is now casting Trump as an enabler in Iowa. If the New York billionaire wins there, it means Rubio’s biggest rival, Ted Cruz, does not—and a second place finish, even though it puts Cruz ahead of Rubio, would be viewed as a disappointment for the candidate who held a double-digit lead in the state just weeks ago.

Cruz’s end-of-year Iowa surge came after Ben Carson flunked a foreign policy test and lost most of his support, largely from the state’s social conservatives. Winning the coveted endorsement of evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats in December cemented Cruz as the candidate to beat in Iowa. But the Texas senator, whose campaign is now relying on its superior organization and army of volunteers, may have done the one thing Rubio has sought to avoid: peak too early.

Now, under attack from a feisty Trump, who has won endorsements in the last week from important figures in conservative circles – Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Jerry Falwell Jr. and Sarah Palin – the Texas senator is desperately clinging to support from grassroots conservatives. He’s gone so far as to attack Iowa’s popular governor and rallied religious conservatives behind closed doors, warning that Trump might be unstoppable if he takes Iowa and New Hampshire.

As the top two candidates duke it out, Rubio appears increasingly confident as he closes out a week of campaigning across Iowa. With his establishment rivals seemingly ceding Iowa and campaigning in other states and the two candidates in front of him focused on one another, Rubio suddenly has more space to maneuver. He is amping up his Iowa schedule, holding three or four events a day. While he presses his case for generational change, Rubio is openly relishing the damage Trump is doing to Cruz, whose Iowa support has dipped five points since the start of the year, according to the Real Clear Politics average.

"I think Ted is under a lot of pressure over the last few days," Rubio told reporters after a Marshalltown rally. "People are learning more about his record and it’s hurting him and he’s dropping in the polls. He’s losing to Donald."

Rubio wouldn't comment about whether Trump besting Cruz in Iowa would help the Floridian.

"I feel very good about what the results are going to be [in Iowa] and we’re going to move onto New Hampshire and do well there as well. And we’ll be the nominee," Rubio said.

But make no mistake: Cruz and Rubio have long eyed one another as their most dangerous opponent, each being the likeliest second choice of most of their supporters. Following a contentious exchange over immigration in the December debate, their sparring dominated coverage of the race through the end of the year. Now, Trump and Cruz are going at it—and no one is happier about it than Rubio.

“Iowa’s going to play an important role in helping America begin to narrow its choices. And Iowa’s always done that,” Rubio said. “Then as we move on into other states, obviously, the election will take different twists and turns. It’s been an unusual year.”

Particularly so for Rubio. His strategy—straddling the primary’s conservative and establishment lanes, competing in all four early voting states and refusing to focus on one as a must-win—and his inability to fully consolidate establishment support despite his consistent prowess on the debate stage and Jeb Bush’s inability to enthuse voters, has long confounded many mainstream conservatives eager for a clear alternative to Trump and Cruz. In the last month, allies of Rubio’s three main establishment rivals—Bush, Chris Christie and John Kasich—have successfully planted news stories aimed at questioning his campaign’s strategy, organization and Rubio’s individual work ethic and commitment to Iowa.

Rubio has drawn the most negative fire from his fellow Republicans, especially the team backing his longtime friend and Miami-area neighbor, Bush. The Right to Rise super PAC backing Bush has accounted for more than $20 million of the nearly $25 million in negative TV ads trained on Rubio. Just Tuesday, the group quietly went up with a new ad attacking Rubio for his use of a Republican Party of Florida credit card over a decade ago.

All of the negative ads and press helped keep expectations for Rubio low. While the onslaught of negative ads have likely kept him from expanding his support and consolidating the anti-Trump/Cruz vote, his very survival underscores the characteristic that matters most to pragmatic, establishment Republicans: electability.

"If he can withstand all of that and be the mainstream alternative, that's a pretty powerful position to be in," said Doug Gross, a Romney campaign co-chair in 2012 who remains undecided. “They always say, 'Get hot at the end,' and he is. I think he’s in a position potentially to finish a strong third in Iowa, and if he does, he becomes the mainstream Republicans' consensus alternative to Trump and Cruz going into New Hampshire, and that's a strong position to be in. If he's a strong third in Iowa, I really think he's likely going to be our nominee.”

