Yes, it's a bit premature, but lets be honest, the GOP Establishment writes the rules and they've already told us, they elect the candidate, not us.
Without going into details and rules that would put a meth head to sleep, suffice it to say they will fight with every dirty trick in the book to keep a Constitutional Conservative out of power.
As it stands, Trump will be yesterdays news in short time, Cruz will run the board and expose the game both party's have been running, and despite the sudden groundswell of support for Cruz emerging, the Establishment and LSM have the lies at the ready, even Cruz epitaph.
So lets take a stand here and now to WRITE IN CRUZ regardless and make him the next POTUS.
God knows, I hope I'm wrong, but since when has the Establishment ever been on the side of Conservatism?
I would totally write in Cruz, but I am extremely confident Cruz mops up at the convention.
My post from the Cali tread concerning GOPe shenanigans at the convention. But I too will write in Cruz if it comes to that
Quote from: Sauce on March 26, 2016, 08:09:42 PM
Well, as we know that will be the end of the Wigs V2.0 if they do...
I would think they would poll and focus group the shit out of any scenarios they have drawn up.....I hope they aren't that dumb to think that anyone other than Cruz could possibly save them from this Liberal vice they've created.
...otherwise the Wigs v2.0 as well as USA v1.0 is down for the count
Quote from: taxed on April 02, 2016, 07:43:26 AM
I would totally write in Cruz, but I am extremely confident Cruz mops up at the convention.
Once Trump collapses, the war against Cruz will go into full swing, and God knows what they'll pull before the convention.
I'm with you, he'll own the convention, assuming the RINO don't change the rules on who attends.
Yeah, I distrust the Marxist crony capitalists that much.
Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2016, 08:02:00 AM
Once Trump collapses, the war against Cruz will go into full swing, and God knows what they'll pull before the convention.
I'm with you, he'll own the convention, assuming the RINO don't change the rules on who attends.
Yeah, I distrust the Marxist crony capitalists that much.
I don't know. The establishment is smart enough to know that they can ride on - and hide in - the coattails of a winner, whereas Hilary is poison.
Quote from: mdgiles on April 02, 2016, 08:10:14 AM
I don't know. The establishment is smart enough to know that they can ride on - and hide in - the coattails of a winner, whereas Hilary is poison.
Think Omnibus Bill given to the Marxist and which candidate would appease the Establishment in 2017.
I stumbled on to this article about Gingrich's plan in 2012 on the Lefty site Slate when looking for info on
RNC rule 40 as it related to the following post in the Kasich tread:
Quote from: Sauce on April 01, 2016, 02:02:37 PM
True, but that's only IF the rules committee (made up of I believe) 2 delegates from each state, don't eliminate of modify that rule. The rule was modified from 5 states to 8 at the last convention by the Romney camp muscling into the process to block Ron Paul from having a bigger presence at the convention....IMHO
Given the attention that garnered last convention and the fact the everyone is hyper aware of the rule and the rules committee in general this convention, I don't see how they can monkey around with it too much without a full scale revolt...
Anyways, its interesting read and info even if you have to take some of bias in it with a pound of salt.
Looking back at how some of the same strategies and possible GOPe shannigans were being discussed in 2012
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/03/the_republican_national_committee_rule_no_40_b_won_t_be_the_reason_newt_gingrich_can_t_be_the_party_s_nominee.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/03/the_republican_national_committee_rule_no_40_b_won_t_be_the_reason_newt_gingrich_can_t_be_the_party_s_nominee.html)
...and please excuse me quoting myself, just triying to piece together by scattered thoughts :biggrin:
Adjusted link size.
walks
More proof Trump was a chosen leftist vote splitter.
You can't win an election when the base abandons your leftist ass.
FOR RELEASE MARCH 31, 2016
Just 38% of GOP voters say party would 'solidly unite' behind Trump
http://www.people-press.org/files/2016/03/3-31-16-March-Political-release-1.pdf
I was planning to do this anyhow as I have said many times on this board, but I think Cruz is winning over the GOP (Reluctantly) one day at a time.
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on April 04, 2016, 04:51:15 AM
I was planning to do this anyhow as I have said many times on this board, but I think Cruz is winning over the GOP (Reluctantly) one day at a time.
Same here Billy. It appears he has the momentum for winning despite the hatred from the Establishment holding the rule book that can change on a dime.
However, I think it's important that we show the GOP'e we're willing to fight regardless of the tricks they pull, and we'll elect Cruz and expose the ledership as paper tigers.
With the GOP'e well aware we will follow through with a write in campaign, it becomes insurance against their slimy behavior.
They needed to be informed, and they need to know it now which is why CPF is leading the fight against the Establishment.
We're TEA. We're the base!
I wasn't sure if Colorado allowed write in candidates in the general election so I checked. From what I read, they apparently do not. However the bold text below may apply here in CO. Therefore, if Trump is nominated, I will write in Cruz.
Quote"Sore loser" laws
See also: "Sore loser" laws for presidential candidates
Some states bar candidates who sought, but failed, to secure the nomination of a political party from running as independents in the general election. These restrictions are sometimes called "sore loser" laws. Under Colorado state law, "no person who has been defeated as a candidate in a primary election shall be eligible for election to the same office by ballot or as a write-in candidate in the next general election."[27][28][29]
Ballot access expert Richard Winger has noted that, generally speaking, "sore loser laws have been construed not to apply to presidential primaries." In August 2015, Winger compiled a list of precedents supporting this interpretation. Winger noted in his analysis that because Colorado does not conduct presidential primaries, the aforementioned prohibition is moot.[30]
Write-in requirements
A write-in candidate for the presidency must file an affidavit of intent in order to have his or her votes tallied. This affidavit must be filed with the Colorado Secretary of State by close of business on the 110th day before the general election.[31][32]
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_access_requirements_for_presidential_candidates_in_Colorado
Quote from: tac on April 04, 2016, 06:02:04 AM
I wasn't sure if Colorado allowed write in candidates in the general election so I checked. From what I read, they apparently do not. However the bold text below may apply here in CO. Therefore, if Trump is nominated, I will write in Cruz.
If I'm not mistaken, or remember correctly, this came up in the 60s and no State is allowed to block write ins during a Presidential election.
It had something to do with Pat Paulson running, or something like that.
Quote from: Solar on April 04, 2016, 07:11:41 AM
If I'm not mistaken, or remember correctly, this came up in the 60s and no State is allowed to block write ins during a Presidential election.
It had something to do with Pat Paulson running, or something like that.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if one of the GOP candidates decided to test the Sore Loser law in court.
Quote from: tac on April 04, 2016, 07:21:39 AM
It would be interesting to see what would happen if one of the GOP candidates decided to test the Sore Loser law in court.
THIS Court? 4-4 tie, fuhgeddabout 2016, just try again later, and thanks for playing. :wink:
I have a special pen waiting to be used. I'm all in baby...!
Quote from: Bronx on April 04, 2016, 09:21:01 AM
I have a special pen waiting to be used. I'm all in baby...!
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Excellent idea, I too have a very special pen.
I'll write mine in blood...
Quote from: taxed on April 04, 2016, 10:43:50 AM
I'll write mine in blood...
Next question, "Whose Blood"? :lol:
I'm with ya. Only one small question/problem.
My state uses electronic machines here.
There is no place to write in a candidate. It's all touch screen. Ya don't even get a paper ballot, they hand ya a card, you put it in the puter, make the selections (vote) and voila, spits the card back out and you turn that in.
That's your ballot. Anyone know how we're supposed to write in using this system?
Quote from: daidalos on April 05, 2016, 12:03:13 PM
I'm with ya. Only one small question/problem.
My state uses electronic machines here.
There is no place to write in a candidate. It's all touch screen. Ya don't even get a paper ballot, they hand ya a card, you put it in the puter, make the selections (vote) and voila, spits the card back out and you turn that in.
That's your ballot. Anyone know how we're supposed to write in using this system?
County registrar of Voters office and demand a ballot..
Count me in, have been planning on this for a couple of weeks if the worst happens. I can not vote for trump.
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
Since Cruz will not be the nominee, what will be the position of this forum at that time?
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:11:34 AM
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
As stated many times from many others...... that would be their waterloo, little big horn, Armageddon, choose your metaphor... I believe that that's what they wish they could do, but I think they will have done enough research before the convention to realize they are done as a party if they try it.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:19:46 AM
Since Cruz will not be the nominee, what will be the position of this forum at that time?
The forum does not have an opinion. Posters have their own desires. It just happens that Cruz is the choice of a number here.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:11:34 AM
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
Think Reagan. This race is no different in how the Establishment hates the candidate, but like Reagan, the people are choosing a real Conservative and interfering with the will of the people would be suicide for the party.
QuoteSince Cruz will not be the nominee, what will be the position of this forum at that time?
Dream on, but to entertain your nonsensical delusion.
Conservatives will not change, the forum will not change, even if the party were to choose a full blown Marxist, this forums ideals would not change.
You really have no clue as to what it means to be a Conservative, not even an inkling, do you?
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:11:34 AM
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
It will be Cruz. Use your brain, dummy.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:11:34 AM
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
Which one of those three are you putting your money on?
Quote from: gandb77 on April 08, 2016, 05:11:34 AM
It will never be Cruz or Trump. They are doing exactly as the party wants, They are nullifying each other.
When all is said and done the party will chose someone else. ie Bush, Romney or Ryan.
Unless they change rule 40, it can never be any of the three you mentioned.
QuoteRULE NO. 40
Nominations
(a) In making the nominations for President
of the United States and Vice President of the United
States and voting thereon, the roll of the states shall be
called separately in each case; provided, however, that
if there is only one candidate for nomination for Vice
President of the United States who has demonstrated
the support required by paragraph (b) of this rule, a
motion to nominate for such office by acclamation
shall be in order and no calling of the roll with respect
to such office shall be required.
(b) Each candidate for nomination for
President of the United States and Vice President of
the United States shall demonstrate the support of a
40 of 42
majority of the delegates from each of eight (8) or
more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the
name of that candidate for nomination.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of these rules or
any rule of the House of Representatives, to
demonstrate the support required of this paragraph a
certificate evidencing the affirmative written support
of the required number of permanently seated
delegates from each of the eight (8) or more states
shall have been submitted to the secretary of the
convention not later than one (1) hour prior to the
placing of the names of candidates for nomination
pursuant to this rule and the established order of
business.
(c) The total time of the nominating speech
and seconding speeches for any candidate for
nomination for President of the United States or Vice
President of the United States shall not exceed fifteen
(15) minutes.
(d) When at the close of a roll call any
candidate for nomination for President of the United
States or Vice President of the United States has
received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in
the convention, the chairman of the convention shall
announce the votes for each candidate whose name
was presented in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (b) of this rule. Before the convention
adjourns sine die, the chairman of the convention shall
declare the candidate nominated by the Republican
Party for President of the United States and Vice
President of the United States.
(e) If no candidate shall have received such
majority, the chairman of the convention shall direct
the roll of the states be called again and shall repeat
the calling of the roll until a candidate shall have
received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in
the convention.
I cannot do this. Despite the fact I have never seen a guy like Cruz run for president in my life (I didn't know what government was when Ronnie was being re-elected).
Trump at least holds the fort from the complete socialists and allows time for people to vote in a more conservative guy. Not voting Trump if need to is not worth allowing Bernie in. I firming believe he is offering enough free stuff to these idiot people that they will put him over HRC. I am very scared what will happen if this guy gets in. I'd rather us risk (no sure thing) go into WW3 cuz Trump can't shut his mouth than ruin the economy from the inside out and damage the country in an irreparable way like SB will do.
Welcome Skate.
Bernie is a avowed socialist, and many people do not understand what that means. For many, Bernie had them with the word 'free'.
Quote from: tac on April 15, 2016, 06:42:34 AM
Welcome Skate.
Bernie is a avowed socialist, and many people do not understand what that means. For many, Bernie had them with the word 'free'.
It's freakin' scary. Like the guy is a complete nightmare. I feel too many Trumpets and Cruzers are so hell bent against the other guy this clown is going to make us Greece.
Quote from: Skatebeanz on April 15, 2016, 06:38:52 AM
I cannot do this. Despite the fact I have never seen a guy like Cruz run for president in my life (I didn't know what government was when Ronnie was being re-elected).
Trump at least holds the fort from the complete socialists and allows time for people to vote in a more conservative guy. Not voting Trump if need to is not worth allowing Bernie in. I firming believe he is offering enough free stuff to these idiot people that they will put him over HRC. I am very scared what will happen if this guy gets in. I'd rather us risk (no sure thing) go into WW3 cuz Trump can't shut his mouth than ruin the economy from the inside out and damage the country in an irreparable way like SB will do.
How is Trump different than Bernie?
Quote from: taxed on April 16, 2016, 10:42:37 AM
How is Trump different than Bernie?
Bernie's honest, he has a (D) next to his name. :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on April 16, 2016, 11:53:16 AM
Bernie's honest, he has a (D) next to his name. :biggrin:
But it should be a (S) :wink:
Quote from: walkstall on April 16, 2016, 12:42:35 PM
But it should be a (S)
Heh, exactly, he's miss represent'n as bad as Trump :biggrin:
Bernie is a fraud. A Dumb wannabe "revolutionary" who has accomplished nothing in his pathetic life. He's the pot smoking college roommate in the Che shirt that never grew up. He has less of a grasp on reality than most liberals.
Do you honestly think that the republican party will nominate Cruz if he does not have the required 1237??? How will this work?
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 03:39:28 PM
Do you honestly think that the republican party will nominate Cruz if he does not have the required 1237??? How will this work?
Well lets see...
Take into account what you see posted on this site, then, with a grain of salt actually read the title of the thread you just posted in. Use your (albeit questionable) ability to reason as most humans do and figure it out.
Pleas post your answer in the form of question like Jeopardy.
Thank you
(jeezus............)
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 03:39:28 PM
Do you honestly think that the republican party will nominate Cruz if he does not have the required 1237??? How will this work?
If no one comes up with 1237 on the first vote at the convention, then they keep voting until someone does. Most delegates are only obliged to vote for the candidate that won in their precinct in the first round, they can then vote for anyone they chose after that. Some states are bound through the second vote. Some delegates are held by the States' Republican party, and they are not all bound to the first vote.
That's my understanding of how it works.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 03:39:28 PM
Do you honestly think that the republican party will nominate Cruz if he does not have the required 1237??? How will this work?
Before you ask another questions you to follow up on this post.
Quote from: Solar on April 18, 2016, 05:49:44 AM
Oh please enlighten us with your brilliance and explain your point as well as backing it up with actual facts.
I'm serious, you post this nonsensical bull shit all the time as if it has any meaning in reality, so here's your chance, back it up!
No, it's not a request, it's a demand!
Quote from: walkstall on April 18, 2016, 04:02:59 PM
Before you ask another questions you to follow up on this post.
If he doesn't answer, put him on a timeout.
Length of time is up to you.
Neither Trump or Cruz are favorites of the establishment of the republican party, When it comes to the second and or third votes at the convention, it is totally unlikely that the party regulars will select Trump or Cruz. There will be rules changes that will allow a third person to be nominated. Someone more palatable to the party.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 04:17:30 PM
Neither Trump or Cruz are favorites of the establishment of the republican party, When it comes to the second and or third votes at the convention, it is totally unlikely that the party regulars will select Trump or Cruz. There will be rules changes that will allow a third person to be nominated. Someone more palatable to the party.
Changing the rules midway through the convention will probably not happen. If it does, there could be revolt that would destroy the establishment GOP - and might be a good thing.
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 04:17:30 PM
Neither Trump or Cruz are favorites of the establishment of the republican party, When it comes to the second and or third votes at the convention, it is totally unlikely that the party regulars will select Trump or Cruz. There will be rules changes that will allow a third person to be nominated. Someone more palatable to the party.
Changing the rules at the convention while they are nominating someone?
Quote from: gandb77 on April 18, 2016, 04:17:30 PM
Neither Trump or Cruz are favorites of the establishment of the republican party, When it comes to the second and or third votes at the convention, it is totally unlikely that the party regulars will select Trump or Cruz. There will be rules changes that will allow a third person to be nominated. Someone more palatable to the party.
Sounds like you think the delegates are synonymous with "establishment." It is totally
LIKELY that delegates will fulfill their obligated (first) vote and then keep voting until they get the man they want. (Pronoun deliberate.) There are many Presidential conventions where this has gone into several rounds.
At that point the party is obliged to accept what their delegates want---the more closely-aligned part of their party is telling them, you screwed up and here's the guy we think our people back home will vote for. Simple. Inevitable if the party bosses don't want to get voted out or die friendless at these confabs.
Look it up. Learn something unless you think it might injure you there in your cocoon.
Hi, I'm kinda new here, Richard's my name.
If we are not permitted to by majority vote in the primaries choose our Candidate, and that Majority it is has been shown to be Donald Trump.
Clinton will win.
Yes, the other establishment choice could win, but not likely.
The media has told us: We don't like Trump.
The Establishment on both sides say they'll find a way to subvert our vote.
The Crazies have said they will burn buildings again if we choose him.
Not all but a couple of those who ran against him are still hoping to stop the majority vote from counting.
Enemies overseas have said they want don't want us to have this man, the hell with them.
The Clintons don't want to run against him.
What is shown by the majority of the Non Left American Voters is Donald trump is their choice~And those mentioned above DO NOT WANT OUR/YOUR WILL EXPRESSED.
Think about it or it's a vote more than likely for Clinton.
Quote from: valley on April 28, 2016, 10:24:18 AM
Hi, I'm kinda new here, Richard's my name.
If we are not permitted to by majority vote in the primaries choose our Candidate, and that Majority it is has been shown to be Donald Trump.
Clinton will win.
Yes, the other establishment choice could win, but not likely.
The media has told us: We don't like Trump.
The Establishment on both sides say they'll find a way to subvert our vote.
The Crazies have said they will burn buildings again if we choose him.
Not all but a couple of those who ran against him are still hoping to stop the majority vote from counting.
Enemies overseas have said they want don't want us to have this man, the hell with them.
The Clintons don't want to run against him.
What is shown by the majority of the Non Left American Voters is Donald trump is their choice~And those mentioned above DO NOT WANT OUR/YOUR WILL EXPRESSED.
Think about it or it's a vote more than likely for Clinton.
Taxed, Solar, Hoofer.....we have a hang'n curve ball waiting to get driv'n to RIGHT field..... break out the quotes and send him on his way :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2016, 07:33:53 AM
Yes, it's a bit premature, but lets be honest, the GOP Establishment writes the rules and they've already told us, they elect the candidate, not us.
Without going into details and rules that would put a meth head to sleep, suffice it to say they will fight with every dirty trick in the book to keep a Constitutional Conservative out of power.
As it stands, Trump will be yesterdays news in short time, Cruz will run the board and expose the game both party's have been running, and despite the sudden groundswell of support for Cruz emerging, the Establishment and LSM have the lies at the ready, even Cruz epitaph.
So lets take a stand here and now to WRITE IN CRUZ regardless and make him the next POTUS.
God knows, I hope I'm wrong, but since when has the Establishment ever been on the side of Conservatism?
Yep. If there were ever a candidate who was likely to be assassinated by the NWO, it would be Ted Cruz. No doubt they are looking for someone to dose with Ketamine / PCP / LSD and work over with sleep deprivation/subliminal assassin programming, as we speak.
Quote from: valley on April 28, 2016, 10:24:18 AM
Hi, I'm kinda new here, Richard's my name.
We'll call ya Dick for short.
Quote
If we are not permitted to by majority vote in the primaries choose our Candidate, and that Majority it is has been shown to be Donald Trump.
Explain.
Quote
Clinton will win.
No she won't. Trump won't be the nominee.
Quote
Yes, the other establishment choice could win, but not likely.
Kasich is pretty far back. I wouldn't pay him too much mind, except for when his delegates come on over to Cruz.
Quote
The media has told us: We don't like Trump.
Well, we actually told the media that. They just don't listen very well. In all fairness, nobody likes Trump. Not even his home state, where Hillary TROUNCED him in vote count in the primary. Bernie even trounced Donnie. I guess people in his home state know him too well. Anyway, if Trump was nominated, he proved he loses his home state. But tell us again how he beats Hillary?
Quote
The Establishment on both sides say they'll find a way to subvert our vote.
They have?
Quote
The Crazies have said they will burn buildings again if we choose him.
I'm really scared. I guess I'll vote for the radical liberal then.
Quote
Not all but a couple of those who ran against him are still hoping to stop the majority vote from counting.
Explain.
Quote
Enemies overseas have said they want don't want us to have this man, the hell with them.
And our allies. Nobody wants him.
Quote
The Clintons don't want to run against him.
Yes they do. They need someone with higher unfavorables and more baggage than Hillary. She also takes his home state. Actually, he should be her VP.
Quote
What is shown by the majority of the Non Left American Voters is Donald trump is their choice~And those mentioned above DO NOT WANT OUR/YOUR WILL EXPRESSED.
Donnie doesn't have a lot of support. I'm sorry, Hannity lied to you.
Quote
Think about it or it's a vote more than likely for Clinton.
We do think. That's why we wouldn't vote for a radical liberal.
Quote from: valley on April 28, 2016, 10:24:18 AM
Hi, I'm kinda new here, Richard's my name.
If we are not permitted to by majority vote in the primaries choose our Candidate, and that Majority it is has been shown to be Donald Trump.
Clinton will win.
Yes, the other establishment choice could win, but not likely.
The media has told us: We don't like Trump.
The Establishment on both sides say they'll find a way to subvert our vote.
The Crazies have said they will burn buildings again if we choose him.
Not all but a couple of those who ran against him are still hoping to stop the majority vote from counting.
Enemies overseas have said they want don't want us to have this man, the hell with them.
The Clintons don't want to run against him.
What is shown by the majority of the Non Left American Voters is Donald trump is their choice~And those mentioned above DO NOT WANT OUR/YOUR WILL EXPRESSED.
Think about it or it's a vote more than likely for Clinton.
Good God, this is like playing T-Ball...
Wheres the challenge?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ch3ho1EXEAE6q_x.jpg)
If CO allows a write in, I will do that.
Go to your local secretary of state or other voting authority and get the OFFICIAL ways to get a write-in candidate registered in your county. This is NOT as easy as you'd expect for obvious incumbent-protection reasons. Next, get the local media into it and announce you are seeking signatures at address-thus-and-so.
Then watch them not bother remembering you, the week before they anoint Hillary. You need to hammer them with calls from more than just a few people to get them aware voters ARE serious. Newsroom attitudes will be: why are you bothering, when we anoint our next President for you?
Quote from: valley on April 28, 2016, 10:24:18 AM
Hi, I'm kinda new here, Richard's my name.
If we are not permitted to by majority vote in the primaries choose our Candidate, and that Majority it is has been shown to be Donald Trump.
I believe for the Primaries, all the ballots have been printed.
I vote in CA on June 7. Cruz, Carson and Kasich are on the Primary ballot.
This is from wiki
In 1928, Herbert Hoover won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary on write-ins, polling 100,279.
In 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt won the Democratic New Jersey presidential primary with 34,278 write-ins.
In 1944, Thomas Dewey won the Republican Pennsylvania presidential primary with 146,706 write-ins. He also won the Oregon Republican presidential primary with 50,001 write-ins.
In 1948, Harold Stassen won the Republican Pennsylvania presidential primary with 81,242 write-ins.
In 1952, Robert A. Taft won the Republican Nebraska presidential primary with 79,357 write-ins.
Also in 1952, Estes Kefauver won the Democratic Pennsylvania presidential primary with 93,160 write-ins.
Also in 1952, Dwight Eisenhower won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 254,898 write-ins.
In 1956, Dwight Eisenhower won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 51,951 write-ins.
In 1960, Richard Nixon won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 53,164 write-ins.
Also in 1960, John F. Kennedy won the Democratic Pennsylvania presidential primary with 183,073 write-ins, and he won the Democratic Massachusetts presidential primary with 91,607 write-ins.
In 1964, a write-in campaign organized by supporters of former U.S. Senator and vice presidential nominee Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. won Republican primaries for President in New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, defeating declared candidates Barry Goldwater, Nelson Rockefeller, and Margaret Chase Smith.
In 1968 in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire, incumbent President Lyndon Johnson did not file, but received write-ins totaling 50% of all Democratic votes cast. Senator Eugene McCarthy, who campaigned actively against Johnson's Vietnam war policies, was on the ballot. He received an impressive 41% of the vote and gained more delegates than the President. Johnson was so stunned that he did not run for reelection.[2]
Consumer advocate Ralph Nader ran a write-in campaign in 1992 during the New Hampshire primary for the presidential nomination of both the Democratic and Republican parties. Declaring himself the "none of the above candidate" and using the Concord Principles as his platform, Nader received 3,054 votes from Democrats and 3,258 votes from Republicans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write-in_candidate
Quote from: Dori on May 08, 2016, 07:11:48 AM
I believe for the Primaries, all the ballots have been printed.
I vote in CA on June 7. Cruz, Carson and Kasich are on the Primary ballot.
This is from wiki
In 1928, Herbert Hoover won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary on write-ins, polling 100,279.
In 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt won the Democratic New Jersey presidential primary with 34,278 write-ins.
In 1944, Thomas Dewey won the Republican Pennsylvania presidential primary with 146,706 write-ins. He also won the Oregon Republican presidential primary with 50,001 write-ins.
In 1948, Harold Stassen won the Republican Pennsylvania presidential primary with 81,242 write-ins.
In 1952, Robert A. Taft won the Republican Nebraska presidential primary with 79,357 write-ins.
Also in 1952, Estes Kefauver won the Democratic Pennsylvania presidential primary with 93,160 write-ins.
Also in 1952, Dwight Eisenhower won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 254,898 write-ins.
In 1956, Dwight Eisenhower won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 51,951 write-ins.
In 1960, Richard Nixon won the Republican Massachusetts presidential primary with 53,164 write-ins.
Also in 1960, John F. Kennedy won the Democratic Pennsylvania presidential primary with 183,073 write-ins, and he won the Democratic Massachusetts presidential primary with 91,607 write-ins.
In 1964, a write-in campaign organized by supporters of former U.S. Senator and vice presidential nominee Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. won Republican primaries for President in New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, defeating declared candidates Barry Goldwater, Nelson Rockefeller, and Margaret Chase Smith.
In 1968 in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire, incumbent President Lyndon Johnson did not file, but received write-ins totaling 50% of all Democratic votes cast. Senator Eugene McCarthy, who campaigned actively against Johnson's Vietnam war policies, was on the ballot. He received an impressive 41% of the vote and gained more delegates than the President. Johnson was so stunned that he did not run for reelection.[2]
Consumer advocate Ralph Nader ran a write-in campaign in 1992 during the New Hampshire primary for the presidential nomination of both the Democratic and Republican parties. Declaring himself the "none of the above candidate" and using the Concord Principles as his platform, Nader received 3,054 votes from Democrats and 3,258 votes from Republicans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write-in_candidate
We received our ballots in Oregon the day before Cruz announced his suspension. We all voted for Cruz :) I also plan to write in his name in the General if he isn't on the ballot.. I think if enough people do this we can prove the movement is not a majority for trump and regardless of what the MSM tells you, he has never been able to get about 40% nationwide. He will get annihilated in a General election
Quote from: AmericanMom on May 08, 2016, 08:10:25 AM
We received our ballots in Oregon the day before Cruz announced his suspension. We all voted for Cruz :) I also plan to write in his name in the General if he isn't on the ballot.. I think if enough people do this we can prove the movement is not a majority for trump and regardless of what the MSM tells you, he has never been able to get about 40% nationwide. He will get annihilated in a General election
AMom, your in Oregon and I am in Washington state. It my age I know I am living on borrowed time. :biggrin: But I will not ever hold my nose and vote again. Cruz will be my write in. Is it a vote for Hillary? NO it's a vote for
Cruz and
The Constitution of the United States.
Quote from: walkstall on May 08, 2016, 08:43:08 AM
AMom, your in Oregon and I am in Washington state. It my age I know I am living on borrowed time. :biggrin: But I will not ever hold my nose and vote again. Cruz will be my write in. Is it a vote for Hillary? NO it's a vote for Cruz and The Constitution of the United States.
Doctrinaire. Purely. I like you and have the greatest respect for you and this forum, but you have articulated the very thing that the 'Crats have been dreaming of since the day their 2016 campaign began - a divided GOP that refuses to stand united against the 'Crat candidate because of fractious, DOCTRINAIRE divisions in their own ranks.
Sure, it FEELS good to "take a stand" but the strategic effect this indulgence in feelings produces is to hand victory to Hillary Clinton.
Long ago, before the primary process began, I realized that there was a best scenario and a worst scenario for my candidate. It was Scott Walker first, then Cruz. I decided that I would follow the Buckley Rule regardless of who the nominee was, regardless of my own feelings. I trust the wisdom of the Buckley Rule far more than my own feelings or personal judgment.
I derive my good feelings, my PATRIOTIC feelings, from knowing that I fought the good fight and chose the path that was most likely to win the war, not the path that was the most gratifying to me personally.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 06:59:57 AM
Doctrinaire. Purely. I like you and have the greatest respect for you and this forum, but you have articulated the very thing that the 'Crats have been dreaming of since the day their 2016 campaign began - a divided GOP that refuses to stand united against the 'Crat candidate because of fractious, DOCTRINAIRE divisions in their own ranks.
Sure, it FEELS good to "take a stand" but the strategic effect this indulgence in feelings produces is to hand victory to Hillary Clinton.
Long ago, before the primary process began, I realized that there was a best scenario and a worst scenario for my candidate. It was Scott Walker first, then Cruz. I decided that I would follow the Buckley Rule regardless of who the nominee was, regardless of my own feelings. I trust the wisdom of the Buckley Rule far more than my own feelings or personal judgment.
I derive my good feelings, my PATRIOTIC feelings, from knowing that I fought the good fight and chose the path that was most likely to win the war, not the path that was the most gratifying to me personally.
What makes you so certain the GOPe is not the Dim party in disguise?
If you think supporting Trump against Hillary is somehow fighting Progressivism, is akin to picking a turd up by the clean end.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 06:59:57 AM
Sure, it FEELS good to "take a stand" but the strategic effect this indulgence in feelings produces is to hand victory to Hillary Clinton.
So tell us what you KNOW that Trump will do in office if elected.
I believe him to be dangerous for the country. He knows nothing about our geo-political history and how that affects us today.
The last person I want in office is someone who shoots first and damned the consequences. I don't want a trade war with China. The man may be able to make real estate deals, (many of which are underhanded and suspect) but I have zero confidence he can parlay that into being a good President.
Quote from: Dori on May 09, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
So tell us what you KNOW that Trump will do in office if elected.
Thank you, madame. You have made my point for me entirely. For all of his flaws in style and background, he is an unknown quantity far more than Hill-O-Lies.
Businesspeople are traditionally more pragmatic and adaptable - so they are more capable of changing than career politicians.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 11:05:32 AM
Thank you, madame. You have made my point for me entirely. For all of his flaws in style and background, he is an unknown quantity far more than Hill-O-Lies.
Businesspeople are traditionally more pragmatic and adaptable - so they are more capable of changing than career politicians.
So in your mind, having no core values, or understanding of the Constitution, is somehow seen as pragmatic?
Does the term Lib ever enter your mind when viewing Trump?
Quote from: Solar on May 09, 2016, 11:12:54 AM
So in your mind, having no core values, or understanding of the Constitution, is somehow seen as pragmatic?
Does the term Lib ever enter your mind when viewing Trump?
Not at all. That is my point. All I know for sure is my own mind. I cannot read minds. In my view, the greater evidence is that Hill-O-Lies is the greater threat (the one who is less in conformity with the Buckley Rule) than Donald Trump.
Elections are binary decisions there are only two choices. Nuance is not a factor.
There is no way to eliminate all risk from decisions. The only way that a vote for Trump would be no better than a vote for Hill-O-Lies is if there were irrefutable evidence that they are identical ( equally destructive or worse) on all important policy, ideology and character points.
Of course they could be absolutely identically destructive, but I don't think the evidence is that strong yet.
As previously mentioned, if Trump wants to be reelected, he will have to administrate things better than Hill-O-Lies says that she will. Her stated policy positions are guaranteed to destroy the nation (or rather finish the job of that which the Eightball Obama has started) while Trump has at the very least articulated general intentions of taking drastically different directions in several ways, although vague on the details
The devil you know is not better than the devil you only strongly suspect.
The tragedy of this entire situation is how we arrived at this sorry state of affairs with a candidate like Trump. Now that we are stuck with it, we must make the best of a bad situation.
The trick will be trying to get a better candidate to be ready to challenge Trump and anyone else who runs in either party 2020.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 12:44:47 PM
Not at all. That is my point. All I know for sure is my own mind. I cannot read minds. In my view, the greater evidence is that Hill-O-Lies is the greater threat (the one who is less in conformity with the Buckley Rule) than Donald Trump.
Elections are binary decisions there are only two choices. Nuance is not a factor.
There is no way to eliminate all risk from decisions. The only way that a vote for Trump would be no better than a vote for Hill-O-Lies is if there were irrefutable evidence that they are identical ( equally destructive or worse) on all important policy, ideology and character points.
Of course they could be absolutely identically destructive, but I don't think the evidence is that strong yet.
As previously mentioned, if Trump wants to be reelected, he will have to administrate things better than Hill-O-Lies says that she will. Her stated policy positions are guaranteed to destroy the nation (or rather finish the job of that which the Eightball Obama has started) while Trump has at the very least articulated general intentions of taking drastically different directions in several ways, although vague on the details
The devil you know is not better than the devil you only strongly suspect.
The tragedy of this entire situation is how we arrived at this sorry state of affairs with a candidate like Trump. Now that we are stuck with it, we must make the best of a bad situation.
The trick will be trying to get a better candidate to be ready to challenge Trump and anyone else who runs in either party 2020.
Both are a disaster, neither one is qualified. How to look at the "big picture"? hillery will bring down the dem party even further than obama did. The midterms where the tea party made inroads was no accident, and I will be one of the first to admit it did not go as far as I would have liked but it was a fantastic start and in part we have obama to thank. a hillery president will be a disaster but should help to keep pushing the tea party. A trump president will be a disaster too and the republicans will pay for it. Would it hurt the tea party??? hope not, but trump could ruin all the gains in just four short years.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 12:44:47 PM
Not at all. That is my point. All I know for sure is my own mind. I cannot read minds. In my view, the greater evidence is that Hill-O-Lies is the greater threat (the one who is less in conformity with the Buckley Rule) than Donald Trump.
Elections are binary decisions there are only two choices. Nuance is not a factor.
There is no way to eliminate all risk from decisions. The only way that a vote for Trump would be no better than a vote for Hill-O-Lies is if there were irrefutable evidence that they are identical ( equally destructive or worse) on all important policy, ideology and character points.
Of course they could be absolutely identically destructive, but I don't think the evidence is that strong yet.
As previously mentioned, if Trump wants to be reelected, he will have to administrate things better than Hill-O-Lies says that she will. Her stated policy positions are guaranteed to destroy the nation (or rather finish the job of that which the Eightball Obama has started) while Trump has at the very least articulated general intentions of taking drastically different directions in several ways, although vague on the details
The devil you know is not better than the devil you only strongly suspect.
The tragedy of this entire situation is how we arrived at this sorry state of affairs with a candidate like Trump. Now that we are stuck with it, we must make the best of a bad situation.
The trick will be trying to get a better candidate to be ready to challenge Trump and anyone else who runs in either party 2020.
Instead of me wasting my time trying to convince you Chump is no better better than a Dim, how about you prove Chump's policies are superior to that of the socialist.
