quote:

Cruz's face now? Come on, grow up.

You have to admit. The Presidents have gotten better looking since television was invented.

We are wading through shallow waters now.... With everything we have facing us and founding principles hanging in the balance, we are worried about someone's face.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Cruz's face now? Come on, grow up.

Just play on your own street it will save you much grief. You notice I just let you Cruz boys rant all you want there in the Cruz thread.

You won't change minds and neither will I.

Peace man.

I was annoyed last week to hear a bit of Rush Limbaugh's show in which he was "explaining" that The Rules of the RNC permit them to award delegates regardless of the popular vote, or even without a popular vote, etc. He kept saying that he was not condoning this practice, but it was clear from his repeated argument that The Rules allowed this that he was-- in effect-- justifying that Trump might win the votes but not the delegates.

Here is an article by Ann Coulter, who is a lawyer and actually read The Rules. Here's what she says:

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-04-13.html

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Cruz's face now? Come on, grow up.

If you actually read the links, they are more substantive than the Trump's hair, Trump's reality show, and Trump's everything else you guys piss and moan about in the other thread. Cruz has a sleazy television preacher look that will limit him in the general election.

At this point we should all stay in our own lanes because the longer these two threads go on, the less common ground we are finding. For me, Cruz offers very little so I'm staying out of the I-love-Cruz side of the house.

Everytime someone mentions Trump's hair or Cruz's face or any similar nonsense, as though either are truly concerning - we all get a little dumber. It's shameful.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Cruz's face now? Come on, grow up.

If you actually read the links, they are more substantive than the Trump's hair, Trump's reality show, and Trump's everything else you guys piss and moan about in the other thread. Cruz has a sleazy television preacher look that will limit him in the general election.

At this point we should all stay in our own lanes because the longer these two threads go on, the less common ground we are finding. For me, Cruz offers very little so I'm staying out of the I-love-Cruz side of the house.

More substantive, eh?

Alrighty then.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/1...ald-trump/index.html

How Rupert Murdoch warmed up to Donald Trump's candidacy

The most intriguing part about the New York Post's endorsement of Donald Trump might be what it says about the relationship between the candidate and Rupert Murdoch.

The Post, of course, is owned by Murdoch, once a vocal critic of Trump's presidential campaign. The tabloid's endorsement comes amid a thaw in tensions between Trump and Murdoch's media empire.

Trump and Murdoch have had several meetings and conversations in recent months, according to sources close to both men. Those discussions were brokered by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, the owner and publisher of the New York Observer, the sources said.

Kushner, who helped write Trump's speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference last month, encouraged Murdoch to have a dialogue with the Republican frontrunner.

Over the course of these discussions, Murdoch has apparently come to see Trump not only as a serious candidate with potential, but also as the GOP's inevitable nominee, the sources told CNNMoney.

...

But Murdoch softened his tone after the new year. He said in January that "many influential Republicans" were beginning to recognize the inevitability of a Trump nomination. And Murdoch, a conservative power broker, cautioned the GOP last month against opposing Trump.

"If he becomes inevitable party would be mad not to unify," he tweeted.

Trump's on-again-off-again feud with Fox News and the channel's star anchor Megyn Kelly appears to have reached detente, too. Kelly sat down with Trump earlier this week to "clear the air." After that face-to-face meeting, Trump had lunch with Fox News chief Roger Ailes. Trump may even appear on a Kelly special next month.

quote:

Originally posted by Loganspawn:

Just play on your own street it will save you much grief. You notice I just let you Cruz boys rant all you want there in the Cruz thread.

You won't change minds and neither will I.

But if you don't rationally interact anywhere, you may never find the commonality that can be shared. We, I believe, will need to work together when we need it for the benefit of both the Cruz and Trump supporters.

. . . just a thought.

The situation in Colorado smells a bit worse.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-...-ted-cruz-delegates/

Social media posts, along with Cruz’s campaign website, reveal that Cruz supporters in the Colorado Republican Party were responsible for crushing an effort to give Colorado the ability to vote in a state primary.

In May of 2015, four Colorado Senate Republicans killed an initiative “to create a presidential primary in 2016,” reported the Denver Post. “Under the bill, Colorado would have held a presidential primary in March that ran parallel with the state’s complicated caucus system… when it came before the Senate Appropriations Committee, four Republicans voted to kill the bill with three Democrats supporting it.”

The four Republicans who voted against the initiative were Sen. Kevin Grantham, Sen. Kent Lambert, Sen. Laura Woods, and Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg.