Rubio’s homestretch pitch: I’m more electable than Trump or Cruz
In Iowa, Rubio's super PAC and campaign are now bragging that Democrats and Republicans share the view that Rubio is the most formidable GOP contender as evidenced by the amount of money spent attacking him and statements from Democrats about the young, Florida senator being the nominee who scares them most.

And Iowa's Republican stalwarts are helping Rubio close the sale, directly and indirectly.

Gov. Terry Branstad has urged Iowans not to support Cruz; and Sen. Chuck Grassley provided Trump with an important stamp of approval by introducing him at a recent rally. Sen. Joni Ernst tacitly but unofficially backed Rubio by virtue of campaigning alongside him last weekend. “She’s such a normal person from here," said Shelly Whalen, of Cumming, Iowa, one of roughly 500 people who attended Rubio's event in West Des Moines Monday night. "It’s just nice to see him relate to someone like that, a real person.”

Rubio is speaking to growing, standing room only crowds this week, just days after he won the endorsement from the state's biggest and most influential newspaper, the Des Moines Register, which wrote that Rubio "has the potential to chart a new direction for the party, and perhaps the nation." Meanwhile, his establishment rivals have yet to show up. Christie and Kasich have remained in New Hampshire, while Bush, after fundraising events Monday and Tuesday and a rally in Elko, Nev., made his first caucus week appearance in Iowa just last night.

"We feel very good about how we are closing here in Iowa," Todd Harris, Rubio's senior strategist, told reporters Monday night. "There's real movement that we're experiencing on the ground here and that's why we feel confident that on caucus day we're going to do what we need to do here in Iowa, and I think we're going to surprise a lot of people."

A sense of momentum at the right time offers validation for Rubio's brain trust, which has long plotted for him to expand his support as the field shrinks and eventually become the GOP's alternative to Trump. But Trump's dominance remains the elephant in the room.

Unlike in past months, though, the Trump-bashing wing of the Republican Party now sees Trump as a likely nominee. If Trump wins Iowa and New Hampshire he’ll have not only a formidable number of delegates needed to secure the nomination, he’ll benefit from the growing aura of invincibility around his candidacy.

Rubio isn’t the first candidate to see Trump’s candidacy as an assist to his own, however. In August, one consultant who has worked for Bush summed up Bush World’s thinking this way: “It’s going to come down to Trump v. Somebody and Jeb is the somebody.”

But Bush only got weaker; Trump stronger.

Cruz, too, thought he could use Trump to his advantage – but by praising him for a time in the hopes that the frontrunner would implode and send his supporters to Cruz. Florida-based Republican consultant Rick Wilson said the tactic was akin to “feeding the alligator in hopes that it eats him last.”

Marco Rubio's Scandinavian blooper reel
In Team Rubio’s thinking, Trump’s elimination of Cruz in Iowa will send many of the Texas senator’s supporters to the Florida senator, who has a similar conservative voting record as Cruz – except for immigration. Under their theory, Cruz will be damaged goods heading into New Hampshire and that will help Rubio bounce into contention for second place with Kasich. Most consultants, including Rubio’s team, say they can’t see Kasich expanding his appeal beyond New Hampshire until March, when Ohio holds its primary. And, they say, Christie won’t survive past New Hampshire if he remains stalled in single digits despite spending more time there than in his home state of New Jersey.

So just as Rubio’s backers hope Iowa kills off also-rans like Mike Huckabee and weakens Cruz, they’re counting on New Hampshire to do the same to Christie and Kasich. Bush, Rubio’s team thinks, hangs on to compete in South Carolina, where he has the added benefit of the support of Sen. Lindsey Graham, whose home state infrastructure could give Bush a boost in a state his family has never lost.

