Are Republicans already dissatisfied with the 2016 field?

posted at 8:01 pm on July 23, 2013 by Allahpundit

Byron York asked that question yesterday after hearing Iowa conservatives rave about Ted Cruz. Is Cruzmania chiefly a function of Cruz’s awesomeness, he wonders, or at least partly a function of righties starting to scrutinize the 2016 crop more closely and feeling the need for an alternative?

Some of the complaints: Sen. Marco Rubio has hurt himself by taking the lead on comprehensive immigration reform. Rep. Paul Ryan was on the last losing ticket and might also anger the base on immigration. Gov. Bobby Jindal fails to ignite Republican passions. Sen. Rand Paul can be divisive. Gov. Chris Christie is too willing to work with Democrats (especially the one in the White House). Rick Santorum doesn’t have broad enough appeal. Former Gov. Jeb Bush carries his family’s baggage.

None are crippling weaknesses, and any one of these potential candidates might look much different a year from now. But the fact is, Republicans are in a period of flaw-finding at the moment, and they are finding flaws in most of the politicians who will make up their 2016 field.

And then along comes Ted Cruz. Straight-down-the-line conservative, smart as hell, anti-establishment, ready for a fight, professing a principles-based approach to politics — Cruz says what many Iowa conservative activists want to hear. And in the last few days they have heard it for the first time from a man who doesn’t have a very long record to complicate things. On top of that, Cruz is great with a crowd, big or small: he is a captivating speaker who leaves audiences fired up about themselves and their cause — and about Ted Cruz…

“I mostly agree,” added longtime social conservative Bob Vander Plaats, head of The Family Leader. “The Cruz phenomenon is unlike anything I’ve witnessed. It’s very real and surreal at the same time.” Vander Plaats said his group’s big event in August will be a further test of Cruz’s appeal. “If he continues down this impressive path, he will likely squeeze many others who are thinking about running.”

“Dissatisfied” seems like the wrong word when, by universal agreement, we’re headed for a much stronger field in 2016 than we had last year. Ask yourself: How many of the likely GOP candidates next cycle would conservatives have preferred to Romney as nominee? Go down the line — Rubio, Cruz, Jindal, Ryan, Scott Walker, on and on. The only two who are even debatable, I think, are Christie and maybe Rand Paul. The field as a whole is satisfying. The question is whether it’s not as satisfying as righties had hoped.

The affection for Cruz will endure, I think, just because there’s no reason why it shouldn’t. He knows who his base is and he knows what they want. He can be the guy who meets 100 percent of grassroots conservatives’ criteria instead of only 80-90 percent like the rest, provided he doesn’t do something before 2016 as anathema to the tea party as Rubio did on amnesty. If he remains dependably tea-party-ish on all major issues (he can be bipartisan on less major ones to build a resume for the general), he’ll have a huge chunk of the base with him. The big loser in that case would, I assume, be Rand Paul, who’s probably the next closest thing to a pure tea-party candidate in the field. I think there’s a fair number of mainstream conservatives who like Paul but are leery of him on foreign policy and electability grounds, yet will lay their misgivings aside and vote for him if there isn’t another tea-party type in the field without those liabilities. Cruz is that guy.

If righties rally around Cruz, though, Beltway Republicans will be forced to rally around an establishment choice. They can’t afford to let the centrist vote split multiple ways; that would enable Cruz to win primaries with 30-40 percent of the vote. The two likeliest guys to be crowned establishment champ are, I think, Rubio and Scott Walker, just because they’re best positioned to pull some tea-party votes away from Cruz, not only on policy grounds but on electability grounds. Would righties be satisfied with a Scott Walker versus Ted Cruz battle for the nomination in 2016? (I won’t offer Rubio versus Cruz just because so many grassroots conservatives blanch at Rubio’s name right now.) I could live with that.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I want to create a Cruz juggernaut.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 8:23 AM

If you have to create it, it’s not a juggernaut. I mean, y’all did such a bang-up job creating that Mittmentum juggernaut and all.

ddrintn on July 24, 2013 at 8:57 AM

Over

Bmore on July 24, 2013 at 8:58 AM

yes… I am disappointed already… And no I don’t want Cruz.