One problem, Chump has yet to set any policy in stone since running, add to that when he first started campaigning, he presumably ran to the right, but as time 'Progressed' he became more and more Progressive, leaving one to conclude he's just that, a Progressive.
Quote from: s3779m on May 09, 2016, 01:15:55 PM
Both are a disaster, neither one is qualified. How to look at the "big picture"? hillery will bring down the dem party even further than obama did. The midterms where the tea party made inroads was no accident, and I will be one of the first to admit it did not go as far as I would have liked but it was a fantastic start and in part we have obama to thank. a hillery president will be a disaster but should help to keep pushing the tea party. A trump president will be a disaster too and the republicans will pay for it. Would it hurt the tea party??? hope not, but trump could ruin all the gains in just four short years.
I must very respectfully disagree in all regards. Without doing an exhaustive point-by-point( maybe better done on another thread about "Trump's flaws"), the central disagreement I have is with the use of the term "disaster". A disaster by your definition may be different from my own. I agree that Hill-O-Lies would be a true disaster for a whole slew of reasons based on very strong evidence. The assumption that Trump will be a disaster is, it seems to me, at best based on a series of extrapolations and suppositions. As far as I know, for instance, Trump's decisions have not resulted in the deaths of four innocent people, nor has he deliberately put the security of the nation at risk by using a private email server in order to do an end run around the rule of law because he has things he wants to conceal from public knowledge.
But my God, how on Earth did we get into this horrible mess? I have to think that the mis-education system is powerful beyond measure in order for so many people to be so poorly informed on who should rightly be the nation's chief executive.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 01:41:35 PM
I must very respectfully disagree in all regards. Without doing an exhaustive point-by-point( maybe better done on another thread about "Trump's flaws"), the central disagreement I have is with the use of the term "disaster". A disaster by your definition may be different from my own. I agree that Hill-O-Lies would be a true disaster for a whole slew of reasons based on very strong evidence. The assumption that Trump will be a disaster is, it seems to me, at best based on a series of extrapolations and suppositions. As far as I know, for instance, Trump's decisions have not resulted in the deaths of four innocent people, nor has he deliberately put the security of the nation at risk by using a private email server in order to do an end run around the rule of law because he has things he wants to conceal from public knowledge.
But my God, how on Earth did we get into this horrible mess? I have to think that the mis-education system is powerful beyond measure in order for so many people to be so poorly informed on who should rightly be the nation's chief executive.
they obviously do not learn from here. Your right, disaster might be too strong a word. But with all the changing of policy on the fly, I imagine there will be few benefits for the republicans at the mid terms.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 06:59:57 AM
Doctrinaire. Purely. I like you and have the greatest respect for you and this forum, but you have articulated the very thing that the 'Crats have been dreaming of since the day their 2016 campaign began - a divided GOP that refuses to stand united against the 'Crat candidate because of fractious, DOCTRINAIRE divisions in their own ranks.
Sure, it FEELS good to "take a stand" but the strategic effect this indulgence in feelings produces is to hand victory to Hillary Clinton. I'm voting for Cruz and The Constitution of the United States. I can live with that. Long ago, before the primary process began, I realized that there was a best scenario and a worst scenario for my candidate. It was Scott Walker first, then Cruz. I decided that I would follow the Buckley Rule regardless of who the nominee was, regardless of my own feelings. I trust the wisdom of the Buckley Rule far more than my own feelings or personal judgment.
I derive my good feelings, my PATRIOTIC feelings, from knowing that I fought the good fight and chose the path that was most likely to win the war, not the path that was the most gratifying to me personally.
You sir can do as you like. But I will be damn if I will hold my nose and vote for a RINO (Democrat) again. At some point you need to make a stand. Vote for A Democrat or vote your core values. I am not voting for Trump or Hillary. I can live with voting a Protest Vote. ("A protest vote (also known as a blank vote or white vote) is a vote cast in an election to demonstrate the caster's dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates or refusal of the current political system.") I can live with my vote, can you? Un like b o I have draw a line in the sand and I will not cross it.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 01:41:35 PMI agree that Hill-O-Lies would be a true disaster for a whole slew of reasons based on very strong evidence. The assumption that Trump will be a disaster is, it seems to me, at best based on a series of extrapolations and suppositions. As far as I know, for instance, Trump's decisions have not resulted in the deaths of four innocent people, nor has he deliberately put the security of the nation at risk by using a private email server in order to do an end run around the rule of law because he has things he wants to conceal from public knowledge.
It's all moot anyway. If Trump runs against Hillary, he can't win.
Quote from: Dori on May 09, 2016, 03:22:26 PM
It's all moot anyway. If Trump runs against Hillary, he can't win.
Dori --
I seem to recall that a similar statement was made about Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Regards,
Russ
Quote from: Solid Right on May 09, 2016, 04:37:04 PM
Dori --
I seem to recall that a similar statement was made about Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Regards,
Russ
Trump is no Reagan. Those voters aren't in Trumps camp.
Quote from: Dori on May 09, 2016, 04:42:01 PM
1 - Trump is no Reagan.
2 - Those voters aren't in Trumps camp.
Dori --
1. That is correct. Reagan had better manners and more relevant experience.
2. Well, since that was 36 years ago, I suspect that many of them have moved on to the Big Camp In the Sky.
However, I did not assert either thing. I was simply pointing out the similarity of statements made.
Regards,
Russ
Quote from: Solid Right on May 09, 2016, 04:51:22 PM
Dori --
1. That is correct. Reagan had better manners and more relevant experience.
2. Well, since that was 36 years ago, I suspect that many of them have moved on to the Big Camp In the Sky.
However, I did not assert either thing. I was simply pointing out the similarity of statements made.
Regards,
Russ
That's true without question. Times change. I don't think that Ronaldus Maximus could get elected today. He was a statesman and a gentleman - totally unsuited to the "newer cheaper age" ( nods to Hunter Thompson) in which we now live.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 09, 2016, 05:59:55 PM
That's true without question. Times change. I don't think that Ronaldus Maximus could get elected today. He was a statesman and a gentleman - totally unsuited to the "newer cheaper age" ( nods to Hunter Thompson) in which we now live.
Using that logic, Cruz actually lost in a level playing field. Nothing could be further from reality.
Quote from: Dori on May 09, 2016, 03:22:26 PM
It's all moot anyway. If Trump runs against Hillary, he can't win.
They said that REPEATEDLY about Obama versus Evil-R-Us.
There are a lot of people who truly, viscerally hate that woman. Don't bet against the Donks handing this to Trump because they hate her worse than the GOP does. Which raises the question, would swapping candidates be a help or a hindrance here?
Quote from: quiller on May 10, 2016, 02:18:59 AM
They said that REPEATEDLY about Obama versus Evil-R-Us.
There are a lot of people who truly, viscerally hate that woman. Don't bet against the Donks handing this to Trump because they hate her worse than the GOP does. Which raises the question, would swapping candidates be a help or a hindrance here?
Yep, so far the leftists have won, there is no difference in these two NY Libs, so it's of the utmost importance we all write in Ted.
Just so you all know, we're not alone in our push to write in Ted.
Just received this email.
To All The 298 Cruz Crew Team! This is the last message from Bob Summers and I as
Co-Chairs of the El Dorado County Cruz Crew. Thank you for your conservatism, and
I'm still voting for Senator Cruz on June 7th! Semper Fi!!!
Quote from: Solar on May 10, 2016, 04:27:52 AM
Just so you all know, we're not alone in our push to write in Ted.
Just received this email.
To All The 298 Cruz Crew Team! This is the last message from Bob Summers and I as
Co-Chairs of the El Dorado County Cruz Crew. Thank you for your conservatism, and
I'm still voting for Senator Cruz on June 7th! Semper Fi!!!
Have you ever read Melville, sieur?
Quote from: Dori on May 09, 2016, 03:22:26 PM
It's all moot anyway. If Trump runs against Hillary, he can't win.
Latest Quinipiac poll shows Trump and Hillary tied in FL and PA with Trump 4 points up in OH.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 10, 2016, 04:55:20 AM
Have you ever read Melville, sieur?
Herman Melville? That's like saying you ever read Shakespeare.
Quote from: Solar on May 10, 2016, 04:27:52 AM
Just so you all know, we're not alone in our push to write in Ted.
Just received this email.
To All The 298 Cruz Crew Team! This is the last message from Bob Summers and I as
Co-Chairs of the El Dorado County Cruz Crew. Thank you for your conservatism, and
I'm still voting for Senator Cruz on June 7th! Semper Fi!!!
For those that read between the lines?
[email protected] (
This email remains until November's election.) El Dorado County Cruz Crew 2016 | PO Box 744 | Shingle Springs | CA | 95682 This email was
sent to Solar@
In other words, Ca is still in play...
Unfortunately.....like it or not.....it appears Trump will be the next GOP nominee for president.
Pick your poison Hillary or "the Donald"
Left with those two choices I will probably vote for Trump and then commit suicide (to avoid staying around to see what happens)
Quote from: FTL Rick on May 12, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Unfortunately.....like it or not.....it appears Trump will be the next GOP nominee for president.
Pick your poison Hillary or "the Donald"
Left with those two choices I will probably vote for Trump and then commit suicide (to avoid staying around to see what happens)
Shallow is as shallow does, Forrest.
Well I never considered the depth of the joke but it could be considered shallow.
Quote from: FTL Rick on May 12, 2016, 12:39:16 PM
Well I never considered the depth of the joke but it could be considered shallow.
Suicide is no joke, sonny. Retune the Laugh-O-Meter.
Quote from: FTL Rick on May 12, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Unfortunately.....like it or not.....it appears Trump will be the next GOP nominee for president.
Pick your poison Hillary or "the Donald"
Left with those two choices I will probably vote for Trump and then commit suicide (to avoid staying around to see what happens)
Keyword, "Appears". Anyway the media is going all out to make that happen, or rather appear he looks Presidential (Trump meets Ryan) media frenzy bull shit, but until he hits 1237 delegates, he's just another Leftist RINO candidate.
Quote from: Solar on May 12, 2016, 01:03:28 PM
Keyword, "Appears". Anyway the media is going all out to make that happen, or rather appear he looks Presidential (Trump meets Ryan) media frenzy bull shit, but until he hits 1237 delegates, he's just another Leftist RINO candidate.
Even if he hits 1237 he is still a leftist rino. I keep hearing I should vote against hillery but I have not heard WHY i should vote FOR trump.
Quote from: s3779m on May 12, 2016, 03:13:29 PM
Even if he hits 1237 he is still a leftist rino. I keep hearing I should vote against hillery but I have not heard WHY i should vote FOR trump.
The best I have heard is because he isn't Hillary ;)
Never trump and Never Hillary
Quote from: s3779m on May 12, 2016, 03:13:29 PM
Even if he hits 1237 he is still a leftist rino. I keep hearing I should vote against hillery but I have not heard WHY i should vote FOR trump.
You're right, I've not heard one valid reason other than SCOTUS pick, but then, Trump has yet to prove to us he won't pick a Marxist.
Even then, he needs to be the caliber of Scalia or a Cruz.
Actually I HAVE read Melville. And most recently, Shakespeare's Tempest. Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment. It beats the Hell out of reality T.V.
Call me Ishmael.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" That is a line from one of the only film series that I have enjoyed recently. Lucas was mostly a conservative.
I understand the intense emotion about Trump, but I do not share it. Unlike most people, my vote is based more on strategic thinking with the Buckley Rule uber alles. Strong conclusions require strong evidence. Sure trump needs to get down to specifics and to repair his image with many groups if possible - but he is running center-left because he wants to win. He will likely swing right after winning, because that is the most expedient course.
All of you nice folks are forgetting that it is possible that Trump will follow conservative principles because they are simply more expedient at administrating a reelection chance for him. If he swings back toward NWO Statism, or Alinskyite Marxism he will be doing the equivalent of putting a bullet in his own head (politically).
Ryan has the right idea - and to some degree, Trump must have his feet held to the fire - because he must give at least the appearance of having a change of heart in many ways - or he will lose.
Mark Levin is doing that in large part, viz a viz conservatism. I think at this point, Levin's endorsement may mean more to Trump's chances than Ryans.
One of the reasons I've decided to give Trump another chance is that Michael Medved has all but come out for Hill-O-Lies over Trump and I have come to detest Medved.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 13, 2016, 08:38:29 AM
Actually I HAVE read Melville. And most recently, Shakespeare's Tempest. Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment. It beats the Hell out of reality T.V.
Call me Ishmael.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" That is a line from one of the only film series that I have enjoyed recently. Lucas was mostly a conservative.
I understand the intense emotion about Trump, but I do not share it. Unlike most people, my vote is based more on strategic thinking with the Buckley Rule uber alles. Strong conclusions require strong evidence. Sure trump needs to get down to specifics and to repair his image with many groups if possible - but he is running center-left because he wants to win. He will likely swing right after winning, because that is the most expedient course.
All of you nice folks are forgetting that it is possible that Trump will follow conservative principles because they are simply more expedient at administrating a reelection chance for him. If he swings back toward NWO Statism, or Alinskyite Marxism he will be doing the equivalent of putting a bullet in his own head (politically).
Ryan has the right idea - and to some degree, Trump must have his feet held to the fire - because he must give at least the appearance of having a change of heart in many ways - or he will lose.
Mark Levin is doing that in large part, viz a viz conservatism. I think at this point, Levin's endorsement may mean more to Trump's chances than Ryans.
One of the reasons I've decided to give Trump another chance is that Michael Medved has all but come out for Hill-O-Lies over Trump and I have come to detest Medved.
Use the quote function if you expect a response. This is not a request, nor will I suggest it again.
Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2016, 09:29:48 AM
Use the quote function if you expect a response. This is not a request, nor will I suggest it again.
Sure. BTW is that in the site rules and regulations? Yes, I am aware that this has been mentioned before but distractions abound. Did I miss that when I went over the rules? Since this comes up a lot and is obviously infuriating for you to deal with (understandably) maybe it should be emphasized. 'Just a suggestion.
BTW, my transgressions of the site rules aside,(with my apologies and acceptance of the last warning in the spirit it was meant) should I assume the substance of my post was not of interest to you, sieur !?! I value your opinion. That is most definitely a request.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 13, 2016, 01:58:27 PM
Sure. BTW is that in the site rules and regulations? Yes, I am aware that this has been mentioned before but distractions abound. Did I miss that when I went over the rules? Since this comes up a lot and is obviously infuriating for you to deal with (understandably) maybe it should be emphasized. 'Just a suggestion.
BTW, my transgressions of the site rules aside,(with my apologies and acceptance of the last warning in the spirit it was meant) should I assume the substance of my post was not of interest to you, sieur !?! I value your opinion. That is most definitely a request.
First off, it's sir, not sieur, secondly we're an adult Conservative site, which means the rules should come natural and no need for enumeration.
Commonsense/courtesy ring a bell? That's what the quote function is for. It makes it easier for others reading the forum to follow the conversation, a common courtesy.
And third. No, like I said, if you want a response, use quote and since you didn't, I didn't offer the courtesy of a read.
With that understanding, I will respond now.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 13, 2016, 08:38:29 AM
Actually I HAVE read Melville. And most recently, Shakespeare's Tempest. Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment. It beats the Hell out of reality T.V.
Call me Ishmael.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" That is a line from one of the only film series that I have enjoyed recently. Lucas was mostly a conservative.
OK? Keep in mind, I'm not here for idle chitchat, so save your breath.
QuoteI understand the intense emotion about Trump, but I do not share it. Unlike most people, my vote is based more on strategic thinking with the Buckley Rule uber alles.
So you're not really a Conservative with convictions. Got it....
QuoteStrong conclusions require strong evidence. Sure trump needs to get down to specifics and to repair his image with many groups if possible - but he is running center-left because he wants to win. He will likely swing right after winning, because that is the most expedient course.
You have that completely backwards. Trump ran to the right in hopes of getting the nod, and now that Cruz suspended, Trump ran to the left.
QuoteAll of you nice folks are forgetting that it is possible that Trump will follow conservative principles because they are simply more expedient at administrating a reelection chance for him. If he swings back toward NWO Statism, or Alinskyite Marxism he will be doing the equivalent of putting a bullet in his own head (politically).
Optimist...
QuoteRyan has the right idea - and to some degree, Trump must have his feet held to the fire - because he must give at least the appearance of having a change of heart in many ways - or he will lose.
Ryan is playing a game, he's a hardcore leftists. Hell, he gave the Marxists the Omnibus Bill, and padded it with more than the left was asking, even Fuglosi stated so publicly.
QuoteMark Levin is doing that in large part, viz a viz conservatism. I think at this point, Levin's endorsement may mean more to Trump's chances than Ryans.
Do you actually take me for a fool as to believe for a second that Levin endorsed Trump?
Something we do frequently on this forum is educate and elucidate. For two reasons we call out bull shit, and this is one of those times when I don't let bull shit slide.
Back up your claim that Levin backed Trump
QuoteOne of the reasons I've decided to give Trump another chance is that Michael Medved has all but come out for Hill-O-Lies over Trump and I have come to detest Medved.
No, you back Trump because you lack conviction.
Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2016, 02:41:37 PM
First off, it's sir, not sieur, secondly we're an adult Conservative site, which means the rules should come natural and no need for enumeration.
Commonsense/courtesy ring a bell? That's what the quote function is for. It makes it easier for others reading the forum to follow the conversation, a common courtesy.
And third. No, like I said, if you want a response, use quote and since you didn't, I didn't offer the courtesy of a read.
With that understanding, I will respond now.
OK? Keep in mind, I'm not here for idle chitchat, so save your breath.
So you're not really a Conservative with convictions. Got it....You have that completely backwards. Trump ran to the right in hopes of getting the nod, and now that Cruz suspended, Trump ran to the left.
Optimist...
Ryan is playing a game, he's a hardcore leftists. Hell, he gave the Marxists the Omnibus Bill, and padded it with more than the left was asking, even Fuglosi stated so publicly.
Do you actually take me for a fool as to believe for a second that Levin endorsed Trump?
Something we do frequently on this forum is educate and elucidate. For two reasons we call out bull shit, and this is one of those times when I don't let bull shit slide.
Back up your claim that Levin backed Trump
No, you back Trump because you lack conviction.
I find that in response to all of that, I must say either a great deal, or nothing at all. I elect the latter. Take care, sieur.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 16, 2016, 08:18:07 AM
I find that in response to all of that, I must say either a great deal, or nothing at all. I elect the latter. Take care, sieur.
If you wanted to be taken seriously you would have responded with factual evidence to back up your assertions, otherwise they are nothing more than feelings, I actually kinda lost hope for you when you said this:
QuoteStrong conclusions require strong evidence. Sure trump needs to get down to specifics and to repair his image with many groups if possible - but he is running center-left because he wants to win. He will likely swing right after winning, because that is the most expedient course.
He running to the left because he wants to appeal to Bernie supports, since Bernie is a self avowed socialist and attempting to swing his voters to trump it forces me to come to the conclusion that trump has not one conservative bone in his over tanned body, no self respecting Conservative would ever swing left ... Ever
Trump along with 90% of Republicans are throwing TEA and Conservatives out, were being told that they don't NEED us, they would rather pander to socialist libs then to Conservative ideals.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 16, 2016, 08:18:07 AM
I find that in response to all of that, I must say either a great deal, or nothing at all. I elect the latter. Take care, sieur.
Thank you.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 16, 2016, 08:18:07 AM
I find that in response to all of that, I must say either a great deal, or nothing at all. I elect the latter. Take care, sieur.
Tell me why you should be afforded the pleasure of membership on this forum if you're unwilling to participate in actual debate?
Last time, it's Sir!
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 13, 2016, 08:38:29 AM
Actually I HAVE read Melville. And most recently, Shakespeare's Tempest. Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment. It beats the Hell out of reality T.V.
Call me Ishmael.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" That is a line from one of the only film series that I have enjoyed recently. Lucas was mostly a conservative.
Since you're not a conservative, you probably aren't the qualified to declare someone conservative or not conservative.
Quote
I understand the intense emotion about Trump,
What intense emotion? I have disdain for him like I do Hillary. They're the same. We already lost. Emotion is for the Trumpers. Remember, they're mad at the system and all that?
Quote
but I do not share it. Unlike most people, my vote is based more on strategic thinking
This is not true. Your choice is not based on any thinking, whatsoever, and you know it. You simply see Donald has an (R) next to his name. That's it.
Quote
with the Buckley Rule uber alles. Strong conclusions require strong evidence. Sure trump needs to get down to specifics and to repair his image with many groups if possible - but he is running center-left because he wants to win. He will likely swing right after winning, because that is the most expedient course.
Trump is actually running far right for what he is. Yet, he is still just as left as Hillary.
Quote
All of you nice folks are forgetting that it is possible that Trump will follow conservative principles because they are simply more expedient at administrating a reelection chance for him.
No. We're not stupid enough to believe that.
Quote
If he swings back toward NWO Statism, or Alinskyite Marxism he will be doing the equivalent of putting a bullet in his own head (politically).
Ryan has the right idea - and to some degree, Trump must have his feet held to the fire - because he must give at least the appearance of having a change of heart in many ways - or he will lose.
Mark Levin is doing that in large part, viz a viz conservatism. I think at this point, Levin's endorsement may mean more to Trump's chances than Ryans.
One of the reasons I've decided to give Trump another chance is that Michael Medved has all but come out for Hill-O-Lies over Trump and I have come to detest Medved.
Why do you call her Hill-O-Lies, but not give Trump the same label? Why are you not being truthful with yourself, and others?
Quote from: AmericanMom on May 16, 2016, 08:31:30 AM
If you wanted to be taken seriously you would have responded with factual evidence to back up your assertions, otherwise they are nothing more than feelings, I actually kinda lost hope for you when you said this:
He running to the left because he wants to appeal to Bernie supports, since Bernie is a self avowed socialist and attempting to swing his voters to trump it forces me to come to the conclusion that trump has not one conservative bone in his over tanned body, no self respecting Conservative would ever swing left ... Ever
Trump along with 90% of Republicans are throwing TEA and Conservatives out, were being told that they don't NEED us, they would rather pander to socialist libs then to Conservative ideals.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, Madame.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 17, 2016, 07:53:07 AM
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, Madame.
What "Feeling"? What she stated is fact, not an emotional response.
Though I differ on the 90% claim, beyond that, she's spot on.
Quote from: Solar on May 16, 2016, 09:10:58 AM
Tell me why you should be afforded the pleasure of membership on this forum if you're unwilling to participate in actual debate?
Last time, it's Sir!
Well, substantive debate is all fine. It's the level of personal invective that informs me on taking a way-and-see posture. If I did not recognize when my remarks and observations are unwelcome and unappreciated (and generate anger) then I WOULD be obtuse, neh?
I regard forums as living rooms, Solar. You have been gracious enough to invite me into yours. It would be ill - mannered of me to express contrary views which are experienced as offensive (obviously, or they could not be triggering so much invective). Likewise it would be morally base of me to say that I fully agree with opinions which I do not. So I chose to remain mute and ponder awhile how I may contribute.
When my posts trigger more invective and outrage than correlation, it's a clue that my "shoulder is not to the wheel", so to speak. The TEA party is righteous. It deserves every good man's full support. Never doubt that. I support the TEA party fully and share anger at those who water down or try to "temper" righteous policy with adulteration.
Many people are unaware that the Founders considered the word "innovative" to be worthy of contempt. This because it was seen as a representation of something effete, purely philosophical and therefore detached from reality. I'm striving not to be "innovative".
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 17, 2016, 08:07:31 AM
Well, substantive debate is all fine. It's the level of personal invective that informs me on taking a way-and-see posture. If I did not recognize when my remarks and observations are unwelcome and unappreciated (and generate anger) then I WOULD be obtuse, neh?
Personal invectives? My what a frail indiviual you are...
I gave you a substantive response, but instead of taking on my points, you cowered and took the low road of passive aggressive in an attempt to smear me for calling you out for the quote function issue..
Here's the post you obviated, I'll bold the points you previously avoided.
And yes, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that Levin backed Trump.
Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2016, 02:41:37 PM
First off, it's sir, not sieur, secondly we're an adult Conservative site, which means the rules should come natural and no need for enumeration.
Commonsense/courtesy ring a bell? That's what the quote function is for. It makes it easier for others reading the forum to follow the conversation, a common courtesy.
And third. No, like I said, if you want a response, use quote and since you didn't, I didn't offer the courtesy of a read.
With that understanding, I will respond now.
OK? Keep in mind, I'm not here for idle chitchat, so save your breath.
So you're not really a Conservative with convictions. Got it....You have that completely backwards. Trump ran to the right in hopes of getting the nod, and now that Cruz suspended, Trump ran to the left.
Optimist...
Ryan is playing a game, he's a hardcore leftists. Hell, he gave the Marxists the Omnibus Bill, and padded it with more than the left was asking, even Fuglosi stated so publicly.
Do you actually take me for a fool as to believe for a second that Levin endorsed Trump?
Something we do frequently on this forum is educate and elucidate. For two reasons we call out bull shit, and this is one of those times when I don't let bull shit slide.
Back up your claim that Levin backed Trump
No, you back Trump because you lack conviction.
QuoteI regard forums as living rooms, Solar. You have been gracious enough to invite me into yours. It would be ill - mannered of me to express contrary views which are experienced as offensive (obviously, or they could not be triggering so much invective). Likewise it would be morally base of me to say that I fully agree with opinions which I do not. So I chose to remain mute and ponder awhile how I may contribute.
When my posts trigger more invective and outrage than correlation, it's a clue that my "shoulder is not to the wheel", so to speak. The TEA party is righteous. It deserves every good man's full support. Never doubt that. I support the TEA party fully and share anger at those who water down or try to "temper" righteous policy with adulteration.
What invective? When someone avoids the subject at hand in a discussion, they can expect a bitch slapping designed to invoke a response to the query previously avoided.
QuoteMany people are unaware that the Founders considered the word "innovative" to be worthy of contempt. This because it was seen as a representation of something effete, purely philosophical and therefore detached from reality. I'm striving not to be "innovative".
Where did that shit come from? :blink:
Quote from: Solar on May 17, 2016, 10:04:49 AM
Personal invectives? My what a frail indiviual you are...
I gave you a substantive response, but instead of taking on my points, you cowered and took the low road of passive aggressive in an attempt to smear me for calling you out for the quote function issue..
Here's the post you obviated, I'll bold the points you previously avoided.
And yes, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that Levin backed Trump.
What invective? When someone avoids the subject at hand in a discussion, they can expect a bitch slapping designed to invoke a response to the query previously avoided.
Where did that shit come from? :blink:
Solar. I did not express myself clearly and for that I apologize. 'Never said Levin backed Trump, but he has not definitely stated that he would not. He did say in one recent show that the Trump campaign had likely done something to him (Mr.Levin) that he would consider unforgiveable and that it might make his personal endorsement impossible, but I have not heard an update.
I meant to express that Levin's endorsement would be more valuable to Trump than that of Ryan. I meant that it would be more valuable so he should SEEK IT in lieu of seeking Ryan's. Ryan is at best an utterly inept politician and a horrible spokesman for conservatism in the sturm und drang of political campaigns.
Levin is the standard bearer for conservatism in many ways far more than Ryan. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Levin has a PLAN and an HISTORICAL CONTEXT for conservatism that is unparalleled. His depth of understanding of conservatism and culture is truly awesome.
If the mass media did not control at least 8% of the electorate wholly, Mark Levin would be an excellent choice for Trump's VP.
I live in Mexifonia, and even though Trump has all but sewn up the primary, I will be voting for Cruz.
I like the plans I have heard for trying to wrest the nomination away from Trump at the convention a lot. So you see, I am truly on the side of conservatism.
I will take any lions share of the blame for any misconceptions to the contrary.
BTW, the "innovation" comment was derived from Miracle at Philadelphia; The Story of the Constitutional Convention May-September 1787. People who try to consider all angles (as I often do) sometimes get carried away with possibilities and forsake the good in pursuit of the perfect. I don't want to be mistaken for someone who thinks there is some substitute for genuine Reagan/Sobran/Buckley/Levin-style conservatism. Populism is not conservatism - it equates to Statism in the final analysis. Levin proved that to me on one of his programs.
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 17, 2016, 06:32:19 PM
Solar. There must be some misunderstanding. 'Never said Levin backed Trump, but he has not definitely stated that he would not. He did say in one show I listened to that the Trump campaign had likely done something to him that he would consider unforgiveable and that it might make his endorsement impossible, but I have not heard an update.
Your words:
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on May 13, 2016, 08:38:29 AM
"Mark Levin is doing that in large part, viz a viz conservatism. I think at this point, Levin's endorsement may mean more to Trump's chances than Ryans."
Quote
I stated that Levin's endorsement would be more valuable to Trump than that of Ryan. I meant that it would be more valuable so he should SEEK IT in lieu of seeking Ryans.
Levin is the standard bearer for conservatism in many ways far more than Ryan. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Levin has a PLAN and an HISTORICAL CONTEXT for conservatism that is unparalleled. His depth of understanding of conservatism and culture is truly awesome.
Ryan is a hardcore leftist, how can you even mention him in context to, or even the same sentence with Levin?
REP. PAUL RYAN
WISCONSIN (R)
F LIBERTY SCORE® 56%
QuoteIf the mass media did not control at least 8% of the electorate wholly, Mark Levin would be an excellent choice for Trump's VP.
Seriously? They're oil and water, hot and cold, Idiot Leftist vs Conservative.
QuoteI live in Mexifonia, and even though Trump has all but sewn up the primary, I will be voting for Cruz.
Ca Native here, the entire state will be voting Cruz, we've seen what NY Libs do to a state.
QuoteI like the plans I have heard for trying to wrest the nomination away from Trump at the convention a lot. So you see, I am truly on the side of conservatism.
I will take any lions share of the blame for any misconceptions to the contrary.
You have a huge mountain ahead of you...
Best pray very hard that the write-ins work. Trump has it in the bag, and no one will take it from him. It's either Hillary or Trump. Write-in Cruz, and you just inaugurated the enemy, Hillary. Vote Trump...lesser of two evils.
Quote from: OvomitTheMuslim on June 13, 2016, 11:50:46 AM
Best pray very hard that the write-ins work. Trump has it in the bag, and no one will take it from him. It's either Hillary or Trump. Write-in Cruz, and you just inaugurated the enemy, Hillary. Vote Trump...lesser of two evils.
Trump and Clinton are the enemy, they are cut from the same cloth.
Quote from: OvomitTheMuslim on June 13, 2016, 11:50:46 AM
Best pray very hard that the write-ins work. Trump has it in the bag, and no one will take it from him. It's either Hillary or Trump. Write-in Cruz, and you just inaugurated the enemy, Hillary. Vote Trump...lesser of two evils.
Why would anyone vote for a liberal? Are you a liberal?
Quote from: taxed on June 14, 2016, 06:39:17 AM
Why would anyone vote for a liberal? Are you a liberal?
Yes he is, he just refuses to recognize his malady/brain damage/stupidity for what it is, liberalism. He thinks that backing a lib with an (R) next to his name, absolves his dumb ass for backing the Marxist.
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2016, 07:56:10 AM
Yes he is, he just refuses to recognize his malady/brain damage/stupidity for what it is, liberalism. He thinks that backing a lib with an (R) next to his name, absolves his dumb ass for backing the Marxist.
Ahhh. That explains his deep idiocy.
Quote from: taxed on June 14, 2016, 02:31:26 PM
Ahhh. That explains his deep idiocy.
Yeah, just another retread troll Trumpanzee.
A good read:
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/06/this-is-why-ignoring-the-gop-base-is-political-suicide
QuoteWrite O'Keefe and Rivkin:
Recent weeks have not been kind to the Grand Old Party. Republicans have been embarrassed by Donald Trump 's racist attacks on Gonzalo Curiel, the federal judge presiding over a fraud lawsuit against Trump University. They have watched him assault popular GOP leaders like Speaker Paul Ryan and New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez. Many among the party faithful are realizing that Mr. Trump may flame out before Election Day—and that he could bring the party's slate of candidates down with him.
Yet conventional wisdom remains that Mr. Trump's nomination is inevitable. The theory is twofold: First, his primary victories give him enough delegates to prevail on the first ballot at the Republican convention in July. Second, those delegates are bound to vote for Mr. Trump by state laws and GOP rules.
Not so fast. Although 20 states have passed laws that purport to bind delegates, these statutes can't be legally enforced. When Republican delegates arrive in Cleveland to select their party's nominee, they should recognize that they are bound only by their consciences.
The problem? Some 13.2 million Republican voters, with, depending on various state primary rules, an assist from Democrats and Independents, have looked over the field of 17 GOP candidates and decided exactly in whom they have confidence: Donald Trump.
In these days... I'm glad I'm not a delegate... or GOPe party member. THEY have a real problem, I don't.
QuoteIn the aftermath of the horrific events in Orlando, it is very sad to say that Trump's support among his voters—and even now, some horrified liberals who are gay—has intensified. It amazes that there is no realization by #NeverTrumpers that stripping Trump of his nomination would inflict massive down-ballot casualties on GOP candidates for the Senate, House, governorships and any one further down the ballot. To identify the GOP as a party in which party (and media) elites deliberately overrule their own voters when the results aren't to the liking of some would set loose the wrath of all those Trump voters, roaming free to target every single Republican on any ballot anywhere in an act of political retaliation so massive as to boggle the mind. Particularly in the wake of Orlando and the realization of the massive fail that has been the Obama-Clinton national security policies, this is no moment to fill the nation's convention-televising with images of a handful of folks trying to overturn the majority's decision.
Again - not MY problem, the GOPe let him in, now they can figure out what to do with him.
This reminds me of the guy who keeps losing & betting, "Double or Nothing?"
They demonized Ted Cruz and got Donald Trump -
they got him, I didn't. And have they noticed, Donald is still chasing the Bernie Sanders vote & ignoring the GOP base? Don't blame me when Trump loses, he's an outsider to the GOP, and insider to the DEMs.
Quote from: Hoofer on June 14, 2016, 05:04:08 PM
A good read:
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/06/this-is-why-ignoring-the-gop-base-is-political-suicide
In these days... I'm glad I'm not a delegate... or GOPe party member. THEY have a real problem, I don't.
Again - not MY problem, the GOPe let him in, now they can figure out what to do with him.
This reminds me of the guy who keeps losing & betting, "Double or Nothing?"
They demonized Ted Cruz and got Donald Trump - they got him, I didn't. And have they noticed, Donald is still chasing the Bernie Sanders vote & ignoring the GOP base? Don't blame me when Trump loses, he's an outsider to the GOP, and insider to the DEMs.
Couldn't agree more! The Establishment deserves this headache they created. Sure we could have had a 2nd Reagan, but noooo, they'd rather take their chances with a liberal.
Screw em, I'll write in Cruz, I will not be responsible for what the party created.
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2016, 05:52:01 PM
Couldn't agree more! The Establishment deserves this headache they created. Sure we could have had a 2nd Reagan, but noooo, they'd rather take their chances with a liberal.
Screw em, I'll write in Cruz, I will not be responsible for what the party created.
And that is just mind-boggling. The GOPe is so drunk with power, and keeping political power, they'll take a political enemy over a saint.
Quote from: Hoofer on June 15, 2016, 04:21:11 PM
And that is just mind-boggling. The GOPe is so drunk with power, and keeping political power, they'll take a political enemy over a saint.
I'm going to print up bumper stickers that say "I'm Not Voting For The Liberal"...
I've no doubt everyone that reads it, will get it.
Quote from: Solar on June 15, 2016, 04:35:08 PM
I'm going to print up bumper stickers that say "I'm Not Voting For The Liberal(s)"...
I've no doubt everyone that reads it, will get it.