“What will make post-New Hampshire different is that Bush will be out of money and he won’t have finished ahead of Marco or in the top three in Iowa and New Hampshire,” another Rubio backer familiar with the campaign’s thinking said. “So Marco sees this as a chance to make South Carolina a real two-man race, if not a three-man race with Trump and Cruz.”

Though Rubio, too, could be cash poor coming out of the Iowa. His team pulled back advertising and the Florida Republican has tried to keep up his fundraising even holding an event at a local country club Tuesday evening.

Rubio’s team has been adamant in pushing back at one storyline gaining traction among reporters: the “3-2-1” strategy, outlined by the National Review, in which Rubio would take third in Iowa, second in New Hampshire and first in South Carolina.

While Rubio’s campaign would love that, no one associated with it would venture to set expectations that high this far out. Many say Rubio has a far better shot of winning Nevada outright, but the team’s challenge is to make this smallest of the four early states appear as if it matters heading into the March contests.

66  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: January 28, 2016, 10:42:50 AM
Agreed, Rubio is the far better choice in this regard.  Cruz's theory essentially is that moderation (Dole, McCain, Romney) fails to bring out the base and that he can win by so doing.

True that this is Cruz's strategy if in fact he has one for the general election.  In truth, you need both strategies.  You must turn out the base AND win the middle.

One take from Romney 2012 is that he lost by 5 million votes while 6 million white voters stayed home.  But whites split 60/40 for Romney, not 90/10, and Romney especially wasn't strong with the ones who stayed home.  Cruz has turned other factions of the party against him opening the door for other problems, a centrist third party challenge for example.
67  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: January 28, 2016, 10:32:07 AM
"Her point was valid but her tone and insistence was over the top."

Her tone was typical for msm vs Republicans in debates, not the softball they wish to expect from allegedly conservative media.

A point from Rush, when they pay these guys $6 million a year (a gal in this case), they do not expect them to namelessly and facelessly read the news or ask a basic issue question.  They expect them to become part of the story.  Also RNC and DNC sells the debate rights to these media outlets for them to run at a profit.  It should be the party hosting and the networks picking it up because of public demand.  The Presidential race is public domain IMHO, not the exclusive right of a network.  To add the obvious, the format is really not a debate. 
68  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Bill Clinton's Labor Secretary says Bernie can win on: January 28, 2016, 10:21:39 AM

Robert Reich is an idiot and a leftist but he is right on this.  Not only can Bernie win, he is winning.  He is poised to beat Hillary in the first two contests while she is poised to face charges or a pardon for mismanagement of the last job she held and deadlines have passed for others to jump in.  Bernie leads the R frontrunner by double digits nationwide.  If it is Trump and Sanders and Bloomberg steps in , it will be the so called advocate for the little guy against two fat cat billionaires.  A perfectly set table for Bernie Sandinistas.


69  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Cheryl Mills lost Blackberry on: January 27, 2016, 08:59:42 PM

This is a big deal.  I saw the headline, didn't realize it was Cheryl Mills.  (The aide who pilfered Vince Foster's office while his body went from 98.6 to park temperature.  People can see how classified info could have fallen into the wrong hands.  This demonstrates it.  Everybody has lost a wallet or cell phone.  Even if it falls into friendly hands, you realize how easily all your contacts, messages and data could have been taken and exploited.  But these are national secrets, not bank sign in codes with a hundred or thousand dollars at stake.  Lives are at stake in classified info.

The felony act is gross negligence.  This kind of exposure is what happens when you commit gross negligence in the handling of national secrets.  In reality, the hackers in China, Russia and those who sell to ISIS already took the data through elementary school level hacking, but this loss illustrates to everyone how vulnerable they left us.

Somewhere in those emails we will find Chris Stevens' pleas for security along with his location and itinerary.
70  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Government programs, 40 Percent Qualify for Need-Tested Benefits on: January 27, 2016, 03:39:37 PM
We should needs test this country...
71  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, 1980 Iowa GOP Presidential Debat on: January 27, 2016, 03:37:06 PM
72  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillbillary Clintons criminal: FBI going to source of classified material on: January 27, 2016, 03:21:27 PM

FBI going 'right to the source' in Clinton email probe, interviewing intel agencies
73  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential - Debate is Thursday! on: January 27, 2016, 03:13:36 PM
Correction to previous post where I said it is tonight.
74  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz takes on King Corn Ethanol on: January 27, 2016, 03:10:22 PM

I agree in the context of the Iowa caucuses.  More impressive if his position was in conflict with the special interests of Houston and Texas than Iowa.

