Patterico's Pontifications

6/8/2016

#ExGOP

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:46 am



Leon Wolf has a great post about Trump University at RedState, addressing various Trump claims. This part is very important, because it is a great reminder of why I will never, ever support Donald Trump:

2. [Trump claim:] The original lead plaintiff withdrew because “she was a disaster” and “she couldn’t win.” This is one of the more galling lies that Trump has repeatedly told throughout his sob story about this case, and he has never once been challenged to his face about it, that I’ve seen. The truth is that Trump’s legal team made this woman – whose name is Tarla Makaeff – go through living hell as part of scorched earth tactics. They countersued her individually and dragged her through separate litigation that was so extensive that at the end of it – which she won – the judge awarded her an astounding $800,000 in legal fees.

She also alleged (and who does not believe her?) that both Trump and his attorneys have repeatedly threatened to ruin her financially for pursuing the suit, regardless of how long it takes. Given that this suit was started five years ago, and that Trump is now running for President, while followed by a bunch of slobbering hate-filled lunatics who harass everyone who dares to disagree with Trump, Makaeff furthermore says (and who does not believe her?) that she does not wish to continue being harassed by Trump, his lawyers, and his fans for the duration of this awful Presidential campaign.

For five years, Makaeff has been the face of the Trump University plaintiffs, and Donald Trump tried to destroy her life for it. He shows every indication of continuing to do so for all eternity. Ordinary people cannot deal with this kind of perpetual pressure in their lives. That is why she withdrew from the case.

Trump is a thug. Pure and simple.

The bit about her praising Trump U. is part of a scam, of course: they solicited feedback early on, after the free stuff, and then upsold people.

Jay Nordlinger has a great piece that sums up how I feel about all this. Like me, Nordlinger was GOP until May 3, when he became #ExGOP:

Much as I disliked the Democrats, my Republicanism was not merely negative — not merely a reaction to the Democrats. I held the Republicans to be a boon to the country and world.

But then they nominated, or were poised to nominate, Donald J. Trump for president. And that’s where I get off. I ceased to be a Republican on the night of May 3, when the results of the Indiana primary came in. A party that thinks Donald Trump ought to be president is not a party I should belong to.

Think of it in different terms: If there were a party somewhere that thought Donald Trump ought to be president, would you belong to it? I wouldn’t. And that party exists: It is my old party.

. . . .

Trump made his remarks about Rafael Cruz and JFK on the day he won, May 3. That night, a new hashtag appeared on Twitter: “#ExGOP.” I do not want to wear that tag, but I suppose I do.

If you do a search for the #ExGOP hashtag you’ll see when it first “appeared” on May 3:

So yeah, I feel a pretty close kinship with Nordlinger’s sentiments. And last night, after casting a vote for Ted Cruz, I took the first step towards making it official:

I hate this. I hope it lasts a short period of time. But I think it’s important to send a message to party leaders that we’re out.

Being #ExGOP means that I get to watch idiots try to justify Donald Trump and I don’t feel the slightest need to rise to his, or their, partisan defense. When I see something like this, I point and laugh:

When I watch Paul Ryan call Trump’s Curiel comments the “textbook definition of racism” (they weren’t, really; they were just stupid) and still declare that he supports Trump — again, I point and laugh.

But it’s a bitter and sad laugh. Because we threw away a real chance this year.

So what’s the solution? Hillary Clinton has started a group called . . . wait for it . . . Republicans Against Trump:

Yeah, I’ll pass on the chance to be a RAT, Hillary. You can save your speeches about income inequality — put them in a pocket of your $12,495 Versace jacket, why don’t you.

We’ll be in the political wilderness for a while. It could be a long time. In the meantime, there’s the Constitutional Vanguard mailing list and Facebook group for those who feel the same as I do. (Please note: the Facebook group is for mailing list recipients only!) Or, for non-joiners, there are the comments below.

