Cruz Drops Out of Race

[ShotgunBlast]

Kasich decides to keep going... for some reason.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/03/politics/ ... index.html

[FiremanBob]

Poor America. Died just before its 240th birthday. Madison and Adams were right - democracies inevitably destroy themselves.

[kelu]

The best place for Cruz is as supreme court judge. It would one heck of a constitutionalist. I hope to see him there.

[SHMIV]

I was thinking the same thing, Kelu.

I'm surprised that Cruz dropped out. I really thought he might hang in there.

I think that Kasich has been in solely as a last ditch effort to keep Trump out. I wonder, though, if he didn't end up hurting Cruz, instead.

Trump, I am certain, will do things that we won't like. However, I think that he is serious about border control. And, I think that he's serious about not giving generous concessions to foriegn entities without our nation receiving generous concession in return.

In short, I'm hoping that his foriegn policy will be strong enough to keep the rest of the world at bay, so that we have time to fix our massive internal problems. Also, I'm hoping that he'll have an advisor or two that can point to the Constitution and say, "Hey, Mr. Trump, that thing you want to do is in conflict with this here".

I do believe that Trump is capable of listening to and heeding advice. I doubt that he'd have come this far in life if he wasn't.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[FiremanBob]

Kasich has always been running for VP. His lips are stuck to Trump's butt.

[ShotgunBlast]

If you're part of the growing #NeverTrump crowd (or soon to be disgruntled Bernie supporters), there's a former two-term Republican governor who has plenty of experience growing his own business while promoting adherence to the Constitution and expanding personal liberty that wants to let you know there are still options for you.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ter-ted-c/

[smltooner]

The best place for Cruz is as supreme court judge. It would one heck of a constitutionalist. I hope to see him there.

[ShotgunBlast]

Less than 24 hours after Cruz announces he's dropping out, Libertarian Party registrations are up along with Google searches for "Libertarian Party" and "Gary Johnson".

http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/0 ... trump-win/

[SHMIV]

I remember looking at Gary Johnson last time around. I can't rightly recall why didn't like him, then.

However, recently he was interviewed by Jonathan Gilliam, on either Wilkows program or David Webb. Johnson is so weak on the border, that I can't believe he's actually governed New Mexico. Sorry, but I'll take Trump, thanks.

We are being invaded. Gary Johnson doesn't get that.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[ShotgunBlast]

Here's Gary Johnson's stance on immigration. From Johnson's website:

Having served as Governor of a border state, Gary Johnson understands immigration. He understands that a robust flow of labor, regulated not by politics, but by the marketplace, is essential. He understands that a bigger fence will only produce taller ladders and deeper tunnels, and that the flow of illegal immigrants across the border is not a consequence of too little security, but rather a legal immigration system that simply doesn’t work. Militarizing the border, bigger fences, and other punitive measures espoused by too many politicians are all simplistic “solutions” to a problem caused by artificial quotas, bureaucratic incompetence and the shameful failure of Congress to actually put in place an immigration system that matches reality.
Governor Johnson has long advocated a simplified and secure system of work visas by which willing workers and willing employers can meet in a robust labor marketplace efficiently and economically. Aspiring immigrants would undergo a background check, pay taxes and provide proof of employment.
Making it simpler and efficient to enter the U.S. legally will provide the greatest security possible, allowing law enforcement to focus its time and resources on the criminals and bad actors who are, in reality, a relatively small portion of those who are today entering the country illegally.

Trump's stance is "build a wall and have Mexico pay for it" and if that doesn't work, use executive orders against legal companies conducting legal transactions like Western Union the same way Obama's administration creates hassles for banks to do business with companies in the firearms industry. He will also look at trade tariffs and increase visa fees or outright cancel them to strong arm Mexico. That doesn't seem so conservative or free market like. His plan boils down to coercing a country that he himself admits is impoverished to somehow come up with $5-10 billion to pay for a wall (which a former border state governor just said will just result in taller ladders and longer tunnels) and/or using authoritarian tactics to manipulate business, trade, and labor. From Trump's website:

COMPELLING MEXICO TO PAY FOR THE WALL

Introduction: The provision of the Patriot Act, Section 326 - the "know your customer" provision, compelling financial institutions to demand identity documents before opening accounts or conducting financial transactions is a fundamental element of the outline below. That section authorized the executive branch to issue detailed regulations on the subject, found at 31 CFR 130.120-121. It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year. There are several ways to compel Mexico to pay for the wall including the following:

On day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31 CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to include wire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States.
On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety net provided by the state in Mexico.
On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.
Trade tariffs, or enforcement of existing trade rules: There is no doubt that Mexico is engaging in unfair subsidy behavior that has eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs, and which we are obligated to respond to; the impact of any tariffs on the price imports will be more than offset by the economic and income gains of increased production in the United States, in addition to revenue from any tariffs themselves. Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation. By definition, if you have a large trade deficit with a nation, it means they are selling far more to you than the reverse - thus they, not you, stand to lose from enforcing trade rules through tariffs (as has been done to save many U.S. industries in the past).
Cancelling visas: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. Mexico is totally dependent on the United States as a release valve for its own poverty - our approvals of hundreds of thousands of visas to their nationals every year is one of our greatest leverage points. We also have leverage through business and tourist visas for important people in the Mexican economy. Keep in mind, the United States has already taken in 4X more migrants than any other country on planet earth, producing lower wages and higher unemployment for our own citizens and recent migrants.
Visa fees: Even a small increase in visa fees would pay for the wall. This includes fees on border crossing cards, of which more than 1 million are issued a year. The border-crossing card is also one of the greatest sources of illegal immigration into the United States, via overstays. Mexico is also the single largest recipient of U.S. green cards, which confer a path to U.S. citizenship. Again, we have the leverage so Mexico will back down.
Conclusion: Mexico has taken advantage of us in another way as well: gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States. The United States has borne the extraordinary daily cost of this criminal activity, including the cost of trials and incarcerations. Not to mention the even greater human cost. We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage. It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again.

[kelu]

It happen I saw Gary Johnson for first time on TV in this interview: http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2016/ ... start=true (min 27 is about immigration).
Well, it did not impressed me. Cream of the crop? Really?
If you have patience, you will hear at min 32-33 something scary, but unfortunately true.

[FiremanBob]

Gary Johnson is such an unrealistic ideologue that he would be a disaster for the US. Sure, it might seem nice to allow the free market in labor to solve all problems. But you can't get to that until you also 100% demolish the welfare state. And even then, allowing millions of people who have neither understanding nor respect for the unique American culture that makes us so successful would undermine that culture. Finally, without a secure border we cannot protect our society from violent terrorists who hate America and want to kill us in our own home.

A vote for Johnson = a vote for Clinton.

[ShotgunBlast]

Gary Johnson is such an unrealistic ideologue that he would be a disaster for the US. Sure, it might seem nice to allow the free market in labor to solve all problems. But you can't get to that until you also 100% demolish the welfare state. And even then, allowing millions of people who have neither understanding nor respect for the unique American culture that makes us so successful would undermine that culture. Finally, without a secure border we cannot protect our society from violent terrorists who hate America and want to kill us in our own home.

A vote for Johnson = a vote for Clinton.

Let's get a little reminder on what you said on primary day:

Please think before you vote today. A vote for Trump is a vote for Clinton.If you are guided by the Constitution, Trump is against you. He knows nothing of the Constitution and respects it even less. He is a fraud, a scam artist who is pulling the biggest scam in America since 2008. Don't be a sucker.Friends don't let friends vote for Trump.

Now I know you root for the candidate you really want on primary day, but how can you reconcile your primary day statements about Trump to Republicans who don't like him to convince them to still vote for him in the general election?

If Trump is a fraud, a scam artist, and against the Constitution as you and many other Republicans against Trump have said but still pull the lever for him in November, does that just make all of you party hacks or people that don't really believe in anything over party? Is there a Republican candidate possible that's bad enough to make you not vote for them in the general election? Cause the way I see it, the quality of the candidates have been going down and I'm not sure Trump is the bottom of the barrel.

[FiremanBob]

That's easy to explain: time changes things. The huge turnout of middle and lower income Democrats for Trump is the first time since 1984 that millions of them have crossed the aisle to support a Republican.

I believed then, and still do, that Ted Cruz would crush Clinton. Today it appears that Trump could, too. Cruz would be even better than Reagan, because he fights longer and harder, while Reagan was too quick to compromise.

Trump isn't so much "against" the Constitution as he is ignorant of it. I still don't like Trump, but I know what Clinton, or any cog in the Democrat machine would do to America. They really are against the Constitution, and their arrogance becomes more brazen each day.

Today's bottom line is the lesser of two evils. Another term of Democrat machine control of the federal government will bring us dangerously close to a breakdown of our civil society. Johnson has zero chance and will only split our forces. It's going to be hard enough to overcome the millions of votes created by the Democrat election fraud machine.

And the convention isn't until July. More things can still happen before a nominee is named officially.

[ShotgunBlast]

1. Will hold nose while voting for a party candidate? Check.

2. "Lesser of the two evils mantra?" Check.

3. "This country won't survive another term of the other side in charge" mantra? Check.