Kaptain Amerika on July 24, 2013 at 9:00 AM

You mean that expecting people without principles or courage to be our valiant leaders in taking back the nation may not work as expected? /sarc

sharrukin on July 23, 2013 at 9:42 PM

I mean that those few people left with principles and courage are effectively shut out of the system. …

gryphon202 on July 23, 2013 at 9:46 PM

They’re as “shut out of the system” as sheeple GOP voters allow them to be.

ddrintn on July 24, 2013 at 9:01 AM

These are the names that would get me to fill out my ballot, and maybe even work my tail-fanny off in support of:
Palin
Cruz
West

These are the names that I would consider voting for:
Walker
Giuliani (and I’m pro-life–I just have a lot of respect for all he did for New York)
Gingrich
Cain
Perry

These are the names that would seriously make me nauseous:
Rubio
Christie
Bush

theotherone on July 24, 2013 at 9:02 AM

Perry/Pence please.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 23, 2013 at 10:11 PM

This!

bitsy on July 24, 2013 at 9:02 AM

“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” ― Thomas Paine

Show me a candidate who lives this…I will show you a candidate worth my vote.

coldwarrior on July 23, 2013 at 10:21 PM

Money quote right there. We need to give power back to the people in a real way (not the fake Marxist drivel). Cut back government power, abolish federal agencies, repeal certain amendments, restore the 10th.

It’s a pipe dream to be honest. Any candidate who attempted to do those things would probably make Gryph’s wish come true via the leftists showing their true colors and began killing their neighbors.

Pattosensei on July 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM

Since party politics controls who gets nominated, & therefore the choices we have in the election, it is imperative people get involved in changing their party dynamics.
If you are only going to pull the lever at the national election, and aren’t satisfied with the choices, get involved with the party.
Of course IMO the real struggle for control & reform needs to be at the state level.
The national parties are starting (or maybe have been for a long time) to control state elections.
This crap needs to stop.
I have noticed that a candidate who wins a state office often tries their level best for the interest of the state.
It’s when they run & win positions like a Congressman that they forget where they come from & play DC politics.
But then again, see what happens when people like West come in to make changes? Palin?
They blackball them from being able to make a difference.
Was it George Washington that said party politics would be the death of this nation?
ONe of the Founders warned against it.

Badger40 on July 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Since party politics controls who gets nominated, & therefore the choices we have in the election, it is imperative people get involved in changing their party dynamics.
If you are only going to pull the lever at the national election, and aren’t satisfied with the choices, get involved with the party.
Of course IMO the real struggle for control & reform needs to be at the state level.
The national parties are starting (or maybe have been for a long time) to control state elections.
This crap needs to stop.

Badger40 on July 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Id say it’s a little too late for that for the GOP, and most definitely too late for the 2016 cycle. The problem is that you just have too many voters in the GOP who dutifully swallow any crap fed to them time after time after time. And enough of them will do so again in 2016 to enable the GOPe to have their choice of nominee.

ddrintn on July 24, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Here’s what is lacking.

Someone principled who can speak from the heart.

Someone that does not dissemble into political rhetoric and platitudes when challenged on policy or unfairly questioned by the liberal media.

Someone who truly believes in what they are stating and is immutable on core principles.

Someone who understands that compromise does not mean surrender, but more-so it is an opportunity to further a righteous philosophy that sometimes moves in inches, not feet.

Someone who can articulate what they are for, rather than building a platform on what they are against.

Someone who is proactive, not reactive. A person who leads from the front, not behind.

Someone who does use important legislative and governmental issues as a subterfuge for their personal, whimsical and purely political survival.

Someone who ultimately speaks honestly from their heart about what is best for OUR country, culture and continued existence.

Someone who attempts to unite us with the best all Americans have to offer- that unique fabric of our values, work ethic, determination and moxie.

Someone who sees our differences not as a weakness to be exploited and create divisions, but an opportunity to continue weaving a strong, impenetrable and united America.

Someone who can honestly and wisely interpret facts, trends and economic data to set our country back on a course of growth and self sustainment.

Someone who believes this is a government of the people, by the people, for the people- not a cudgel used to steal their liberty and make them forever dependent on their whimsical decisions.

Someone who believes in and espouses capitalism and the free markets which have brought us increasing prosperity since the beginning of our Republic.