260 Responses to “#ExGOP”

  1. Read the whole Nordlinger piece. It says so much of what I have been thinking.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  2. Me too, Patterico.

    What I hate—so very much—is that bully boys with faux macho and weird language will be here shortly to insult and carry on.

    The Nordlinger piece is precisely how I feel.

    And let’s be clear: the Trump movement only makes HRC as President possible. And during the primaries (just like previous ones) I kept reading folks going on and on about purity of ideals in candidates, and mocking decent people with silly names, and frankly making things up.

    Some of those same people are Trump supporters now.

    We are indeed in the wilderness. But I will not help Trumpism. Period. DJT is intellectually lazy, a thug, and thoughtless in his approach. He is many of the things that people say they oppose.

    Maybe he is the flip side of Obama. And like Obama, he has a choice.

    DJT chooses to act the buffoon. And I won’t fall into line.

    To quote Reagan, I didn’t leave the Party, the Party left me.

    What a mess.

    SImon Jester (c8876d)

  3. Mre news about the Hillary e-mails.

    Bryan Pagliano wants to have both immunity and the ability to take the Fifth Amendment in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. (apparently, the immunity agreement was carefully crafted so as to allow him, or with the goal of allowing him, to still take the 5th amendment in a public forum.)

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/06/all-the-secrets-clinton-aide-wants-immunity-deal-kept-under-wraps/#more-173917

    The FBI and the Justice Department are also making secret filings in this FOIA case:

    http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/282454-fbi-asks-to-make-new-secret-filing-in-clinton-email-case

    Sammy Finkelman (eb1481)

  4. Ah Simon, how naive you can be, you think the robbins firm and the other that paid red queen for her services, is doing this out of altruism, any more than Patton bogs did to chevron, or the 30 pieces of silver paid out to spring gitmo detainees

    narciso (732bc0)

  5. Lindsey Graham also said he is not endorsing Donald Trump. He is not Ex-GOP. He said he wished he could endorse the nominee of his party. Earlier he had merely indicated he would not attend the convention, which is something also true of Bush II, McCain and Romney. (Bush I is too infoirm to attend anyway)

    Sammy Finkelman (eb1481)

  6. People on the right who pay attention to politics have all sorts of subtly-interacting goals, with about as many different permutations of priorities as there are people. It makes compromise difficult.

    Leftists have all sorts of goals, but the half of them can be solved by getting someone else to pay for them, and the other half can be solved by punishing white straight male cisgender etc. people. It has a natural compromise that makes party politics fairly easy.

    I’m kinda disappointed Patterico made a Facebook group instead of putting together his own forum, though.

    CayleyGraph (871f7b)

  7. Yeah, pretty much. If the best a party can produce is Trump, it should die.

    But then I live in Illinois. The Combine is not any different from the Machine except maybe that three Democrat governors have gone to prison in my lifetime versus one Republican.

    Still. There is some sentimental attachment.

    The late Chairman (woman) of the Illinois Republican Party was my neighbor. One time I tried to hand her a palm card, in my electioneering zeal outside the polling place.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. I formally left the GOP a few weeks ago myself–before it was actually fashionable to be #ExGOP. Before Patrick even made it a thing. :) Like Simon Jester, I get that my stance will likely ensure a Clinton win (and I have friends who are beyond angry at me), but I will NOT help Trumpism. It is not who I am.
    I am in the political wilderness. Looking at the libertarian ticket. My problem with libertarians is that the tend to be pro choice and I am most adamantly not.