The important thing is to articulate how this needs to be not ended alone, punishing Iowa, but ended in the context of ending all these boondoggles for all special interests in all states, to be persuasive on that and to get it done.

The government is the referee of the level playing field of production in America, not an investor, supplier, competitor, contributor or board member.
75  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on abortion / life on: January 27, 2016, 02:52:59 PM
76  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: What could go wrong with Donald Trump? on: January 27, 2016, 11:57:58 AM
In that talk he praised Pelosi, Reid and Schumer while ripping Ted Cruz as nasty.

As I have said to Pat, Trump is the one choosing to not be on my side.

Great candidate for people who don't believe in constitutional limits on power and want surprises everyday in their public policy choices.
77  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen. Bernie Sanders, underwhelming on: January 27, 2016, 11:54:04 AM
Report from the Bernie Sanders appearance in St. Paul last night from a young supporter who attended:

'The rally was fun but she didn't hear anything she hadn't heard from him before.'

The media was more apparently more excited than the attendees:
78  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential - Debate tonight! on: January 27, 2016, 11:46:04 AM
From Iowa, Fox News, 9pm ET, 6:00 pacific?

Trump already knew the ratings would be down.  Everybody watch!   )

I don't know anything about Megyn Kelly's politics, but for a mainstream media personality, she is smart, good looking and asks tough questions.  Same goes for Bret Baier and Chris Wallace - minus the good looking part.

Smaller stage, better conversation is possible.  I hope they don't spend all their time on scorched earth politics, taking down their own friends who may end up being the nominee.  Instead they should be calling out Obama's failures, explaining why leftism doesn't work, and laying out their own positive agenda.

Next debate in a week and a half in NH.  One month to go until March 1, after which Dick Morris says the field narrows to two.
79  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sr. Federal Judge Laurence Silberman: Bush did NOT lie on: January 27, 2016, 11:26:47 AM
This is a very important point.  It was among the main failings of the Bush administration that they did not fight back and surrendered to ruthless political opponents.  Also remember the campaign against General "Betray Us" before he became a war hero, before personal weakness let him down.  This was everyone from Moveondotorg which is Obama, Sanders, Clinton et al to the Mainstream media.  No one misled us into war and it is about the only good thing going in the Middle East right now that Saddam Hussein is dead, out of power and not a nuclear power.

The best intelligence in the world all said Saddam had WMD.  Saddam bragged he had them.  He had used them on his own people.  There were reports of chem weapons trucked to Syria while the Bush administration took his case to the UN and to Congress.

There are recent reports of WMD found that the public wasn't informed about.

There were 22 reasons other than possession of WMD contained in the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed by Congress.  Among ohter things, he had launched attacks against 4 of his neighbors, not counting his shooting at American peace keeping planes.

And then the liberal Dems along with the hate mongers in the msm started this lie sabotaging the war effort while our troops were in harm's way.

It wasn't the war in Iraq that left a power vacuum in the heart of the Middle East; it was the poorly timed and horribly executed withdrawal that caused that.

The success of this lie about lying has permanently changed our already bad politics for the worse.
80  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Global Warming on: January 27, 2016, 10:58:36 AM
It may be my subpar intellect, but I'd like someone to explain to me how it is "global warming" when it is snowing in the middle of Mexico.

Maybe it's just me.  afro

I also have an intellect unable to comprehend this.  Anecdotal evidence can support global warming, but not refute it.

Actual data proves all alarmist models wrong.