Ultimately, someone who can bring us our of the malaise, division, incompetence, fiscal crisis we’ve suffered over the past 6 years and restore America to her former greatness. Someone who believes in our country with their heart- not as some throwaway political line meant to beguile you as to their true intentions.

This is my list of demands and I am not about to cede this person does not exist. Only, we have not truly seen them yet.

Marcus Traianus on July 24, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Is there a “Please, Sarah, don’t run for president” fund? I will give the max donation and will do so in honor of ddrintn’s endless trashing of any politician not named Palin and anyone not enamored with Palin.

Cruz is so far superior to Palin it isn’t even funny.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 9:40 AM

Is there a “Please, Sarah, don’t run for president” fund? I will give the max donation and will do so in honor of ddrintn’s endless trashing of any politician not named Palin and anyone not enamored with Palin.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 9:40 AM

I didn’t trash Cruz. I’m just saying he doesn’t have Palin’s charisma or ability to connect. Besides, I’d think you’d want Palin to run.

ddrintn on July 24, 2013 at 9:42 AM

gilled one

Bmore on July 24, 2013 at 9:43 AM

If Hillary’s on the way to the nomination, whoever’s out front in the GOP should seriously consider Haley as running mate. Like it or not, “novelty voters” are somewhat of a factor these days in the general election.

TMOverbeck on July 24, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Is there a “Please, Sarah, don’t run for president” fund? I will give the max donation and will do so in honor of ddrintn’s endless trashing of any politician not named Palin and anyone not enamored with Palin.

Cruz is so far superior to Palin it isn’t even funny.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 9:40 AM

You know, as much as I hate Obama & others like him, their names never pass my lips & fingers on the keyboard half as much as Sarah’s comes from your.
You are seriously deranged & obsessed with her.
You should get a fracking life.

And yes, I do like Palin. But I don’t think she’s the next Thomas Jefferson, either.

Badger40 on July 24, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Let me tell you something, gryph. We will win this through peaceful democratic means. We have the truth on our side. Shame on your for alluding to non-peaceful means (or at least that’s what I think you were alluding to).

Gryph, the kind of shameful radicalism that you are (apparently) alluding to must be eschewed by all responsible HotAir readers.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 8:29 AM

As our founders wished to scrupulously avoid “Democracy,” I don’t think you could be MORE wrong about “winning this” (whatever “this” is, I guess) through democratic means. Mob rule is the problem. Rule of law is the answer, and as our elected officials don’t respect it, I’d love to hear a credible idea for what kind of “peaceful democratic” process can achieve something we haven’t achieved in the last 29 years.

As to what you infer from my words, you may or may not be right, but it says more about you than it says about me. ;)

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 10:04 AM

This is my list of demands and I am not about to cede this person does not exist. Only, we have not truly seen them yet.

Marcus Traianus on July 24, 2013 at 9:38 AM

I thought one of those people whom you describe declined to run in ’12. But that’s okay. She won’t run in 2016 either — and neither will Ted Cruz.

/KABOOM

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 10:06 AM

Kaptain Amerika on July 24, 2013 at 9:00 AM

Why not?

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Let me give you guys a safe example of what I’m talking about here.

You can yell “Gryph’s a fringe whacko!” until you’re blue in the face, but I know I’m not alone in knowing — not feeling, not believing, but KNOWING — that “vote the bums out” is a failed political strategy. The next step is civil disobedience on the level of state legislatures, and we’ll see what kind of stuff America is made out of there. I fear we are a nation of cowards, but I still may be proven wrong.

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 10:21 AM

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 10:04 AM

I wish that more of the public would either realize or, if they are aware, let Congress know that we are on to them. They pass a bunch of laws to placate different segments of society and then refuse to enforce them or defund them. And oddly usually to the benefit of non-citizens. We should at least demand that these old dogs learn new tricks or get some new dogs in to corrupt. Because that is what DC does, corrupt.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Is there a “Please, Sarah, don’t run for president” fund? I will give the max donation and will do so in honor of ddrintn’s endless trashing of any politician not named Palin and anyone not enamored with Palin.