    Kew (8dbb06)

  9. That’s embarrassing about Hillary. Next, we’ll have People Unhappy with Sander’s Socialism!

    Tillman (a95660)

  10. Patterico, I would appreciate you giving your reasons for not being able to support Johnston. Or at least link to an old post where you did so.

    kishnevi (0dce2b)

  11. Lot of wannabe pissing on a grave going on here. Good luck with your life – and your neck – under the boot.

    Colonel Haiku (cdb06f)

  12. Bluntman, let me count the ways, he’s a niche product,

    narciso (732bc0)

  13. One of the things that’s been curiously absent in all the furor over whether Gonzalo Curiel is biased against Donald Trump or not is any evidence of any ruling that exhibits bias against Donald Trump, as opposed to adherence to the law. I mean, if Trump and his team are going to assert that the judge’s impartiality is hopelessly impaired by Trump’s plan to build a wall, surely they should be able to come up with some specific ruling the judge made that flagrantly violated the law. Right?

    This, so this. The Trumpalos go on and on about how biased the Judge is because of MEXICANS and LA RAZA . Yet they are unable to demonstrate just how that bias has affected any of his decisions, and are unable to point out where the judge was wrong because of that bias.

    I’ve been #ExGOP for years. After voting for Bush in 2000, I didn’t vote for Bush in 2004, nor McCain or Romney. They just believe too many things differently than me. I didn’t believe sky is falling about Obama becoming President, just like I don’t about Clinton now.

    I was hopeful this would be the first year I would be back, but then Trump happened. Funny thing is, I like how he hits back at the media, and I like how he is dovish on wars. But I cannot stand anything else about him. He is another liberal authoritarian. He is a con man and stands for so much that I oppose. Its a downer.

    Patrick Henry, the 2nd (e04f50)

  14. Lot of wannabe pissing on a grave going on here. Good luck with your life – and your neck – under the boot.

    Colonel Haiku (cdb06f) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:46 am

    That’s the case no matter whether Clinton or Trumps wins.

    Patrick Henry, the 2nd (e04f50)

  15. But you can vote for the Gucci clone of a workboot instead of a Prada high heeled boot!

    kishnevi (0dce2b)

  16. On February 29, 2016, Hugh Hewitt said there were 6 reasons to vote for Trump instead of Hillary. He also said
    this:

    I spent Friday’s radio show explaining to incredulous guests that of course I’d support Donald Trump if he is the GOP nominee.

    “But after he just insulted you and your radio show in front of 15 million people?” came the question.

    When I reminded Trump at Thursday’s debate that it was the first anniversary of his promise — made on my radio show — to release his tax returns, Donald told the world “very few people listen to your show, it is a very low rated show,” which is neither true nor responsive. It was indeed entertaining, momentarily effective, and made for my third “Trump tattoo” in 12 months. He had delivered another on MSNBC, and the third in his book.

    I’m either jaded or used to it. Doesn’t matter. “This is the business we have chosen” said Hyman Roth in “The Godfather Part II.”

    Trump can insult me three times thirty times in front of 30 million people — 30 million is a reach, but I’ll be back on stage for the final CNN-Salem Media Group debate in Miami on March 10, so who knows? Bottom line: Insults of journalists don’t matter. Short of insulting my family, it simply doesn’t matter what Donald says to me or any reporters and pundits.

    What matters is what he would do vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton in a November showdown. To get to that answer, journalists have to be willing to take some flack while asking pointed questions, from all sides, even when the journalist is an avowed conservative of long standing.

    Today, June 8, 2016, Hugh Hewitt called for the GOP convention to change the rules to allow for an alternative candidate to be selected:

    Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt argued Wednesday morning that the Republican Party should make an unprecedented effort to change the Republican National Convention rules to allow them to dump Donald Trump as their nominee.

    “It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer. You can’t do it, you gotta go attack it,” Hewitt said. “And right now the Republican Party is facing — the plane is headed towards the mountain after the last 72 hours.”

    Hewitt said he disagreed with Republican senators like Lindsey Graham and Mark Kirk who said they could not vote for their party’s nominee. “I wanna support the nominee of the party, but I think the party ought to change the nominee. Because we’re going to get killed with this nominee.”

    DRJ (15874d)

  17. the failmerican president for the last 8 years has been an execrable and unholy freedom-raping genocidal slut

    one candidate is explicitly saying she wants to give us more of the same

    one says nope let’s go in a different direction

    this post is all about problematizing something that’s not even a little bit complicated

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  18. Can be done online, too. I just did.