The temperatures and oceans rise more in a day than they do in a century.
81  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: January 26, 2016, 02:56:14 PM
Cruz made a big mistake with his comment about NY values.  OTOH as Levin pointed out we know what he meant with regards to NY being a Democrat stronghold (Boomer is not a Republican, nor was Pataki, though Gulliani seems to be somewhat of an exception) and part of the DC establishment.

That said it was a tactical error.  Yet the author of this piece from the WSJ was certainly never a fan of Cruz so we know where he is coming from too.   The WSJ is part of the establishment.

Bret Stephens is a very thoughtful, anti-Obama, foreign policy oriented conservative and always a worthwhile read IMO.  Don't let the Pulitzer Prize make you think he is establishment.

I don't think Ted Cruz thought he made a mistake saying NY values, nor when he continues to lump Rubio in with Schumer.  It's an intentional dig that plays with the base without regard to how it plays further. 

From the piece:  "...those purple lands in Ohio, Florida and Virginia where swing voters still decide elections in this country. Mr. Cruz needs to answer how he plans to win 50.1% in those states, not 70% of the Bible Belt."

Far more eloquent, but that is what I have been saying about Cruz.  Like Trump, he is trying to win a strong plurality in a divided field but he is not even talking to the other voters needed to be President. 
82  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 8 questions the msm won't ask Hillary about abortion on: January 26, 2016, 11:38:34 AM
Mrs. Clinton, just a few questions:

A new Marist poll shows that 81% of Americans support some restrictions on abortion.  Do you disagree with 81% of Americans on this issue?  If not, what restrictions on abortion would you support?
The same poll found that 66% of pro-choice Americans would restrict abortion to the first three months of pregnancy.  Do you stand with the majority of pro-choice Americans on this issue?
Your husband famously said that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.”  Do you agree or disagree with that statement?
If you agree that abortion should be safe, would you support legislation that would require abortion clinics to meet minimum standards for patient safety and sanitary conditions?
Why should abortion be rare?

Do you condemn China’s policy of forced abortion as a violation of a woman’s right to choose?
The movie Gosnell comes out later this year. As you know, Kermit Gosnell was convicted of the first degree murder of three babies. The Grand Jury report alleged that Gosnell killed hundreds of infants by sticking scissors into their necks. Do you support Kermit Gosnell’s actions? Why not?
Would you support legislation that protects a woman’s right to post-birth abortion?
83  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential - General Election Matchups on: January 26, 2016, 11:28:22 AM
Cruz keeps scoring better than expected, IMHO, way better than Trump, slightly behind Rubio.

I like what Crafty said, that Rubio should be touting his advantage here.  Problem there is that it is to act Trump-like, bragging about your polls as a reason to elect you President.  Maybe more powerful (and also Trump-like) would be for one of these guys to paint Trump with a big "L" on his forehead for the general election poll "Loser" that he is.  I would expect something like that to come out shortly, after all the polls are released before an important contest.

Anyone want to predict the next 3 momentum shifts in this race.  I'll come back and post the right answer later...   )
84  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / NBC WSJ, Trump % in general election, 39 against Bernie and 41 against HRC on: January 26, 2016, 11:13:41 AM
GOP might as well nominate a Democrat as Trump.  That's who wins.
Trump makes socialism popular.

Funny that the polls are all wrong, yet the only reason he is relevant is because of the polls.

What (positive info) is left to learn about him; he has been the central news story for almost a year.  All he has left to offer is to bring others down.
85  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: January 26, 2016, 11:00:19 AM
Trump is running to be the greatest President ever in post-constitutional America.

Since it's all about him, the slogan should be, Make Trump Great Again.

Taunting Pat to jump back in ....
86  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Russia, Putin denounces Lenin on: January 26, 2016, 10:57:39 AM
Says Stalin got it right.  Really?

Unfortunately, Russia and Putin are relevant in the world and this latest story either gives insight into his thinking or more likely is the disinformation you would expect from a trained KGB professional.
87  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of Republicans, Podhoretz, No 'Republican Establishment' on: January 26, 2016, 10:51:47 AM
[I thought we had a thread for the non-existent Republican establishment but I couldn't find it.]