Cruz is so far superior to Palin it isn’t even funny.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 9:40 AM

Yeah, all that homage he paid to her was a Figment
of my imagination, OBVIOUSLY

ToddPA on July 24, 2013 at 10:34 AM

ToddPA on July 24, 2013 at 10:34 AM

The existence of Harvard and Princeton in a pedigree is not something that can be topped in our young friend’s list of things to be admired.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 10:42 AM

I am totally amazed at what considerations people impose when choosing a candidate. We are trying to hire someone for the highest job in the world and yet it seems people so little thought or concern into what qualifications these candidates have.

What you want your car repaired or your plumbing fix or want to hire someone in your company – don’t you look over their qualifications and expect the best?

I realize there are a few candidates out there that have wonderful potential, have a great career ahead of them but in NO way are they even remotely ready, have experience or any record to honestly evaluate.

I think Cruz has a huge potential but come on – he has only been in office a few months (less than or wonderful leader and chief, Obama) and yet people want him in 2016? Then I see someone mentioned Cain – OMG, give me a break! The guy has never held office, has so many serious problems.

Experience and Qualifications and a resume – doesn’t this mean anything to anyone anymore?

A few “conservative” names come to mind that meet that criteria: Rick Perry, Scott Walker, Palin (but she is so polarizing that it is hard to consider her). Forget about the moderate Christie or Bush but they do have experience. Forget about Santorum – couldn’t even win race, a big gov’t moderate.

Potentials in years to come, as they gain experience and build a resume: Cruz, West, Rand Paul, Rubio?, etc

bzip on July 24, 2013 at 10:43 AM

Romney satisfied 80-90% of our criteria? Reall? In what alternate universe?
Rubio is a fraud and that means he will not get my vote-period.
Ryan is also showing himself to be pro-amnesty- so no vote.

Cruz is a lock for me if he runs. Maybe Jindal too.

Hard Right on July 24, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Rick Perry and facts.

http://www.corridorwatch.com

Big Goverment working with big international bussiness with the taking of private lands by eminat domain, deals with Spanish toll road companies, deals leading to the sale of Texas owned toll roads to said Spanish toll road companies, financed my Spanish banks, working with Rudy G.’s New York law firm.

Former Democrat, weak gov. office in Texas only appointment powers and lots of crony deals, not so smart and a Bush made man.

Facts do count.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Best thing about Ted Cruz is that he has not been in the made man deal of elections.

We conservatives and he and his ability got him elected and as Pres. he will not belong to any of the evil powers who got U.S. in this shape.

The two party evil money cult did this, will continue this and only we the people working with outsiders can change the course.

We can take over the R party, we are the votes.

All we have to do is get turn out up and behind the right people.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:05 AM

I believe in simplification.

How about a nominee who is for Americans?

Were I to run, I would outright state that I am the candidate of the American who earns his way. The American who works or studies hard to get ahead. The American who strives for his dreams. The American who supports his community. The American who, when disaster hits, is there for his family and there for his friends and neighbors rather than sitting on their behinds whining that no one is there to help.

These strivers are white, black, Asian, heterosexual or homosexual, religious or atheist. They all believe in what America is at least supposed to be about. This segmenting of the population by groups is nothing more than divide and conquer.

I also believe that a candidate can be any of the above as long as they are willing to bring America back to what it is supposed to be about.

Okay, now you can hack and chop me to pieces.

friendlygrizzly on July 24, 2013 at 11:12 AM

Hard to figure what makes these threads go weird.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:22 AM

I believe in simplification.

How about a nominee who is for Americans?

Were I to run, I would outright state that I am the candidate of the American who earns his way. The American who works or studies hard to get ahead. The American who strives for his dreams. The American who supports his community. The American who, when disaster hits, is there for his family and there for his friends and neighbors rather than sitting on their behinds whining that no one is there to help.

These strivers are white, black, Asian, heterosexual or homosexual, religious or atheist. They all believe in what America is at least supposed to be about. This segmenting of the population by groups is nothing more than divide and conquer.

I also believe that a candidate can be any of the above as long as they are willing to bring America back to what it is supposed to be about.

Okay, now you can hack and chop me to pieces.

friendlygrizzly on July 24, 2013 at 11:12 AM

(above emphasis mine)

I don’t have to. The voters would.

Voters don’t want to hear about self-sufficiency and self-reliance. They don’t want to hear about what you’ll do for legal immigrants and citizens. If they did, they wouldn’t have voted en masse for our current president.