    ManlyDad (bec1ce)

  19. People who believe in the 2nd amendment will vote accordingly. The rest of you are just plain selfish.

    mg (31009b)

  20. Guns and ammo will win this for Trump. You elitist Hewitt lovers best be dressed in camo while you wander in your wilderness.

    mg (31009b)

  21. People who believe in the 2nd amendment will vote accordingly. The rest of you are just plain selfish.

    mg (31009b) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:09 am

    Yes, and that would be voting for neither Trump nor Clinton. Clinton obviously hates guns, and Trump will sell out gun rights the first chance he gets. He’ll choose a middle of the road Justice that will also sell us out.

    Patrick Henry, the 2nd (e04f50)

  22. Sheesh. Gun threats? That’s going to help.

    Trump truly does bring out the best in his supporters.

    SImon Jester (c8876d)

  23. By which I don’t mean the common views between HRC and DJT. I mean all the tough talking commenters.

    On the other hand, at least those people can communicate in regular English.

    SImon Jester (c8876d)

  24. the failmerican president for the last 8 years has been an execrable and unholy freedom-raping genocidal slut

    one candidate is explicitly saying she wants to give us more of the same

    one says nope let’s go in a different direction

    this post is all about problematizing something that’s not even a little bit complicated

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:03 am

    yes yes

    this is not complicated

    we need a new failamerican president

    in fact we need a failamerican king

    he will cut down those first amendment rights

    he will sick the government on freedom lovers left and right

    he will get those goldy sacks men their money

    he will kill jobs and the economy for the working man

    he will rule over failamerica

    and he certainly won’t be her

    sadfeet (e04f50)

  25. 21… Carnac speaks!

    Greetings, my friends. We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future. You are interested in the unknown, the mysterious, the unexplainable. That is why you are here. And now, for the first time, we are bringing to you the full story of what will happen on that fateful day. We are bringing you all the evidence, based only on the future secret testimony of the miserable souls who will have survived this terrifying ordeal. The incidents, the places. My friends, we cannot keep this a secret any longer. Let us punish the innocent. Let us reward the guilty.

    Colonel Haiku (111e13)

  26. the failmerican president for the last 8 years has been an execrable and unholy freedom-raping genocidal slut

    one candidate is explicitly saying she wants to give us more of the same

    Gosh, it’s so easy. If we just told the American people how awful the last eight years have been and how vile the Democrat nominee is then surely they would fall in line right behind us. Why did none of us think of that up until now?

    JVW (eabb2a)

  27. mg,

    I’m not a Hewitt fan but, in the past, he supported Trump as the GOP nominee because he wants Hillary to lose. I think a lot of people here agree with that position. What Hewitt is saying now is that Trump can’t beat Hillary so the GOP needs a new nominee. Hewitt’s point isn’t about Trump, it’s about winning.

    DRJ (15874d)

  28. Sheesh. Gun threats? That’s going to help.

    Trump truly does bring out the best in his supporters.
    SImon Jester (c8876d) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:44 am

    Yes, threats of violence will bring out people to volunteer to climb on the derailing Trump train.

    BTW, Those of that ilk should keep in mind that while they would like to think otherwise, they are in the minority.

    And as the Trump train keeps on failing to run on time, the ranks of #neverTrump are going to grow.

    Torcer (654698)

  29. mg–

    What makes you think that Trump believes in the 2nd Amendment? Because he promised the NRA? Did anyone check to see if his fingers were crossed?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  30. I’ll be registering No Party Preference online the moment the CA Secretary of State website comes back online. Probably down due to all the re-registering.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  31. I forget, you don’t have a party in California, at least no indications of one, and that works out great,

    narciso (732bc0)

  32. Sounds like Hewitt isn’t the only concerned Republican:

    But just as Trump’s charged comments could weaken his campaign, they’re only adding to the pressure on Priebus — he is already hearing calls from some arguing that Trump’s racially based attacks are reason enough to justify the extreme measure of passing a rule to unbind delegates on the first ballot at the RNC convention next month.