This commentator agrees with me (or vice versa) and makes a persuasive case of it.  In 1980, G.H.W. Bush was the embodiment of the R establishment, being sensible and moderate on all issues, well schooled and cultured.  He was not liberal and not conservative.  He called Reaganomics voodoo economics because it strayed from (failed) conventional wisdom.  He and the so-called establishment was defeated in the primaries and the victors were vindicated by growth, success and elections.  That HW was VP to Reagan is a footnote to his administration.  By 1988 Bush Sr. was [allegedly] a born again Reaganite and supply side conservative, then later in his term he relapsed into his old ways and the Presidency went Democrat.  Newt following Reagan was anti-establishment in the minority long before taking the majority. 

"The term “Republican Establishment” has no meaning. The actual Republican Establishment ceased to exist nearly a quarter-century ago, and nothing remotely coherent has come along to take its place."   - John Podhoretz, Commentary Magazine
88  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: January 25, 2016, 02:02:25 PM
IMHO a fundamental cause at the root of several of our biggest and seemingly most intractable problems is that the House of Reps has lost its will to use the power of the purse. 

Who has proven himself to be the exception on this and willing to stand alone if need be? 

Sen. Ted Cruz

(Sen. Mike Lee, Sen. Rand Paul too)

Cruz has Nathan Hale like bravery, but not Ronald Reagan like leadership qualities, IMHO.  Standing alone might be admirable but is NOT the goal.  

They can put that on my tombstone; here Doug stood alone.  He found a few like like minded people on the internet, but mostly he stood alone while the world went to hell.  But a President can make a difference and a conservative Republican one has a very difficult, uphill and challenging task to do everyday and the central focus of the work is to change hearts and minds, not just energize the people who already agree with you.

Taking a last stand against the liberal budget delays just slightly the force of the tide of leftism.  Cruz's efforts weren't organized or strategic.  I'm not blaming him, just pointing it out.  I'm looking for who can change the tide, who will bring the most people with him, have a lasting effect and make it harder for the country to relapse into leftism when the term is done.  And what ticket could lead in the right direction for 16 years, not 4, or zero like failed nominee or a single term President.  Who can win the Presidency and bring the House and Senate with them at the same time and keep it, not who is a bold, brave maverick.   Trump by his own admission is irrelevant to Congressional elections.  He can deal equally well with the mafia or a helpless widow.  A Cruz candidacy, if seen as far right and he is one of the 3 farthest right Senators, would likely lose the Senate even if he won the Presidency.  People in the middle vote for split tickets when they aren't fully on board with the agenda.  Note how Obama brought Republicans to power in Congress.  Who can inspire the most people to support change to principles of the American Creed, not just harness the energy of those already pissed off or win off the personal weakness of the opponent?  

"...[Cruz] claims Reagan was more loathed in 1980 than he is now."

Reagan was a two term Governor of California and a two decade leader of the entire conservative movement in 1980, and th second place finisher of the previous cycle, losing only by a whisker to the incumbent President in his own party.  He also carried California three more times in 1980, 1984, and with his coattails in 1988.  That compares how with Cruz standing alone or losing key votes 97-3.  I'm sick of hearing Trump, Cruz (and Obama) comparing themselves to Reagan.  A different candidate reminds ME of Reagan but he is no Reagan either.  They should run the best way they know how and WE will tell them who compares best with Reagan. 
89  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: January 25, 2016, 01:16:43 PM

"Maybe a dictator with American first values is precisely what the country needs"

I profoundly disagree.  We need a president who believes in the American Creed and who will apply it. 

I would agree IF it could be decided what that is. The problem is that it isn't. Mikulski (Senator D Maryland just stated "Let's not get involved in constitutional arguments...") just stated that in regard to gun control. There is no definition in a unilateral manner as to what the American Creed is.

My question then is, how else do you define in a resound manner, what that creed is to be?

It's a fair question. I have proposed my answer.