Minor fix, takes away the subtle undertones, but even the uneducated sheep might pick up on it with the "s" in parenthesis.... Spoken in a whisper....
"psst, there both liberals"
Quote from: Sauce on June 16, 2016, 04:26:31 AM
Minor fix, takes away the subtle undertones, but even the uneducated sheep might pick up on it with the "s" in parenthesis.... Spoken in a whisper.... "psst, there both liberals"
I think most people are smart enough that they don't need a hint.
Quote from: Sauce on June 16, 2016, 04:26:31 AM
Minor fix, takes away the subtle undertones, but even the uneducated sheep might pick up on it with the "s" in parenthesis.... Spoken in a whisper.... "psst, there both liberals"
Shorter version:
The FIX is IN
They're BOTH Libs
Quote from: Hoofer on June 17, 2016, 06:58:15 AM
Shorter version:
The FIX is IN
They're BOTH Libs
Well, I'm still hoping that a rule change will make it possible for Sen. Cruz to have a delegate-driven coup and replace Donald Trump as the nominee. 'Not likely I grant (owing to the entrenched hatred for Cruz by the GOP Establishment) but I like to dream about it.
God, did anyone hear Sen. Cruz talking about the terrorist attack in Orlando yesterday? My goodness, compared to the other candidates, he sounds like the only sane adult in the conversation. It was awe-inspiring how great a speaker he is.
To think, people thought I was nuts, a traitor, by stating before anyone else that I'd never support Trump, that the only option regardless was to write in Cruz, (See OP) but now it seems that even party heads are refusing to support trump, while others support Hillary?
How sad is it when your own party votes for the enemy and refuses to support the only Constitutional Conservative running.
No doubt I made the Right call, it also looks like Cruz still has a shot at the WH, at least far better than the NY LIB.
To the casual reader, let this be evidence that the GOP has become the enemy of the people.
Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Thursday became the third high-ranking Republican in the last week to say that he was voting for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in November.
"To my Republican friends: I know I'm not alone."
Clinton received vote pledges from Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush, and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who served under Bush 43.
Paulson, now chairman of the Paulson Institute think tank in Chicago, called Trump's candidacy "a populist hijacking of one of the United States' great political parties.
"The GOP, in putting Trump at the top of the ticket, is endorsing a brand of populism rooted in ignorance, prejudice, fear and isolationism," he added. "This troubles me deeply as a Republican, but it troubles me even more as an American.
"Enough is enough. It's time to put country before party and say it together: Never Trump."
Paulson, who plans to support down-ballot Republicans in state and congressional races, slammed Trump's business acumen. He cited the developer's bankruptcies and the continued questions surrounding Trump's wealth.
"The tactics he has used in running his business wouldn't work in running a truly successful company, let alone the most powerful nation on Earth," he said. "Every good businessman or -woman carefully analyzes all the available facts before making a decision.
"Trump repeatedly, blatantly and knowingly makes up or gravely distorts facts to support his positions or create populist divisions.
"Simply put, a Trump presidency is unthinkable," Paulson said, later adding that "when it comes to the presidency, I will not vote for Donald Trump."
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/henry-paulson-republican-voting-hillary-clinton/2016/06/24/id/735592/
what happens to this forum after Cruz is no longer an option (Now) Is it just then a "Hate Trump" forum?
Quote from: gandb77 on June 26, 2016, 04:51:49 AM
what happens to this forum after Cruz is no longer an option (Now) Is it just then a "Hate Trump" forum?
So you must watch TV news for all your information?
Trump is already on his way out, the Delegates have been freed to vote their conscience and are no longer obligated to vote for the liberal usurper.
So tell us, what will you whine about once Trump drops out and people start talking about Cruz again?
does it make no difference to you what the voters want? They chose TRUMP
Quote from: gandb77 on June 26, 2016, 05:38:18 AM
does it make no difference to you what the voters want? They chose TRUMP
QuoteOf 31 million who voted in the Republican Primary 38% approximately were Democrats.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/how-did-trump-steal-the-vote/msg308373/#msg308373
Quote from: gandb77 on June 26, 2016, 05:38:18 AM
does it make no difference to you what the voters want? They chose TRUMP
As Walks pointed out with the thread I posted, Libs chose our candidate via the open primary process as by design of leftists infiltrating the GOP.
So it depends, do you think Dims should have a say in who the Republicans choose, or choose for us?
Quote from: Solar on June 26, 2016, 07:57:43 AM
As Walks pointed out with the thread I posted, Libs chose our candidate via the open primary process as by design of leftists infiltrating the GOP.
So it depends, do you think Dims should have a say in who the Republicans choose, or choose for us?
I think this will be just one more hit and run post by gandb77.
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Did you come here just to make Kanooks look stupid?
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
You obviously do not understand being the off spring of an American parent gives one citizenship.
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
Another trumpbot wanna be.
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F500x%2F23100121.jpg&hash=6bffdb1331f2ee83afd8cc6af5577df1b7e53277)
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi951.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad359%2FKc_lion%2FFunny%2520Stuff%2Ffaceplant.gif&hash=ebfbe20e5994f3e7c2d7c037064480f8582013fe)
Quote from: gandb77 on June 26, 2016, 04:51:49 AM
what happens to this forum after Cruz is no longer an option (Now) Is it just then a "Hate Trump" forum?
I suppose we'll just go back to tearing into leftist trash, which they fully deserve.
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
If he's from Calgary, he should STAMPEDE his competition...eh?
Have a Maple Leaf. And a new all-inclusive national anthem nobody will remember.
Quote from: quiller on June 26, 2016, 09:08:01 PM
If he's from Calgary, he should STAMPEDE his competition...eh?
Have a Maple Leaf. And a new all-inclusive national anthem nobody will remember.
They have there own National Anthem? I don't remember it.
Well, no offense, but it looks like to me that most of you are hell bent to put Clinton in power. But that is fine. Then it will be time to go the mattresses anyway.
Quote from: miketx on June 27, 2016, 05:16:54 AM
Well, no offense, but it looks like to me that most of you are hell bent to put Clinton in power. But that is fine. Then it will be time to go the mattresses anyway.
So you'd rather waste your vote on a NY Lib in helping elect a Carpetbagger lib in Hillary?
Write in Cruz and keep a clear conscience, in that you voted for the true conservative, you won't be alone.
Quote from: walkstall on June 26, 2016, 09:33:45 PM
They have there own National Anthem? I don't remember it.
It used to be "O Canada" (evidently to help remember it). I forget the new name. Really.
Quote from: quiller on June 27, 2016, 06:27:09 AM
It used to be "O Canada" (evidently to help remember it). I forget the new name. Really.
Even Canadians wanna forget it now that the left changed it for PC reasons...
Quote from: Solar on June 27, 2016, 06:40:07 AM
Even Canadians wanna forget it now that the left changed it for PC reasons...
I erred in saying the new anthem has been adopted, only proposed. Here's one take on that....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4ylqJhJNec
Quote from: Yukon on June 26, 2016, 12:04:24 PM
I'm new here and I'm Canadian. I hope you people know Cruz is a Canadian. He was born in Calgary, Alberta, and went to school there up to The end of Grade 1. Don't let this nut-bar fool you. He is not, repeat NOT, an American.
Cruz is an American citizen and also attended Princeton and Harvard Universities. He was the first Hispanic, and the longest-serving, Solicitor General in Texas history. He currently is a United States Senator. Nope, not fooled by him at all.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 27, 2016, 06:57:05 PM
Cruz is an American citizen and also attended Princeton and Harvard Universities. He was the first Hispanic, and the longest-serving, Solicitor General in Texas history. He currently is a United States Senator. Nope, not fooled by him at all.
Welcome to the forum Ms.Independence.
Thank you.
I would much prefer Cruz to Trump but a write in vote for Cruz takes one vote away from our party's presumptive candidate. Think about that.
Quote from: stewball on June 28, 2016, 04:19:08 PM
I would much prefer Cruz to Trump but a write in vote for Cruz takes one vote away from our party's presumptive candidate. Think about that.
Yes, you should think about that. The party has been infiltrated by a life long NY liberal that all the sudden claims to be a conservative. I dont vote for any liberal regardless of any newfound label they may have acquired.
Quote from: stewball on June 28, 2016, 04:19:08 PM
I would much prefer Cruz to Trump but a write in vote for Cruz takes one vote away from our party's presumptive candidate. Think about that.
tHAT'S THE IDEA...
Quote from: stewball on June 28, 2016, 04:19:08 PM
I would much prefer Cruz to Trump but a write in vote for Cruz takes one vote away from our party's presumptive candidate. Think about that.
"Our" party? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Neither Clinton nor Trump deserves OUR vote, Sparky. Go play. Leave the adults alone.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 04:58:29 AM
Hey, let's all write in "Newt" That way we can show our opposition and we can still achieve the same results. That would be to take a Republican vote away from Trump, and would have the result of electing Hilary.
After watching this forum for quite a while it appears that the real main purpose is to assist Hillary in attaining the presidency.
This, by putting up a false stalking horse to divert the non-Hilary votes, and thereby insuring her ultimate victory
SHAME, SHAME SHAME.
This right here folks, is the perfect example of leftist 'Tool', the useful idiot both party's depend upon to stay in power.
No, never think independently, always settle between a turd sandwich, or a shit salad.
Rubes like you are afraid to simply refuse to eat anything else and have put us on the fast track towards communism.
Quote from: Solar on June 29, 2016, 05:49:17 AM
This right here folks, is the perfect example of leftist 'Tool', the useful idiot both party's depend upon to stay in power.
No, never think independently, always settle between a turd sandwich, or a shit salad.
Rubes like you are afraid to simply refuse to eat anything else and have put us on the fast track towards communism.
Exactly. Why in the world would I vote for someone who I
feel know is going to continue us on our current path of destruction?? I stopped playing the game of voting for the lesser of two evils or for the sake of party a long time ago. I will continue to vote for whom I feel is the best for this country period. Just think (I know it's a stretch for some) if everyone did this we wouldn't be in the God awful predicament that we're in now and faced with losing our country. No. I cannot and will not vote for the orange buffoon, nor will I vote for the criminal who belongs in an orange jump suit.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 29, 2016, 06:02:28 AM
Exactly. Why in the world would I vote for someone who I feel know is going to continue us on our current path of destruction?? I stopped playing the game of voting for the lesser of two evils or for the sake of party a long time ago. I will continue to vote for whom I feel is the best for this country period. Just think (I know it's a stretch for some) if everyone did this we wouldn't be in the God awful predicament that we're in now and faced with losing our country. No. I cannot and will not vote for the orange buffoon, nor will I vote for the criminal who belongs in an orange jump suit.
Exactly Ms. We are stuck with Trump because we allowed a party to set the rules that not only cement their place in power, but guarantee a leftist slide towards the gutter over decades.
Open primaries exist for one reason, to keep Conservatives out of power, and with the gift of hindsight, it's only obvious the leftists infiltrated the GOP decades ago, and this current election is evidence of the cancer.
I'm beyond done with the game, I'm now in it for blood, the blood of Marxists!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 29, 2016, 06:02:28 AM
Exactly. Why in the world would I vote for someone who I feel know is going to continue us on our current path of destruction?? I stopped playing the game of voting for the lesser of two evils or for the sake of party a long time ago. I will continue to vote for whom I feel is the best for this country period. Just think (I know it's a stretch for some) if everyone did this we wouldn't be in the God awful predicament that we're in now and faced with losing our country. No. I cannot and will not vote for the orange buffoon, nor will I vote for the criminal who belongs in an orange jump suit.
Unfortunately, there are many who cannot see the logic in what you say. They want you to drink the party Kool-Aid, hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
Quote from: taxed on March 24, 2015, 07:44:05 PM
The fact this is even a discussion blows my mind. More so, 99.99999999999% of the idiot RINOs who ran and hid under a table whenever the subject of Hussein the usurper's birth certificate was raised are stomping around like children trying to sabotage Cruz. Even the liberal media and academia are united in saying he's eligible. This is a play by the RINOs. Interestingly, John McCain was eligible, contrary to their own idiocy.
Cruz is a natural born citizen, i.e., a citizen who was a citizen at birth, versus becoming a citizen after birth.
The Naturalization Act of 1790 alone demonstrates who the founders intended to exclude. The Nationality Act of 1940 makes it clear. There is ample support for what the founders meant, what "natural born" means, and that Cruz is eligible.
https://americansabroad.org/files/3013/3478/0295/18-04-2012_1318_971.pdf (https://americansabroad.org/files/3013/3478/0295/18-04-2012_1318_971.pdf)
For those of you too stupid to read, you can listen to Mark Levin explain it:
http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen-and-eligible-to-be-president/ (http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen-and-eligible-to-be-president/)
As a CANADA Educate-Yourself.
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
Heh, well I guess YOU need to bone up on the actual language associated with eligibility, not to mention a couple recent court decisions in regards to this.
....and for what its worth, we would think most conservatives could spot Lib, even when he's painted bright orange...guess not
Quote from: Sauce on June 29, 2016, 07:48:58 AM
Heh, well I guess YOU need to bone up on the actual language associated with eligibility, not to mention a couple recent court decisions in regards to this.
....and for what its worth, we would think most conservatives could spot Lib, even when he's painted bright orange...guess not
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
Well he was right about one thing. :lol:
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
So McCain was ineligible also?
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 29, 2016, 08:30:36 AM
So McCain was ineligible also?
I think your talking over his head now. :popcorn:
Quote from: walkstall on June 29, 2016, 08:34:45 AM
I think your talking over his head now. :popcorn:
I am thinking he needs to find another sandbox for further training.
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 29, 2016, 09:05:12 AM
I am thinking he needs to find another sandbox for further training.
He not even up to Romper Room 101 debating yet.
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
Ok. I'll play along. Actually during Cruz's campaign to run for president his eligibility to be on the ballot was challenged. The courts ruled in Cruz's favor; he IS eligible. End of story.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/04/14/new-jersey-court-rules-that-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen-eligible-to-become-president/
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/22895-pennsylvania-supreme-court-rules-cruz-eligible
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268043-illinois-board-of-elections-rules-cruz-eligible-for
http://www.teaparty.org/court-rules-on-cruz-eligibility-for-president-155512/
Fixed first link.
walks
Quote from: Yukon on June 29, 2016, 07:18:22 AM
Ted Cruz maybe an American citizen but he was born in CANADA therefor he is NOT eligible to be President of the USA. I thought conservatives would know that much about their own system? I guess I was wrong
Trumpanzees/Libs beat this horse to death, so they thought, until it turned around and kicked them square in the ass and dislodged their their brains.
I posted the pertinent laws in one easy to understand paragraph, so easy, libs of all stripes could grasp, even Canadians.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/disqus-topics/proof-that-cruz-is-natural-born/
Quote from: Solar on June 28, 2016, 06:36:35 PM
tHAT'S THE IDEA...
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
:smile:
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
Well, there is a marginal possibility that the GOP convention will decide to allow the delegates to vote their conscience and then the shoe will be on the other foot. I am prepared to vote for Trump but I do not fault others for refusing to do so. Trump has a plurality, but not a majority - which is not a compelling position from which to lay claim to absolute loyalty from nor claim mandate for one's candidacy from one's party.
If Trump is rejected and no laws are broken, will the nominee have your vote, Mr. Expansive and Enlightened Voice of Reason? Or will you then revert to the same doctrinaire emotionalism which you accuse others of displaying and place your feelings above loyalty to the Buckley Rule?
Quote from: gandb77 on June 26, 2016, 05:38:18 AM
does it make no difference to you what the voters want? They chose CHUMP
No, it really doesn't, political parties are private organizations. They can choose who they want to nominate and adjust their rule accordingly.
Though this process can be used in a nefarious manor, in this case, if they choose, it can be used to circumvent a disaster for their party and country.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
Actually, as we have all been saying, Trump is the original stalking horse to make that possible...trouble is, his volatile combination of ego and low self esteem (kind of like combining an acid and base together/ matter and antimatter, choose your metaphor) added with possibly his growing senility - Which has caused him to forget his original motives and now believes he has a shot at winning.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
The more you talk the more you show your ignorance. If we could go back and redo the primaries and not have any open primaries and Trump still came out victorious, I might consider voting for him (well probably not). Problem is, millions of dems crossed over to ensure the repubs would run a candidate that is unable to beat Hillary and if by some thin chance he won they would still have a liberal in office. If you really believe the republican party chose their candidate, I have some ocean front property to sell you in Arizona. You and your fellow Trumpbots have been duped.
Quote from: Double D on June 29, 2016, 05:27:07 PM
The more you talk the more you show your ignorance. If we could go back and redo the primaries and not have any open primaries and Trump still came out victorious, I might consider voting for him (well probably not). Problem is, millions of dems crossed over to ensure the repubs would run a candidate that is unable to beat Hillary and if by some thin chance he won they would still have a liberal in office. If you really believe the republican party chose their candidate, I have some ocean front property to sell you in Arizona. You and your fellow Trumpbots have been duped.
Agreed...and why the Trumpsters can't see the obvious is beyond me. They've been duped! He's a fraud. He lacks substance and with that comes just plain ignorance.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
I see no reason to respond to your idiocy, but I do have a question.
Do your friends laugh when you talk poolitics, or are they polite and laugh behind your back?
Hell, do you even have friends, or are Trumpanzees more of a cult type following?
You should check out the Jim Jones method...
Quote from: Solar on June 29, 2016, 06:28:59 PM
I see no reason to respond to your idiocy, but I do have a question.
Do your friends laugh when you talk poolitics, or are they polite and laugh behind your back?
Hell, do you even have friends, or are Trumpanzees more of a cult type following?
You should check out the Jim Jones method...
As usual you employ stupid ridicule and don't defend your position. Good tactic.
When Hiliary is elected, we will have people like you to thank.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 03:48:41 AM
As usual you employ stupid ridicule and don't defend your position. Good tactic.
When Hiliary is elected, we will have people like you to thank.
I quit responding to you because you generally ignore what I write anyway, you should be thankful you're still allowed to post here.
As to your Hillary BS, she's where she is because of people like you, we have a trump because of unprincipled idiots like you supporting them.
Grow a set of values and stand by them for a change, if more did, we could purge the nation of commies like those currently infecting both party's.
Quote from: Solar on June 30, 2016, 04:12:05 AM
I quit responding to you because you generally ignore what I write anyway, you should be thankful you're still allowed to post here.
As to your Hillary BS, she's where she is because of people like you, we have a trump because of unprincipled idiots like you supporting them.
Grow a set of values and stand by them for a change, if more did, we could purge the nation of commies like those currently infecting both party's.
Just one question. Will your unwavering support for Cruz benefit the election of Hilary?
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 04:32:41 AM
Just one question. Will your unwavering support for Cruz benefit the election of Hilary?
One question. Will your unwavering support of Trump benefit the nation?
Just imagine if the base say's no to the NY Lib...
Quote from: Solar on June 30, 2016, 04:41:17 AM
One question. Will your unwavering support of Trump benefit the nation?
Just imagine if the base say's no to the NY Lib...
Actually I don't like either Trump or Hilary so I will not be voting. How about you?
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:02:23 AM
Actually I don't like either Trump or Hilary so I will not be voting. How about you?
You are one weird SOB. You chastise everyone for refusing to support a lib, then attempt to claim moral high ground by stating you refuse to participate?
Again, why are you even here?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sherv.net%2Fcm%2Femo%2Flaughing%2Fcrying.gif&hash=7dafaa2c50091bfe3081204643cd24aa5cc44bfc)
Hello POT.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:02:23 AM
Actually I don't like either Trump or Hilary so I will not be voting. How about you?
Quote from: Solar on June 30, 2016, 05:08:38 AM
You are one weird SOB. You chastise everyone for refusing to support a lib, then attempt to claim moral high ground by stating you refuse to participate?
Again, why are you even here?
Your unwavering support for Cruz amounts to the same thing as mine. actually a wasted vote or the same as staying home.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:02:23 AM
Actually I don't like either Trump or Hilary so I will not be voting. How about you?
If you aren't voting, then stop complaining. STFU and GTFO, you waste good air here.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:32:03 AM
Your unwavering support for Cruz amounts to the same thing as mine. actually a wasted vote or the same as staying home.
Only in your warped mind!
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:02:23 AM
Actually I don't like either Trump or Hilary so I will not be voting. How about you?
Uh yea, ok. I believe you.....not. I can envision Trump posters hung all over your bedroom wall and dozens of red ball caps on your dresser.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:32:03 AM
Your unwavering support for Cruz amounts to the same thing as mine. actually a wasted vote or the same as staying home.
While the conversation doesn't include me ... I feel compelled to weigh in on this and you can take it for what it's worth; just my humble opinion.
I would first like to ask you a very valid but serious question? Have you done any research on Ted Cruz and Donald Trump? How about Hillary Clinton? Have you listened to any of their speeches in which they clearly go into detail about issues such as illegal immigration, Muslim/jihadist, economy, taxes, 2nd amendment, etc? There just is no comparison; Trump can't go into detail about anything as he clearly lacks the knowledge. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable. Ted Cruz has actually walked the walk and doesn't just talk the talk. Ted Cruz is by far the most conservative. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable about the Constitution. Ted Cruz knows the function of the three branches of government. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a Republic and not a Democracy. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a government not a business. Ted Cruz by far has the most integrity. Ted Cruz is fit to by our Commander in Chief.
Yes you are correct; Trump is the presumptive nominee and at this point in time a lot of people are kicking themselves for not backing a conservative when they had a chance. The GOP establishment certainly isn't jumping in to rally around Trump; heck he can't even get members from his own party to speak at his convention. Secondly; he responds in an aggressive with an 'in your face attitude'. He is a bombastic narcissistic demagogue who is actually a danger to this country.
Why am I going to write in Ted Cruz? Three reasons. #1 Because he is the most qualified person to lead this country out of the turmoil that it is in. #2 Because I have what is known as a conscious. I cannot and absolutely will not vote for someone who will continue us down our current path of destruction. #3 If there are enough write ins and third party votes, there is the possibility that it will deny both Hillary or Trump the majority needed and it then becomes the decision of the House of Representatives.
If all of us had voted our conscious long ago instead of voting for party we wouldn't be in the absolute mess that we are in.
The way I look at it, either we can write in a candidate or vote for a 3rd party candidate (Constitution Party has qualified in some states) who will lead us to restoring this country or we can vote for someone who will continue to contribute to its demise.
I don't know about you, but my choice is pretty darn clear. I chose restoration.
By the way, I would welcome you to give my just one clear and substantial reason as to why I should waste my vote on Trump? Saying that it will prevent Hillary from getting the presidency is not a substantial reason; that I see as the cowards way out. I am one who firmly believes that Trump has been in this from the beginning to hand the keys to the oval office to Hillary.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 30, 2016, 06:05:34 AM
While the conversation doesn't include me ... I feel compelled to weigh in on this and you can take it for what it's worth; just my humble opinion.
I would first like to ask you a very valid but serious question? Have you done any research on Ted Cruz and Donald Trump? How about Hillary Clinton? Have you listened to any of their speeches in which they clearly go into detail about issues such as illegal immigration, Muslim/jihadist, economy, taxes, 2nd amendment, etc? There just is no comparison; Trump can't go into detail about anything as he clearly lacks the knowledge. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable. Ted Cruz has actually walked the walk and doesn't just talk the talk. Ted Cruz is by far the most conservative. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable about the Constitution. Ted Cruz knows the function of the three branches of government. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a Republic and not a Democracy. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a government not a business. Ted Cruz by far has the most integrity. Ted Cruz is fit to by our Commander in Chief.
Yes you are correct; Trump is the presumptive nominee and at this point in time a lot of people are kicking themselves for not backing a conservative when they had a chance. The GOP establishment certainly isn't jumping in to rally around Trump; heck he can't even get members from his own party to speak at his convention. Secondly; he responds in an aggressive with an 'in your face attitude'. He is a bombastic narcissistic demagogue who is actually a danger to this country.
Why am I going to write in Ted Cruz? Three reasons. #1 Because he is the most qualified person to lead this country out of the turmoil that it is in. #2 Because I have what is known as a conscious. I cannot and absolutely will not vote for someone who will continue us down our current path of destruction. #3 If there are enough write ins and third party votes, there is the possibility that it will deny both Hillary or Trump the majority needed and it then becomes the decision of the House of Representatives.
If all of us had voted our conscious long ago instead of voting for party we wouldn't be in the absolute mess that we are in.
The way I look at it, either we can write in a candidate or vote for a 3rd party candidate (Constitution Party has qualified in some states) who will lead us to restoring this country or we can vote for someone who will continue to contribute to its demise.
I don't know about you, but my choice is pretty darn clear. I chose restoration. In other words, I chose to be part of the solution rather than contribute to the problem.
By the way, I would welcome you to give my just one clear and substantial reason as to why I should waste my vote on Trump? Saying that it will prevent Hillary from getting the presidency is not a substantial reason; that I see as the cowards way out. I am one who firmly believes that Trump has been in this from the beginning to hand the keys to the oval office to Hillary.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 30, 2016, 06:05:34 AM
While the conversation doesn't include me ... I feel compelled to weigh in on this and you can take it for what it's worth; just my humble opinion.
I would first like to ask you a very valid but serious question? Have you done any research on Ted Cruz and Donald Trump? How about Hillary Clinton? Have you listened to any of their speeches in which they clearly go into detail about issues such as illegal immigration, Muslim/jihadist, economy, taxes, 2nd amendment, etc? There just is no comparison; Trump can't go into detail about anything as he clearly lacks the knowledge. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable. Ted Cruz has actually walked the walk and doesn't just talk the talk. Ted Cruz is by far the most conservative. Ted Cruz is by far the most knowledgeable about the Constitution. Ted Cruz knows the function of the three branches of government. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a Republic and not a Democracy. Ted Cruz realizes that we are a government not a business. Ted Cruz by far has the most integrity. Ted Cruz is fit to by our Commander in Chief.
Yes you are correct; Trump is the presumptive nominee and at this point in time a lot of people are kicking themselves for not backing a conservative when they had a chance. The GOP establishment certainly isn't jumping in to rally around Trump; heck he can't even get members from his own party to speak at his convention. Secondly; he responds in an aggressive with an 'in your face attitude'. He is a bombastic narcissistic demagogue who is actually a danger to this country.
Why am I going to write in Ted Cruz? Three reasons. #1 Because he is the most qualified person to lead this country out of the turmoil that it is in. #2 Because I have what is known as a conscious. I cannot and absolutely will not vote for someone who will continue us down our current path of destruction. #3 If there are enough write ins and third party votes, there is the possibility that it will deny both Hillary or Trump the majority needed and it then becomes the decision of the House of Representatives.
If all of us had voted our conscious long ago instead of voting for party we wouldn't be in the absolute mess that we are in.
The way I look at it, either we can write in a candidate or vote for a 3rd party candidate (Constitution Party has qualified in some states) who will lead us to restoring this country or we can vote for someone who will continue to contribute to its demise.
I don't know about you, but my choice is pretty darn clear. I chose restoration.
By the way, I would welcome you to give my just one clear and substantial reason as to why I should waste my vote on Trump? Saying that it will prevent Hillary from getting the presidency is not a substantial reason; that I see as the cowards way out. I am one who firmly believes that Trump has been in this from the beginning to hand the keys to the oval office to Hillary.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!
A vote for the constitution is never throw away.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 30, 2016, 05:32:03 AM
Your unwavering support for Cruz amounts to the same thing as mine. actually a wasted vote or the same as staying home.
My vote speaks volumes in sending a message to the Establishment.
Your lack of participation say's nothing, with the exception of shirking ones obligations to the country.
Again, why the fuck are you here, why are you even concerned what others think when you yourself admittedly refuse to participate?
What we have here folks is a troll, as Double,D pointed out, the guy is nothing but a shill for the lib, as his past posts have born out, he's always been an ignorant lib without values.
Quote from: gandb77 on June 29, 2016, 03:20:17 PM
"Thats the idea" To elect Hilary Clinton. As I said, Cruz is the stalking horse to make this possible.
Trump is getting his ass kicked by Hillary.
Donald Trump: Making Hillary Great Again!
Quote from: Solar on June 30, 2016, 08:19:50 AM
My vote speaks volumes in sending a message to the Establishment.
Your lack of participation say's nothing, with the exception of shirking ones obligations to the country.
Again, why the fuck are you here, why are you even concerned what others think when you yourself admittedly refuse to participate?
What we have here folks is a troll, as Double,D pointed out, the guy is nothing but a shill for the lib, as his past posts have born out, he's always been an ignorant lib without values.
Well it's not quite a Hobsons choice but it come close.
Our choice now is only between Hilary or Trump. Lets face it, these two have garnered more votes in the legitimate primaries than any other candidate.
Now, unless we change the rules, they are our choices. They both have met the requirements of their respective parties.
Therefore our choices now are:
. Vote for a known Lib lifetime politician that will continue the policies of the Obama admin, and would also select liberal candidates for the supreme court.
. Vote for a business man with no political experience who we think may be a Lib but who also talks a conservative game. May select liberal supreme court candidates but has indicated a preference for conservative nominees
. Write in a name for another person whom we prefer knowing that this person will not be elected, but we then have made a statement.
. Stay home and do not vote, thereby telling them that the whole system is
lousy.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 01, 2016, 04:59:21 AM
Well it's not quite a Hobsons choice but it come close.
Our choice now is only between Hilary or Trump. Lets face it, these two have garnered more votes in the legitimate primaries than any other candidate.
Now, unless we change the rules, they are our choices. They both have met the requirements of their respective parties.
Therefore our choices now are:
. Vote for a known Lib lifetime politician that will continue the policies of the Obama admin, and would also select liberal candidates for the supreme court.
. Vote for a business man with no political experience who we think may be a Lib but who also talks a conservative game. May select liberal supreme court candidates but has indicated a preference for conservative nominees
. Write in a name for another person whom we prefer knowing that this person will not be elected, but we then have made a statement.
. Stay home and do not vote, thereby telling them that the whole system is
lousy.
You left out one key scenario; writing in a candidate or voting third party has a chance of denying either Clinton or Trump the majority. If that happens, the House of Representatives elects our next president.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 01, 2016, 04:59:21 AM
Well it's not quite a Hobsons choice but it come close.
Our choice now is only between Hilary or Trump. Lets face it, these two have garnered more votes in the legitimate primaries than any other candidate.
Now, unless we change the rules, they are our choices. They both have met the requirements of their respective parties.
Therefore our choices now are:
Since when did a plurality become a majority vote?
Quote. Vote for a known Lib lifetime politician that will continue the policies of the Obama admin, and would also select liberal candidates for the supreme court.
That's no guarantee she can get her choice nominated, just because she makes outrageous claims of who she'll appoint, doesn't mean Congress will approve.
Quote. Vote for a business man with no political experience who we think may be a Lib but who also talks a conservative game. May select liberal supreme court candidates but has indicated a preference for conservative nominees
Admitted lib! Have you been living under a rock? Nomenclature of businessman is applied loosely here. By definition, he gives real business owners a very bad name.
He did nothing on his own, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, uses other people's money to achieve his end goals, uses the court as a weapon against those that oppose him an investor's he's filched.
It's the third time he's ran for POTUS, First as a Dim then as a Independent and now as a Pub, and during that span was friends with the Clinton's, and to date has not said one bad thing about them.
To top it all off, he stated his sister, a known hardcore leftist would make an excellent SCOTUS pick.
Quote. Write in a name for another person whom we prefer knowing that this person will not be elected, but we then have made a statement.
If you had been paying attention, the delegates are no longer bound to one candidate, a majority of which stated their first choice is Cruz.
But you wouldn't know that because, one, you're a lib and two, support a NY Lib and purposefully blocked out any real evidence that might cloud your opinion of a lib running on Nationalism.
Quote. Stay home and do not vote, thereby telling them that the whole system is
lousy.
Running from the enemy sends the message of weakness, that their adversary is easily manipulated and will herd like sheep for the slaughter like the good little pacifist cowards they are.
Voting for Trump tells the Establishment they win by backing losers. You know, like they have since Bush Nixon.
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
Quote from: TFields on July 02, 2016, 04:07:39 PM
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
I'd love to hear your explanation.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/question-for-trump-supporters/
Quote from: TFields on July 02, 2016, 04:07:39 PM
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
This is a Conservative TEA forum. NOT a RINO forum. Voting for Trump
is voting for the democratic party.
Quote from: TFields on July 02, 2016, 04:07:39 PM
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
Hahahahaha.....what are you, 12? My god. Please educate yourself prior to posting. Your statement is so original. Wow.
Another troll for Trump! :rolleyes:
Quote from: tac on July 02, 2016, 04:41:35 PM
Another troll for Trump! :rolleyes:
Just one more person voting for a democratic that believes the Trumps (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi162.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft270%2FEV1L1%2F114_bsflag.gif&hash=5a059a2d445aacde252953f628267aab09f2d8f3)
Quote from: walkstall on July 02, 2016, 04:22:43 PM
This is a Conservative TEA forum. NOT a RINO forum. Voting for Trump is voting for the democratic party.
hE COMES TO A cONSERVATIVE tea FORUM AND IS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER WE'RE NOT VOTING FOR A LIB? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2016, 04:09:51 PM
I'd love to hear your explanation.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/question-for-trump-supporters/
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.codejourneymen.com%2Fsites%2Fg%2Ffiles%2Fg202031%2Ff%2F201311%2Fcookie_monster_wait.gif&hash=2001dec20f3ae17c20be17a3ac8e48327bf7e851)
Quote from: walkstall on July 02, 2016, 06:14:05 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.codejourneymen.com%2Fsites%2Fg%2Ffiles%2Fg202031%2Ff%2F201311%2Fcookie_monster_wait.gif&hash=2001dec20f3ae17c20be17a3ac8e48327bf7e851)
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
tIRED OF WAITING...
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_UVBlDZcvnKY%2FTI-Xc3uUHHI%2FAAAAAAAAAYE%2FTHlKOThsgRE%2Fs1600%2FCookie-Monster-Binge.jpg&hash=4a46153366f25ec1e3009e0d92fd15c12b86ce71)
Hillary for prison 2016
Trump for bankruptcy 2016
Question: If Trump is worth Billions, why is he begging for donations?
Quote from: Hoofer on July 04, 2016, 09:24:49 AM
Hillary for prison 2016
Trump for bankruptcy 2016
Question: If Trump is worth Billions, why is he begging for donations?
I see Trump as just another.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M4d55859b32a4208fb0cd7408e3cbf12cH0%26amp%3Bpid%3D15.1&hash=759512d3a3050c6a2a885d8f3ed269569364070a)
Quote from: walkstall on July 04, 2016, 09:37:35 AM
I see Trump as just another.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M4d55859b32a4208fb0cd7408e3cbf12cH0%26amp%3Bpid%3D15.1&hash=759512d3a3050c6a2a885d8f3ed269569364070a)
Trump is a clown in a three ring circus.
Quote from: walkstall on July 04, 2016, 10:49:48 AM
Sideshow maybe!
Freak show with unbelievable hair followed on the program by the fat lady, Hillary.
Quote from: TFields on July 02, 2016, 04:07:39 PM
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
tell me why I should vote for trump? What does he stand for that you admire. which of his principles do you think will guide the country?
Quote from: TFields on July 02, 2016, 04:07:39 PM
A Cruz write in campaign? I come on a conservative forum and find a campaign to help Hillary Clinton.
NEVER TRUMP = FOREVER HILLARY
Trump 2016: Making Hillary Great Again!
Quote from: Solar on April 04, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Same here Billy. It appears he has the momentum for winning despite the hatred from the Establishment holding the rule book that can change on a dime.