4. Unverified party claim about the other side (millions of fraudulent votes? Really?) Check.

5. Can't think of a party candidate that they wouldn't vote for in a general election? Check.

Yep, looking pretty hackish to me.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[WRW]

Charles Schultz had a couple of recurring themes that come to mind regarding perennial optimism. Third party Presidential winners are scarcer than hen's teeth, with division of votes by similar platforms being the more common occurrence. I'll use history as a guideline rather than forget it and suffer the similar fate.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[FiremanBob]

SB: I'd appreciate it if you would stick to the issues. Going ad hominem on me is a Leftist reflex that should be beneath you. Perhaps you could strengthen your case for Johnson instead.

[kelu]

I think he would be terrific on the Supreme Court, or I think he would be a terrific attorney general. Or he could be both," Carson said when asked if Cruz would make for a good Supreme Court pick. "He could be attorney general first, you know, go ahead and prosecute Hillary, and then go on the Supreme Court."

http://www.businessinsider.com/ben-cars ... tus-2016-5

[ShotgunBlast]

SB: I'd appreciate it if you would stick to the issues. Going ad hominem on me is a Leftist reflex that should be beneath you. Perhaps you could strengthen your case for Johnson instead.

The point isn't to go ad hominem, but to see where "conservatives" will draw the line and actually start walking the principles they espouse. Seeing how far the GOP has been twisted from its core conservative beliefs and if they'll finally say "nope, I can't get behind that." Out of all of the GOP candidates that were in this cycle's primary, who (if any) of them would you not have pulled the lever for in the general election because they do not line up with your principles? Instead, come general election time the plan is to throw principles out the window and just vote party line because the party whips have you more scared of what it'll be like with the other party in charge.

Republicans think so much of St Reagan, but just in these last four election cycles the party has gone from establishment Bush to establishment McCain to RINO Romney to Democrat with a R before his name Trump. But conservatives keep pulling the party lever and then scratch their heads in secret wondering why the candidates get worse and worse. If Trump doesn't win, come the 2020 cycle you might not even get any conservatives to step up and put their hat in the ring because the message the RNC is getting from all of those votes is "we want more Democrat-lite." Instead it'll be a field of all amped up Trump and Chris Christie wannabes.

When the presumptive GOP nominee is someone who has donated at least $100k to the Clinton Foundation in addition to donating to his presumed general election opponent's Senate campaign, why should I fight for a conservative GOP if registered Republicans won't even?

[SHMIV]

I'm a Constitutional Conservative. I believe that following the Constitution is imperative to long term survival.

I'm also a realist. There's no way in hell that we wouldn't be better off today had McCain won in '08, or Romney in '12. Barry Soetoro has done an insane amount of damage.

I've said from the get go that I was a Cruz guy, but that I could envision a scenario where I would vote for Trump, and the scenario has presented itself.

Donald Trump is not McCain and not Romney. He's not Bush, and he's not Dole. Trump is NOT the next old white guy in line. He's hated by the establishment GOP, and I view that as a plus. He is also not a career politician. He has spent his adult life actually creating jobs. Other candidates talk about it, but he's actually done it. It's a by-product of being a successful businessman. I believe that Donald Trump truly loves the United States. Compare that to Hillary or Bernie, who hate the US with a passion, and would prefer that we turn into the USSR.

On Gary Johnson, his position, as stated a few posts above, on the border and immigration, is pretty much what I heard him say on the subject. Maybe Johnson is a patriot; he probably is. But, he is fatally wrong on that subject. I drive though places that are heavily populated with illegal Hispanic invaders, with great frequency. Those places are dangerous and filthy. Those people are not here to assimilate. They are here to soak up our resources, and send them back home. They are essentially bringing the culture that they have fled into our own.

Not only do I want to see a wall built, I want to see illegal immigrants executed on the spot, as enemy invaders, if they are caught here a second time. We do not need anything from that region. We have plenty of welfare recipients that can easily push brooms, pick cabbage, run cash registers, lawn mowers, and weed whackers. We have teenagers for that sort of thing, too. If we can get the government to back off in the agricultural department, we wouldn't need to import produce from that region.

Donald Trump does not hate the Constitution. As Bob pointed out, he is ignorant of it. Though, I think that he is less ignorant of it than he comes off.

Look, no one wants to get back to living by the Constitutional principles more than I. The Constitution is the closest thing to living by God's idea of Free Will that we can get with out having Anarchy. It's a beautiful thing.

But I also understand that we'll never get there until the Mexican Invasion has ceased, the Islamic Invasion has ceased, the UN has been kicked out, and we remind the rest of the world that we are still the World Superpower. Donald Trump seems to want to do these things. Sure, he could be lying. But, we know where everyone else, who's still running, stands on the matter, and they are all standing in the wrong place.

I will vote for Donald Trump. I will not hold my nose when doing so. And my conscience will be clear. I will not view my vote as one for the lesser of two evils; it will be a vote to preserve the United States as a Nation. Once we reestablish our nation as one with clear and definite borders, we can worry about reestablishing ourselves as a Constitutional Republic.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]