Defined here by Crafty:;msg=92793;topic=1736.750;sesc=4fa5408003f8d5f8290a92723f78fc2b

From another thread:

American Creed= Free minds, free markets, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of contract, right of self-defense (hence guns and knives, etc) property rights, privacy, all connected with responsibility for the consequences of one's action.  All this from our Creator, not the State nor majority vote.
90  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: January 25, 2016, 10:01:44 AM
This has to have something to do with 'global warming' and 'climate change', when did we start naming snowstorms?
91  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: January 25, 2016, 09:52:12 AM
It'll be great to watch American policy shaped by stream of consciousness ramblings.

Great, in a gallows humor sort of way.
92  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Morris on: January 25, 2016, 09:49:48 AM

Hillary is accusing Sanders of being establishment because he has been in the Senate so long.  That's it, I think I'll vote against Bernie because he is too establishment!

She is not the brightest light, is she?

On a related matter, I see Obama's numbers creep up.  His disapproval rate is what will determine the outcome of the election more than anything else.  R's should stay focused on running against HIS record, leftist and WHY leftism fails.  Instead we are on birtherism, footwear, shiny objects and 50 shades of amnesty.

Our media and our message is noise.  We are about to got through 8 years of Obama, 10 years since Nov 2006 if you count when they actually took over Washington, and people aren't going to know what went wrong.
93  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Donald Trump on: January 25, 2016, 09:20:49 AM
A Rush comment on Trump.  When he repeats himself he is trying to figure out what to say next, not reiterating the point.  This is not a slam, just advice on how to listen to him.  I noticed it again when he appeared on Meet the dePressed yesterday.

He reminds me in that of Joe Biden.  When he would repeat himself over and over in the VP debates for emphasis, he was always wrong.  Trump does it instead of silence or saying uh or um.  It works for him, he is obviously he is a very successful speaker.  Just don't think that his repetition of a statement means double or triple emphasis.  It doesn't.  Sometimes it means just the opposite.
94  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of the Republicans on: January 25, 2016, 09:14:30 AM
George Will Sunday, may be too late to stop Trump.

George Will last week, ruthlessly ripping Rubio, one of only two who could conceivably still beat Trump, without offering anything new against him.

Mark Levin appeared with Trump on his rise before discovering he is no conservative.

Sean Hannity, fellow New Yorker, is a friend of Trump, has defended him against all charges.

Hugh Hewitt, who walked back his comments that Trump doesn't have the temperament in order to stay as a debate questioner.  Now has Trump on as the lead interview anytime he wants to come on the show.  Calls him the best interview in radio, meaning ratings and attention.

Rush Limbaugh is a personal friend of Trump, has defended him from the beginning.  Without favoring him he always sounds like he favors him.  The worst part is that he has spent >50% of his show supporting Trump since entering the race (though I would assume he politically favors Cruz).

Now try to walk all of this back with a week to go...
95  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Senator Marco Rubio on: January 24, 2016, 06:13:32 PM
Very bad for Rubio that Trump is way ahead in Florida.

Rubio now has a state he leads in, Minnesota.  He leads Trump Cruz et al.  He also leads Hillary Clinton.  
Republicans last won MN 44 years ago.

I thought Rubio was done when he cut advertising $3 million in IA and NH.  Turns out they switched from 60 second spots to 30 second ads.  No ads were canceled.  Cash conserved for other uses.

Rubio appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning.  Answered all the hard questions - as he always does.

One analyst says Rubio's fate is like that of an NFL team that needs other teams to lose for him to advance.
96  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen.Ted Cruz on: January 24, 2016, 06:00:45 PM
I like Cruz but I don't think his appeal is large enough to win.  His rival Trump puts it in stronger terms than that.

One hit against him is that of the other 99 Senators and the other 53 Republican Senators, none of his colleagues have endorsed him.  Further, none of the 32 Republican Governors have endorsed Cruz at this point.

Confucious say (okay, Doug says):  A leader without followers is not a leader.

(Meanwhile Rubio has endorsements from Darrel Issa, Trey Gowdy, Kristi Noem, Mia Love, Cory Gardner, Mike Pompeo and Iowa Senator Joni Ernst.