However, I think it's important that we show the GOP'e we're willing to fight regardless of the tricks they pull, and we'll elect Cruz and expose the ledership as paper tigers.
With the GOP'e well aware we will follow through with a write in campaign, it becomes insurance against their slimy behavior.
They needed to be informed, and they need to know it now which is why CPF is leading the fight against the Establishment.
We're TEA. We're the base!
It is very difficult to discern what is going on. I've read many conflicting articles; some state that delegates aren't bound, but yet delegates are suing in Virginia. The RNC has stated that they are implementing rules so that Trump isn't sidestepped; yet articles state that the delegates are set to revolt and it has been reported that some delegates aren't going to even show up and other delegates have claimed to have been threatened.
What has been consistent is the failure of the party; both the establishment (RINO's) and conservative wings of the GOP to get behind Trump. Down ballot candidates are distancing themselves from Trump. I can really only think of a handful of those who have continued to 'back' Trump; Sessions, Christie, Gingrich and Palin...and Ryan who has reluctantly backed him. Trump has been nothing more than a siphon for the DEMS from the beginning and by the failure of the party to get behind him they realize it as well. Trump hijacking and derailing the GOP(e) has been in the works for awhile.
Of course what happens at the convention, remains to be seen. Cruz's momentum continues and his supporters are NOT going away anytime soon.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 04, 2016, 08:18:13 PM
It is very difficult to discern what is going on. I've read many conflicting articles; some state that delegates aren't bound, but yet delegates are suing in Virginia. The RNC has stated that they are implementing rules so that Trump isn't sidestepped; yet articles state that the delegates are set to revolt and it has been reported that some delegates aren't going to even show up and other delegates have claimed to have been threatened.
What has been consistent is the failure of the party; both the establishment (RINO's) and conservative wings of the GOP to get behind Trump. Down ballot candidates are distancing themselves from Trump. I can really only think of a handful of those who have continued to 'back' Trump; Sessions, Christie, Gingrich and Palin...and Ryan who has reluctantly backed him. Trump has been nothing more than a siphon for the DEMS from the beginning and by the failure of the party to get behind him they realize it as well. Trump hijacking and derailing the GOP(e) has been in the works for awhile.
Of course what happens at the convention, remains to be seen. Cruz's momentum continues and his supporters are NOT going away anytime soon.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!
Yeah, I've read the same stuff, but if you notice, all the Establishment crap that comes out is stated by one individual, unlike the articles quoting delegates and constitutional scholars are generally people we've either heard of, or are quoting a source from within the rules committee itself, which happens to favor Cruz.
If I were to guess, I'd say the pressure is on Trump to concede, or the GOP faces total collapse of the party in revolt, resulting in a coup.
It's why you're being given so much conflicting information, the Establishment is trying to fracture the base, and it's not working.
:huh:
Quote from: Amelia_Kai on July 05, 2016, 01:23:49 AM
:huh:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Me417c102409c214736b9254ecb3df717H0%26amp%3Bpid%3D15.1&hash=73639834785407642802727a0e552045b1883280)
Quote from: Amelia_Kai on July 05, 2016, 01:23:49 AM
:huh:
That's Right, you don't have to support a NY Lib, or any lib for that matter.
When did this come down to just 2 choices, Donald or Hillary?
I can't remember a time when voters WEREN'T writing in their choice for POTUS.
Neither can I remember a time when the presumptive nominee relentlessly insulted and bashed the party he claimed to represent.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 05, 2016, 03:55:46 PM
When did this come down to just 2 choices, Donald or Hillary?
I can't remember a time when voters WEREN'T writing in their choice for POTUS.
Neither can I remember a time when the presumptive nominee relentlessly insulted and bashed the party he claimed to represent.
I think have found my choice. ----Gary Johnson
Quote from: gandb77 on July 09, 2016, 05:57:58 AM
I think have found my choice. ----Gary Johnson
The one who likes 80% to 90% of Hillary Clinton's policies? That Gary Johnson? Why not just vote for Momma Grisly and be done with it, doing your share of screwing America?
Quote from: gandb77 on July 09, 2016, 05:57:58 AM
I think have found my choice. ----Gary Johnson
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Why am I not surprised?
Quote from: gandb77 on July 09, 2016, 05:57:58 AM
I think have found my choice. ----Gary Johnson
Ok. You are free to vote for whom you want of course, but, have you done any research?? He is PRO-AMNESTY and PRO-ABORTION. He is also AGAINST expanding the military!!! In this day and age, with ISIS running rampant, he wants to limit our military? Again ... you are free to vote for whom you want. I'm just hoping you're making an informed decision.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 09, 2016, 08:53:46 AM
Ok. You are free to vote for whom you want of course, but, have you done any research?? He is PRO-AMNESTY and PRO-ABORTION. He is also AGAINST expanding the military!!! In this day and age, with ISIS running rampant, he wants to limit our military? Again ... you are free to vote for whom you want. I'm just hoping you're making an informed decision.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm
That's the keyword, something he is not, in fact, he's making an emotional decision.
Johnson, IMO, is an Establishment plant from both sides of the isle. I believe if the Libertarian party had a candidate true to the values of the movement, the party could wreak all sorts of damage to the so called "Two Party" system, or rather one leftist party system.
I remember the libertarian movement from the 70s, when ones word meant something, the party today is merely a facade of what it once was.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 09, 2016, 05:57:58 AM
I think have found my choice. ----Gary Johnson
Libertarians are the party that's hell-bent on destroying the moral fabric of America, masquerading as liberal freedom fighters - but too stoned to realize it. Pontificating on the moral high-ground from a cesspool of filth.
The 3-legged platform, which has never changed:
Drugs - Isolationism - Prostitution (call them DIP S...)
Gary Johnson has NO BUSINESS in the Libertarian Party... yes, he's a BETTER man than the rest of them.
Not the best, but better. He's a Republican without a voice, the only place he gets a hearing is among the DIPs. The best thing about Gary Johnson is fiscal policy / budget... unfortunately he likes cutting defense.
http://pertruth.com/10-facts-about-gary-johnson/10/
Sorry, I find no compelling reason to pull the lever for him.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 10, 2016, 11:39:00 AM
Libertarians are the party that's hell-bent on destroying the moral fabric of America, masquerading as liberal freedom fighters - but too stoned to realize it. Pontificating on the moral high-ground from a cesspool of filth.
The 3-legged platform, which has never changed:
Drugs - Isolationism - Prostitution
(call them DIP S...)
Gary Johnson has NO BUSINESS in the Libertarian Party... yes, he's a BETTER man than the rest of them.
Not the best, but better. He's a Republican without a voice, the only place he gets a hearing is among the DIPs. The best thing about Gary Johnson is fiscal policy / budget... unfortunately he likes cutting defense.
http://pertruth.com/10-facts-about-gary-johnson/10/
Sorry, I find no compelling reason to pull the lever for him.
A third party doesn't have a chance in this election. However, there is a slim possibility that if enough votes are cast for third party candidates and there are enough write-in candidates, it just may be enough to keep either Hillary or Donny from getting the needed majority. The president will then be decided by the House.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 10, 2016, 01:10:48 PM
A third party doesn't have a chance in this election. However, there is a slim possibility that if enough votes are cast for third party candidates and there are enough write-in candidates, it just may be enough to keep either Hillary or Donny from getting the needed majority. The president will then be decided by the House.
I'm trying to decide if that's a good thing, or a bad thing. If the choice is between Trump and Clinton, we still have a lunatic as president. However, if Cruz enters the mix that's a different story.
Quote from: tac on July 10, 2016, 02:17:52 PM
I'm trying to decide if that's a good thing, or a bad thing. If the choice is between Trump and Clinton, we still have a lunatic as president. However, if Cruz enters the mix that's a different story.
I've read conflicting articles. Some say that the House can pick who they want. Some articles state that the House has to pick from the candidates who ran in the primaries and some articles state that the House has to pick from the top three delegate receivers. I'm not sure if that's the top 3 from each party or the top 3 period. If it's the top 3 from each party Cruz would be in the picture, but if it's the top 3 period, then Cruz would be eliminated and it would be Clinton, Trump, and Sanders. I also am not quite sure how 'Super Delegates' enter into the picture.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 11, 2016, 06:08:40 AM
I've read conflicting articles. Some say that the House can pick who they want. Some articles state that the House has to pick from the candidates who ran in the primaries and some articles state that the House has to pick from the top three delegate receivers. I'm not sure if that's the top 3 from each party or the top 3 period. If it's the top 3 from each party Cruz would be in the picture, but if it's the top 3 period, then Cruz would be eliminated and it would be Clinton, Trump, and Sanders. I also am not quite sure how 'Super Delegates' enter into the picture.
Why would the RNC delegates vote on a Dim candidate?
I think that we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 12, 2016, 03:39:04 PM
I think that we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
What this we shit! (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-hOB1JkFZhek%2FTvr0Jjzx8EI%2FAAAAAAAAJmA%2FPiyUE8bxDxg%2Fs1600%2Fred-dumb-ass.jpg&hash=bcfb265d14b22602b43c1c0ec98288e5daf20a08)
Quote from: Jonathan on July 12, 2016, 03:39:04 PM
I think that we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
You do realize, you and your mindless ilk are but a very tiny minority, vocal, but extremely tiny, right?
Quote from: s3779m on July 04, 2016, 02:43:24 PM
tell me why I should vote for trump? What does he stand for that you admire. which of his principles do you think will guide the country?
IntegretyA business person does not gain success without integrity. Do you know of any rich auto mechanics? The rich auto mechanic has integrity, honesty, and dignity; with repeat business. Trump has not built his wealth on deceit, slight of hand, nor dishonesty. Financial success comes from dealing with lots of different people; on lots of different levels; about lots of different opinions; all cooperating for mutual benefit.
Trump's integrity is an admirable trait.Many business people declare bankruptcy (note the federal law concerning bankruptcy as a legal option), make poor decisions, and fail at some things. Financial failure does not reflect lack of integrity. Financial success, on the other hand, does not come without integrity.
Business SenseRemember, this Country was founded on the idea of business. The Tea Party was all about taxes. All business people are always concerned about taxes. Trump's business principles will guide our Nation back to a realistic business mentality.
Trumps principles will guide the country.None of our other politicians know how to run a business. The Nation is a business; with a budget, with income and expenses, with Marketing challenges, and with competition from other forms of government and political rhetoric.
Separation of Church and StateBecause Trump is not wearing his personal religious beliefs or principals on his shirt sleeves, like many, uninformed conservatives, Trump will make secular decisions (about ISIS) and not become involved with right or wrong but rather concern himself with your freedom to express either opinion.
The three above reasons strongly support the proposition that you should vote for Trump.
Money is the great equalizer. Access to it requires a free market. A free market requires a Republic. The Founding Fathers understood the power of money and thus created a Republic: The United States of America.
Quote from: Solar on July 12, 2016, 04:08:07 PM
You do realize, you and your mindless ilk are but a very tiny minority, vocal, but extremely tiny, right?
Yes, we are Fourteen Million (14,000,0000) tiny. About 4% of the total population, including children.
[14,000,000 / 330,000,000 = .0424]
What is your demographic?
Quote from: Jonathan on July 12, 2016, 04:13:52 PM
Integrety
A business person does not gain success without integrity. Do you know of any rich auto mechanics? The rich auto mechanic has integrity, honesty, and dignity; with repeat business. Trump has not built his wealth on deceit, slight of hand, nor dishonesty. Financial success comes from dealing with lots of different people; on lots of different levels; about lots of different opinions; all cooperating for mutual benefit.
Trump's integrity is an admirable trait.
Many business people declare bankruptcy (note the federal law concerning bankruptcy as a legal option), make poor decisions, and fail at some things. Financial failure does not reflect lack of integrity. Financial success, on the other hand, does not come without integrity.
Pure Bull Shit!!! I've been in business my entire life, some failures, others have been successes, but regardless, I always made good on my failures and debts, because that's what real men do, and they don't screw over their investors all for the sake of profit.
Trump screws everyone but himselfTake Imminent Domain and how he tried to steal an elderly widowed woman's home.
QuoteBusiness Sense
Remember, this Country was founded on the idea of business. The Tea Party was all about taxes. All business people are always concerned about taxes. Trump's business principles will guide our Nation back to a realistic business mentality.
Greasing the palms of politicians is not what Americans consider business in any stretch of the imagination.
QuoteTrumps principles will guide the country.
Straight to Hell, they would!
QuoteNone of our other politicians know how to run a business. The Nation is a business; with a budget, with income and expenses, with Marketing challenges, and with competition from other forms of government and political rhetoric.
WRONG!!! The govt is not a business, it is a leach on the taxpayer, which is why Cruz wants to shrink it and Trump wants to grow it.
Did you ever ask yourself why he wants to grow it?
QuoteSeparation of Church and State
Because Trump is not wearing his personal religious beliefs or principals on his shirt sleeves, like many, uninformed conservatives, Trump will make secular decisions (about ISIS) and not become involved with right or wrong but rather concern himself with your freedom to express either opinion.
You confuse values and principles with religion, that's a costly mistake.
QuoteThe three above reasons strongly support the proposition that you should vote for Trump.
Sorry John, but only a fool would take all that crap at face value and never challenge it, as I have done.
QuoteMoney is the great equalizer. Access to it requires a free market. A free market requires a Republic. The Founding Fathers understood the power of money and thus created a Republic: The United States of America.
What Trump does is considered govt welfare fraud, what the Founders envisioned was a free market void of govt.
Take a basic econ course.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 12, 2016, 03:39:04 PM
I think that we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
The second half of that sentence proves you weren't thinking at all.
Quote from: Solar on July 12, 2016, 04:34:05 PM
Pure Bull Shit!!! I've been in business my entire life, some failures, others have been successes, but regardless, I always made good on my failures and debts, because that's what real men do, and they don't screw over their investors all for the sake of profit.
Here you mistake that "making good on failures and debts" is reflective of integrity.
Because you were able to make good on your failures and debts, it just means that the risk that you took was low risk, because you were able to make good on your loan (the bank took no risk).
Those who stretch beyond their personal ability to repay a loan are the true entrepreneurs. You tried. Good for you. You paid your debts. Good for you.
Try stretching your limit next time. Learn how far lack of integrity won't take you if you need to partner up with other individuals who have greater wealth than you.
You found your comfort zone, good for you. Trump is not afraid to try bigger and better things.
And using the Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States was contemplated by the founding fathers. Did they have a lack of integrity because they considered that some folks might stretch their limits beyond their ability to pay back?
Imminent domain is another tool that has emerged out of the 5th Amendment, "without just compensation." Trying does not degrade a person's integrity.
Solar Said,
"Straight to Hell, they [Trump Business Principles] would!
WRONG!!! The govt is not a business."
Here you miss the point again. Who else do you know has built a 9 billion dollar business out of a 1 million dollar budget? Business Principles always prevail. You know that, you owned a business.
And finally, again, your pointing finger points three back toward yourself. The govt is a business!
(1) The United States is a business that shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;
(2) The United States is a business that controls the number of people that come into the United States;
(3) The United States is a business that provides laws for bankruptcy;
(4) The United States is a business that promotes the Progress of Science and useful Arts; and
(5) The United States is a business that regulates the Value of Money.
Your perceptions parrot a poor prism.
Reread your Constitution. The United Stated entered into a business contract with the 13 States of the Confederation via Article VI, "All Debts contracted and Engagement entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
A graduate school Economics class would have given you the opportunity to learn that all governments develop a business agreement between the people and the bureaucracy.
Trump is a champion business person. Vote for Trump! :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on July 12, 2016, 04:34:05 PM
You confuse values and principles with religion, that's a costly mistake.
No, I do not confuse values and principles with religion. A secular state understands the difference between government policy and personal prayer.
In contrast to a secular government, the Muslim culture is incapable of separating Allah from Government.
Each person's values and principles are derived from within an individual's heart. You can call it religion if you wish.
Business Principles are derived from evidence of financial success. Without integrity, one's personal principles whither.
Government Policies are derived from civil agreement in defining inappropriate behavior.
Hillary's behavior is despicable.
Trump's behavior is inspiring.
As you recognized, I only have Fourteen Million people with whom I agree regarding the vote for Trump.
If you do not vote, you fail our soldiers. If you fail to vote for Trump, you deny your own worth.
Solar Says,
"what the Founders envisioned was a free market void of govt.
False statement. Thus, Solar's mis-perception. The creation of the United States was all about dealing with money problems. Solar need's to read the Adventures of Rush Revere!
The Confederation was replaced by a Federal Government. The Founders did not envision a free market void of govt, silly Solar, the Founders knew that the independent Confederate States would not withstand their financial burden if the Federal Government did not take over.
Solar talks more than he knows.
Jonathan
Please learn to use the quote functionso people can follow.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:59:05 AM
No, I do not confuse values and principles with religion. A secular state understands the difference between government policy and personal prayer.
In contrast to a secular government, the Muslim culture is incapable of separating Allah from Government.
Each person's values and principles are derived from within an individual's heart. You can call it religion if you wish.
Business Principles are derived from evidence of financial success. Without integrity, one's personal principles whither.
Government Policies are derived from civil agreement in defining inappropriate behavior.
Hillary's behavior is despicable.
Trump's behavior is inspiring.
As you recognized, I only have Fourteen Million people with whom I agree regarding the vote for Trump.
If you do not vote, you fail our soldiers. If you fail to vote for Trump, you deny your own worth.
Uhh, remind me again how many of that 14 million were democrats? Also, remind me again what % of the GOP supports frump? Remind me why any conservative should forego their morals and life long convictions to vote for a life long NY liberal who has stood for everything we hate for his entire adult life?
Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2016, 12:19:47 PM
Uhh, remind me again how many of that 14 million were democrats? Also, remind me again what % of the GOP supports frump? Remind me why any conservative should forego their morals and life long convictions to vote for a life long NY liberal who has stood for everything we hate for his entire adult life?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcUCLwWCihE
Quote from: Jonathan on July 12, 2016, 04:13:52 PM
Integrety
A business person does not gain success without integrity. Do you know of any rich auto mechanics? The rich auto mechanic has integrity, honesty, and dignity; with repeat business. Trump has not built his wealth on deceit, slight of hand, nor dishonesty. Financial success comes from dealing with lots of different people; on lots of different levels; about lots of different opinions; all cooperating for mutual benefit.
Trump's integrity is an admirable trait.
Many business people declare bankruptcy (note the federal law concerning bankruptcy as a legal option), make poor decisions, and fail at some things. Financial failure does not reflect lack of integrity. Financial success, on the other hand, does not come without integrity.
Business Sense
Remember, this Country was founded on the idea of business. The Tea Party was all about taxes. All business people are always concerned about taxes. Trump's business principles will guide our Nation back to a realistic business mentality.
Trumps principles will guide the country.
None of our other politicians know how to run a business. The Nation is a business; with a budget, with income and expenses, with Marketing challenges, and with competition from other forms of government and political rhetoric.
Separation of Church and State
Because Trump is not wearing his personal religious beliefs or principals on his shirt sleeves, like many, uninformed conservatives, Trump will make secular decisions (about ISIS) and not become involved with right or wrong but rather concern himself with your freedom to express either opinion.
The three above reasons strongly support the proposition that you should vote for Trump.
Money is the great equalizer. Access to it requires a free market. A free market requires a Republic. The Founding Fathers understood the power of money and thus created a Republic: The United States of America.
Sorry, if you have been reading on this forum you would have seen he has been called out from the beginning, he is a liberal. Every promised made has been backtracked on, that is not integrity, that is a liar. And by the way, his $ came from inheritance not integrity.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:59:05 AM
No, I do not confuse values and principles with religion. A secular state understands the difference between government policy and personal prayer.
In contrast to a secular government, the Muslim culture is incapable of separating Allah from Government.
Each person's values and principles are derived from within an individual's heart. You can call it religion if you wish.
Business Principles are derived from evidence of financial success. Without integrity, one's personal principles whither.
Government Policies are derived from civil agreement in defining inappropriate behavior.
Hillary's behavior is despicable.
Trump's behavior is inspiring.
As you recognized, I only have Fourteen Million people with whom I agree regarding the vote for Trump.
If you do not vote, you fail our soldiers. If you fail to vote for Trump, you deny your own worth.
Scamming money from innocent people and supporting universal health care? Gee, my hero.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:41:55 AM
Pure Bull Shit!!! I've been in business my entire life, some failures, others have been successes, but regardless, I always made good on my failures and debts, because that's what real men do, and they don't screw over their investors all for the sake of profit.
Here you mistake that "making good on failures and debts" is reflective of integrity.
Botched that one, didn't ya?
Try and color within the lines.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Obviously you've never been in business, or you'd know better than to get a loan from a bank.
QuoteBecause you were able to make good on your failures and debts, it just means that the risk that you took was low risk, because you were able to make good on your loan (the bank took no risk).
So please tell me, how is having a track record of integrity a mistake?
In your mind a 1.8 million is a low risk investment? :rolleyes:
QuoteThose who stretch beyond their personal ability to repay a loan are the true entrepreneurs. You tried. Good for you. You paid your debts. Good for you.
It's one thing to believe in your project and yourself, but when you have other peoples money on the line, there is no such thing as not paying back their investment unless it was understood it was a risky investment.
QuoteTry stretching your limit next time. Learn how far lack of integrity won't take you if you need to partner up with other individuals who have greater wealth than you.
You found your comfort zone, good for you. Trump is not afraid to try bigger and better things.
No, I knew the risk going in, but when it didn't work, I repaid my debt, unlike Trump, where he hides behind an LLC with the design of bilking investors while still pulling a profit, yes, that's how Trump does it and it's underhanded.
QuoteAnd using the Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States was contemplated by the founding fathers. Did they have a lack of integrity because they considered that some folks might stretch their limits beyond their ability to pay back?
Seriously? The Founders adopted English law at the time, which was just short of debtors prison, because debtors were viewed as quasi felons, it wasn't until the late 1800s did the laws change.
No, bankruptcy is not a party of doing business, it's become a tool for the corrupt. I know, I grew up in a world where bankruptcy was viewed as the ultimate failure, public scorn was deserved.
Trump ios scum for using the courts as a weapon.
Quote
Imminent domain is another tool that has emerged out of the 5th Amendment, "without just compensation." Trying does not degrade a person's integrity.
Wow, if he was selling children to pedophiles, you'd probably applaud him for his entrepreneurship.
QuoteSolar Said,
"Straight to Hell, they [Trump Business Principles] would!
WRONG!!! The govt is not a business."
Here you miss the point again. Who else do you know has built a 9 billion dollar business out of a 1 million dollar budget? Business Principles always prevail. You know that, you owned a business.
You're a gullible fool for believing that BS.
QuoteAnd finally, again, your pointing finger points three back toward yourself. The govt is a business!
(1) The United States is a business that shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;
How is that a business?
Quote(2) The United States is a business that controls the number of people that come into the United States;
Number crunching bureaucrats are not business people.
Quote
(3) The United States is a business that provides laws for bankruptcy;
WTF? Now you're just showing your youth and inexperience.
Quote
(4) The United States is a business that promotes the Progress of Science and useful Arts; and
Show me where in the Constitution is was charged with such bull shit!
Quote(5) The United States is a business that regulates the Value of Money.
Holy Shit, did you actually spout that Communist bull shit?
What part of Free Fucking Market, do you not get?
QuoteYour perceptions parrot a poor prism.
Reread your Constitution. The United Stated entered into a business contract with the 13 States of the Confederation via Article VI, "All Debts contracted and Engagement entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
The govt was charged with the security of the States, PERIOD!!! That is not a Business, fool!
QuoteA graduate school Economics class would have given you the opportunity to learn that all governments develop a business agreement between the people and the bureaucracy.
Trump is a champion business person. Vote for Trump! :popcorn:
More socialist pap!
Trump is a scam artist! I'll be writing in Cruz regardless along with millions of Americans.
Dear Mr. Solar,
Thank you for reading my writing. Your insipid responses have no meaning; just dribble that exposes a dull brain. Using adjectives and calling people names reflects on you like a mirror in the bathroom. After you flush your toilet and squirt a couple sprays of air freshener, take a deep breath and think. If you get dizzy thinking, go ahead a sit down at your computer and mindlessly type.
I am glad that you were able to pay back a $1.8M loan. Why didn't you borrow $5M? And why didn't you convert your $1.8M into $9B? Where do you draw the line between corrupt and successful? Succeeding requires skill. Don't underestimate your own ability. Certainly, you underestimate Trump's.
OK, sit back for a lesson on the Constitution.
If a person takes a risky investment, and can't pay it back, she declares Bankruptcy.
You believe, "bankruptcy is not a part of doing business, it's become a tool for the corrupt." Wrong you are. For an example, the Hebrew folk were required to forgive a loan after 7 years. Exactly, because debtor's prison is not beneficial to society. So caution goes to the lender. If a lender believes that a loan might not be paid back in 7 years, then the loan is not made. So when a person declares bankruptcy, it was not a one person show, several people made the decision to borrow/loan more than they could pay back, if the venture failed. Declaring Bankruptcy is not a corrupt endeavor.
The United States Constitution provides for Bankruptcy Laws. (see Article I, section 8, clause 4) That's business buddy.
Its ok, sit on the couch for a moment to reminisce, the tissue box is there on the bright white knitted doily, "I grew up in a world where bankruptcy was viewed as the ultimate failure, public scorn was deserved." You poor thing. Such abuse has stifled your intrepidness.
Bankruptcy is a fair-minded business tool. Gosh, sometimes the barn burns down and there ain't nobody to pay back the loan.
Your tears from the above admission fogged your vision because you failed to observe that the 5th Amendment allows for just compensation if the government takes private land for public use. In Trump's case the question was whether a new private development was such a benefit to the public that it would fit into the definition. He failed. But what about Larry Flint who succeeded at questioning whether his speech was beneficial to the public. So, Mr. Solar, your definition of corrupt is prejudiced by your upbringing. Open up a bit, fly a little.
YOU ASK, "How is that a business to protect the States from Invasion?" Like a security company is a business that protects your $1.8M investment from thieves, so is the Federal Government responsible for halting illegal immigration. When money is spent, business takes place. How elemental do we need to be here, Mr. Solar?
Dude, when a bureaucrat gets paid a salary, business is being conducted. Think about it. Union Contracts; Union Dues. Workman's comp, Health Insurance. Salaries being paid for family groceries, electric bill and housing costs. Come on Mr. Solar, number crunchers get paid big bucks. If you believe that such activity is NOT a business, then I understand your vehemence against Trump.
After attacking my youth, you ask me to, "Show me where in the Constitution is was charged with such bull shit!" Well, flip the pages of your Constitution to Article I, section 8, clause 8. Mr. Solar, read that section of the Constitution aloud to the class, please.
And finally Mr. Solar, please read clause 4, of that same section 8, in Article I of your Constitution. Your shock is understandable, if you are reading, for the first time, that the Government regulates the Value of Money.
The spouters of such above ideas came from your Founding Fathers. They are not communist, as you amply do not understand, "Holy Shit, did you actually spout that Communist bull shit? What part of Free Fucking Market, do you not get?"
Mr. Solar, consider yourself bare bottom spanked, in front of the all male class, by the the sexy, young nun with her wooden ruler.
As suggested in a far distant past post, go re-read your constitution.
I think we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Quote from: Double D on July 13, 2016, 12:19:47 PM
Uhh, remind me again how many of that 14 million were democrats? Also, remind me again what % of the GOP supports frump? Remind me why any conservative should forego their morals and life long convictions to vote for a life long NY liberal who has stood for everything we hate for his entire adult life?
I do not know the numbers. I know that Trump garnered 14M votes.
Please elaborate on the demographics. I would like to know.
The GOP is bound to the delegate rules. So what ever % that may be. Rules, by the way, that a few GOP folks are attempting to change.
I know that somehow, out of the 14M votes that Trump received, he garnered more than enough delegates to win the republican nomination. From my studies, that's a pretty high hurtle to overcome. And he did it!
It's ok to join the multitudes. Lets not fight, we must unite!
We need Republicans at all levels of the political scene.
Vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:52:11 PM
I think we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
I don't vote for draft dodgers.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:52:11 PM
I think we should all vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Oh really? I am of the very FIRM belief NOT to vote for someone whom I feel will continue this country on its current path of destruction. I also am a firm believer in NOT voting for the lesser of two evils. His narcissistic personality is not only offensive but dangerous. Certainly anyone in their right mind is not going to vote to give one of the most wealthiest narcissistic, psychotic men in the world one of the most powerful positions in the world. To do so is absolute sheer lunacy. Trump had no clue that we are a Republic, not a Democracy, nor does he comprehend or know the functions of the 3 branches of our government. He hasn't a clue about the Constitution nor does he understand what the function of the Supreme Court is. He is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
Listening to him makes me cringe; he has nothing of substance to say and repeats him self in an effort to make it appear that he actually has something to say; he is nothing more than a hollow drum. He lacks integrity and is a fraud. So, why would I vote for him?? Because he has an 'R' by his name on the ballot? :lol::lol:
#NeverTRUMP
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:04:48 AM
I do not know the numbers. I know that Trump garnered 14M votes.
Please elaborate on the demographics. I would like to know.
The GOP is bound to the delegate rules. So what ever % that may be. Rules, by the way, that a few GOP folks are attempting to change.
I know that somehow, out of the 14M votes that Trump received, he garnered more than enough delegates to win the republican nomination. From my studies, that's a pretty high hurtle to overcome. And he did it!
It's ok to join the multitudes. Lets not fight, we must unite!
We need Republicans at all levels of the political scene.
Vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Only problem Johnathan, those who are unwilling to vote for Trump do have INTEGRITY. It is their integrity that WILL prevent them from voting for the orange buffoon. Perhaps you missed the fact that Donny received a lot of DEM votes ... they wanted him as the nominee ... they know he doesn't stand a chance in the general. He is a siphon for the DEMS and his intent has clearly been to ensure Hillary is seated.
By the way, I have spent many, many hours working towards the reconstruction of this country. The way I see things, either you can be a part of rebuilding our country or you can be a part of its continued destruction. I believe it is my duty to my country to support and honor its Constitution and I believe in a government of the people, by the people and for the people. You need to remember that the power of the government is supposed to be derived from the consent of the governed.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!!
Quote from: Jonathan on July 13, 2016, 11:33:21 PM
Dear Mr. Solar,
Thank you for reading my writing. Your insipid responses have no meaning; just dribble that exposes a dull brain. Using adjectives and calling people names reflects on you like a mirror in the bathroom. After you flush your toilet and squirt a couple sprays of air freshener, take a deep breath and think. If you get dizzy thinking, go ahead a sit down at your computer and mindlessly type.
I am glad that you were able to pay back a $1.8M loan. Why didn't you borrow $5M? And why didn't you convert your $1.8M into $9B? Where do you draw the line between corrupt and successful? Succeeding requires skill. Don't underestimate your own ability. Certainly, you underestimate Trump's.
OK, sit back for a lesson on the Constitution.
If a person takes a risky investment, and can't pay it back, she declares Bankruptcy.
You believe, "bankruptcy is not a part of doing business, it's become a tool for the corrupt." Wrong you are. For an example, the Hebrew folk were required to forgive a loan after 7 years. Exactly, because debtor's prison is not beneficial to society. So caution goes to the lender. If a lender believes that a loan might not be paid back in 7 years, then the loan is not made. So when a person declares bankruptcy, it was not a one person show, several people made the decision to borrow/loan more than they could pay back, if the venture failed. Declaring Bankruptcy is not a corrupt endeavor.
The United States Constitution provides for Bankruptcy Laws. (see Article I, section 8, clause 4) That's business buddy.
Does Govt produce anything consumable, a product of any kind? No, it's a leach on society, it's sole existence is to feed itself, that is not how business works.
Business: A commercial or industrial enterprise'
The activity of providing goods and services involving financial and commercial and industrial aspects
Those are basic definitions of business. Now you've been schooled!
QuoteIts ok, sit on the couch for a moment to reminisce, the tissue box is there on the bright white knitted doily, "I grew up in a world where bankruptcy was viewed as the ultimate failure, public scorn was deserved." You poor thing. Such abuse has stifled your intrepidness.
Bankruptcy is a fair-minded business tool. Gosh, sometimes the barn burns down and there ain't nobody to pay back the loan.
Son, cut the patronizing bull shit, you're talking to an actual adult that's lived the experience, and now retired, in fact, I lived it so precise, that I was able to retire in my early 40s.
What have you done with your life other than leach off mommy and whine that life is unfair?
QuoteYour tears from the above admission fogged your vision because you failed to observe that the 5th Amendment allows for just compensation if the government takes private land for public use. In Trump's case the question was whether a new private development was such a benefit to the public that it would fit into the definition. He failed. But what about Larry Flint who succeeded at questioning whether his speech was beneficial to the public. So, Mr. Solar, your definition of corrupt is prejudiced by your upbringing. Open up a bit, fly a little.
So if I were a wealthy billionaire and I focused on your moms property, which threatens your basement domicile, how could you stop me if I want it badly enough?
Remember, I have the financial means to keep her in court, spending her fixed income, forcing you to get an actual job, and in the end, owning your 235 govt housing.
QuoteYOU ASK, "How is that a business to protect the States from Invasion?" Like a security company is a business that protects your $1.8M investment from thieves, so is the Federal Government responsible for halting illegal immigration. When money is spent, business takes place. How elemental do we need to be here, Mr. Solar?
A simple business can't write law to affect it's existence. What a fool!
QuoteDude, when a bureaucrat gets paid a salary, business is being conducted. Think about it. Union Contracts; Union Dues. Workman's comp, Health Insurance. Salaries being paid for family groceries, electric bill and housing costs. Come on Mr. Solar, number crunchers get paid big bucks. If you believe that such activity is NOT a business, then I understand your vehemence against Trump.
Where did the money originate, how was it secured and what was the end product? Come on business genius, answer the question~!
You see, now you're being completely hypocritical, in one sentence you claim the 16th is illegal, and if abolished, would make your argument for Trump and his abuse of governmental laws illegal.
QuoteAfter attacking my youth, you ask me to, "Show me where in the Constitution is was charged with such bull shit!" Well, flip the pages of your Constitution to Article I, section 8, clause 8. Mr. Solar, read that section of the Constitution aloud to the class, please.
And finally Mr. Solar, please read clause 4, of that same section 8, in Article I of your Constitution. Your shock is understandable, if you are reading, for the first time, that the Government regulates the Value of Money.
WOW, even yet more hypocrisy.
QuoteThe spouters of such above ideas came from your Founding Fathers. They are not communist, as you amply do not understand, "Holy Shit, did you actually spout that Communist bull shit? What part of Free Fucking Market, do you not get?"
Really, the Founders created laws that gave govt the power to asses your earnings, the fruits of your labor?
There you go again, advocating for the very thing you claim needs abolishing?
What happened in 1913? Hmmmm.?
QuoteMr. Solar, consider yourself bare bottom spanked, in front of the all male class, by the the sexy, young nun with her wooden ruler.
As suggested in a far distant past post, go re-read your constitution.
Son, all you managed to achieve, was to expose your ignorance and hypocrisy. If you insist on displaying your immaturity on this forum, your stay will be short lived.
I suggest, I mean this in all seriousness, that you stick to facts and lose the personal insults, all you manage to do is create animosity for yourself and dilute whatever point you're attempting.
Trolls like this troll Jonathan are usually overpriced at ten for a penny. He should watch his puke mouth or adults will help him eat his teeth.
Quote from: quiller on July 14, 2016, 06:54:44 AM
Trolls like this troll Jonathan are usually overpriced at ten for a penny. He should watch his puke mouth or adults will help him eat his teeth.
The trolls stay will be brief...