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 11:24 AM

We can take over the R party, we are the votes.

All we have to do is get turn out up and behind the right people.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:05 AM

How many times do the Republicans have to get thwomped? How many times do Republicans have to stab you in the back before you start to think, “Hmmm…maybe this isn’t working out?”

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM

gripeon on July 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM

So, your a active Republican, your say a pricent chair, you go to the county, state conventions, you serve on committees, you work to get conservatives on the local, state and national balots, right.

or do you just gripe on and on

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:35 AM

How about an alternative headline:

‘Are Republicans finally dissatisfied with the Republican Party enough to do something about it?’

ajacksonian on July 24, 2013 at 11:38 AM

240 million possible voters in U.S.

130 million voted in 2012 pres. election.

110 million sat on their ass

get only 10% of those off their ass and voteing conservative get them active in the R party,,the whole deal gets fixed

That is our job one.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Cruz and Cain

nazo311 on July 24, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Republican voters are dissatisfied with very good reason.

News came out yesterday, that President Barack Hussein Obama’s (mm mmm mmmm) popularity had dropped to 41% in the polls. Now, just when Americans are finally waking up to the Manchurian President, he is about to be bailed out…by the “Maverick” and his merry band of Vichy Republicans.

kingsjester on July 24, 2013 at 11:44 AM

So, your a active Republican, your say a pricent chair, you go to the county, state conventions, you serve on committees, you work to get conservatives on the local, state and national balots, right.

or do you just gripe on and on

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:35 AM

You have no idea who I am or what I do. And furthermore, I don’t have to justify my gripes to you. You wanna keep looking at the world through rose-colored glasses, that’s your own business, But that is exactly what you are doing.

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Blue Team

Bmore on July 24, 2013 at 11:51 AM

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Sorry but I completely understand gryphon202′s dissatisfaction. We keep getting handed moderates and they keep getting their azzes kicked but “we” are the problem. It appears to me that the machine is bigger than the constituency. There is no place to go.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I’m a Republican but nobody will beat Hillary.

EVERYTHING has changed and the media will make EVERY Republican a sexist before it even starts.

Maybe, just maybe, after 4 years of her people will see the light but they’ll still blame EVERYTHING on Republicans and she’ll probably get 8 years.

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:05 PM

I don’t know, an with her whining about what difference does it make played ever fifteen minutes might be effective.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:15 PM

Opps, and ad with her whining………

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:16 PM

I don’t know, an with her whining about what difference does it make played ever fifteen minutes might be effective.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:15 PM

If you bring it up you’re sexist.

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:17 PM

I’m good with that.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Won’t they have to be a bit careful with that sort of stuff. I don’t see how making a victim out of someone who thinks they should be commander in chief is helpful but I must admit that the Dems will probably give it a try.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Won’t they have to be a bit careful with that sort of stuff. I don’t see how making a victim out of someone who thinks they should be commander in chief is helpful but I must admit that the Dems will probably give it a try.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Sure but when you can just make stuff up about somebody and the low information voter eats it up the damage is already done before you can even say it’s made up. See Herman Cain and Christine O’Donnell.

Wagthatdog on July 24, 2013 at 12:30 PM

I am sick of this talk about Cruz!
Yes, he is all that and highly desirable.
But, he is ineligible!
He can do a lot in Senate, and that is where he can do a lot of good.
We have to face the reality of our constitution, and stay with it.
Much of what we are facing now is because we went away from the framework the founding fathers have set up. It has proven to be a good thing until we adulterated it up.
That is our biggest mistake.

deafy on July 24, 2013 at 12:49 PM

Cruz and Cain

nazo311 on July 24, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Laverne and Shirley have a better chance.

Capitalist Hog on July 24, 2013 at 12:54 PM

People I could vote for
in no special order:

1. Perry
2. Palin
3. Cruz
4. Pence
5. Walker
6. (maybe Rand Paul)

mostly anyone else and I vote Libertarian

conservative tarheel on July 24, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Let me tell you something, gryph. We will win this through peaceful democratic means. We have the truth on our side. Shame on your for alluding to non-peaceful means (or at least that’s what I think you were alluding to).