On Cruz’s campaign website, Sens. Woods, Grantham, and Lambert are all listed as Cruz supporters and as declared members of Cruz’s “Colorado Leadership team.”

At the time, the editors of the Denver Post seemed perplexed by Grantham’s decision not to support the primary election initiative. In a May 2015 editorial titled, “Colorado GOP flubs chance for 2016 presidential primary,” the editors write: “What? Grantham was a sponsor of the bill. If he thought the bill made enough sense to put his name on it, why wouldn’t he think it should be passed out of committee?”

The editors go on to suggest that Party leaders may have had “other agendas that remain undisclosed” for rejecting a primary election of the people.

Denver post article:

http://blogs.denverpost.com/th...tial-primary/119831/

quote:

Originally posted by Tubetone:

quote:

Originally posted by Loganspawn:

Just play on your own street it will save you much grief. You notice I just let you Cruz boys rant all you want there in the Cruz thread.

You won't change minds and neither will I.

But if you don't rationally interact anywhere, you may never find the commonality that can be shared. We, I believe, will need to work together when we need it for the benefit of both the Cruz and Trump supporters.

. . . just a thought.

And telling the other side they are wrong over and over is insane.

I am totally for the let's get together after this shit is done but until then we should stay in out own camps those that are already set on a person.

Besides those for Cruz are so silly they think he can win the national election.......

I wish he could but the reality in this country now tells my brain otherwise. To me all Cruz is doing is making sure the Republicans lose at this point. So you can see why me posting in the Cruz thread is just not smart.

Just like they have beliefs many of us pro Trump guys do not agree with.

Who is correct? Who cares we won't solve it here now.

That's my thoughts.

MITT ROMNEY: Trump will win the nomination if Cruz and Kasich stay in the race

Mitt Romney suggested on Monday that Manhattan billionaire Donald Trump would secure the GOP nomination if Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich stay in the race until the July convention.

In a preview of his interview with David Gregory for his podcast, "The David Gregory Show," Romney insisted that stopping Trump depends on whether Cruz and Kasich continue campaigning.

"I think that Mr. Cruz and Mr. Kasich divide the vote, and that makes it easier for Mr. Trump to win the winner-take-all congressional districts and the winner-take-all states and get the delegates he needs to either hit the 1,237 or get close enough to sway the uncommitted delegates on the first ballot," said Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee.

Romney added that if either drops out after Tuesday's New York primary, then he thinks Trump would not hit the needed 1,237 delegates to win the nomination. Instead, Republicans would enter into a contested convention.

He did not suggest who, between Cruz and Kasich, he believed should drop out of the race. Romney said last month that he was voting for Cruz in the Utah caucuses, which Cruz ended up winning, but said his encouragement was not an endorsement.

Romney made robo-calls for Kasich and campaigned for him ahead of the March 15 Ohio primary, which was the only contest Kasich won.

Since early March, Romney has been a leading figure in the anti-Trump movement, and the pair have engaged in a vicious back and forth that has cooled down only recently.

The former Massachusetts governor also opined on the rules the Republican Party has for the delegate-selection process — one that Trump has called "rigged" and "crooked" — as pro-Cruz delegates have been chosen across the country to spots that are committed to Trump on the initial ballot.

"Well, actually at this stage of course the rules are the rules, and the party put them out there well over a year ago," Romney said. "And they're very similar to the rules that existed at the time when I was running four years ago."

"By the way, there's probably nothing wrong with making it difficult," he continued. "After all, these rules are a lot simpler than the rules of foreign affairs, for instance, or the rules of our economy. And if you want to be president, you're going to have to deal with rules far more complicated than Republican delegate rules."

quote:

Mitt Romney suggested on Monday that Manhattan billionaire Donald Trump would secure the GOP nomination if Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich stay in the race until the July convention.

Previously I said that once somebody was mathematically unable to reach 1,237, they should drop out. However, if it means my guy will win, I will be a hypocrite, and say that the rules are the rules, and there's nothing wrong with Kasich staying in the race.

Yeah, Romney knows.

Well consult with Sitting Bull and get back to me on the math

There is a Republican delegate from Washington DC who said if Trump is the candidate, she would vote for Clinton.

Now it turns out she doesn't actually live in DC. She lives in Virginia.

Rina Shah Bharara

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...republican-delegate/

“A candidate for Delegate and/or Alternate to the Republican National Convention must be: 1. A resident and registered voter in the District of Columbia as of January 1, 2016; and 2. A registered Republican,” according to D.C. GOP rules.