Correction.  Joni Ernst appearing with Rubio today, not endorsing.
97  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Energy Politics & Science on: January 21, 2016, 07:18:05 PM
That is correct.  Trump is for ethanol subsidies-- which are quite popular in Iowa, and Cruz has the character to stand against them.

Perfect example of special interest politics, same for the sugar subsidies.  (Sorry to say Rubio was insincere on that one.)

There is a similar problem opening the nuclear storage site at Yucca Mountain where we already have $15 Billion invested.
Where do they stand on that?  Whoever wants to lose Nevada can take the strongest stand -  and not get it done.

Which candidate could get elected and get these things fixed?  To do any of them, it has to be part of a process of correcting all of them. (What's your favorite special interest subsidy?  It also could be driven by Congress onto the Executive.
98  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: January 21, 2016, 07:08:38 PM
"I don't believe the polls anyway that Sanders is so ahead (15 points) of Trump.  Just not true.  No way."

Agree.  Trump only trailed Sanders by 13% in the next most recent one.  (

I don't fully believe things like that either, but their is some truth to the preponderance of the polls.

The larger point is that while consistently leading the Republicans, DT consistently matches up the worst in the general election.  

Yes that could change.  It could get worse.

My harping point is that there needs to be a big asterisk every time they say he is leading in the polls.  He is leading us into disaster - if you believe the polls, at least up until now.

People on the right hate the entire George W Bush Presidency because he did some things right and some things wrong.  Likewise for Trump; you can see it already.  His supporters are right, he will be great on certain things.  He will also be horrible on other things if you take him at his word, Supreme Court Justices and worldwide trade wars if you take him at his word, and if you are a Republican or an American, he will be doing those things and saying all those things in our name.
99  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, Jan 2016 on: January 21, 2016, 11:21:29 AM
Trump has a huge GOP lead in Florida among many other places. (Mentioned in the Rubio thread)

Cruz is having problems gaining traction on Trump but has solidified second place.  The strange birther charge slowed him and Trump's Sarah Palin endorsement cuts right into Cruz's presumed strength.  (There is no prize for second place.)

Rubio is still 3rd nationally, not gaining at all, staying relevant but ONLY if he can make a move up at some point, meaning soon.

Rubio still has the best general election matchup numbers of any of them.
Why does that not seem to matter to anyone / everyone conservative who wants to win?  I don't know.  Hard to say it is still too early for polls to matter.

Trump trails commie-socialist Sanders by 15 points!  So stay on the current path and we can say about the leftist Obama years, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Bush, Christie, Kasich and Fiorina have GOP still polling nationally at 2.4 - 4.8%.  Huckabee, Paul and Santorum even less.  
Make a plan to win (and you didn't), so get out of the way.  Now!  Each one hates the idea of a Trump nomination or Presidency and yet everything they are doing is helping him by diluting the rest of the field.  If this race comes down to Trump, Cruz, Rubio, let's clear the field and see how that goes.

My advice to Trump supporters.  Stay with him right up until voting time if you believe he is the one with the strength to make a difference and make America great again.  But if you don't see him as the general election winner at primary voting time, jump ship or cause the end of this once great nation under Bernie the Socialist or equivalent.

My advice to Cruz supporters, I hear you.  Show your support now for the most conservative candidate running, but at voting time switch to the most conservative candidate who can win.  If that is Cruz, fine.  But as I questioned yesterday, when was the last time a candidate ran on a platform of conservative purity and won, never?

The question is not who is most conservative, the question for conservatives is, who can bring the most people over to our side?

Or else, everybody, just hold your stubborn positions and watch America elect and spiral down European failed socialism or worse!  Conservative and Republican voters aren't known for being either great strategists or communicators against their leftist rivals.  Note who has been winning and which direction we have been heading for most of the last half century.

My two cents.
100  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Bernie Sanders: "I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.” on: January 21, 2016, 10:36:04 AM

Important read.  Don't anyone assume this guy is harmless, especially when he leads Hillary in the first two contests and leads the R frontrunner by 15 points!
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 150
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!