Quote from: quiller on July 14, 2016, 06:54:44 AM
Trolls like this troll Jonathan are usually overpriced at ten for a penny. He should watch his puke mouth or adults will help him eat his teeth.
Jonathan will eventually fade away; in the meantime, it's fun to listen to his rhetoric. It will soon become apparent that he has no rebuttal and then the fun will really begin! :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 06:59:09 AM
The trolls stay will be brief...
:biggrin: Speaking of...
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crtwgdskqqbqfgbkxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Ffwqtkwgdbxbsgbrssfgxrtdsggwsk%2F1%2F1595431%2F13159128%2Fcpftaxedfruitninja398x268x100-vi.png&hash=a24510e2cb424ffb65e45d6bd337983d8d42224f)
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 06:01:44 AM
Because he has an 'R' by his name on the ballot?
Yes, Ted Cruz and all the other Republicans on the debate stage promised to support and back the chosen one, the Republican Nominee. The word Republican begins with the letter "R." Yes, because he has an 'R' by his name on the ballot.
Ask Mr. Solar about keeping a promise.
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 06:59:09 AM
The trolls stay will be brief...
The meaning of troll: a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having very ugly appearance.
If you are calling me a troll, your accusations teeter on hate language. :popcorn:
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 07:00:24 AM
Jonathan will eventually fade away; in the meantime, it's fun to listen to his rhetoric
Thank you for the compliment. I'll fade away after November 8, 2016. :popcorn:
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 07:00:24 AM
It will soon become apparent that he has no rebuttal.
Deprecatory comments deserve no rebuttal. Questions encourage conversation. :smile:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-nAMVHmnHLxQ%2FToiBpIXi4SI%2FAAAAAAAABh4%2FYMNLa50mvfY%2Fs1600%2Ftick%2Btock.png&hash=e6074e2dca1e7846580aec7c5fa0bc895ade28e2)
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OjlSAEgeTo4/maxresdefault.jpg)
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 06:52:03 AM
A simple business can't write law to affect it's existence.
Wrong, Mr. Solar.
A corporation files papers within the State it wishes to conduct business. The Articles of Incorporation and By-laws are the written law by which the simple business must conduct itself. Whether you create an LLC; Scorp; Ccorp; or Trust, one must write law to affect it's existence.
A Sole Proprietorship, on the other hand, is not a legal entity because all business is conducted through a personal Social Security Number (SSN); as opposed to an Employer Identification Number (EIN).
Some folks obtain a fictitious business name and acquire an EIN, but it is still a simple flow-through business; meaning all profit and taxes flow through to the SSN of the Sole Proprietorship.
There are only two ways to become an entity here in the United States: (1) be born as a human being; or (2) create a corporation using
written law.
There are useful ways in dealing with trolls:
https://blog.disqus.com/user-blocking-is-now-available-on-disqus?UTM_SOURCE=motd_home&UTM_MEDIUM=web
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 06:52:03 AM.
What happened in 1913? Hmmmm.?
Look everybody, Mr. Solar liked his schooling so much that he has come back for more. We feel sorry for you, Mr. Solar, because the sexy, young nun who smacked you with her wooden ruler was a mere substitute for that day. Just to warn you, Mr. Solar, I see troll hair on the teacher's arms today.
In the year of 1913, your Congress voted into law the income tax.
In the past, taxing a person's personal income required a temporary special law. For example, President Lincoln used the income tax to pay private corporations to build railway and telegraph equipment. Lincoln saved the Union using his taxation strategy.
But, in 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations.
The congressional events that happened on Jeckyll Island, in 1913, were a direct attack on the United States Constitution.
Before 1913, the Constitution included clause 4, of section 9, of Article I of the Constitution. "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
The Founding Fathers knew that if governments tax your earnings, then you are merely a vassal beholden to the government. For example, if a single, no-kids person works eight hours a day, two hours of that wage is taken away from the worker and placed into the government's treasure trove. Ouch. The Tea Party was upset about a 3% tax.
Currently the 16th Amendment is as follows, "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
We need to abolish the 16th Amendment and get back to the original language of our Constitution. We repealed the 18th Amendment (prohibition) with the 21st Amendment. Lets repeal the 16th Amendment with a 28th Amendment.
Lets unite! Vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 10:57:57 AM
There are useful ways in dealing with trolls:
Please use your own brain if you desire to express a feeling. Using Copy/Paste to express your own idea evinces mental indolence.
This is serious, be original. :popcorn:
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 10:57:57 AM
There are useful ways in dealing with trolls:
Or maybe I misread your intent; to stroke Solar with your keyboard, blistered palm. :smile:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 10:19:48 AM
The meaning of troll: a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having very ugly appearance.
If you are calling me a troll, your accusations teeter on hate language. :popcorn:
I don't hate, I loathe trolls. Though I generally let them bury themselves first. You klnow, like you are doing in this very thread.
Show me one member you can point to as a ally.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 10:23:43 AM
I'll fade away after November 8, 2016. :popcorn:
You actually think you have a say in the matter?
The thing about Free Speech, is nothing in the First that says we have to listen to your nonsense.
I'll let the forum decide just how long your stench is allowed to linger.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 10:43:48 AM
Wrong, Mr. Solar.
A corporation files papers within the State it wishes to conduct business. The Articles of Incorporation and By-laws are the written law by which the simple business must conduct itself. Whether you create an LLC; Scorp; Ccorp; or Trust, one must write law to affect it's existence.
A Sole Proprietorship, on the other hand, is not a legal entity because all business is conducted through a personal Social Security Number (SSN); as opposed to an Employer Identification Number (EIN).
Some folks obtain a fictitious business name and acquire an EIN, but it is still a simple flow-through business; meaning all profit and taxes flow through to the SSN of the Sole Proprietorship.
There are only two ways to become an entity here in the United States: (1) be born as a human being; or (2) create a corporation using written law.
Add to your ignorance, a problem with reading comprehension.
Business cannot write law, Period!!!
Quote from: quiller on July 14, 2016, 06:54:44 AM
He should watch his puke mouth or adults will help him eat his teeth.
Do you teach your children to speak this way? Heaven forbid you spilt your sperm into a fertile womb.
To me, your words conjure up visions of a yapping Chihauhua dog clothed in a green, roughly knit dog garment with glittery, yellow-gold hems and bootys, shivering and growling from the shady, front porch, as I walk by your chain-linked fenced yard on a sunny afternoon. You are indeed conscious of your safe zone though you spew loveless words. :popcorn:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 11:11:26 AM
Look everybody, Mr. Solar liked his schooling so much that he has come back for more. We feel sorry for you, Mr. Solar, because the sexy, young nun who smacked you with her wooden ruler was a mere substitute for that day. Just to warn you, Mr. Solar, I see troll hair on the teacher's arms today.
In the year of 1913, your Congress voted into law the income tax.
In the past, taxing a person's personal income required a temporary special law. For example, President Lincoln used the income tax to pay private corporations to build railway and telegraph equipment. Lincoln saved the Union using his taxation strategy.
But, in 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations.
The congressional events that happened on Jeckyll Island, in 1913, were a direct attack on the United States Constitution.
Before 1913, the Constitution included clause 4, of section 9, of Article I of the Constitution. "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
The Founding Fathers knew that if governments tax your earnings, then you are merely a vassal beholden to the government. For example, if a single, no-kids person works eight hours a day, two hours of that wage is taken away from the worker and placed into the government's treasure trove. Ouch. The Tea Party was upset about a 3% tax.
Currently the 16th Amendment is as follows, "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
We need to abolish the 16th Amendment and get back to the original language of our Constitution. We repealed the 18th Amendment (prohibition) with the 21st Amendment. Lets repeal the 16th Amendment with a 28th Amendment.
Lets unite! Vote for Trump. :popcorn:
So basically you were schooled into looking up the 1913 law, only to discover you were wrong, then tried to turn it around and claim a win?
You do realize, that's an old leftist trick this forum is more than familiar with.
Question: What is the function of business?
Come on, it's a really short answer.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 11:54:24 AM
Do you teach your children to speak this way? Heaven forbid you spilt your sperm into a fertile womb.
To me, your words conjure up visions of a yapping Chihauhua dog clothed in a green, roughly knit dog garment with glittery, yellow-gold hems and bootys, shivering and growling from the shady, front porch, as I walk by your chain-linked fenced yard on a sunny afternoon. You are indeed conscious of your safe zone though you spew loveless words. :popcorn:
This will be your only warning. Post shit like that again, and you're out of here troll.
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 11:50:52 AM
Business cannot write law, Period!!!
The business of Congress is to write law.
The business of a Corporation's Board is to write corporate policy (bureaucratic procedure) operating structure, written regulations.
Same concept: Write Law.
Your $1.8M simple business certainly followed legal procedure as written in you operating manual, if you had one. :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 11:57:08 AM
This will be your only warning. Post shit like that again, and you're out of here troll.
Consider it re-posted. :smile:
I think that we should all vote for Trump! :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 11:57:08 AM
you're out of here troll.
My, my Mr. Solar. You have a bit of a dictator's bullishness about you.
Notwithstanding your personal characteristics (diminishing or otherwise), I patiently await your response to the suggestion that we, together as Republicans, repeal the 16th Amendment and how it relates to your history lesson about the events that took place on Jekyll Island in 1913.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:00:25 PM
The business of Congress is to write law.
The business of a Corporation's Board is to write corporate policy (bureaucratic procedure) operating structure, written regulations.
Same concept: Write Law.
Your $1.8M simple business certainly followed legal procedure as written in you operating manual, if you had one. :popcorn:
Wrong Gumby! Policy is not law.
Policy:
A plan of action adopted by an individual or social group
A line of argument rationalizing the course of action
A contract
Law:
The collection of
rules imposed by authorityA rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society
The force of policemen and officers
jurisprudence: The collection of rules imposed by authority
Now answer the question, what is the purpose of business.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:00:25 PM
The business of Congress is to write law.
The business of a Corporation's Board is to write corporate policy (bureaucratic procedure) operating structure, written regulations.
Same concept: Write Law.
Your $1.8M simple business certainly followed legal procedure as written in you operating manual, if you had one. :popcorn:
How can a business write anything that compels me to follow it? That is a law.
Quote from: supsalemgr on July 14, 2016, 12:13:39 PM
How can a business write anything that compels me to follow it? That is a law.
How thick is this kid, that he doesn't realize he's being spanked?
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 11:54:56 AMQuestion: What is the function of business?
I see that you raised you hand there in the back to ask a question. I like the participation level of this class.
Answer: The function of "a" Business is to produce wealth. The function of "business" is to generate win/win monetary transactions. :mellow:
Quote from: supsalemgr on July 14, 2016, 12:13:39 PM
How can a business write anything that compels me to follow it?
Another involved student. Good class.
Mr. Sales guy, do you have a cable contract; a cell phone contract; an employment contract; a marriage?
Every product that you purchase or agreement that you make comes with an Implied Warranty enforceable by law.
Bottom line, if you don't pay, then you don't get service or the product. If you have without paying, then you have either stolen it or you are a charity case.
Next intelligent question! :smile:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
I see that you raised you hand there in the back to ask a question. I like the participation level of this class.
Answer: The function of "a" Business is to produce wealth. The function of "business" is to generate win/win monetary transactions. :mellow:
We are talking about corporations. The purpose of a corporation is to enhance shareholder value, not to produce wealth. Some individuals might become wealthy by owning stock in a corporation.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:21:02 PM
I see that you raised you hand there in the back to ask a question. I like the participation level of this class.
Answer: The function of "a" Business is to produce wealth. The function of "business" is to generate win/win monetary transactions. :mellow:
Good, we're getting somewhere. So essentially the business needs a product the consumer is willing to pay for, so as to generate profit so it can grow and compete with other entities.
Govt on the other hand, creates nothing, it's very existence is that of a leach, it writes laws dictating the behavior of others, is dictatorial in that it does not allow for competition.
In essence, it's the antithesis of business.
Class is dismissed.
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 12:12:27 PM
Policy:
A plan of action adopted by an individual or social group
A line of argument rationalizing the course of action
A contract
Law:
The collection of rules imposed by authority
A rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society
The force of policemen and officers
jurisprudence: The collection of rules imposed by authority
Math class!
Law is a subset of Policy.As ideas evolve they move through the dialectic of human discourse that eventually solidify into paradigms upon which society forms a culture. Within a given social culture there are unspoken rules; like being polite. But as vagueness is the enemy of clarity, words are narrowed down to a minimum that eventuate into Law that dictate a common behavior of the people living within that culture (governmental region).
In our case, we live in the United States of America. We are a culture that lives by the Rule of Law, while respecting different ideas.
Our Founding Fathers understood the necessity to limit the power of government while protecting that same government from fluctuating ideas asserted by the people who run the government. Thusly, the Federal Government is structured around a corporate business model.
The Legislative Branch is the Board of Directors
The Executive Branch is the paid management; like CEO, COO, CFO, etc.
The Judicial Branch is the Human Resource Department of the Corporation.
So, if an employee violates corporate policy, they may be fired according to the Corporate Regulations; like inside trading and stuff.
Accordingly, if a citizen breaks the law, like Hillary did in mishandling government property (emails), that government employee is held accountable to government policy.
The language of Law is more narrowed than the verbiage of Policy. However, Policy serves the same purpose as Law, to give instruction as to proper behavior given the circumstances.
:popcorn:
That's why we should all vote for Trump.
Trump is a wizard at managing Corporations.
Vote for Trump. :popcorn:
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 11:49:25 AM
You actually think you have a say in the matter?
The thing about Free Speech, is nothing in the First that says we have to listen to your nonsense.
I'll let the forum decide just how long your stench is allowed to linger.
QuoteI'll let the forum decide just how long your stench is allowed to linger.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 12:56:55 PM
Math class!
Law is a subset of Policy.
As ideas evolve they move through the dialectic of human discourse that eventually solidify into paradigms upon which society forms a culture. Within a given social culture there are unspoken rules; like being polite. But as vagueness is the enemy of clarity, words are narrowed down to a minimum that eventuate into Law that dictate a common behavior of the people living within that culture (governmental region).
In our case, we live in the United States of America. We are a culture that lives by the Rule of Law, while respecting different ideas.
Our Founding Fathers understood the necessity to limit the power of government while protecting that same government from fluctuating ideas asserted by the people who run the government. Thusly, the Federal Government is structured around a corporate business model.
The Legislative Branch is the Board of Directors
The Executive Branch is the paid management; like CEO, COO, CFO, etc.
The Judicial Branch is the Human Resource Department of the Corporation.
So, if an employee violates corporate policy, they may be fired according to the Corporate Regulations; like inside trading and stuff.
Accordingly, if a citizen breaks the law, like Hillary did in mishandling government property (emails), that government employee is held accountable to government policy.
The language of Law is more narrowed than the verbiage of Policy. However, Policy serves the same purpose as Law, to give instruction as to proper behavior given the circumstances.
:popcorn:
Nope, without an actual law backing policy, it has no more power than a suggestion, no penalty, in fact, policy has to work within existing "LAW", it cannot write policy usurping US law.
Give it a rest son, you made a complete ass of yourself, and now you're bordering on certifiable lunacy, you bring nothing to the forum, claimed some crazy conspiracy that I lured you here just to expose your insanity, and now, without any help from anyone, you've managed to remove all doubt of your sanity.
I see no reason to keep you around, unless you can somehow convince the forum otherwise.
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 12:30:51 PM
So essentially the business needs a product the consumer is willing to pay for, so as to generate profit so it can grow and compete with other entities. Class is dismissed.
Now, now, I know you want to run off to recess right now. Be patient my Solar grasshopper. You can stretch your legs in a bit. But wear your safety helmet when you go out there. Those monkey bars can get confusingly tricky for you.
Business exists only if it provides a consumable product, like an opera singer performing for rich people at the concert hall. Or the toilet paper and fragrance spray you use in your bathroom.
Many non-profit corporations exist without generating a profit but they certainly compete with other entities for the donated dollar.
And my student, you fail to recognize that your government does produce consumables for which you dearly pay.
Not only is your Country not being Invaded, oh wait, that's a breach of Contract on the part of the United States of America to protect States from Invasion. So that consumable product (service) is not apropos.
Okay, roads! The Interstate Highway system was built in the 50's for your free use and access to other regions of the Country. To get your toilet paper to you. That's a product worthy of purchase. Transportation, by the way, is the forth basic need. [food, shelter, clothing, and transportation].
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is another valuable consumable that protects inventors from copy cats.
But this, my student, is the essence of Trump's skill and expertise.
Trump's business sense will prove very useful in determining which government cost (agency) is really producing a good product that is consumable and helpful. A product that is worth of the taxpayers' dollars.
The Veteran's Administration is another example. I hear, however, that that department is performing poorly.
Coffee break for the teachers. Go out and play, now. Good boy. :smile:
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Now, now, I know you want to run off to recess right now. Be patient my Solar grasshopper. You can stretch your legs in a bit. But wear your safety helmet when you go out there. Those monkey bars can get confusingly tricky for you.
Business exists only if it provides a consumable product, like an opera singer performing for rich people at the concert hall. Or the toilet paper and fragrance spray you use in your bathroom.
Many non-profit corporations exist without generating a profit but they certainly compete with other entities for the donated dollar.
And my student, you fail to recognize that your government does produce consumables for which you dearly pay.
Not only is your Country not being Invaded, oh wait, that's a breach of Contract on the part of the United States of America to protect States from Invasion. So that consumable product (service) is not apropos.
Okay, roads! The Interstate Highway system was built in the 50's for your free use and access to other regions of the Country. To get your toilet paper to you. That's a product worthy of purchase. Transportation, by the way, is the forth basic need. [food, shelter, clothing, and transportation].
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is another valuable consumable that protects inventors from copy cats.
But this, my student, is the essence of Trump's skill and expertise.
Trump's business sense will prove very useful in determining which government cost (agency) is really producing a good product that is consumable and helpful. A product that is worth of the taxpayers' dollars.
The Veteran's Administration is another example. I hear, however, that that department is performing poorly.
Coffee break for the teachers. Go out and play, now. Good boy. :smile:
Someone is wearing diapers on economics but it's not Solar. Do you even understand the definition of public goods and private goods or why they are discussed as entirely different aspects of the total output of the economy? Managing or administrating infrastructure etc., is not the same thing as creating it. Tax dollars (derived from the private sector exclusively) create infrastructure - not government. (rolls eyes) Awaiting your substantive response (save the patronizing thinly-veiled insults - using that technique of writing makes you look weak). I'm just trying to establish whether you are as ignorant as you appear (which would explain why you attempt to disguise it with excessive verbiage) or if there is some hope of salvaging you from your own self-adoring lunacy.
The fact that Trump advocates increasing tariffs as the centerpiece of his domestic economic policy speaks volumes about his lack of wisdom about trade policy (Hill-O-Lies is worse, but at least she tacitly admits to being a Fabian Marxist socialist, but that is beside the point - we're talking about Trump) whereas Trump is talking like someone who has never even heard of the Great Depression or knows anything about how Hoover's "business experience" did nothing to prevent him from making one catastrophic blunder after another in managing the national economy in the post-1929 crash environment.
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 01:05:26 PM
without an actual law backing policy, it has no more power than a suggestion
That was a quick recess. Dust your dirty pants and helmet off. I heard you fell out of the swing. Thank goodness your helmet strap was snapped.
Exactly right, there is no law that requires a person to be polite. Rude people are free to be expressive. Thus the unspoken rule (to be Polite) is less enforceable than the rule to not offensively touch another or to not let your shivering, Chihuahua dog out of the fenced yard to bite passer-byers.
A Policy is less enforceable than a Law. Thus, all Law is a subset within the whole set of Policy. Only the Government may prosecute a broke Law. Concurrently, a business organization may enforce their internal policies.
All organizations create Policy. Some organizations are actually Governments.
Our Founding Fathers organized our government under the general policy (truth) that all men are created equal. And therefore, in order to create a more perfect Union, we do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America, reserving to the States respectively, or to the people, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States.
I believe that Trump will be an excellent CEO of the United States of America. :popcorn:
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on July 14, 2016, 01:38:58 PM
Do you even understand the definition of public goods and private goods or why they are discussed as entirely different aspects of the total output of the economy?
No I do not know the individual definitions of a public or private good.
I do understand that all goods must be purchased. And that each good must provide a benefit to the consumer.
The difference between public and private is clear to me.
The meaning of Private entitles the owner to exclude all others and therefore to set a fair market value for a produced good.
The meaning of Public denotes that tax dollars paid for the production or care of the good.
My thinking is that the same
business principles (cost of production) apply to either a public good or a private good.
I know that President Hoover preceded President Roosevelt and that both had different approaches toward the economy.
Are you suggesting that Trump will follow the same business principles that Hoover did (or didn't) apply during his short, 4-year term (1929-1933)? Or are you suggesting that we are headed toward another depression as was created by the Roaring Twenties? :mellow:
Quote from: Late-For-Lunch on July 14, 2016, 01:38:58 PM
The fact that Trump advocates increasing tariffs as the centerpiece of his domestic economic policy speaks volumes about his lack of wisdom about trade policy
(emphasis added)
Please substantiate your asserted fact:
advocating increased tariffs.
I have not heard of any increased tariffs promoted by the Trump camp.
I have heard that the "deals" we have are out of balance; disfavoring American exceptionalism. Trump advocates re-negotiating the trade agreements.
The centerpieces of our domestic economic policy are as follows:
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sets tax rates.
The Federal Reserve System (FED) sets the Value of the Dollar.
The Treaties, signed by the President, set the tone of international trade between businesses operating within the various countries.
:popcorn:
Johnny boy, you came to a conservative site to attempt to push your liberal agenda. It happens all the time and people here have seen it over and over. Liberalism is a mental disorder. Its an illness with no cure. Your king and savior the donald is a flaming liberal who will continue the destructive liberal policies that this illegal administration has put in place. Your continuous spouting to vote for him shows your youth and vulnerability. Trump has zero substance and was put in this position by liberals and other uninformed idiots who are all just as clueless. Electing him will nullify the GOP as we know it. Fortunately, he doesnt have the support to win. Now, how about going back to your daily liberal websites for some hugs and kisses and leave the conservatives alone. Your butt should be beet red by now anyhow.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 02:25:43 PM
(emphasis added)
Please substantiate your asserted fact: advocating increased tariffs.
I have not heard of any increased tariffs promoted by the Trump camp.
I have heard that the "deals" we have are out of balance; disfavoring American exceptionalism. Trump advocates re-negotiating the trade agreements.
The centerpieces of our domestic economic policy are as follows:
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sets tax rates.
The Federal Reserve System (FED) sets the Value of the Dollar.
The Treaties, signed by the President, set the tone of international trade between businesses operating within the various countries.
:popcorn:
You might want to read this
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/07/donald-trump-says-he-favors-big-tariffs-on-chinese-exports/?_r=0
I understand you back trump, what you do not understand, the trump you back is not the trump you will get. Too bad you cannot learn from this forum, facts have been given to you free of charge which is a hell of a lot better than anything you will get from the orange buffoon. Couple of other items, congress sets the tax rate, the free market system sets the value of the dollar, and the senate must ratify the treaties. So far I have to say you need to read more and post less because you bring nothing.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 01:27:05 PM
Now, now, I know you want to run off to recess right now. Be patient my Solar grasshopper. You can stretch your legs in a bit. But wear your safety helmet when you go out there. Those monkey bars can get confusingly tricky for you.
Business exists only if it provides a consumable product, like an opera singer performing for rich people at the concert hall. Or the toilet paper and fragrance spray you use in your bathroom.
Many non-profit corporations exist without generating a profit but they certainly compete with other entities for the donated dollar.
And my student, you fail to recognize that your government does produce consumables for which you dearly pay.
Not only is your Country not being Invaded, oh wait, that's a breach of Contract on the part of the United States of America to protect States from Invasion. So that consumable product (service) is not apropos.
Okay, roads! The Interstate Highway system was built in the 50's for your free use and access to other regions of the Country. To get your toilet paper to you. That's a product worthy of purchase. Transportation, by the way, is the forth basic need. [food, shelter, clothing, and transportation].
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is another valuable consumable that protects inventors from copy cats.
But this, my student, is the essence of Trump's skill and expertise.
Trump's business sense will prove very useful in determining which government cost (agency) is really producing a good product that is consumable and helpful. A product that is worth of the taxpayers' dollars.
The Veteran's Administration is another example. I hear, however, that that department is performing poorly.
Coffee break for the teachers. Go out and play, now. Good boy. :smile:
Wow, you're the dumbest fuck we've had come through here in a long time.
Govt provides regulation, it builds nothing idiot! The highway system you claim as a business entity, was unconstitutional as Hell, but as a lib, you'd never understand that.
The only thing the govt was charged with, was the security of the nation, an agreement of uniformity by the States.
Everything not charged to the Fed, was strictly reserved to the states. Meaning everything the govt does today beyond security is unconstitutional!
As a disabled Vet, I assure you, the VA should be dissolved and ALL services should be controlled by the private sector.
So in essence, what Trump will do is expand the behemoth that is govt, to ranks only a dictator would admire.
Your lib bull shit is getting old, the condescension of a child on an adult forum was entertaining the first couple of times, but now it's old, like that of a "Got yer nose" joke.
I see no reason to keep your commie ass around, you tried and failed, but your failure is not a total loss, the forum is a teaching forum, and exposing your stupidity for other libs to learn from is a good thing, and yes, not all libs are as stupid as you, not all of them are stupid enough to alter the Bill of Rights, that's reserved for a spetchal kind of stoopid.
So say good night little troll, though I'll allow you the courtesy of reading what others think of you.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 02:08:51 PM
No I do not know the individual definitions of a public or private good.
I do understand that all goods must be purchased. And that each good must provide a benefit to the consumer.
The difference between public and private is clear to me.
The meaning of Private entitles the owner to exclude all others and therefore to set a fair market value for a produced good.
The meaning of Public denotes that tax dollars paid for the production or care of the good.
My thinking is that the same business principles (cost of production) apply to either a public good or a private good.
I know that President Hoover preceded President Roosevelt and that both had different approaches toward the economy.
Are you suggesting that Trump will follow the same business principles that Hoover did (or didn't) apply during his short, 4-year term (1929-1933)? Or are you suggesting that we are headed toward another depression as was created by the Roaring Twenties? :mellow:
Aww, just saw this nonsense after I banned your dumb ass. But I know you're reading it son. :biggrin:
If you had any sense at all, you'd know we are experiencing the worst depression in US history.
The only difference this time, is the Fed just keeps printing money, adding to the unfunded debt.
The upside?
I'll be gone when the debt comes due, but you'll be the one waiting in a soup line because the dollar finally lost worldwide support and collapsed.
Yeah, and as an old man, your only sustenance will come from the govt you wanted to grow. Picture that, you with a walker, or even a wheelchair waiting in an never ending line with other poor, stupid libs that thought growing govt was such a wonderful idea, that gutting the Bill of Rights was the work of a genius. :lol:
Quote from: Solar on July 14, 2016, 03:33:51 PM
Aww, just saw this nonsense after I banned your dumb ass. But I know you're reading it son. :biggrin:
If you had any sense at all, you'd know we are experiencing the worst depression in US history.
The only difference this time, is the Fed just keeps printing money, adding to the unfunded debt.
The upside?
I'll be gone when the debt comes due, but you'll be the one waiting in a soup line because the dollar finally lost worldwide support and collapsed.
Yeah, and as an old man, your only sustenance will come from the govt you wanted to grow. Picture that, you with a walker, or even a wheelchair waiting in an never ending line with other poor, stupid libs that thought growing govt was such a wonderful idea, that gutting the Bill of Rights was the work of a genius. :lol:
So the "teacher" :rolleyes: has left the room, with a boot up his ass.
Quote from: walkstall on July 14, 2016, 03:54:53 PM
So the "teacher" :rolleyes: has left the room, with a boot up his ass.
And a bright red bottom.....why do libs bother?
Quote from: walkstall on July 14, 2016, 03:54:53 PM
So the "teacher" :rolleyes: has left the room, with a boot up his ass.
Teacher? No one has ever been schooled by a toddler.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 14, 2016, 02:25:43 PM
(emphasis added)
Please substantiate your asserted fact: advocating increased tariffs.
Here he is denying he said it, then confirms he's good with it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0TDHWMFkGM
Thanks for getting rid of the 'jackalope'...I left another forum to avoid jerks like that. He's a typical Trumpster; loud mouth know it all without a hint of reality. As the saying goes ... you just can't fix stupid.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 14, 2016, 06:13:35 PM
Thanks for getting rid of the 'jackalope'...I left another forum to avoid jerks like that. He's a typical Trumpster; loud mouth know it all without a hint of reality. As the saying goes ... you just can't fix stupid.
There good for a teaching tool. That and taxed needs a chew toy now and then.
TED CRUZ WILL GIVE A SPEECH TO THE TEXAS DELEGATES AT THE GOP CONVENTION...
Posted by SooperMexican on Jul 15, 2016 at 4:01 PM in Politics | 14 Comments
By SooperMexican
FACEBOOK37TWITTERGOOGLEEMAILReddit
Here's another bit of intrigue about the GOP convention – apparently Cruz is going to give a special address to the Texan delegates on Thursday:
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan are among those speaking to the Texas delegation next week at the Republican National Convention, according to a tentative schedule obtained by The Texas Tribune. Cruz, a former presidential candidate, will address the delegates Thursday morning, while Ryan will do so Tuesday morning. Other prominent Republicans addressing the group include former Gov. Rick Perry(Monday morning) and U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (Tuesday morning).
Hmmm.. we've heard rumors that the deal he struck with Trump to speak at the convention included him not getting in the way of the nomination. Makes you wonder....
Cruz's speech could be his only public remarks in Cleveland beside his address Wednesday night to all of the convention's delegates. Cruz made a short trip to Cleveland on Friday to address a private gathering of conservative activists known as the Council for National Policy. He is expected to return to Cleveland late Tuesday to attend more private events, including a thank-you reception for his delegates Wednesday afternoon at a bar on the city's waterfront.
This comes right after the "conscience clause" vote failed to give delegates an out when voting at the convention. Does the Cruzinator have something else up his sleeve or has he give up to the Donald? Stay tuned...
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-will-give-a-speech-to-the-texas-delegates-at-the-gop-convention/#ixzz4EVkqAXYw
Quote from: blades on July 15, 2016, 01:27:49 PM
TED CRUZ WILL GIVE A SPEECH TO THE TEXAS DELEGATES AT THE GOP CONVENTION...
Posted by SooperMexican on Jul 15, 2016 at 4:01 PM in Politics | 14 Comments
By SooperMexican
FACEBOOK37TWITTERGOOGLEEMAILReddit
Here's another bit of intrigue about the GOP convention – apparently Cruz is going to give a special address to the Texan delegates on Thursday:
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan are among those speaking to the Texas delegation next week at the Republican National Convention, according to a tentative schedule obtained by The Texas Tribune. Cruz, a former presidential candidate, will address the delegates Thursday morning, while Ryan will do so Tuesday morning. Other prominent Republicans addressing the group include former Gov. Rick Perry(Monday morning) and U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (Tuesday morning).
Hmmm.. we've heard rumors that the deal he struck with Trump to speak at the convention included him not getting in the way of the nomination. Makes you wonder....
Cruz's speech could be his only public remarks in Cleveland beside his address Wednesday night to all of the convention's delegates. Cruz made a short trip to Cleveland on Friday to address a private gathering of conservative activists known as the Council for National Policy. He is expected to return to Cleveland late Tuesday to attend more private events, including a thank-you reception for his delegates Wednesday afternoon at a bar on the city's waterfront.
This comes right after the "conscience clause" vote failed to give delegates an out when voting at the convention. Does the Cruzinator have something else up his sleeve or has he give up to the Donald? Stay tuned...
Read more: http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-will-give-a-speech-to-the-texas-delegates-at-the-gop-convention/#ixzz4EVkqAXYw
Interesting.
The so called vote is a sham anyway, and so is the rule claiming they are bound delegates.
Welcome to the forum Blades.
thanks solar...just thought this forum has a little better understanding of the constitution than the one I am on now..will see how it goes..based on the support of the current GOP candidate
do I have to type in these letters everytime I post??/
Quote from: blades on July 15, 2016, 03:54:34 PM
thanks solar...just thought this forum has a little better understanding of the constitution than the one I am on now..will see how it goes..based on the support of the current GOP candidate
do I have to type in these letters everytime I post??/
Nah, either close and reopen your browser or make sure cookies are accepted, but it should stop.
What forum do you frequent?
my son put on some add blocker ...but will see f it stops after a while...OH not there now...god deal thanks
well I have been kicked off some of the less better sites for not goose step to trumps dictatorship...like ''WE THE PEOPLE'' and the old ''TEA PARTY PATRIOTS SITE THAT IS NOW NON ACTIVE...NOT CAUSE OF ME THOUGH...OOPS..and currently on the tea party nation that has only me posting...
as for now I have no one to vote for ...and planning a write in for cruz unless at the last minute i decide to go libertarian to get their percentage up for next time...just dont like Johnson but Peterson really seems like a good choice
Quote from: blades on July 15, 2016, 04:28:21 PM
my son put on some add blocker ...but will see f it stops after a while...OH not there now...god deal thanks
well I have been kicked off some of the less better sites for not goose step to trumps dictatorship...like ''WE THE PEOPLE'' and the old ''TEA PARTY PATRIOTS SITE THAT IS NOW NON ACTIVE...NOT CAUSE OF ME THOUGH...OOPS..and currently on the tea party nation that has only me posting...
as for now I have no one to vote for ...and planning a write in for cruz unless at the last minute i decide to go libertarian to get their percentage up for next time...just dont like Johnson but Peterson really seems like a good choice
Yeah, I know what you're talking about, I've been seeing a lot of so called TEA sites going under because they lied and backed Trump, so most of the members up and left.
We're solid on TEA/Conservative values, and nothing has changed since our inception.
Quote from: Solar on July 15, 2016, 05:40:06 PM
Yeah, I know what you're talking about, I've been seeing a lot of so called TEA sites going under because they lied and backed Trump, so most of the members up and left.
We're solid on TEA/Conservative values, and nothing has changed since our inception.
As you know, I am an administrator on a gun forum. I have had to distance myself from there due to several of the so called conservative members and leaders spouting trump love and trashing anyone who refuses to support him as Hillary supporters. It makes me sick to see how many people that you thought would man the trenches with you are being fooled by the orange obama.
Quote from: Double D on July 16, 2016, 08:16:35 AM
As you know, I am an administrator on a gun forum. I have had to distance myself from there due to several of the so called conservative members and leaders spouting trump love and trashing anyone who refuses to support him as Hillary supporters. It makes me sick to see how many people that you thought would man the trenches with you are being fooled by the orange obama.
Are you seeing a quelling of trumpanzees on your site?
Quote from: Solar on July 16, 2016, 08:21:59 AM
Are you seeing a quelling of trumpanzees on your site?
Well, they seem to somehow overlook any negative reporting. They hate to see anything that makes them wrong or uncomfortable.
DD to call that an understatement would be an understatement
Quote from: Double D on July 16, 2016, 09:13:29 AM
Well, they seem to somehow overlook any negative reporting. They hate to see anything that makes them wrong or uncomfortable.
I take it the owner of the site is a Trumpette?
Quote from: Solar on July 16, 2016, 11:08:10 AM
I take it the owner of the site is a Trumpette?