Bharara said that she owns a business in Washington, D.C. that is registered. Bharara would not provide documentation that she owns property in D.C., saying “Do I own a property in Washington, DC? I’m not going to make a comment. I don’t really feel comfortable.”

quote:

Rina Shah Bharara

A twat with a 3 word name...all I need to know

Today is the day. Trump is going down. He has peaked, and this is the beginning of the end. Just wait and see.

This is an important article by Patrick Buchanan. It's long, but worth it.


Will Cruz Steal the Nomination?

By PATRICK J. BUCHANAN • April 19, 2016, 12:05 AM

Donald Trump has brought out the largest crowds in the history of primaries. He has won the most victories, the most delegates, the most votes. He is poised to sweep three of the five largest states in the nation—New York, Pennsylvania, and California. If he does, and the nomination is taken from him, the Republican Party will be seen by the American people as a glorified Chinese tong.

Last week, Ted Cruz swept 34 delegates at the Colorado party convention. Attendees were not allowed to vote on whom they wanted as the party’s nominee. This weekend, Cruz shut out Trump in Wyoming the same way. What does this tell us? Cruz has a better “ground game.” His operatives work the system better. Ted Cruz is the king of small ball.

But having gone head-to-head in some 30 primaries and caucuses, Cruz has fallen millions of votes behind Trump, and will fall millions further behind after New York, Pennsylvania, and California. Cruz will soon join John Kasich in being mathematically eliminated from winning the nomination on the first ballot. His fallback strategy is to keep Trump just short of the 1,237 votes needed for victory on the first ballot, and then steal the nomination on the second.

How? Poaching and pilfering. In state after state, he is getting Cruz loyalists elected as Trump delegates. After casting an obligatory vote for Trump on the first ballot, the turncoats will go over the hill and vote for Cruz on the second ballot. Faithless delegates are preparing to switch to give Ted Cruz a nomination that he could not persuade Republican voters to confer upon him.

Like the 1919 World Series, the fix is in.

The rules are the rules, says Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus in defense of what went down in Colorado and Wyoming. Priebus is correct. The rules are the rules. But what is also true is that the rules have been and are being manipulated by party elites to frustrate the expressed will of a Republican electorate, and to impose a nominee other then the clear winner of the primaries.

Republican elites are engaged in a conspiracy to frustrate and overturn the democratic decision of the Republican electorate.

Prediction: If Trump sweeps the remaining major primaries, comes to Cleveland with millions more votes than any other candidate, and then has the nomination stolen from him, the Grand Old Party will be committing hara-kiri on worldwide TV.

This political race ranks among the most exciting in American history. Seventeen Republicans entered the lists last summer in what party officials hailed as “the strongest Republican field since 1980.”

Then Trump came down the escalator, took them on, and bested them all. Can Republican Party elites think they will be celebrated if they substitute their wants for the will of the voters?

A Cruz nomination would be like taking the gold medal away from the man who won it, and handing it to a runner-up. The GOP elites would be about as popular as those Olympic boxing judges in South Korea.

The deeper problem here is the refusal of party elites to realize that the world has changed. The Bush dynasty is done. Jeb Bush, the Prince of Wales, understands this. He will not be going to Cleveland. The primaries have starkly revealed that a new era is upon us.

Even the neocons, the dominant element among the 121 foreign policy experts who declared in an open letter that they will never work for a President Trump, testify to this. They see Trump’s victories as a repudiation of their legacy, and a Trump presidency as the end of their post-Cold War ascendancy. And given the disasters they have produced for America, from Afghanistan to Iraq, Libya and Yemen, the nation would be well rid of them.

Indeed, Trump’s victories, and the energies he has unleashed, are due, not only to his outsized persona but to his issues. People believe Trump will secure the borders, halt the invasion, embrace tariff and trade policies to reduce imports, and restart the production of goods, Made in the USA, by and for Americans.

In his first inaugural, Woodrow Wilson said, “The success of a party means little except when the Nation is using that party for a large and definite purpose.” Bush Republicans saw their “large and definite purpose” as creating a “New World Order” and “ending tyranny in our world.”

Trump seems to see repairing, rebuilding and restoring America to greatness as the “large and definite purpose” of the party he would lead. And a new emerging Republican majority seems to agree. If Trump had been routed, as first expected, then his message could rightly have been regarded as outside the mainstream. But Republican voters rallied to the issues he raised.

To either ignore the clear instructions of its electorate, or renounce their chosen messenger, would be for the Republican Party to forfeit its future, and cling to a discredited and dead past.

http://www.theamericanconserva...teal-the-nomination/