Gryph, the kind of shameful radicalism that you are (apparently) alluding to must be eschewed by all responsible HotAir readers.

bluegill on July 24, 2013 at 8:29 AM

As our founders wished to scrupulously avoid “Democracy,” I don’t think you could be MORE wrong about “winning this” (whatever “this” is, I guess) through democratic means. Mob rule is the problem. Rule of law is the answer, and as our elected officials don’t respect it, I’d love to hear a credible idea for what kind of “peaceful democratic” process can achieve something we haven’t achieved in the last 29 years.

As to what you infer from my words, you may or may not be right, but it says more about you than it says about me. ;)

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 10:04 AM

OK, jumping into the fecal storm, with the foreknowledge of the likelihood of splatters.

Bluegill, it appears that you believe that the possibility of other than electoral means that you are attributing to Gryphon202 are what he desires. I, and I suspect others [and of course YMMV] see him as coming to a logical conclusion based on the hard data that he sees.

Yeah, we would all like to believe that “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” was a viable pattern. The government of Detroit would like to believe that there is a pot of free money to keep the scam going there, too. But in the end, reality always wins.

We have tried standard electoral politics for decades. After 2010, if such worked; the “leadership” of the Republican party would have joined the grassroots and we would really be fighting the Leftists in charge of the government. What happened was that the said “leadership” chose collaboration with the Left rather choosing their own base. Because their rice bowl might have been broken if they did. The leadership of the Institutional Republican party fights and hates conservatives and the TEA Party far more than they fight and hate the Left. And they will collaborate to elect Democrats rather than elect conservatives. That is how the Republicans lost the governorship and both US Senate seats here in Colorado. What we have is one “Governing Party” as described by Codavilla, with two wings.

We do not have time to fight the Left, the Media, and the Institutional Republicans before we lose this country and the Constitution forever. Reality always wins.

Battling what should be our own side became more impossible last Republican National Convention, when they changed the nominating rules. The nominee is guaranteed to be a “moderate” Republican, loyal to the Institutionals, who will be indistinguishable in practice from the Democrats. Think Executive Branch Boehner.

But being the nominee does not mean that he will win by any means. The electoral system is compromised by fraud, one sided fraud. And the Republican Party has signed a Federal court consent decree with Democrats pledging NEVER to go after vote fraud ANYWHERE in the country.

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/rnc-v-dnc.pdf

The case # is US Third Circuit Court of Appeals 09-4615 “DNC, et. al. -v- RNC, et. al.”

The original consent decree was signed by the Republicans in the 1980′s and was continued as shown here in 2012.

That explains a lot of our political history and the anomalies that always favor the Left while our side stays silent.

Mention was made by APACHEWHOKNOWS of working through Precinct, delegate, National, etc. Been there, done that, for well over 3 decades, including running a winning presidential campaign in my county. I have watched the Republican war on the base from the inside. And I have somewhat of a background in history and political science. We have seen this particular play before in Western history.

If I may impute something to gryphon202 [and he is free to call me all sorts of nasty names in return if he desires]; I think like me he does not eagerly anticipate or desire a life and society where the forbidden subjects are operative. He may have children, as I do. Despite our doing the best we could for the country, they are going to have to live in the world we leave them. I think that it is possible that he is more candid in his examination of the situation than most.

Since I was young I envisaged the last years of my life to include sitting in a Chinese-style garden, surrounded by a horde of adoring grandchildren and great grandchildren. No grandchildren yet, my fantasy will not take place, and I fear for their future if they should come.

What their world will be like, I don’t know. I do figure that what we do politically now will not influence events directly, but will set the framework for whatever will come.

Subotai Bahadur on July 24, 2013 at 1:12 PM

In a debate on CNN debate on Oct 24, 2010, Rubio stated that strong border control and fixing internal immigration enforcement would result in: “… a legal immigration system that works. And you’ll have people in this country that are without documents that will be able … to leave this country, return to their homeland, and try to re-enter through our system that now functions, a system that makes sense…Earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty.”

In short: Rubio blatantly lied to get elected. And he’s far from the only one.

I want to live in a nation where lying to get elected results in fines and prison.

Prosecute a Senator here, President there, and dozen or so House members, and pretty soon our government will begin to straighten up.

But that’s not going to happen. It is getting worse rapidly.