Well, the original owner is a good friend but about a year or so ago he sold to a big company. We remained as administrators and the new owner has basically allowed us to continue running things. There is a mixture of trumpbots at every level and the overall attitude of the board is either get on the trump train or your making sure hillary gets elected. No in between. I argued my case several times over but the threads end up pro trump in the end. Sick and tired of it. I pissed off several when my final assumption was that there is no way a true conservative could vote trump. Several use the NRA, Palin, Coulter, Carson and others to say if those people support trump, he must really be a conservative so they are on board as well and I need to admit I got it wrong. I swear to god its like visiting a liberal site...
Quote from: Double D on July 16, 2016, 11:48:24 AM
Well, the original owner is a good friend but about a year or so ago he sold to a big company. We remained as administrators and the new owner has basically allowed us to continue running things. There is a mixture of trumpbots at every level and the overall attitude of the board is either get on the trump train or your making sure hillary gets elected. No in between. I argued my case several times over but the threads end up pro trump in the end. Sick and tired of it. I pissed off several when my final assumption was that there is no way a true conservative could vote trump. Several use the NRA, Palin, Coulter, Carson and others to say if those people support trump, he must really be a conservative so they are on board as well and I need to admit I got it wrong. I swear to god its like visiting a liberal site...
I'd have gotten rid of them just like so many other sites banning stupid obnoxious libs.
It's like forcing your neighbor to clean up his property of junk cars, overflowing septic and household garbage because he's driving good neighbors away and property values continue to plummet.
Eventually all you have left are loud obnoxious neighbors soiling the place up. Look at any big city. :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on July 16, 2016, 02:06:09 PM
I'd have gotten rid of them just like so many other sites banning stupid obnoxious libs.
It's like forcing your neighbor to clean up his property of junk cars, overflowing septic and household garbage because he's driving good neighbors away and property values continue to plummet.
Eventually all you have left are loud obnoxious neighbors soiling the place up. Look at any big city. :biggrin:
If it was my site, I would clean it up. Easier for me to let them implode...
Quote from: Yukon on July 18, 2016, 08:10:07 AM
McCain was born on a US Military base to American parents. Under US law that makes him an American. Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada to an American mother and Cuban father. He went to school in Calgary 'til his was 7 years old. He is CANADIAN under international, Canadian, and US constitutional law.
Your lack of knowledge is shocking but not surprising.
Your ignorance is underwhelming, but not surprising.
Cruz relinquished his Canadian citizenship, leaving him with the only citizenship that matters, that of a Natural Born Citizen of the US.
Like it or not, it was the 14th Amendment that made that possible.
Here is the short reference, but I'll go into detail for those wanting to understand the truth.
a. Section 1993 (48 Stat. 797) was amended by the Act of May 24, 1934, to permit American women to transmit U.S. citizenship to their children born abroad, regardless of the father's citizenship.
b. The amended Section 1993 was in effect from May 24, 1934, at noon Eastern Standard Time until January 12, 1941. The text of the amended law is shown in 7 FAM 1135.6-1. It was repealed, and superseded by the Nationality Act of
In 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment as follows...
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the United States Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.
Only natural born citizens are eligible to serve as President of the United States or as Vice President. Though the text of the Constitution does not define the meaning of natural born, in particular it does not specify any distinction to be made between people whose citizenship is based on jus sanguinis [parentage] or those whose citizenship was based on jus soli [place of birth]
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/disqus-topics/proof-that-cruz-is-natural-born/
Quote from: Yukon on July 18, 2016, 08:20:12 AM
SOLAR,
As I said earlier. Your ignorance of your own Constitution is astonishing. It clearly states that to be President you must be born in the US of A. Now you can twist and spin that anyway you want but I can assure you that those grey haired, old men who wrote it did not intend that a President could be born in what was at the time a British colony (Canada).
Get with it SOLAR surely you aren't that ill-informed....or are you? Were you educated in the USA?
Yawn. Another ill informed liberal laying his own foundation to go "poof". An early "bye bye" to ya.
Quote from: Double D on July 18, 2016, 08:27:28 AM
Yawn. Another ill informed liberal laying his own foundation to go "poof". An early "bye bye" to ya.
You called that one.
Not only did I boot his worthless ass, I deleted all 12 of his asinine posts to boot, something trolls hate the most is having all traces of their excrement flushed.
Quote from: Solar on July 18, 2016, 08:14:42 AM
Your ignorance is underwhelming, but not surprising.
Cruz relinquished his Canadian citizenship, leaving him with the only citizenship that matters, that of a Natural Born Citizen of the US.
Like it or not, it was the 14th Amendment that made that possible.
Here is the short reference, but I'll go into detail for those wanting to understand the truth.
a. Section 1993 (48 Stat. 797) was amended by the Act of May 24, 1934, to permit American women to transmit U.S. citizenship to their children born abroad, regardless of the father's citizenship.
b. The amended Section 1993 was in effect from May 24, 1934, at noon Eastern Standard Time until January 12, 1941. The text of the amended law is shown in 7 FAM 1135.6-1. It was repealed, and superseded by the Nationality Act of
In 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment as follows...
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the United States Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.
Only natural born citizens are eligible to serve as President of the United States or as Vice President. Though the text of the Constitution does not define the meaning of natural born, in particular it does not specify any distinction to be made between people whose citizenship is based on jus sanguinis [parentage] or those whose citizenship was based on jus soli [place of birth]
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/disqus-topics/proof-that-cruz-is-natural-born/
Nothing like hitting a liberal with facts to ruin their day.
Quote from: s3779m on July 18, 2016, 02:04:19 PM
Nothing like hitting a liberal with facts to ruin their day.
Something tells me he lacks the intellect to conceive of what the law actually states.
After three court failed lawsuits trying to prove he was ineligible, you'd think one of these idiot lib trumpanzees would have enlightened his dumb ass, so as to avoid further embarrassment of their movement.
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 19, 2016, 05:01:12 AM
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
Only an idiot would think the Constitution is outdated, that Capitalism is evil, that higher taxes lead to prosperity, giving up ones values to coddle Marxist ideals of allowing grown men to use the same restroom as little girls will somehow create harmony, that BLM is about racist cops and isn't really a Marxist funded movement by Soros to further division in the country..
But according to you we're the bigots and racists because we refuse to allow Marxists more ground in destroying this great Nation by supporting a NY Lib plant to takeover the party.
Ya know what, we appreciate dissenting voices, but where sanity is challenged we draw the line, and in your case, where you to date, have yet to make a single cogent post, Hell, even one with a semblance of intellect above the level of a 7 year old, have brought absolutely nothing to the discussion above the lineament of "Whhhyyy"??? And a rhetorical response of "Sooo what"... and this post is representative of more failed attempts at insult towards thinking individuals that tolerated your immature nonsense because they felt sorry for you.
But that geniality is gone, so it's time for gand77 the little leftist to say good night and find a new place to play the fool, because we're done with your worthless commie ass.
Take a Fuckin hike dumb ass!
Quote from: gandb77 on July 19, 2016, 05:01:12 AM
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
This fool supports the totally anti-American concept of censorship before the fact. There is no possible other interpretation. "Vile name"? Isn't liberal bad enough?
What sick trash were YOU taught about freedom, Snowflake? It's "a closed group" supporting freedom of speech...and you object? Re-think your values, because if this moron got his way then YOUR freedom of speech easily might come next.
Quote from: quiller on July 19, 2016, 06:04:01 AM
This fool supports the totally anti-American concept of censorship before the fact. There is no possible other interpretation. "Vile name"? Isn't liberal bad enough?
What sick trash were YOU taught about freedom, Snowflake? It's "a closed group" supporting freedom of speech...and you object? Re-think your values, because if this moron got his way then YOUR freedom of speech easily might come next.
From his very first post over a year ago he proved to be anti American, yet has the audacity to claim we stifle free speech? Yeah, for well over a year he's been spewing nonsense freely. Geee, I'd say that blows his claim out the window.
Sure we have a First Amendment, but that doesn't mean he has the right to be heard, no we don't have to tolerate leftist bull shit, especially stupid leftist bull shit.
Quote from: Solar on July 19, 2016, 06:13:14 AM
From his very first post over a year ago he proved to be anti American, yet has the audacity to claim we stifle free speech? Yeah, for well over a year he's been spewing nonsense freely. Geee, I'd say that blows his claim out the window.
Sure we have a First Amendment, but that doesn't mean he has the right to be heard, no we don't have to tolerate leftist bull shit, especially stupid leftist bull shit.
You may recall that before the 2004 election, at Another Undisclosed Location™ where you, me and others usedta hang out, right about this time the programmed teams of people came in with raft after raft of long well-written posts covering topics the opinion pollsters SERIOUSLY wanted us to discuss.
He wasn't among them.
Quote from: quiller on July 19, 2016, 06:28:05 AM
You may recall that before the 2004 election, at Another Undisclosed Location™ where you, me and others usedta hang out, right about this time the programmed teams of people came in with raft after raft of long well-written posts covering topics the opinion pollsters SERIOUSLY wanted us to discuss.
He wasn't among them.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
The brightest thing he ever said was, "Did you want fries with that"?
Quote from: quiller on July 19, 2016, 06:28:05 AM
You may recall that before the 2004 election, at Another Undisclosed Location™ where you, me and others usedta hang out, right about this time the programmed teams of people came in with raft after raft of long well-written posts covering topics the opinion pollsters SERIOUSLY wanted us to discuss.
He wasn't among them.
He is not even at a Romper Room Kid Debater™ level yet.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 19, 2016, 05:01:12 AM
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
Thank you for the recognition. I might be famous one day!
Quote from: walkstall on July 19, 2016, 06:36:04 AM
He is not even at a Romper Room Kid Debater™ level yet.
As far as leftists go, debate means how fast you can make the other party agree to your ridiculous position, short of physical violence. For that you unionize.
Quote from: gandb77 on July 19, 2016, 05:01:12 AM
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
No kidding! I'm new to this forum and already I have been labeled and accused by a liberal! How flattering! Perhaps 'Conservative Political Forum' - should have been your first clue. Trying to persuade conservatives to a liberal viewpoint, especially in this political climate is futile...in fact...it is an insult!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 19, 2016, 04:16:57 PM
No kidding! I'm new to this forum and already I have been labeled and accused by a liberal! How flattering! Perhaps 'Conservative Political Forum' - should have been your first clue. Trying to persuade conservatives to a liberal viewpoint, especially in this political climate is futile...in fact...it is an insult!
Flatter right back. Make the little buggers regret they were ever born.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crsdksqgbtfqkwbwxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbsrrkbwtfxwgtbwqwssxbsdffqgqs%2F1%2F1595431%2F11064197%2Fmeet_the_internet-vi.png&hash=e2218916ce9a21af3ff0eb22caa88053d359a937)
Quote from: gandb77 on July 19, 2016, 05:01:12 AM
To Jonathan. don't feel bad that you have been banned from this forum. Just understand that this is a closed forum and is populated by a group of individuals that all think the same and allow no contrary thinking.
As you will note most all comments come from Solar, Walkstall, Quiller, Ms Independence, and Double D.
A closed group that talks to each other and allows no discussion.
The ( Chattering nabobs)
If you disagree with their comments you are idiotic, stupid, ill informed, immature and or some other vile name. Don't sweat it, Just move on.
Please wait 15 minutes after taking your meds before posting...
Quote from: taxed on July 19, 2016, 06:55:33 PM
Please wait 15 minutes after taking your meds before posting...
He has made his last post. So he can skip his meds.
With the debacle at the convention and outright suppression of the entire base by leftist Dims running the GOP, does anyone think this just might backfire on these scum when the majority do a protest vote and write in Cruz?
Lets be honest, like Paulettes, the trumpanzees are a vocal lot yet surprisingly small in numbers, and after reading Tacs latest thread, it's obvious they weren't even actual people, but rather paid trolls.
Yes, the base, the majority of Pub voters did not support Trump, yet the RNC gave the vote to Trump because the libs swayed the vote, voters that would never support Trump during the upcoming election.
Does anyone need more proof that the DNC runs the RNC? So what happens now?
TEA has had it's fill of libs being propped up over Conservatives which is why Mitten lost and why Jeb was stuck in a pile of shit at the starting gate and never even participated in the running. Yes, the base refuses to support liberals...
No, the base won't be supporting the lib this time around either, and with the tiny percentile of GOP voters that actually participated in supporting the NY lib, it's obvious he hasn't a prayer. So why even waste your vote on the loser, why not vote for Cruz and walk away with a clear conscience?
Quote from: Solar on July 20, 2016, 06:06:27 AM
With the debacle at the convention and outright suppression of the entire base by leftist Dims running the GOP, does anyone think this just might backfire on these scum when the majority do a protest vote and write in Cruz?
Lets be honest, like Paulettes, the trumpanzees are a vocal lot yet surprisingly small in numbers, and after reading Tacs latest thread, it's obvious they weren't even actual people, but rather paid trolls.
Yes, the base, the majority of Pub voters did not support Trump, yet the RNC gave the vote to Trump because the libs swayed the vote, voters that would never support Trump during the upcoming election.
Does anyone need more proof that the DNC runs the RNC? So what happens now?
TEA has had it's fill of libs being propped up over Conservatives which is why Mitten lost and why Jeb was stuck in a pile of shit at the starting gate and never even participated in the running. Yes, the base refuses to support liberals...
No, the base won't be supporting the lib this time around either, and with the tiny percentile of GOP voters that actually participated in supporting the NY lib, it's obvious he hasn't a prayer. So why even waste your vote on the loser, why not vote for Cruz and walk away with a clear conscience?
So No roll call vote No Accountability. That like letting people walk in with NO ID and just vote. So "He with the Loudest Voice Wins" (Voices) What a way to run a party No Accountability.
Quote from: Solar on July 20, 2016, 06:06:27 AM
With the debacle at the convention and outright suppression of the entire base by leftist Dims running the GOP, does anyone think this just might backfire on these scum when the majority do a protest vote and write in Cruz?
Lets be honest, like Paulettes, the trumpanzees are a vocal lot yet surprisingly small in numbers, and after reading Tacs latest thread, it's obvious they weren't even actual people, but rather paid trolls.
Yes, the base, the majority of Pub voters did not support Trump, yet the RNC gave the vote to Trump because the libs swayed the vote, voters that would never support Trump during the upcoming election.
Does anyone need more proof that the DNC runs the RNC? So what happens now?
TEA has had it's fill of libs being propped up over Conservatives which is why Mitten lost and why Jeb was stuck in a pile of shit at the starting gate and never even participated in the running. Yes, the base refuses to support liberals...
No, the base won't be supporting the lib this time around either, and with the tiny percentile of GOP voters that actually participated in supporting the NY lib, it's obvious he hasn't a prayer. So why even waste your vote on the loser, why not vote for Cruz and walk away with a clear conscience?
I have planned on writing in Cruz for months. However, the magnitude of what happened at the convention and for that matter this primary cannot be ignored. The GOP died and along with it a vital piece of our Republic; the electoral process. A political coup took place; delegates were threatened, Cruz was stripped of his delegates, delegates were denied a roll call and the RNC ignored their own rules in order to hand the nomination to Trump. Preibus was bought a long time ago by the Clinton/Trump machine. I have zero confidence that any write in votes will even be counted. I have a hunch that during the general election precinct captains, poll workers and voters will be intimidated by the Trump thugs.
This only reinforces my conservative convictions. I will continue to vote my conscious regardless. I see it as my duty to my country. #NeverTrump
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!!!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 20, 2016, 07:13:16 AM
I have planned on writing in Cruz for months. However, the magnitude of what happened at the convention and for that matter this primary cannot be ignored. The GOP died and along with it a vital piece of our Republic; the electoral process. A political coup took place; delegates were threatened, Cruz was stripped of his delegates, delegates were denied a roll call and the RNC ignored their own rules in order to hand the nomination to Trump. Preibus was bought a long time ago by the Clinton/Trump machine. I have zero confidence that any write in votes will even be counted. I have a hunch that during the general election precinct captains, poll workers and voters will be intimidated by the Trump thugs.
This only reinforces my conservative convictions. I will continue to vote my conscious regardless. I see it as my duty to my country. #NeverTrump
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America!!!
Nah, the RNC is now despised by the States, and State operatives are pissed, for example.
It has been reported that Alaska did not turn in its required signatures to contribute toward the rules committee roll call vote.
As a rules committee member, I had secured more than enough signatures from Alaska delegates, but the convention secretary was not at the designated location where I was told to submit them.
Some said she was hiding. Others said she was protected by guards. Regardless, I was told I could also present the signatures from the floor.
Nevertheless, when the vote occurred, my mic was not turned on. When I attempted to present these signatures at the stage, my effort was ignored by the chair, and the security guard turned me away.
The effort was made even more difficult by Alaska's late-arriving bus and slow security lines at the entrance.
Overall, this was not a good demonstration of delegate accommodation, nor of full, open, honest debate of the rules as was promised during the rules committee orientation.
Fred Brown
Rules Committee
Member, Alaska
Conventions are their own dynamics and when it comes to disputes are anything but fair. They are what they are. Endless scheming, plotting, tempers flaring. Always happens if there are disputes. I've been to many of them but most watched with a 3rd eye view like watching a circus. Very interesting. Little to do with fairness.
It is important to remember Cruz dropped out, though he would have won more delegates if he hadn't, to prevent coming to be losing too much to preserve himself for future elections But, then, if a person sacrifices taking risks now instead to gamble on the future, he doesn't have a good case to complaint about losing in the now. A person who concedes doesn't really have a complaint about losing. To win a floor fight he would have needed to fight to very end - not give up and then somehow figure he should win anyway.
Why did Cruz quit and stop trying to get delegates in the remaining states?
I am very familiar with Texas politics and watched the rise and then self entrapment of Ron Paul. He gave up being a potential president to instead foster the cheers of the furthest right seeing him uniquely as the ONLY TRUE conservative - for which then all other Republicans and everyone who doesn't agree 100% is evil. He went off the reservation.
When I knew that was his future was when he was traveling about the state trying to get statewide following and I heard 2 of his early era speeches. In it, he said among other things that only land should be allowed to vote, that Lincoln was essentially a mass murderer, and a person should have to pass tests before being allowed to vote (literacy tests).
Yes, some saw him as their one true champion. And I saw a person who is going to become basically a very limited ideological cult leader of extremely devoted followers but no more - and that's what happened. This is exactly the same path I see Cruz traveling down. He is buying his own hype and going further and further in the direction of the most militant and intolerant activists. He likes their raving praises of him. But it's a trap.
He would be far wiser to consider such political advise as mine than those who furiously declare he is the only true conservative furiously cursing anyone who disagrees with anything he says or does. If he is against everyone but his own most militant activists that means everyone else is against him. It is easy for a candidate to nobly lose to the cheers of his activists.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 21, 2016, 10:38:11 PM
I am very familiar with Texas politics and watched the rise and then self entrapment of Ron Paul. He gave up being a potential president to instead foster the cheers of the furthest right seeing him uniquely as the ONLY TRUE conservative - for which then all other Republicans and everyone who doesn't agree 100% is evil. He went off the reservation.
When I knew that was his future was when he was traveling about the state trying to get statewide following and I heard 2 of his early era speeches. In it, he said among other things that only land should be allowed to vote, that Lincoln was essentially a mass murderer, and a person should have to pass tests before being allowed to vote (literacy tests).
Yes, some saw him as their one true champion. And I saw a person who is going to become basically a very limited ideological cult leader of extremely devoted followers but no more - and that's what happened. This is exactly the same path I see Cruz traveling down. He is buying his own hype and going further and further in the direction of the most militant and intolerant activists. He likes their raving praises of him. But it's a trap.
He would be far wiser to consider such political advise as mine than those who furiously declare he is the only true conservative furiously cursing anyone who disagrees with anything he says or does. If he is against everyone but his own most militant activists that means everyone else is against him. It is easy for a candidate to nobly lose to the cheers of his activists.
You don't see Cruz on the same path. Please quit lying. They are very different, and conservatives know that.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 21, 2016, 10:38:11 PM
I am very familiar with Texas politics and watched the rise and then self entrapment of Ron Paul. He gave up being a potential president to instead foster the cheers of the furthest right seeing him uniquely as the ONLY TRUE conservative - for which then all other Republicans and everyone who doesn't agree 100% is evil. He went off the reservation.
When I knew that was his future was when he was traveling about the state trying to get statewide following and I heard 2 of his early era speeches. In it, he said among other things that only land should be allowed to vote, that Lincoln was essentially a mass murderer, and a person should have to pass tests before being allowed to vote (literacy tests).
Yes, some saw him as their one true champion. And I saw a person who is going to become basically a very limited ideological cult leader of extremely devoted followers but no more - and that's what happened. This is exactly the same path I see Cruz traveling down. He is buying his own hype and going further and further in the direction of the most militant and intolerant activists. He likes their raving praises of him. But it's a trap.
He would be far wiser to consider such political advise as mine than those who furiously declare he is the only true conservative furiously cursing anyone who disagrees with anything he says or does. If he is against everyone but his own most militant activists that means everyone else is against him. It is easy for a candidate to nobly lose to the cheers of his activists.
So in essence what you're implying, is f Cruz wants to win, he needs to be more Establishment like, lie to his constituents, tell them all kinds of crap, and govern to the left when elected?
Well that's brilliant, look how well that's worked out for the party as a whole, how despised they are by their very own base, so much so, they had to support a child molesting NY Lib for the ticket.
Nah, that's not true, they supported the lib, because that's who the Establishment are, a bunch of fuckin traitorous libs without values or principles.
But you knew that, that's why you're here, you were sent out to quell the anger Conservatives have for the leadership of the party.
Well you can go back and tell them you failed, but take heart, it wasn't for lack of trying, nor was it your fault you couldn't convince us like Jim Jones did his followers, no, we refuse to swallow the leftist poison.
You can tell them we intend to fight to the death, that being the death of the party, of which we will rebuild in the image of our Founders.
Quote from: taxed on July 21, 2016, 11:10:31 PM
You don't see Cruz on the same path. Please quit lying. They are very different, and conservatives know that.
I do not mean they are the same person on issues but rather political evolution.
As predicted, Ted Cruz stood out as the only man of Principles. After Donald Trump's angrily delivered speech last night, long and purposefully attempting to whip of the crowd, now it's becoming clearer, Ted Cruz was the right choice.
Articles are popping up all over the web - after all the hype dies off (which was less than 12 hrs), Donald expressed more hot air than principles.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438193/ted-cruz-rnc-speech-stood-apart
and this... Apparently the FIX was in?
http://www.stridentconservative.com/ted-cruz-said-what-donald-trump-wanted-him-to-say/
QuoteStill, they condemned Cruz for doing what he said he would do and what Trump and his jack-booted thug, Paul Manafort, knew he would do. They did, after all, approve the speech prior to Cruz's appearance on stage.
So, why did Trump allow it? It wasn't due to his good graces.
Since Trump and Manafort approved of what Cruz was going to say before he said it, it's obvious that Trump's ulterior motive was to use Cruz's appearance as a way to accomplish the only goal he has for this election—feed his demented, narcissistic psyche while trying to destroy everyone who seriously tried to stop him.
With Trump's own words taken from his book The Art of the Deal, his motivations are clear.
"When someone crosses you, my advice is 'Get Even!' That is not typical advice, but it is real life advice. If you do not get even, you are just a schmuck! When people wrong you, go after those people because it is a good feeling and because other people will see you doing it. I love getting even. I get screwed all the time. I go after people, and you know what? People do not play around with me as much as they do with others. They know that if they do, they are in for a big fight."
From the look on Donald Trump Jr's face in that classic picture, does anyone doubt "who" will be sent to exact revenge on Ted Cruz?
IF Donald Trump becomes the
Dictator in Chief President, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Mark Levin, the other Conservatives are going to need our prayerful support. Apparently... Donald does not take criticism lightly.
We know one thing, without a doubt, Ted Cruz is a gutsy Senator.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 22, 2016, 10:17:47 AM
As predicted, Ted Cruz stood out as the only man of Principles. After Donald Trump's angrily delivered speech last night, long and purposefully attempting to whip of the crowd, now it's becoming clearer, Ted Cruz was the right choice.
Articles are popping up all over the web - after all the hype dies off (which was less than 12 hrs), Donald expressed more hot air than principles.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438193/ted-cruz-rnc-speech-stood-apart
and this... Apparently the FIX was in?
http://www.stridentconservative.com/ted-cruz-said-what-donald-trump-wanted-him-to-say/
From the look on Donald Trump Jr's face in that classic picture, does anyone doubt "who" will be sent to exact revenge on Ted Cruz?
IF Donald Trump becomes the Dictator in Chief President, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Mark Levin, the other Conservatives are going to need our prayerful support. Apparently... Donald does not take criticism lightly.
We know one thing, without a doubt, Ted Cruz is a gutsy Senator.
Excellent article.
"When Trump first ran for president, he claimed that the Republican party was nothing but a bunch of spineless weasels who didn't have the mettle to fight. Trump then won the nomination, and most of the Republican establishment proved his contention true by backing a candidate whose worldview directly conflicted with their own stated beliefs."
Quote from: Solar on July 22, 2016, 10:38:50 AM
Excellent article.
"When Trump first ran for president, he claimed that the Republican party was nothing but a bunch of spineless weasels who didn't have the mettle to fight. Trump then won the nomination, and most of the Republican establishment proved his contention true by backing a candidate whose worldview directly conflicted with their own stated beliefs."
He must be a prophet, the spineless weasel won the nomination.
Quote from: tac on July 22, 2016, 10:53:29 AM
He must be a prophet, the spineless weasel won the nomination.
Sure, when you got both leftist party's doing the dirty work of getting you elected.
And for those dealing with leftists claiming Cruz was wrong for not endorsing the lib?
Donald Trump tore into primary rival Ted Cruz on Friday morning, saying he would not accept the Texas senator's endorsement and threatening to fund a Senate challenger against Cruz."If he gives it, I will not accept it," Trump, the GOP presidential nominee, said at a Friday morning press conference in Cleveland.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/288871-trump-i-would-not-accept-cruzs-endorsement
Graceless winner, disgraceful (p)Resident. That's our Donny!
Quote from: Solar on July 22, 2016, 11:29:39 AM
Sure, when you got both leftist party's doing the dirty work of getting you elected.
And for those dealing with leftists claiming Cruz was wrong for not endorsing the lib?
Donald Trump tore into primary rival Ted Cruz on Friday morning, saying he would not accept the Texas senator's endorsement and threatening to fund a Senate challenger against Cruz.
"If he gives it, I will not accept it," Trump, the GOP presidential nominee, said at a Friday morning press conference in Cleveland.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/288871-trump-i-would-not-accept-cruzs-endorsement
Vindictive bastard isn't he?
If this is any indication of how he will act
IFhe's elected, I hope Clinton stomps his miserable ass. :mad:
Quote from: tac on July 22, 2016, 12:19:41 PM
Vindictive bastard isn't he?
If this is any indication of how he will act IFhe's elected, I hope Clinton stomps his miserable ass. :mad:
Not to worry. I am convinced that Trump has been in this to hand his pal Hillary the keys to the Kingdom.
Quote from: tac on July 22, 2016, 12:19:41 PM
Vindictive bastard isn't he?
If this is any indication of how he will act IFhe's elected, I hope Clinton stomps his miserable ass. :mad:
Humorous reading someone CLAIMING to being a "conservative" who is a Clinton supporter.
Looking over some of the messages I wonder if some members so intensely bitter over Cruz losing who plan to write in Cruz and hoping Hillary Clinton becomes president can stand their now TWO candidates both losing in same election without a true emotional breakdown.
Maybe those on the Bush/Kasich/Cruz losers-R-Us team should get a room to watch the returns together on election might shouting Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! to try to bury the pain of Bush, Kasich and Cruz losing again - until the projections that come in that Donald J. Trump has won. Then all of you can go get together with the Democrats declaring Trump can never win re-election to continue the "Trump can't win" going on now for a year and before each time has won again.
Or maybe it should be Bush/Kasich/Cruz Quitters-R-Us club.
I doubt Trump has much use for quitters and bad losers malcontents. At least I don't anyway.
Wrong.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 22, 2016, 10:17:47 AM
As predicted, Ted Cruz stood out as the only man of Principles. After Donald Trump's angrily delivered speech last night, long and purposefully attempting to whip of the crowd, now it's becoming clearer, Ted Cruz was the right choice.
Articles are popping up all over the web - after all the hype dies off (which was less than 12 hrs), Donald expressed more hot air than principles.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438193/ted-cruz-rnc-speech-stood-apart
and this... Apparently the FIX was in?
http://www.stridentconservative.com/ted-cruz-said-what-donald-trump-wanted-him-to-say/
From the look on Donald Trump Jr's face in that classic picture, does anyone doubt "who" will be sent to exact revenge on Ted Cruz?
IF Donald Trump becomes the Dictator in Chief President, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Mark Levin, the other Conservatives are going to need our prayerful support. Apparently... Donald does not take criticism lightly.
We know one thing, without a doubt, Ted Cruz is a gutsy Senator.
Actually, for the first months Senator Cruz hid behind Trump praising Trump and riding Trump's coattails. The he tried to jump over to the Bush and RINO anti-Trump team. When Cruz joined RINO team Bush and cutting a deal with truly liberal Kasich I was done with him.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 22, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Looking over some of the messages I wonder if some members so intensely bitter over Cruz losing who plan to write in Cruz and hoping Hillary Clinton becomes president can stand their now TWO candidates both losing in same election without a true emotional breakdown.
Maybe those on the Bush/Kasich/Cruz losers-R-Us team should get a room to watch the returns together on election might shouting Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! to try to bury the pain of Bush, Kasich and Cruz losing again - until the projections that come in that Donald J. Trump has won. Then all of you can go get together with the Democrats declaring Trump can never win re-election to continue the "Trump can't win" going on now for a year and before each time has won again.
Or maybe it should be Bush/Kasich/Cruz Quitters-R-Us club.
I doubt Trump has much use for quitters and bad losers malcontents. At least I don't anyway.
Thats where your completely wrong. This isnt about our candidate loosing but more so watching the last fractions of the GOP turning liberal. No party can run Trump as its leader and claim to be conservative at the same time. Once you come to realize a big government liberal bully has taken over the party, candidate names dont really matter. This country is on the verge of scrapping the constitution and we desperately needed a constitutional scholar to return us to constitutional law. Instead we have 2 extreme liberals who not only dont know anything about the constitution but they dont care what it says and wont govern that way. Wake up.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 22, 2016, 01:09:11 PM
Actually, for the first months Senator Cruz hid behind Trump praising Trump and riding Trump's coattails. The he tried to jump over to the Bush and RINO anti-Trump team. When Cruz joined RINO team Bush and cutting a deal with truly liberal Kasich I was done with him.
I'm starting to get sick of your lies. One more and you're gone.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 22, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Looking over some of the messages I wonder if some members so intensely bitter over Cruz losing who plan to write in Cruz and hoping Hillary Clinton becomes president can stand their now TWO candidates both losing in same election without a true emotional breakdown.
Why should any Conservative ever throw their principles away to support a lib, can you answer that lib?
QuoteMaybe those on the Bush/Kasich/Cruz losers-R-Us team should get a room to watch the returns together on election might shouting Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! to try to bury the pain of Bush, Kasich and Cruz losing again - until the projections that come in that Donald J. Trump has won. Then all of you can go get together with the Democrats declaring Trump can never win re-election to continue the "Trump can't win" going on now for a year and before each time has won again.
Or maybe it should be Bush/Kasich/Cruz Quitters-R-Us club.
I doubt Trump has much use for quitters and bad losers malcontents. At least I don't anyway.
For the same reason we have no use for lying liberals like you.
Quote from: JakeJ on July 22, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Looking over some of the messages I wonder if some members so intensely bitter over Cruz losing who plan to write in Cruz and hoping Hillary Clinton becomes president can stand their now TWO candidates both losing in same election without a true emotional breakdown.
Maybe those on the Bush/Kasich/Cruz losers-R-Us team should get a room to watch the returns together on election might shouting Hillary! Hillary! Hillary! to try to bury the pain of Bush, Kasich and Cruz losing again - until the projections that come in that Donald J. Trump has won. Then all of you can go get together with the Democrats declaring Trump can never win re-election to continue the "Trump can't win" going on now for a year and before each time has won again.
Or maybe it should be Bush/Kasich/Cruz Quitters-R-Us club.
I doubt Trump has much use for quitters and bad losers malcontents. At least I don't anyway.
Trump has his club, kinda private.... practice makes perfect.....
Bankruptcy-R-Trump'sOMG!!! He's a loser-ala-KING.
He QUITS after he loses his own money and his investors money. Now he's asking for donations...? :rolleyes: :lol: :lol:
They walk among us, and sometimes... step right in it.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 22, 2016, 02:26:55 PM
Trump has his club, kinda private.... practice makes perfect..... Bankruptcy-R-Trump's
OMG!!! He's a loser-ala-KING. He QUITS after he loses his own money and his investors money. Now he's asking for donations...? :rolleyes: :lol: :lol:
They walk among us, and sometimes... step right in it.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I still have yet to hear about a successful Trump venture....
Quote from: taxed on July 22, 2016, 02:32:37 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I still have yet to hear about a successful Trump venture....
.... thanks man, I'm getting a headache trying to think of one. :rolleyes:
Quote from: taxed on July 22, 2016, 02:32:37 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I still have yet to hear about a successful Trump venture....
The only one I know of was stealing the election from Cruz by enlisting the Dim party to funnel lib votes in open primary.
Beyond that, got nutin...
Quote from: taxed on July 22, 2016, 02:32:37 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I still have yet to hear about a successful Trump venture....
Well he did get a new wife. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2016, 07:33:53 AM
Yes, it's a bit premature, but lets be honest, the GOP Establishment writes the rules and they've already told us, they elect the candidate, not us.
Without going into details and rules that would put a meth head to sleep, suffice it to say they will fight with every dirty trick in the book to keep a Constitutional Conservative out of power.
As it stands, Trump will be yesterdays news in short time, Cruz will run the board and expose the game both party's have been running, and despite the sudden groundswell of support for Cruz emerging, the Establishment and LSM have the lies at the ready, even Cruz epitaph.
So lets take a stand here and now to WRITE IN CRUZ regardless and make him the next POTUS.
God knows, I hope I'm wrong, but since when has the Establishment ever been on the side of Conservatism?
I'm just curious why Senator Cruz gets a pass by so many when he ignores both the text and documented legislative intent of our Constitution on two key issues, federal taxation and "legal tender", both of which are the very tools used by the Washington Establishment to plunder the real material wealth created by America's labor, businesses and investors.
When it comes to Cruz's tax reform plan, he keeps alive the socialist friendly tax calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other "incomes" and ignores the rule of apportioning any direct tax laid among the states. Likewise, when it comes to our nation's medium of exchange, he ignores the founder's specific rule to forbid notes of any kind to be made a legal tender.
I don't know how many posters here have studied the making of our Constitution and how the founders addressed the evils of a corruptible and oppressive system of taxation or a dishonest and thieving money system, but those who have I am inclined to believe realize these two issues are at the heart of most of our nation's sufferings.
JWK
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance."___James Madison
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 06:23:24 AM
I'm just curious why Senator Cruz gets a pass by so many when he ignores both the text and documented legislative intent of our Constitution on two key issues, federal taxation and "legal tender", both of which are the very tools used by the Washington Establishment to plunder the real material wealth created by America's labor, businesses and investors.
When it comes to Cruz's tax reform plan, he keeps alive the socialist friendly tax calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other "incomes" and ignores the rule of apportioning any direct tax laid among the states. Likewise, when it comes to our nation's medium of exchange, he ignores the founder's specific rule to forbid notes of any kind to be made a legal tender.
I don't know how many posters here have studied the making of our Constitution and how the founders addressed the evils of a corruptible and oppressive system of taxation or a dishonest and thieving money system, but those who have I am inclined to believe realize these two issues are at the heart of most of our nation's sufferings.
JWK
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance."___James Madison
Seriously, are you really that obtuse? Is that supposed to change minds when the two nominees, one a Marxist, the other a leftist fascist are running, and you come up with this petty nonsense?
Quote from: Solar on July 25, 2016, 06:27:35 AM
Seriously, are you really that obtuse? Is that supposed to change minds when the two nominees, one a Marxist, the other a leftist fascist are running, and you come up with this petty nonsense?
Cruz was facing other GOPers who were raving-lunatic moderates with Chamber of Commerce brands on each cheek of each subservient ass. And no, he wasn't perfect, and probably still isn't...but Ted Cruz remains the
only conservative worth listening to. End of statement.
We take the people we can get. Plain and simple. There are men and women out there who would NEVER subject themselves to the rigors of public scrutiny which any candidate endures...and yet those same reluctant folks are probably ten times better at doing something than a federal employee actually doing (or failing to do) it.
Our next President coulda been a waitress in Waukegan. A liquor store clerk in Miami. But nah, they didn't want every atom of their lives dissected, so Ted Cruz is the one who stepped forward and that's who we wound up with to carry the principles conservatives do believe and do practice in their private lives.
Same thing for money, actually. You're welcome to offer substitutes but as yet no viable alternate has been found, so whining about that detail is as picayune as the notion that we should accept less than the best that's being offered.
Ted Cruz isn't perfect. But he's the only conservative in the game, and for that he has my unqualified heartfelt support.
Quote from: Solar on July 25, 2016, 06:27:35 AM
Seriously, are you really that obtuse? Is that supposed to change minds when the two nominees, one a Marxist, the other a leftist fascist are running, and you come up with this petty nonsense?
Petty nonsense? The "Marxist" and "leftist fascist" you refer to ignore these two vital issues, just like Cruz ignores them. Seems that all three have something in common ___ a disregard for our Constitution when it comes to taxation and legal tender which are the tools used by our notoriously evil federal government to plunder and control our nation's population.
JWK
"Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man's field by the sweat of the poor man's brow."_____ Daniel Webster.
What do you propose to do to change all this, johnwk?
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 07:09:01 AM
Petty nonsense? The "Marxist" and "leftist fascist" you refer to ignore these two vital issues, just like Cruz ignores them. Seems that all three have something in common ___ a disregard for our Constitution when it comes to taxation and legal tender which are the tools used by our notoriously evil federal government to plunder and control our nation's population.
JWK
"Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man's field by the sweat of the poor man's brow."_____ Daniel Webster.
uiller covered it, but...
You have a serious screw loose, if you think eliminating the IRS is somehow comparable to that of the plans in place by a Marxist and a Fascist leftist to grow both, govt and the IRS, and continuing it's use as a weapon to beat Conservatives into submission.
I've heard your claims, now back that bull shit up!
Quote from: quiller on July 25, 2016, 07:21:14 AM
What do you propose to do to change all this, johnwk?
How about working to elect public servants who will support and defend the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent, which gives context to its text?
JWK
Those who reject and ignore abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to "interpret" the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.
Quote from: Solar on July 25, 2016, 08:53:17 AM
uiller covered it, but...
You have a serious screw loose, if you think eliminating the IRS is somehow comparable to that of the plans in place by a Marxist and a Fascist leftist to grow both, govt and the IRS, and continuing it's use as a weapon to beat Conservatives into submission.
I've heard your claims, now back that bull shit up!
Exactly what am I to back up? Quote my words which you are referring to.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 11:49:28 AM
Exactly what am I to back up? Quote my words which you are referring to.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)
All I hear is a lot of whining and no solutions. So, what do you suggest he do?
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 11:47:02 AM
How about working to elect public servants who will support and defend the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent, which gives context to its text?
JWK
Those who reject and ignore abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to "interpret" the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.
In other words you want your unrealistic idealism to outweigh the practical issues involved in ANY change from our existing monetary system. To do so requires a compliant Congress and Supreme Court. How would you propose to get those bodies to agree?
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 11:47:02 AM
How about working to elect public servants who will support and defend the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent, which gives context to its text?
JWK
And what are the name of these people whom you want us to vote for? Or are you playing what if?
Quote from: johnwk on July 25, 2016, 07:09:01 AM
Petty nonsense? The "Marxist" and "leftist fascist" you refer to ignore these two vital issues, just like Cruz ignores them. Seems that all three have something in common ___ a disregard for our Constitution when it comes to taxation and legal tender which are the tools used by our notoriously evil federal government to plunder and control our nation's population.
JWK
"Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man's field by the sweat of the poor man's brow."_____ Daniel Webster.
No one said Cruz was perfect and without flaw. At this point in time based one everything that I know to be true about Cruz , I have absolutely no reservations or hesitations about continuing my support for him. I would invite you to identify someone who has more Supreme Court experience or Constitutional knowledge in the Senate than Cruz. I would also invite you to show me someone who has more integrity and backbone in Congress than Cruz.
Cruz is the only one that I know of in Congress, that has the ability to lead us out of the mess that we are in. Unfortunately, people are too blind (yes I'm being kind) to see it.
Cruz. Reigniting the Promise of America.
I wonder if John has someone in mind that can accomplish everything he talked about in the above posts?
Quote from: tac on July 25, 2016, 07:23:33 PM
I wonder if John has someone in mind that can accomplish everything he talked about in the above posts?
God has better things to do. :laugh:
Quote from: Solar on July 25, 2016, 01:11:14 PM
All I hear is a lot of whining and no solutions. So, what do you suggest he do?
What you read were facts. But instead of dealing with the facts, the response seems to be "attack the messenger and not the message".
Perhaps some day people will learn to address the cause of their sufferings as our founders did instead of embracing politicians who have no intention to remove the tools used to enslave them.
JWK
Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws! ___attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild
Quote from: Ms.Independence on July 25, 2016, 06:28:13 PM
Cruz is the only one that I know of in Congress, that has the ability to lead us out of the mess that we are in.
When Cruz points a finger at our corrupt and thieving money system, and our notoriously evil tax system, I will begin to believe your claim.
Do you not agree that most of our sufferings are made possible by dishonest money and a patently evil system of taxation?
JWK
"We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it". — Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932 (Rep. Pa)
johnwk....
Second time I asked. Now answer it. What would you propose we do, and how would you get the Congress and the President to go along with it?
Quote from: quiller on July 26, 2016, 02:17:21 AM
johnwk....
Second time I asked. Now answer it. What would you propose we do, and how would you get the Congress and the President to go along with it?
Your questions have already been addressed. Perhaps you do not like my answers. We should be obedient to our Constitution and elect public servants who likewise will be obedient to our Constitution.
Does Cruz promote what our Constitution commands regarding money and taxation?
Now what do you propose we do, and how would you get the Congress and President to go along with it?
JWK
Quote from: johnwk on July 26, 2016, 04:12:25 AM
Your questions have already been addressed. Perhaps you do not like my answers. We should be obedient to our Constitution and elect public servants who likewise will be obedient to our Constitution.
Does Cruz promote what our Constitution commands regarding money and taxation?
Now what do you propose we do, and how would you get the Congress and President to go along with it?
JWK
OK,now you're pissing me off, quit being purblind and answer the damn question!
Quote from: tac on July 25, 2016, 07:23:33 PM
I wonder if John has someone in mind that can accomplish everything he talked about in the above posts?
And I wonder how our nation's rule book can be enforced, the undoing of which is the root cause of our sufferings.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)
Quote from: johnwk on July 26, 2016, 06:05:49 AM
And I wonder how our nation's rule book can be enforced, the undoing of which is the root cause of our sufferings.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)
I wasnt going to say anything but I continue to read these posts to nowhere. You say we need to elect people who will adhere to the constitution. No shit Sherlock. Most conservatives vote for candidates who they believe will follow the constitution and once these people are elected its up to them. The majority of these people dont pan out. So, what would you suggest we do about finding these strict constitutional candidates? We can agree we need them but actually changing the landscape is likely impossible. You provide NOTHING to get us to this utopia but instead just complain about the only candidate that even comes close to what you describe. Now, how about thinking for yourself and answer some of the questions people are asking.
Quote from: johnwk on July 26, 2016, 06:05:49 AM
And I wonder how our nation's rule book can be enforced, the undoing of which is the root cause of our sufferings.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)
Last chance troll, or you're out of here.
Quote from: Double D on July 26, 2016, 06:30:56 AM
I wasnt going to say anything but I continue to read these posts to nowhere. You say we need to elect people who will adhere to the constitution. No shit Sherlock. Most conservatives vote for candidates who they believe will follow the constitution and once these people are elected its up to them. The majority of these people dont pan out. So, what would you suggest we do about finding these strict constitutional candidates? We can agree we need them but actually changing the landscape is likely impossible. You provide NOTHING to get us to this utopia but instead just complain about the only candidate that even comes close to what you describe. Now, how about thinking for yourself and answer some of the questions people are asking.
Oh, but I do think for myself and question Cruz's sincerity based upon his desire to perpetuate the notoriously evil tax calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other incomes.
It seems to me most of our sufferings can be traced to a corruptible money system and a notoriously evil tax system, both of which are forbidden by our Constitution. Would it not be in our best interests to find candidates who will address these two issues head on?
JWK
Quote from: johnwk on July 26, 2016, 06:59:27 AM
Oh, but I do think for myself and question Cruz's sincerity based upon his desire to perpetuate the notoriously evil tax calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other incomes.
It seems to me most of our sufferings can be traced to a corruptible money system and a notoriously evil tax system, both of which are forbidden by our Constitution. Would it not be in our best interests to find candidates who will address these two issues head on?
JWK
Say good bye troll.
John has leftist the building...
I can't say he'll be missed. :thumbup:
Thank you.
Quote from: Solar on July 26, 2016, 07:05:37 AM
Say good bye troll.
John has leftist the building...
The guy was as clueless as Trump.
Just another leftist LIB-ertarian Troll.
His demands were so ludicrous, it was painful to read his posts. If he had done some research he would have found that many people have tried to repeal the 16th Amendment and failed miserably. The same with doing away with the Federal Reserve Notes. The USSC has shot down those attempts numerous times. He has a vision of a utopia that will never be. :rolleyes:
Quote from: tac on July 26, 2016, 09:48:06 AM
His demands were so ludicrous, it was painful to read his posts. If he had done some research he would have found that many people have tried to repeal the 16th Amendment and failed miserably. The same with doing away with the Federal Reserve Notes. The USSC has shot down those attempts numerous times. He has a vision of a utopia that will never be. :rolleyes:
Did he think there were a bunch of constitutional conservative candidates sitting in waiting somewhere that could magically replace all of the dead weight in washington? Were we suppose to wave a magic wand and cause people across the country to suddenly vote that way? Did he watch the stepford wives too many times?
Quote from: Double D on July 26, 2016, 11:20:22 AM
Did he think there were a bunch of constitutional conservative candidates sitting in waiting somewhere that could magically replace all of the dead weight in washington? Were we suppose to wave a magic wand and cause people across the country to suddenly vote that way? Did he watch the stepford wives too many times?
Chasing unicorns does something evil to the brain.
Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2016, 07:33:53 AM
Yes, it's a bit premature, but lets be honest, the GOP Establishment writes the rules and they've already told us, they elect the candidate, not us.
Without going into details and rules that would put a meth head to sleep, suffice it to say they will fight with every dirty trick in the book to keep a Constitutional Conservative out of power.
As it stands, Trump will be yesterdays news in short time, Cruz will run the board and expose the game both party's have been running, and despite the sudden groundswell of support for Cruz emerging, the Establishment and LSM have the lies at the ready, even Cruz epitaph.
So lets take a stand here and now to WRITE IN CRUZ regardless and make him the next POTUS.
God knows, I hope I'm wrong, but since when has the Establishment ever been on the side of Conservatism?
Nah.
Writing in CRUZ ?
Nah.
Quote from: SalemCat on July 26, 2016, 07:59:00 PM
Nah.
Writing in CRUZ ?
Nah.
So you just now noticed this thread? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Solar on July 26, 2016, 08:02:43 PM
So you just now noticed this thread? :rolleyes:
Good thing he doesn't juggle dynamite....
Quote from: quiller on July 27, 2016, 03:54:26 AM
Good thing he doesn't juggle dynamite....
I disagree...
Trump Responds to Hillary's Massive 'Infrastructure' Boondoggle; Conservatives Will Be Livid
snip~
Not to be out done, another New York liberal (there are two in the race, in case you didn't notice), Donald Trump was asked by FOX Business Trump sycophant Stuart Varney about his infrastructure plan.
Trump said that he would spend "at least double" Hillary Clinton's, which would place the number north of a half-a-trillion dollars.
More @
http://politistick.com/trump-responds-hillarys-massive-infrastructure-plan-conservative-will-livid/#
Write in Ted Cruz and save us over half-a-trillion dollars.
Quote from: walkstall on August 02, 2016, 01:33:06 PM
Trump Responds to Hillary's Massive 'Infrastructure' Boondoggle; Conservatives Will Be Livid
snip~
Not to be out done, another New York liberal (there are two in the race, in case you didn't notice), Donald Trump was asked by FOX Business Trump sycophant Stuart Varney about his infrastructure plan.
Trump said that he would spend "at least double" Hillary Clinton's, which would place the number north of a half-a-trillion dollars.
More @
http://politistick.com/trump-responds-hillarys-massive-infrastructure-plan-conservative-will-livid/#
Write in Ted Cruz and save us over half-a-trillion dollars.
Ok, so how do we decide if the "Write in Cruz" campaign is a success ?
Yes, I am asking for numbers.
(1) vote nationwide is a LOSE.
(1,000,000) is a WIN.
Those are my numbers.
Yours ?
Quote from: SalemCat on August 05, 2016, 06:41:54 PM
Ok, so how do we decide if the "Write in Cruz" campaign is a success ?
Yes, I am asking for numbers.
(1) vote nationwide is a LOSE.
(1,000,000) is a WIN.
Those are my numbers.
Yours ?
ONLY in a RINO's mind, it has to start some place. It's like saving money, you have to start some place. This IS the year to start NOT voting for the less of two evils. I'm sure even your God will understand. :biggrin:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20131029180227%2Fsonicfanchara%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fda%2FDbz-meme.jpg&hash=0a068deae631833500c8ea752ddf64a3755d7436)
Quote from: SalemCat on August 05, 2016, 06:41:54 PM
Ok, so how do we decide if the "Write in Cruz" campaign is a success ?
Yes, I am asking for numbers.
(1) vote nationwide is a LOSE.
(1,000,000) is a WIN.
Those are my numbers.
Yours ?
My numbers: Ted Cruz write in = win/win.
Quote from: SalemCat on August 05, 2016, 06:41:54 PM
Ok, so how do we decide if the "Write in Cruz" campaign is a success ?
Yes, I am asking for numbers.
(1) vote nationwide is a LOSE.
(1,000,000) is a WIN.
Those are my numbers.
Yours ?
And if we roll over, play dead, and vote for trump, how will we measure success? By how much he still loses by?
Quote from: walkstall on August 06, 2016, 09:35:15 AM
ONLY in a RINO's mind, it has to start some place. It's like saving money, you have to start some place. This IS the year to start NOT voting for the less of two evils. I'm sure even your God will understand. :biggrin:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20131029180227%2Fsonicfanchara%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fda%2FDbz-meme.jpg&hash=0a068deae631833500c8ea752ddf64a3755d7436)
I have never in 30 yrs of voting gone with the lesser of two evils...cause its still evil...
so I got this covered and sleep pretty good as to my actions...
but have nightmares because of what dems and reps have done!!!
The lesser of two evils gave us Bush II, the Patriot Act and a police state.
Quote from: tac on August 08, 2016, 07:05:34 AM
The lesser of two evils gave us Bush II, the Patriot Act and a police state.
Bush I and II, broken up by Dole and McCon....
Soooo, looks like a lot of people are sitting out the election.
But instead of sitting on your hands, send a message by writing in Cruz
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpYuTCRVYAAR1TS.jpg)
I'm telling ya people, if you bother voting for Trump, it won't count, but write in Cruz and you send a message.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.decisiondeskhq.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F2%2F2016%2F08%2Fmonmouth-8-8.jpg&hash=e391cb4b88adbdce70d651695e3e3267da2d7873)
Liberal Establishment hack, Gary Johnson in Yellow, and commie Stein in orange, neither of which make an impact on the race whatsoever.
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2016, 10:40:24 AM
I'm telling ya people, if you bother voting for Trump, it won't count, but write in Cruz and you send a message.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.decisiondeskhq.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F2%2F2016%2F08%2Fmonmouth-8-8.jpg&hash=e391cb4b88adbdce70d651695e3e3267da2d7873)
Liberal Establishment hack, Gary Johnson in Yellow, and commie Stein in orange, neither of which make an impact on the race whatsoever.
:thumbup: write in Cruz, sent trump back to new york, have a great shot at the midterms. Got it. :thumbup:
Quote from: s3779m on August 09, 2016, 11:08:59 AM
:thumbup: write in Cruz, sent trump back to new york, have a great shot at the midterms. Got it. :thumbup:
:thumbup:
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2016, 11:16:16 AM
:thumbup:
It's amazing, other people think you can only vote for Hillary or Trump. It pisses the off when you tell the otherwise. :biggrin:
Quote from: walkstall on August 09, 2016, 11:22:15 AM
It's amazing, other people think you can only vote for Hillary or Trump. It pisses the off when you tell the otherwise. :biggrin:
I think posting evidence that voting for Trump is a waste, while voting Cruz sends a stinging rebuke of the commie Establishment.
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2016, 11:27:16 AM
I think posting evidence that voting for Trump is a waste, while voting Cruz sends a stinging rebuke of the commie Establishment.
But, but you call yourself a republican. NO I don't I call myself Conservative!!
Yet another reason to write in Cruz. No one is actually voting for any particular candidate, no, they're voting against Trump. :lol:
Quinnipiac University Swing State Polls
Posted August 9th, 2016 by Drew McCoy & filed under Uncategorized.
More bad news for the Trump campaign/good news for Team Clinton.
FLORIDA: Clinton 46 – Trump 45
OHIO: Clinton 49 – Trump 45
PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 52 – Trump 42
With huge gender gaps marking the presidential race, Democrat Hillary Clinton is in a virtual likely voter tie with Republican Donald Trump in Florida, but holds the slimmest of leads in Ohio and a 10-point advantage in Pennsylvania, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.
In a campaign driven by negatives, most Trump supporters say they mainly are voting anti- Clinton while many Clinton supporters say they are voting anti-Trump, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds. The Swing State Poll focuses on Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania because since 1960 no candidate has won the presidential race without taking at least two of these three states. This is the first survey of likely voters in this election cycle and can not be compared to earlier surveys of registered voters.
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/2016/08/quinnipiac-university-swing-state-polls/
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2016, 03:00:36 PM
Yet another reason to write in Cruz. No one is actually voting for any particular candidate, no, they're voting against Trump. :lol:
Quinnipiac University Swing State Polls
Posted August 9th, 2016 by Drew McCoy & filed under Uncategorized.
More bad news for the Trump campaign/good news for Team Clinton.
FLORIDA: Clinton 46 – Trump 45
OHIO: Clinton 49 – Trump 45
PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 52 – Trump 42
With huge gender gaps marking the presidential race, Democrat Hillary Clinton is in a virtual likely voter tie with Republican Donald Trump in Florida, but holds the slimmest of leads in Ohio and a 10-point advantage in Pennsylvania, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.
In a campaign driven by negatives, most Trump supporters say they mainly are voting anti- Clinton while many Clinton supporters say they are voting anti-Trump, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds. The Swing State Poll focuses on Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania because since 1960 no candidate has won the presidential race without taking at least two of these three states. This is the first survey of likely voters in this election cycle and can not be compared to earlier surveys of registered voters.
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/2016/08/quinnipiac-university-swing-state-polls/
It is nice knowing my vote will not count for either one of them. Cruz for the write in.
FOX calls it 3 months early for Hillary. Just another reason to not "Feel" obligated to vote Trump...
According to the Fox News ratings, if Clinton wins the states considered "solid" or "lean" Democrat, she would get 273 electoral votes to Trump's 164. That would put Clinton above the 270 electoral votes it takes to win the White House.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftherightscoop.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F08%2FFox-News-Delegates-768x432.jpg&hash=45a50779e7a740da9156c4a92e5dddbc23863c0b)
I see it that time a year again, you have been playing in the Romper Room again also Bam. :lol:
Quote from: bama_beau_redux on August 12, 2016, 07:25:00 AM
If I'm going to vote for a Canadian,
I think I'd rather choose this guy.
If I remember correctly, you were banned from here for (SIP) Stupid In Public?
Quote from: Solar on August 10, 2016, 05:41:14 PM
FOX calls it 3 months early for Hillary. Just another reason to not "Feel" obligated to vote Trump...
According to the Fox News ratings, if Clinton wins the states considered "solid" or "lean" Democrat, she would get 273 electoral votes to Trump's 164. That would put Clinton above the 270 electoral votes it takes to win the White House.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftherightscoop.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F08%2FFox-News-Delegates-768x432.jpg&hash=45a50779e7a740da9156c4a92e5dddbc23863c0b)
It seems like there was something posted here that showed proof of the number of dem crossovers that voted Trump. So many people dont believe it when you tell them. Where is that evidence?
Quote from: Double D on August 12, 2016, 10:46:13 AM
It seems like there was something posted here that showed proof of the number of dem crossovers that voted Trump. So many people dont believe it when you tell them. Where is that evidence?
I looked for it too, but couldn't find it, I think it may have been Tac that posted it.
Anyone want to give it a shot on search? Thanks....
In looking at the map; I am going to predict that Trump loses, OH, FL, and AZ. He will lose OH because of his disdain for Kasich, FL, because he won't get the Latino vote and AZ because he also won't get the Latino vote. It has been rumored that he hasn't been running any ads or trying to sway votes in PA. I know for a fact I have not heard one Trump anti-Hillary ad here in FL. Not a one; so I agree that all the states leaning DEM will go to Hillary. With that in mind; I think Hillary will pick up 58 electoral votes from the toss up states. Putting her at least at 331.
This I think will be a case where Trump may win the popular vote but Hillary will win the electoral vote -- something that I don't think Trump quite understands. He didn't understand how the delegate count process went, and I doubt he knows that it's the electoral votes he needs to worry about -- not how large the crowds are that he draws, but the electoral votes that he gets.
Quote from: Solar on August 12, 2016, 10:59:08 AM
I looked for it too, but couldn't find it, I think it may have been Tac that posted it.
Anyone want to give it a shot on search? Thanks....
Did not find it. But this may be it as I recall.
12 Million Democrats voted in the Republican Primaries
http://www.redstate.com/diary/creinstein/2016/06/25/12-million-democrats-voted-republican-primaries/
Quote from: Solar on August 12, 2016, 10:59:08 AM
I looked for it too, but couldn't find it, I think it may have been Tac that posted it.
Anyone want to give it a shot on search? Thanks....
I remember posting it, but can't find it.
This is the link.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/republican-primaries-stolen-by-democrats/msg311024/#msg311024
Quote from: walkstall on August 12, 2016, 11:32:16 AM
Did not find it. But this may be it as I recall.
12 Million Democrats voted in the Republican Primaries
http://www.redstate.com/diary/creinstein/2016/06/25/12-million-democrats-voted-republican-primaries/
Thank you. I tried searching myself but missed this....
Quote from: tac on August 12, 2016, 12:20:33 PM
This is the link.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/republican-primaries-stolen-by-democrats/msg311024/#msg311024
Thanks tic...
Quote from: Double D on August 12, 2016, 10:46:13 AM
It seems like there was something posted here that showed proof of the number of dem crossovers that voted Trump. So many people dont believe it when you tell them. Where is that evidence?
DOH!!!
It was me that posted it back in June. :rolleyes:
12 Million Democrats Voted In The Republican Primaries
After a lot of work I have finished my math calculations. A simple effort will show that from 2000 to 2008 there was a change in Primary votes of 10-12 million. Ten million more Republicans and 12 million less Democrats. But this is child's play. Getting deeper, examining States with close polling prior to the registration requirements, States with a clear winner in polls prior to registration change requirements, and you can set patterns.
Using 2000 and 2008 as baselines, the conclusion was staggering. Trump only got about 3.3 million Republican Votes. The rest are Democrats, approximately 12 million of them.
I also found via my studies by going back to 1992 that this behavior is not new, in fact even when there is a tight contest about 5% will "strategically vote" in the Republican Party primary/caucus. Even more disturbing is that it appears that there may be even a 5% not normally detectable, of Republicans who only vote Democrat. Aka plants that we always knew existed.
In some circumstances the vote differences were so extreme that it defies explanation. Only for one election did I not find good information, and that being an incumbent versus a challenger I could ignore it safely.
Of 31 million who voted in the Republican Primary 38% approximately were Democrats.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/how-did-trump-steal-the-vote/msg308373/#msg308373
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/how-did-trump-steal-the-vote/
Copied from the other thread, because I guess it needs repeating, again and again!
"WHEN are Conservatives going to stand their ground?"
Republicans are becoming the "Retreat Party" in two ways, Giving up and hanging out with Liberals.
To have the GALL to refer to a Constitutional Conservative a "nut case" or anything less than deserving of their full, unyielding support is LUNACY! If you really want America to return to our Constitutional roots, WHY take a chance on a proven liberal with a 40yr track record, when the REAL DEAL is there - and you still have the opportunity to write in his NAME?
Trump-a-loons aren't helping, not by anyone's imagination, they are damaging the TEA effort by not supporting TEA candidates. We're voting for a CAUSE, if the right candidate has his/her name on the ballot, or can be put on the ballot... and you fail in your opportunity, simply put - you're a traitor to the cause. This isn't an argument about hopeless "blind idealism", neither the "lessor of 2 evils" - who, ask yourself WHO told you we have just TWO choices? What is so hard about spelling out, "Ted Cruz"...?
Here's the real rub... Ted Cruz demonstrated he has the correct political position, and willingness to defend it, PERIOD. Have you no backbone to do the same? When our founding fathers proposed leaving the clutches of England, they too were in the minority, yet persisted. Had I been alive, I sincerely hope I would have had the nads to stand with them - but this is -MY- time to stay true to our heritage of liberty, equality, prosperity and the pursuit of happiness - NOT to fold up the tent, down in defeat & shooting the front line fighters in the back.
WHEN did Donald Trump actually become "an option" for TEA...? Are we putting the "Republican" brand name ahead of "values" - really? Are we becoming a shallow, rudderless, valueless nation without Constitutional roots!? When the enemies to our Liberty start barking like Hyenas, we scatter like rabbits, or roar like Lions?
Lest we forget, there was another "Ted" in the Senate, who stood strong, we despised his policies, but admired his fortitude. Give up on Conservationism by choosing Trump and you have neither policy nor respect.
Quote from: Hoofer on August 13, 2016, 11:17:55 AM
Copied from the other thread, because I guess it needs repeating, again and again!
"WHEN are Conservatives going to stand their ground?"
Republicans are becoming the "Retreat Party" in two ways, Giving up and hanging out with Liberals.
To have the GALL to refer to a Constitutional Conservative a "nut case" or anything less than deserving of their full, unyielding support is LUNACY! If you really want America to return to our Constitutional roots, WHY take a chance on a proven liberal with a 40yr track record, when the REAL DEAL is there - and you still have the opportunity to write in his NAME?
Trump-a-loons aren't helping, not by anyone's imagination, they are damaging the TEA effort by not supporting TEA candidates. We're voting for a CAUSE, if the right candidate has his/her name on the ballot, or can be put on the ballot... and you fail in your opportunity, simply put - you're a traitor to the cause. This isn't an argument about hopeless "blind idealism", neither the "lessor of 2 evils" - who, ask yourself WHO told you we have just TWO choices? What is so hard about spelling out, "Ted Cruz"...?
Here's the real rub... Ted Cruz demonstrated he has the correct political position, and willingness to defend it, PERIOD. Have you no backbone to do the same? When our founding fathers proposed leaving the clutches of England, they too were in the minority, yet persisted. Had I been alive, I sincerely hope I would have had the nads to stand with them - but this is -MY- time to stay true to our heritage of liberty, equality, prosperity and the pursuit of happiness - NOT to fold up the tent, down in defeat & shooting the front line fighters in the back.
WHEN did Donald Trump actually become "an option" for TEA...? Are we putting the "Republican" brand name ahead of "values" - really? Are we becoming a shallow, rudderless, valueless nation without Constitutional roots!? When the enemies to our Liberty start barking like Hyenas, we scatter like rabbits, or roar like Lions?
Lest we forget, there was another "Ted" in the Senate, who stood strong, we despised his policies, but admired his fortitude. Give up on Conservationism by choosing Trump and you have neither policy nor respect.
Amen! I stand with Cruz. I will continue to support him and I am proud to be one of those courageous conservatives.
"Imagine thousands of "courageous conservatives" standing up and saying "we demand our liberty."
--Ted Cruz @ Liberty University
Quote from: Ms.Independence on August 15, 2016, 08:24:09 PM
Amen! I stand with Cruz. I will continue to support him and I am proud to be one of those courageous conservatives.
"Imagine thousands of "courageous conservatives" standing up and saying "we demand our liberty."
--Ted Cruz @ Liberty University
Please let me know if posting these links is ok. Im sure many here already know them.
https://www.facebook.com/Nationalwriteintedcruzcampaign/
https://www.facebook.com/TedCruzPresident2020/
Quote from: Double D on August 17, 2016, 12:06:13 PM
Please let me know if posting these links is ok. Im sure many here already know them.
facebook.com/Nationalwriteintedcruzcampaign/
facebook.com/TedCruzPresident2020/?fref=ts
I think there are only a couple of people here with Faceplant accounts.
Quote from: Solar on August 17, 2016, 12:08:11 PM
I think there are only a couple of people here with Faceplant accounts.
Thats ok, even if it gets shared a few more times its worth it.
Quote from: Double D on August 17, 2016, 12:12:28 PM
Thats ok, even if it gets shared a few more times its worth it.
Compare the dates.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/cruz-write-in-campaign/
Cruz Write In Campaign
« on:
April 02, 2016, 07:33:53 AM »
Quote from: Solar on August 17, 2016, 12:20:08 PM
Compare the dates.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/cruz-write-in-campaign/
Cruz Write In Campaign
« on: April 02, 2016, 07:33:53 AM »
I like it.
Quote from: Solar on August 17, 2016, 12:27:46 PM
Post our link on Faceplant. :biggrin:
I have more than once.
What a circus!
Trump-a-loons vacillating between the "ghost votes", unknown to pollsters, but expected to materialize and launch Donald into the POTUS (with a solid mandate), and polling like Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues under the Sea... and of course the big name Radio Talk shows trying to steady the Tiller of the Trump Cutter (Sailing Ship), he's tacking right and left into the headwinds of this election, nobody knows if he's gaining or losing!
Who's FAULT is it if Trump WINS....?... and completely turns America into a Liberal Utopia, everyone is equally miserable, broke, without God and wondering if America is on the door step of hell?
Where is the "stability" in the Trump campaign? One thing Hillary might be right about, the lack of a steady hand - is anyone keeping track of the Trump positions? We're ready to hear in John Kerry speak, "I was for the wall, before I was against it!" Whew!
So, desperate to salvage the sinking Trump Titanic, we actually have National Talk Show Hosts trying to "coach" Donald Trump over the air and spin his liberal nonsense into common sense. Are they all competing for the WH spokesman position? The next "Josh Earnest" had a 12-3pm time slot...? "Mr. Trump really meant to say he's modifying the "structure" of the Mexican wall, he's proposing a wall of "flubber"... Illegals would bounce right off it, back into Mexico!"
Gary Johnson is trying to assume the mantle of the biggest of the Big Government - completely leaving his legacy of fiscal conservatism behind in New Mexico, for the more "main stream liberal" positions.
So, what gives? We got the worst of the worst candidates - or do we?
Not Ted Cruz! While all the smoke generators are pumping out huge noxious plumes of campaign rhetoric, Ted's hard at work, trying to keep America from going Trump Bankrupt, by blocking Obama's attempt to give away every last nickel to the Illegal Aliens. Hard at work, while the rest of them are trying to figure out how to steal our wallets, again.
Well, neither Trump nor Hillary nor Johnson is currently in office!
True!
But none of them is even HINTING of taking Ted Cruz's position.
More than ever, with political pandering and posturing - devoid of common sense, only one candidate still makes perfect sense. Ted Cruz.
Quote from: Hoofer on August 24, 2016, 07:07:22 PM
What a circus!
Trump-a-loons vacillating between the "ghost votes", unknown to pollsters, but expected to materialize and launch Donald into the POTUS (with a solid mandate), and polling like Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues under the Sea... and of course the big name Radio Talk shows trying to steady the Tiller of the Trump Cutter (Sailing Ship), he's tacking right and left into the headwinds of this election, nobody knows if he's gaining or losing!
Who's FAULT is it if Trump WINS....?... and completely turns America into a Liberal Utopia, everyone is equally miserable, broke, without God and wondering if America is on the door step of hell?
Where is the "stability" in the Trump campaign? One thing Hillary might be right about, the lack of a steady hand - is anyone keeping track of the Trump positions? We're ready to hear in John Kerry speak, "I was for the wall, before I was against it!" Whew!
So, desperate to salvage the sinking Trump Titanic, we actually have National Talk Show Hosts trying to "coach" Donald Trump over the air and spin his liberal nonsense into common sense. Are they all competing for the WH spokesman position? The next "Josh Earnest" had a 12-3pm time slot...? "Mr. Trump really meant to say he's modifying the "structure" of the Mexican wall, he's proposing a wall of "flubber"... Illegals would bounce right off it, back into Mexico!"
Gary Johnson is trying to assume the mantle of the biggest of the Big Government - completely leaving his legacy of fiscal conservatism behind in New Mexico, for the more "main stream liberal" positions.
So, what gives? We got the worst of the worst candidates - or do we?
Not Ted Cruz! While all the smoke generators are pumping out huge noxious plumes of campaign rhetoric, Ted's hard at work, trying to keep America from going Trump Bankrupt, by blocking Obama's attempt to give away every last nickel to the Illegal Aliens. Hard at work, while the rest of them are trying to figure out how to steal our wallets, again.
Well, neither Trump nor Hillary nor Johnson is currently in office!
True!
But none of them is even HINTING of taking Ted Cruz's position.
More than ever, with political pandering and posturing - devoid of common sense, only one candidate still makes perfect sense. Ted Cruz.
Speaking of "Lurch". Has Obama put him in purgatory or is he taking the summer off wind surfing?
Quote from: Hoofer on August 24, 2016, 07:07:22 PM
What a circus!
Trump-a-loons vacillating between the "ghost votes", unknown to pollsters, but expected to materialize and launch Donald into the POTUS (with a solid mandate), and polling like Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues under the Sea... and of course the big name Radio Talk shows trying to steady the Tiller of the Trump Cutter (Sailing Ship), he's tacking right and left into the headwinds of this election, nobody knows if he's gaining or losing!
Who's FAULT is it if Trump WINS....?... and completely turns America into a Liberal Utopia, everyone is equally miserable, broke, without God and wondering if America is on the door step of hell?
Where is the "stability" in the Trump campaign? One thing Hillary might be right about, the lack of a steady hand - is anyone keeping track of the Trump positions? We're ready to hear in John Kerry speak, "I was for the wall, before I was against it!" Whew!