Americans are afflicted with a strange form of political-dyslexia that while we recognize (a shown by polls) that politicians are scum who lie straight to our faces, as soon as they say words that we want to hear, they become “okay or acceptable” and we vote for them.

WTH is up with that?

DrDeano on July 24, 2013 at 1:20 PM

I really dont buy much into the whole ‘establishment picks the nominee’ stuff. if we as conservatives get behind the best person, that person will win. The only way th establishment gets their pick is if we split the con vote.

Jack_Burton on July 24, 2013 at 1:31 PM

I am sick of this talk about Cruz!
Yes, he is all that and highly desirable.
But, he is ineligible!
He can do a lot in Senate, and that is where he can do a lot of good.
We have to face the reality of our constitution, and stay with it.
Much of what we are facing now is because we went away from the framework the founding fathers have set up. It has proven to be a good thing until we adulterated it up.
That is our biggest mistake.

deafy on July 24, 2013 at 12:49 PM

You know what…I don’t care. Maybe he is ineligible, but he’d do a heck of a job.

Othniel on July 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM

I really dont buy much into the whole ‘establishment picks the nominee’ stuff. if we as conservatives get behind the best person, that person will win. The only way th establishment gets their pick is if we split the con vote.

Jack_Burton on July 24, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Oh yeah. The voters did such a bang-up job in ’08 and ’12, eh? What in the bloody blue hell makes you think it’s going to be different in ’16?

gryphon202 on July 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM

I have been readng the names quite a few people have been posting as potential nominees. Several thoughts I will offer:

1) The GOP will completely disregard who the people want and will try to push/offer several Good ol Boy/Whose Turn is It/Washington Insider choices and will try to force Republican to accept THIER choice of nominees…as always.

2) The MEDIA (the Obama-luvin media) will also try to dictate/sell Republicans who they think should be the candidate.

3) The media will attempt to undermine and destroy any stong candidate they see as a threat. A great example of this in the last campaign was Herman Cain. Anyone notice how the DNC & media were bringing women out of the woodwork to ‘sue’ and accuse Cain of sexual harrassment, affairs, etc….but as soon as he dropped out, like a vapor of smoke, they quickly disappeared?!

easyt65 on July 24, 2013 at 2:54 PM

“None are crippling weaknesses, and any one of these potential candidates might look much different a year from now.”

Not to me, Mr. York. And all those weaknesses are crippling in my book.

ncjetsfan on July 24, 2013 at 3:14 PM

I think we all need to pay attention to Trey Gowdy….he has the potential to be great! He and Cruz could make a killer team!!

MONACO1121 on July 24, 2013 at 4:54 PM

Cruz is the biggest threat to the GOP pseudo-conservative establishment since Ronald Reagan took them on in 1976.I guarantee that the elite and their allies in the punditocracy(like National Review) will do all they can to discredit him early on.Scew them.If he’s not the nominee I am staying home.Paul,Rubio,Jeb,et al are nothing but CINOs and I will not be used by them anymore.

redware on July 24, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Cruz/Sessions at the top.

Mark Levin for Chief of Staff in the White House.

Sec. of Def. Allan West.

Atty Gen. any one Mark Levin says is ok.

Jim Demint for Sec. of State.

Hell make Rush , White House Press Sec. rub it in.

Ted Cruz was on Fox today with this…

“To many in the Republican Party have gone along with things the Democrats wanted on spending and taxes and that has to stop.”

He means bussiness and we have to have his back cause the back shooting McCains and other RINO’s will not pot shot him every chance via the msm commies.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Ted also said, “If all current Republicans vote together the party can stop Obama care now during the budget deal.”

41 Senate votes and 218 house votes.

Call it like it is.

He is calling them out in public up front.

Facts count.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 24, 2013 at 8:26 PM

CRUZ TELLS THE TRUTH. This has become a very rare quality especially in D.C.

mobydutch on July 25, 2013 at 12:37 AM

Gee if all Republicans had voted together in 2012… we could have stopped it too.

By acting the way you did about Romney. The republicans will not win again.

I’m not getting behind the bigots.

I am partyless. “Any body but Romney” killed America.

The Republicans are also corrupt. The party keeps asking for money.

They blew it, you blew it, all of you who claimed Romney was not conservative. Because I am not connecting myself to bigots. I just won’t.

You killed America. I am not on your team.

petunia on July 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3