So, desperate to salvage the sinking Trump Titanic, we actually have National Talk Show Hosts trying to "coach" Donald Trump over the air and spin his liberal nonsense into common sense. Are they all competing for the WH spokesman position? The next "Josh Earnest" had a 12-3pm time slot...? "Mr. Trump really meant to say he's modifying the "structure" of the Mexican wall, he's proposing a wall of "flubber"... Illegals would bounce right off it, back into Mexico!"
Gary Johnson is trying to assume the mantle of the biggest of the Big Government - completely leaving his legacy of fiscal conservatism behind in New Mexico, for the more "main stream liberal" positions.
So, what gives? We got the worst of the worst candidates - or do we?
Not Ted Cruz! While all the smoke generators are pumping out huge noxious plumes of campaign rhetoric, Ted's hard at work, trying to keep America from going Trump Bankrupt, by blocking Obama's attempt to give away every last nickel to the Illegal Aliens. Hard at work, while the rest of them are trying to figure out how to steal our wallets, again.
Well, neither Trump nor Hillary nor Johnson is currently in office!
True!
But none of them is even HINTING of taking Ted Cruz's position.
More than ever, with political pandering and posturing - devoid of common sense, only one candidate still makes perfect sense. Ted Cruz.
Makes you wonder just how far gone Congress is when you look back at all those so called conservatives that sat on their hands while the Establishment attacked his principles as outdated, his ideas as extreme and his views as closeted racist.
They all sat quiet, because it wasn't they who were being attacked, and so afraid for their own careers, they threw ted under the bus.
No, they didn't do it outright, but they did nothing to stop the leftist Establishment GOP as they drug Ted under it's wheels.
We'll remember you at election time.
Quote from: Solar on August 25, 2016, 05:59:20 AM
Makes you wonder just how far gone Congress is when you look back at all those so called conservatives that sat on their hands while the Establishment attacked his principles as outdated, his ideas as extreme and his views as closeted racist.
They all sat quiet, because it wasn't they who were being attacked, and so afraid for their own careers, they threw ted under the bus.
No, they didn't do it outright, but they did nothing to stop the leftist Establishment GOP as they drug Ted under it's wheels.
We'll remember you at election time.
Cracks me up when I hear trumpsters telling me we all need to come together now to keep hillery out of the white house, I just tell them hillery won the white house the day their man trump got 1237 delegates, and they don't get it.
Quote from: s3779m on August 25, 2016, 02:35:39 PM
Cracks me up when I hear trumpsters telling me we all need to come together now to keep hillery out of the white house, I just tell them hillery won the white house the day their man trump got 1237 delegates, and they don't get it.
It boggles my mind when a tiny minority of voters tell the majority they're to blame for a NY Lib losing to another NY Lib.
The fact of the matter is, they helped put Hillary into the White House by voting for Donald Trump.
But, as stubborn as the average low-information-voter is likely to be, they'll still be blaming TEA Conservatives for Donald's landslide defeat. While they could pull-the-lever for Ted Cruz, they might not get the spelling correct, T-E-D C-R-U-Z.
Writing in Ted Cruz is the perfect way to right-a-wrong, and given enough sane people, we can save this country.
Trump is so far behind Hillary in the pols, if these "ghost voters" don't turn out in November... well it sucks, doesn't it. So much energy invested in a candidate with such high negatives, yes, it'd be a miracle if he ever made it. If I were a Trump-a-loon, I'd be either depressed, or kinda mad at myself for getting bamboozled by a slick talking New Yorker. Build a wall & have Mexico pay for it, yeah, in your dreams! Stop funding Abortion - Geeeeze! That's a classic... like Bill Clinton's 'make abortion rare and safe'.
If I were a Trump-a-loon, I'd be getting a little pissed too! Donald backpeddling on a promise-a-week, what kind of campaign is that!? His own supporters are trying to tell him to shut up! Not too long ago, Rush mocked Hillary, suggesting they were afraid her pol numbers would plummet whenever she spoke. Now we got Talk Show Hosts begging Donald to shut up, it's making them look like brain-dead lemmings. They're getting tired of the Josh Ernest routine, defending Donald.
So much political energy invested in this Democratic Plant, well, that was wasted, but there is still one more vote, and nobody said you can't vote your conscience & Ted Cruz.
Lots of smoke & mirrors in both Hillary and Donald's campaigns, aren't you GLAD we all found out Donald was a Liberal Democrat BEFORE the election? Like I said, Ted Cruz is the perfect way to right-a-wrong, write him in and live with a clear conscience. I'm not going to "rub-it-in", you got snookered by a New York Liberal, it can happen, it can happen... But, if you STILL insist on going against your Conscience & voting for Donald Trump - you personally become responsible for his reckless spending, growing government & the next war he's sure to bring.
On-the-other-hand.... we can send a strong message to the GOPe, we want smaller government, lower taxes, fewer government regulations, and responsible leadership - vote Ted Cruz.
Quote from: Hoofer on August 27, 2016, 01:27:25 PM
The fact of the matter is, they helped put Hillary into the White House by voting for Donald Trump.
But, as stubborn as the average low-information-voter is likely to be, they'll still be blaming TEA Conservatives for Donald's landslide defeat. While they could pull-the-lever for Ted Cruz, they might not get the spelling correct, T-E-D C-R-U-Z.
Writing in Ted Cruz is the perfect way to right-a-wrong, and given enough sane people, we can save this country.
Trump is so far behind Hillary in the pols, if these "ghost voters" don't turn out in November... well it sucks, doesn't it. So much energy invested in a candidate with such high negatives, yes, it'd be a miracle if he ever made it. If I were a Trump-a-loon, I'd be either depressed, or kinda mad at myself for getting bamboozled by a slick talking New Yorker. Build a wall & have Mexico pay for it, yeah, in your dreams! Stop funding Abortion - Geeeeze! That's a classic... like Bill Clinton's 'make abortion rare and safe'.
If I were a Trump-a-loon, I'd be getting a little pissed too! Donald backpeddling on a promise-a-week, what kind of campaign is that!? His own supporters are trying to tell him to shut up! Not too long ago, Rush mocked Hillary, suggesting they were afraid her pol numbers would plummet whenever she spoke. Now we got Talk Show Hosts begging Donald to shut up, it's making them look like brain-dead lemmings. They're getting tired of the Josh Ernest routine, defending Donald.
So much political energy invested in this Democratic Plant, well, that was wasted, but there is still one more vote, and nobody said you can't vote your conscience & Ted Cruz.
Lots of smoke & mirrors in both Hillary and Donald's campaigns, aren't you GLAD we all found out Donald was a Liberal Democrat BEFORE the election? Like I said, Ted Cruz is the perfect way to right-a-wrong, write him in and live with a clear conscience. I'm not going to "rub-it-in", you got snookered by a New York Liberal, it can happen, it can happen... But, if you STILL insist on going against your Conscience & voting for Donald Trump - you personally become responsible for his reckless spending, growing government & the next war he's sure to bring.
On-the-other-hand.... we can send a strong message to the GOPe, we want smaller government, lower taxes, fewer government regulations, and responsible leadership - vote Ted Cruz.
Ya just can't fix stoopid.
With all the evidence that Trump is a con artist, uses the court system to steal widowed old lady's homes, uses the court system to kill all dissenting voices, stated quite clearly he didn't need the Conservative vote to win, Listed as a perpetrator in a pedophile rape case, and the list goes on for days.
I keep asking these Trumpanzees to give me one reason other than fear of Hillary as to why they'll be voting for Trump.
doing some research on write in candidates in missouri...this is part of what I found
Write-In Candidates
A "write-in candidate" is a person:
whose name is not printed on the ballot (see 115.453(4,5,6) RSMo); and
who has filed a declaration of intent pdf image to be a write-in candidate for election to office with the proper election authority prior to 5:00 p.m. on the second Friday immediately preceding the election day. It is not necessary to file a declaration of intent if there are no candidates on the ballot for that office. (see115.453 (4) RSMo)
Frequently asked questions on write-in candidates
Can a write-in candidate be on a primary election ballot?
No. (Section 115.453 (5) RSMo)
If a candidate runs in a primary election and loses, can the person run in the general election for the same office?
No. If a candidate files for nomination to an office and is not nominated at a primary election, that candidate cannot file a declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate for the same office at the general election. (Section 115.453(4) RSMo)
Are write-in candidates posted at the polling place?
No. The election authority shall furnish a list to the election judges and counting teams prior to Election Day of all write-in candidates who have filed a declaration of intent. (Section 115.453(4) RSMo)
Are write-in votes counted for every name that is written in?
No. If a candidate is on the ballot for an office, write-in votes are counted only for the candidates who have filed a declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate with the proper election authority. (Section 115.453(4), first sentence) If no candidate is on the ballot for an office, it is not required to file a declaration of intent and votes are counted for every name properly written in. (Section 115.453(4) RSMo, last sentence)
What if the voter casts a vote for a candidate on the ballot and properly writes in the name of someone for the same office?
In this case, no candidate for the office shall be counted as this is considered an over vote. If cross (X) marks appear next to the names of more candidates for an office than are entitled to fill the office, no candidate for the office shall be counted as voted for. (Section 115.453.2)
Can a person file as a write-in candidate for United States President?
Yes. When submitted to the election authority, each declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate for the office of United States president shall include the name of a candidate for vice president and the name of nominees for presidential elector equal to the number to which the state is entitled. At least one qualified resident of each congressional district shall be nominated as presidential elector. Each such declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate shall be accompanied by a declaration of candidacy for each presidential elector in substantially the form set forth in subsection 3 of section 115.399 RSMo . Each declaration of candidacy for the office of presidential elector shall be subscribed and sworn to by the candidate before the election official receiving the declaration of intent to be a write-in, notary public or other officer authorized by law to administer oaths. (Section 115.453 (6) RSMo)
http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/writein.asp
what are the requirements in your state???
if I read this right it means a write in for cruz will not be counted unless he declares...
not sure how to proceed
Quote from: blades on September 03, 2016, 01:54:42 PM
if I read this right it means a write in for cruz will not be counted unless he declares...
not sure how to proceed
iT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER, NO ONE EXPECTS HIM TO WIN, it's about sending a message to the GOP.
Quote from: Solar on September 03, 2016, 02:17:17 PM
iT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER, NO ONE EXPECTS HIM TO WIN, it's about sending a message to the GOP.
your right but it isn't even counted or recorded so no one will know...just likre I left it blank...
what to do what to do
Trump seems to be leading in some polls now. Why vote for hillary? So a republican can never win again? 8 years of hillary and no republican will win nationally.
Trump leading now in Reuters, Rassmussen and LA times.
Quote from: ldub23 on September 04, 2016, 03:19:23 PM
Trump seems to be leading in some polls now. Why vote for hillary? So a republican can never win again? 8 years of hillary and no republican will win nationally.
So you think because Trump has an (R) next to his name, he's not a lib?
Quote from: ldub23 on September 04, 2016, 03:19:23 PM
Trump seems to be leading in some polls now. Why vote for hillary? So a republican can never win again? 8 years of hillary and no republican will win nationally.
All the more reason to write in cruz..... I don't want his or her election as POTUS to be on my conscious.
Mark Levin said he'd have his mind sort of "made up" by Labor Day and announce his presidential choice.
Everytime, and I mean EVERYTIME .... I start thinking, "well... Donald -is- better than Hillary, is he not?..."
Red Flags pop up all over the place!
The latest is this "Alt-xxxx" movement, which if Donald is part of...! An absolute show stopper, 'cause I already know what THAT one eventually goes. Every week seems to create more and more unanswered questions.
1. What is this Mexican Wall position that keeps changing? Make up your MIND already!
2. Jobs leaving the hemisphere... ? I thought it was USA, where did this "hemisphere" nonsense come from?
3. Marco Rubio was correct, Donald is back to "touch-back immigration".
4. Donald still thinks and argues from a Democratic mindset - not from a limited FEDERAL government position.
5. Donald has ZERO economic plan that sounds Conservative, or classic Republican... period.
6. Donald should have, could have, 'put the last nail in the coffin of the Clinton campaign' - but won't.
To the last point, how much ammo does the media have to load or lay at Trump's feet before he starts campaigning like a guy trying to win?
I agree completely with Mark Levin on this thing, 'It is entirely up to the candidate to run his own campaign, win or lose' - it is NOT my fault if the candidate does not try to earn MY vote. Trump can do whatever he darn well chooses, so can Hillary, and with Hillary trying to appeal to Republicans lately, and Trump not giving a rip... sigh.
....filling my Email in-box & mailbox with mountains of anti-Hillary trash, is just adding fire-starter.
Another week of adding more reasons to NOT vote for Donald or Hillary or Johnson or ?.
Mandate? You want a Mandate? Here's Ted Cruz, and I'm voting to give Ted a mandate for sensible, responsible, limited government. Ted Cruz - That's an easy choice.
HEY!!! Trump has been reading us, he just admitted! Showed up in my email, so it's gotta be true, not one of those mass campaign emails, right...?
Quote
I've been reading your advice and listening to your concerns.
Between now and Election Day, we have one shared goal: stop Hillary Clinton.
Which is why I want your hand in crafting an actionable plan to defeat her.
Please take the Stop Hillary Survey now. >>
We need to challenge Hillary on the core issues and expose her corruption to the American people. On all accounts, Hillary is absolutely unqualified to lead our great nation.
But first I need your help.
I've said it before: my trusted advisors are the American people. I don't care what the special interests, the media, or lobbyists say is the right path.
I want to know what YOU think is the right path to victory this November.
And I even had my team add an open comment box at the end of the survey where you can provide additional input on what you want to see happen between now and Election Day.
Take the Stop Hillary Survey now. >>
Thanks,
Donald J. Trump
TAKE THE SURVEY
He addressed ME by my legal NAME, which absolutely nobody but the Feds & IRS uses... so he's an insider.
Wait a sec...
He said he was his own trusted 'advisor' on the middle east - and then he got that guy who was mixed up in Ukranian/Russian politics, who do we trust, Donald, or the Russian sympathizer...!?
QuoteHillary is absolutely unqualified to lead our great nation.
What about the logo, "Make America Great Again" - if we're under Libs like Obama, and you're calling it "great", what's going on here, are we a "great nation" or not? Make up your mind, already!
QuoteI want your hand in crafting an actionable plan to defeat her.
Donald, since you're reading this, here's my advice - Endorse Ted Cruz for President.I know Donald won't take me seriously, the feeling is mutual, he's not a serious candidate.
Quote from: ldub23 on September 04, 2016, 03:21:41 PM
Trump leading now in Reuters, Rassmussen and LA times.
You get what you ask for and pay for in a Poll. All Polls do is make money for the MSM.
Quote from: Hoofer on September 05, 2016, 04:46:05 AM
HEY!!! Trump has been reading us, he just admitted!
Showed up in my email, so it's gotta be true, not one of those mass campaign emails, right...?
He addressed ME by my legal NAME, which absolutely nobody but the Feds & IRS uses... so he's an insider.
Wait a sec...
He said he was his own trusted 'advisor' on the middle east - and then he got that guy who was mixed up in Ukranian/Russian politics, who do we trust, Donald, or the Russian sympathizer...!?
What about the logo, "Make America Great Again" - if we're under Libs like Obama, and you're calling it "great", what's going on here, are we a "great nation" or not? Make up your mind, already!
Donald, since you're reading this, here's my advice - Endorse Ted Cruz for President.
I know Donald won't take me seriously, the feeling is mutual, he's not a serious candidate.
I wonder if Levin was always a liberal. What turned me off to Cruz was the lunatic Beck.
Quote from: ldub23 on September 05, 2016, 02:14:00 PM
I wonder if Levin was always a liberal. What turned me off to Cruz was the lunatic Beck.
So you're influenced, not by what an individual stands for, but rather who their supporters are?
By this narrative everyone on this forum is suspect because we believe TEA as a movement, because Beck believes it's principles as well.
Please tell me, you really aren't that damned stupid.
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
Cruz got somewhere around 7-8 million republican votes and trump got 3.3 million. The rest of trumps votes were from DEMOCRATS. Who clobbered who? Close down the open primaries and trump finishes 3rd at best. That being said, yes, write in Cruz. The only choice.
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
I will not my nose and voter, I am voting for Cruz.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.thetimes-tribune.com%2Fkelly%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F05%2Fholding-nose-while-voting-gif_93960_20141106-107.gif&hash=7fdebcc7a54c0ebe83e7b6ae9c39529f989f3ac3)
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
Clobbered by what, a bunch of libs during the GOP Primary?
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
It worked for the RINO's and the Dem.
Quote from: Solar on September 05, 2016, 02:32:12 PM
So you're influenced, not by what an individual stands for, but rather who their supporters are?
By this narrative everyone on this forum is suspect because we believe TEA as a movement, because Beck believes it's principles as well.
Please tell me, you really aren't that damned stupid.
:thumbsup:
I question that sanity of anyone who thinks that Levin is a liberal and doesn't like Beck for his endorsement of Cruz. I also question whether or not they themselves are on a liberal fishing expedition.
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
Actually Cruz didn't get clobbered in the primaries. He accumulated enough delegates to be considered at the convention AND eligible to make his famous speech at the convention requesting voters to vote their conscience.
People who support Trump ARE responsible for what happens as a result of that support.
Certainly, if you'd like to write in Kasich and vote your conscience, that is certainly your choice. I myself would rather vote for a conservative.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on September 06, 2016, 04:50:46 AM
:thumbsup:
I question that sanity of anyone who thinks that Levin is a liberal and doesn't like Beck for his endorsement of Cruz. I also question whether or not they themselves are on a liberal fishing expedition.
Yes. (because they love Trump), they look for excuses and potential flaws in the guy running against him.
You're right, he's just another lib.
Quote from: Citizen Bill on September 05, 2016, 02:55:19 PM
Since Cruz got clobbered in the primaries, do you guys still intend to write in for him?
Hey ... I have an idea ... let's split our votes 17 ways! That way Kasich can win Ohio again.
Comrade Bill - do you prefer a National Socialist or a Communist in the White House with a "mandate" or one of them in the WH, knowing they barely got in, and there's a strong protest vote?
IMO, it does not matter if Ted Cruz loses, I'd rather NOT vote for either of the above, and empower the guy in the Senate, give Ted a mandate to stand strong and advance a Constitutional agenda.
Furthermore, if the SCOTUS is really the PRIZE, focus your energy on the SENATE & send the message, you don't like either candidate, but you stand with the Constitutional Candidate - Ted Cruz.
Mark Levin just announced he's voting Trump... and qualifies it with, 'not responsible for the stuff he says/does'. I wouldn't call it an endorsement, more or less a "what the hell, throw in the towel, pull the Trump lever in disgust...' vote.
Quote from: Hoofer on September 06, 2016, 04:27:16 PM
Mark Levin just announced he's voting Trump... and qualifies it with, 'not responsible for the stuff he says/does'. I wouldn't call it an endorsement, more or less a "what the hell, throw in the towel, pull the Trump lever in disgust...' vote.
Oh man, is he in for a shit storm.
Quote from: Solar on September 06, 2016, 05:02:32 PM
Oh man, is he in for a shit storm.
NOT ME this year!!!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.christianpost.com%2Ffull%2F98237%2Ffranklin-graham-hold-your-nose-and-vote.jpg&hash=a4d3d4061eb24ad44eefe75ea0afe997ad80d33e)
Quote from: Hoofer on September 06, 2016, 04:27:16 PM
Mark Levin just announced he's voting Trump... and qualifies it with, 'not responsible for the stuff he says/does'. I wouldn't call it an endorsement, more or less a "what the hell, throw in the towel, pull the Trump lever in disgust...' vote.
Whether pulling the lever willingly or pulling the lever in disgust, is still pulling the lever. This truly surprises me...I just lost a whole lot of respect for Levine and he just lost a whole lot of credibility.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on September 06, 2016, 06:09:52 PM
Whether pulling the lever willingly or pulling the lever in disgust, is still pulling the lever. This truly surprises me...I just lost a whole lot of respect for Levine and he just lost a whole lot of credibility.
Over the last month, Mark Levin has been saying he'd probably vote for Trump. All he did was
endorse make it official. He could have kept it a private thing, come to think of it, has Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh actually SAID, "I am voting for Trump!!!" ...
Oh, Sean might have said, "I'm voting for Trump and then calling fire down from heaven to consume all those that didn't..." - my bad.
Voting wasn't this blame game, twisting arms, end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it ... the media pundits have turned this into a blood pact with the devil or his wife, and almost completely ignored the down races... except Mark Levin. I don't consider him the enemy, and who knows, if the Trump stench wafts his way, he might change his mind again.
I wouldn't have stated my position, were it not for, what I see utter lunacy in backing Donald Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVwPHHsbIfo
One question for Trumpanzees.
When Cruz said "Vote Your Conscience", why did you instantly assume he wasn't talking about Trump?
Quote from: Solar on September 09, 2016, 06:20:53 PM
One question for Trumpanzees.
When Cruz said "Vote Your Conscience", why did you instantly assume he wasn't talking about Trump?
I am thinking what Trumpaloompahs thought he said was, "vote like your unconscious" and they will oblige.. :biggrin:
Quote from: Sauce on September 09, 2016, 06:51:49 PM
I am thinking what Trumpaloompahs thought he said was, "vote like your unconscious" and they will oblige.. :biggrin:
Trying to understand Trumpsters thinking is a waste of time. Not only do they tend to be low information voters, but some of them are one maraca short of a Mariachi band.
Quote from: Solar on September 09, 2016, 06:20:53 PM
One question for Trumpanzees.
When Cruz said "Vote Your Conscience", why did you instantly assume he wasn't talking about Trump?
I have no love for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for the Son of a Bitch! Here's why...
I believe that the future of our Republic is at stake. If (when) Hillary Clinton is elected, the Marxist-Allynsky plan will come to fruition! There will be little distinction between Vladimir Putin's corrupt Oligarchy and ours! Conservatism will be outlawed, along with guns and our individual freedoms. These Oligarchs will make the greater good of the Collective supreme!
Republicans have all three branches of government within our grasp and yet angry Conservatives may help to destroy our nation by refusing the only choice we have to stop Hillary and the Leftist Cabal from achieving their victory! This withered old refugee from a marxist commune is only a figure head for the ship of state that the Marxists have created. Our nation can not withstand one more term of the sort of CHANGE these people BELIEVE in!
Quote from: wally on September 23, 2016, 11:36:22 AM
I have no love for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for the Son of a Bitch! Here's why...
I believe that the future of our Republic is at stake. If (when) Hillary Clinton is elected, the Marxist-Allynsky plan will come to fruition! There will be little distinction between Vladimir Putin's corrupt Oligarchy and ours! Conservatism will be outlawed, along with guns and our individual freedoms. These Oligarchs will make the greater good of the Collective supreme!
Republicans have all three branches of government within our grasp and yet angry Conservatives may help to destroy our nation by refusing the only choice we have to stop Hillary and the Leftist Cabal from achieving their victory! This withered old refugee from a marxist commune is only a figure head for the ship of state that the Marxists have created. Our nation can not withstand one more term of the sort of CHANGE these people BELIEVE in!
That is one perspective. There is also the very real possibility that Trump's objective was to stop the conservative movement. Plain and simple. He is a narcissistic demagogue and he could very well lead all his sheep to slaughter. We are screwed either way.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on September 23, 2016, 07:03:59 PM
That is one perspective. There is also the very real possibility that Trump's objective was to stop the conservative movement. Plain and simple. He is a narcissistic demagogue and he could very well lead all his sheep to slaughter. We are screwed either way.
We were screwed when Trump won the primary! (I serve a a local Republican Committee person and I spoke out harshly against Trump just prior to the election and (as a result) our committee made no endorsement. (No doubt I pissed some people off and made no friends..but I did what I felt was right)
I posted the "Five Stages of Grief" post because I realized that I was so distressed about this that I have been grief stricken about this election! It had been the one time since Ronald Reagan that we were positioned to have one of our own become POTUS! Trump robbed this from us, by telling the people what they wanted to hear and making the process become a farcical reality tv show.
I stopped coming to this forum and withdrew from the whole thing. I watched very little news and went through political withdrawal. Coming up on this very critical election, I realized that I can not escape from my civic responsibilities. If I truly love this county then as difficult as it is, I must do all I can to save it from being destroyed by the Obama/Clinton/Alynsky style Marxists who have taken control of our government, our media and our institutions. I had to get back into the game and begin working with the only political tools we have left. This includes Donald Trump. God Help us!
Quote from: wally on September 23, 2016, 11:36:22 AM
I have no love for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for the Son of a Bitch! Here's why...
I believe that the future of our Republic is at stake. If (when) Hillary Clinton is elected, the Marxist-Allynsky plan will come to fruition! There will be little distinction between Vladimir Putin's corrupt Oligarchy and ours! Conservatism will be outlawed, along with guns and our individual freedoms. These Oligarchs will make the greater good of the Collective supreme!
Republicans have all three branches of government within our grasp and yet angry Conservatives may help to destroy our nation by refusing the only choice we have to stop Hillary and the Leftist Cabal from achieving their victory! This withered old refugee from a marxist commune is only a figure head for the ship of state that the Marxists have created. Our nation can not withstand one more term of the sort of CHANGE these people BELIEVE in!
Well said.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on September 23, 2016, 07:03:59 PM
That is one perspective. There is also the very real possibility that Trump's objective was to stop the conservative movement. Plain and simple. He is a narcissistic demagogue and he could very well lead all his sheep to slaughter. We are screwed either way.
IMO - that's what the Dems want, the GOPe wants, and messy as it'll get, they don't care!
The GOPe is sick of us, and hope a Liberal like Trump can "backfill" the party with moderates - send us packing.
The WANT us to think we're screwed, but we've been electing more and more Conservatives - they're getting desperate and worried about losing control...
WE are gaining ground in the Senate and House.
Quote from: Hoofer on September 25, 2016, 09:39:54 AM
IMO - that's what the Dems want, the GOPe wants, and messy as it'll get, they don't care!
The GOPe is sick of us, and hope a Liberal like Trump can "backfill" the party with moderates - send us packing.
The WANT us to think we're screwed, but we've been electing more and more Conservatives - they're getting desperate and worried about losing control...
WE are gaining ground in the Senate and House.
The real work is being done at the local and state levels. We have made progress in the House, but the Senate is still full of RINO's.
Ted Cruz has offered to help Donald Trump in his preparation for the next two debates. Cruz demonstrated a great control of his emotions as Trump baited him with "Lying Ted" and attacks on his wife, as well as distortions of his record. Trump to do well to take a page out of Ted Cruz's book and stay on message and stay on attack and not get rattled in the next debates by assault an his character, mischaracterizations of his past and insults! Trump has to demonstrate that he can take it just as well as he has proven that he can dish it out!
Quote from: wally on September 23, 2016, 11:36:22 AM
I have no love for Donald Trump, but I will be voting for the Son of a Bitch! Here's why...
When did you turn liberal? Wait..... has anyone told you yet??
Quote
I believe that the future of our Republic is at stake.
No it isn't. That train has left the station. When you, Wally, are reduced to actually attempting to make the case for Donald Trump being the hail Mary that can save our Republic, it simply proves some money well spent on internet bots and 12mm Democrat crossover votes is all you need to get the easily influenced to vote your way. Sorry, your proven delusion is not my reality. But, feel free to strengthen the current GOP structure with your vote by letting them know that no matter who they run, you will be on board until the end.
Quote
If (when) Hillary Clinton is elected, the Marxist-Allynsky plan will come to fruition! There will be little distinction between Vladimir Putin's corrupt Oligarchy and ours! Conservatism will be outlawed, along with guns and our individual freedoms. These Oligarchs will make the greater good of the Collective supreme!
Yeah, Donald's the answer. Donald can save us.
Quote
Republicans have all three branches of government within our grasp and yet angry Conservatives may help to destroy our nation by refusing the only choice we have to stop Hillary and the Leftist Cabal from achieving their victory!
Incorrect. You are. You were malleable enough to be actually be tricked into thinking Trump had support by millions of crossover voters backing fake internet support. We told you Hillary would trounce him. You didn't listen. Now it's our fault? Nice try, Wally, but I already get this from the Trump emails trying to raise money for his campaign that you were gullible enough to think he could finance because he said so. We told you all this, and you didn't listen. He's YOUR candidate, not mine. Hillary is clinging onto dear life, with the FBI on her ass, passing out under protection of the media that has a stockpile of dirt on Trump that hasn't been needed yet, and is STILL beating Donald. Again, your candidate has a history of losing and lying, so please don't blame us normal people.
Quote
This withered old refugee from a marxist commune is only a figure head for the ship of state that the Marxists have created. Our nation can not withstand one more term of the sort of CHANGE these people BELIEVE in!
Gosh, I've never heard that before.
Been crunching the numbers over the past several months, and I'm beginning to think this election just might be a record breaker, for worst turnout ever.
One thing for certain, neither candidate will carry a mandate and can't claim they are doing the work of the will of the people.
Quote from: Solar on September 30, 2016, 08:30:27 AM
Been crunching the numbers over the past several months, and I'm beginning to think this election just might be a record breaker, for worst turnout ever.
One thing for certain, neither candidate will carry a mandate and can't claim they are doing the work of the will of the people.
Heard it in the lobby today, MSNBC was reporting Johnson support is gaining, at 12% in some states. They readily admit it's Clinton support eroding.
Quote from: Hoofer on September 30, 2016, 02:07:43 PM
Heard it in the lobby today, MSNBC was reporting Johnson support is gaining, at 12% in some states. They readily admit it's Clinton support eroding.
More proof of what I've been saying about the Libertarian movement. For the longest time the movement was a draw to Conservatives, until 'the GOP pushed Johnson onto the movement' (no proof) but it doesn't take a genius to see what happened, and now the libs abandoned the Dims for the LIBertarians because of the damage Johnson did under the guidance of the Establishment.
The Libertarian party was once the biggest threat to the GOP till Johnson watered it down to what it is today, all planned, nothing more than a lib flytrap.
Quote from: Solar on September 30, 2016, 02:26:46 PM
More proof of what I've been saying about the Libertarian movement. For the longest time the movement was a draw to Conservatives, until 'the GOP pushed Johnson onto the movement' (no proof) but it doesn't take a genius to see what happened, and now the libs abandoned the Dims for the LIBertarians because of the damage Johnson did under the guidance of the Establishment.
The Libertarian party was once the biggest threat to the GOP till Johnson watered it down to what it is today, all planned, nothing more than a lib flytrap.
A lot of people are not for the party there in right now or even who they say they are. They remind me of all the fruits out there. What bathroom do I use today.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Falibertarianfuture.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F08%2Fend-evil-step-out-of-line-vote-third-party.jpg&hash=57e98844e5b7acf62fd84182f388d94c4118a6fc)
Just checked to see how google is treating us and the "Cruz Write In Campaign" thread, and low and behold it's no longer on their first page, despite having been the first site to call for it, but go to Duckduckgogo search and we're listed in first place.
Doesn't take a genius to see what's going on here.
Quote from: Solar on October 11, 2016, 12:53:48 PM
Just checked to see how google is treating us and the "Cruz Write In Campaign" thread, and low and behold it's no longer on their first page, despite having been the first site to call for it, but go to Duckduckgogo search and we're listed in first place.
Doesn't take a genius to see what's going on here.
Google is the same the MSM. Only they think no one know what there doing. The count on everyone being a LIV.
Quote from: walkstall on October 11, 2016, 01:33:21 PM
Google is the same the MSM. Only they think no one know what there doing. The count on everyone being a LIV.
I only use DuckDuckGo.
I agree with everything you are saying. Donald Trump is horrible. I'm not sure if he is more horrible than Hillary Clinton but he is an awful, awful candidate.
Quote from: taxed on September 30, 2016, 12:55:03 AM
When did you turn liberal? Wait..... has anyone told you yet??
No it isn't. That train has left the station. When you, Wally, are reduced to actually attempting to make the case for Donald Trump being the hail Mary that can save our Republic, it simply proves some money well spent on internet bots and 12mm Democrat crossover votes is all you need to get the easily influenced to vote your way. Sorry, your proven delusion is not my reality. But, feel free to strengthen the current GOP structure with your vote by letting them know that no matter who they run, you will be on board until the end.
Yeah, Donald's the answer. Donald can save us.
Incorrect. You are. You were malleable enough to be actually be tricked into thinking Trump had support by millions of crossover voters backing fake internet support. We told you Hillary would trounce him. You didn't listen. Now it's our fault? Nice try, Wally, but I already get this from the Trump emails trying to raise money for his campaign that you were gullible enough to think he could finance because he said so. We told you all this, and you didn't listen. He's YOUR candidate, not mine. Hillary is clinging onto dear life, with the FBI on her ass, passing out under protection of the media that has a stockpile of dirt on Trump that hasn't been needed yet, and is STILL beating Donald. Again, your candidate has a history of losing and lying, so please don't blame us normal people.
Gosh, I've never heard that before.
Quote from: CH on October 28, 2016, 02:28:08 AM
I agree with everything you are saying. Donald Trump is horrible. I'm not sure if he is more horrible than Hillary Clinton but he is an awful, awful candidate.
Liberalism will always hurt the country and is always horrible.
Quote from: CH on October 28, 2016, 02:28:08 AM
I agree with everything you are saying. Donald Trump is horrible. I'm not sure if he is more horrible than Hillary Clinton but he is an awful, awful candidate.
Kind of like comparing a Fascist to a Nazi isn't it?
Trump and Hillary are cut from the same cloth. While one sees communism as having always been applied wrong throughout history and believes she has the ability to do it correctly, the other sees Fascism as a possibility.
Both want to be dictators, just have differing opinions as to how to accomplish an ends to a means.
Sure I jest....kind of, but for humor to work, there has to be an element of truth in it.
So, I just got back from writing in Ted Cruz. I feel better now.
Quote from: Double D on November 03, 2016, 11:49:54 AM
So, I just got back from writing in Ted Cruz. I feel better now.
Your integrity remains intact, it's a good feeling. :thumbup:
I wrote this in a comment section an hour ago.
My vote reflects my values, my worth and my word, for without any of these, one cannot claim to be a trustworthy individual.
As a child growing up in the 50s, an elderly man told me "Son, your worth is your word. If you can't keep your word, you are worthless."
I cannot in all good conscience support the NY Lib with an (R) next to his name and claim my word is my worth.
I wrote in Cruz, the GOP needs to see that their base has turned against them.
OK I didn't last long on this forum. What a bunch of fucking idiots you are with your hatred of Trump - the only outsider able to break this logjam
Fuck off and goodbye.
Quote from: dmark22 on November 03, 2016, 05:14:05 PM
OK I didn't last long on this forum. What a bunch of fucking idiots you are with your hatred of Trump - the only outsider able to break this logjam
Fuck off and goodbye.
Oh my so your a Dem on a TEA Conservative board. I think you forgot to delete your account. No two post is not very long. Would you like some help with deleting your account?
Quote from: dmark22 on November 03, 2016, 05:14:05 PM
OK I didn't last long on this forum. What a bunch of fucking idiots you are with your hatred of Trump - the only outsider able to break this logjam
Fuck off and goodbye.
Folks, I give you the intellectual representation of your run of the mill (with a chipped stone) Trumpanzee.
His post speaks volumes on the ignorance these kids share.
Quote from: Solar on November 03, 2016, 06:52:38 PM
Folks, I give you the intellectual representation of your run of the mill (with a chipped stone) Trumpanzee.
His post speaks volumes on the ignorance these kids share.
He is not even up to Romper Room 101 standards. Two posts and he shoots himself in the head.
Quote from: dmark22 on November 03, 2016, 05:14:05 PM
OK I didn't last long on this forum. What a bunch of fucking idiots you are with your hatred of Trump - the only outsider able to break this logjam
Fuck off and goodbye.
If that's an outsider, I'd hate to see an insider...