    DRJ (15874d)

  33. There was only a 30% turnout of registered CA Republicans yesterday. About a million of them of them voted for Trump. The other 4 million stayed home or voted for other people.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  34. This Hillary super-PAC ad campaign is hurting Trump, too. It involves the rally when Trump mocked a disabled reporter.

    DRJ (15874d)

  35. mg, none are bigger supporters of 2A rights than I. Trump hates us as much as he hates anyone. He is a con man. I won’t vote for him based on his fraudulent “promises”.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  36. DRJ,

    Trump is supposed to meet with heavy hitter donors tomorrow. I suspect this episode of bluff, raise, fold has more to do with sucking up to money than to a call from Priebus. Priebus may well have reminded Trump of the meeting – it’s no secret at all major donors regard Trump as closely akin to the bubonic plague. They are also enjoying calling his bluff on ‘self financing’.

    Rick Ballard (45aac8)

  37. you don’t have a party in California

    What we have is a monolithic Democrat machine which owns all the newspapers and TV stations. The jungle primary makes party organization ineffective for any party other than the dominant one.

    It also helps that the GOP leadership has been mostly concerned with petty infighting for several decades now.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  38. That makes sense, Rick. I’m sure Trump does need the money, but will they give it?

    DRJ (15874d)

  39. you don’t have a party in California,

    It should be pointed out that, given the jungle primary, the only difference between registering GOP and NPP is that you can vote (in June) for the GOP presidential nominee. This has not mattered in my lifetime.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  40. But I think it’s important to send a message to party leaders that we’re out.

    I thought the party leaders were largely on your side. It’s the party rank and file who you are out of step with. They are the ones who have to be convinced you are right and they are wrong. I don’t see this happening unless one of two things happen. Either they come to believe that Trump has let them down (like if Trump were to start acting the way you want him to), or if Trump stays true to what his supporters think he is, but that turns out to be the huge catastrophe that you are predicting.

    It does surprise me that the #ExGOPers are using this tactic. Unless they are going to try to form a party to replace the GOP, as the GOP did to the Whigs, I would think the more effective tactic would be to try to change the party form within. Such as trying to get the primaries that are open closed, if you believe that much of Trump’s support in the primaries came from people who weren’t really Republican.

    Or, just plan to live a political life in the wilderness.

    Anon Y. Mous (9e4c83)

  41. The GOP probably could at least have had a name in the Senate race in November if there had only been one Republican running yesterday. By splitting the vote, they guaranteed a D vs D race. The jungle primary almost demands smoke-filled rooms before the primary for a minority party.

    I’m not corrupt enough to vote for a Democrat, but NPP is looking good.

    Malclave (cd7ef4)

  42. Here’s an excerpt from Jeffery Kuhner’s 6/8/16 article in the World Tribune

    The rest of the story: Why Trump is Right about Judge Gonzalo Curiel

    …Gonzalo Curiel has no business being a federal judge. Any man who belongs to an organization that is defined by and devoted to advancing the interests of a particular ethnic, national group at the expense of others is a narrow-minded bigot. Trump is completely correct: He is the victim of a political witch-hunt by a militant La Raza leftist whose ultimate allegiance is to Mexico — and not America.
    The political and media establishment could not defeat Trump during the primary. They are now hoping to crush him before the general election. They have only one strategy left: Smear him as a racist demagogue. This libel is not only false; it must be exposed for the cheap, craven propaganda that it is. They are spinning lies in service to their globalist, corporatist masters. In short, they are traitors, who are willing to sell our country down the river. It’s no wonder they are circling the wagons for Judge Curiel. He’s one of their own — an anti-American zealot who cares nothing for our borders, our culture and our Constitution…

    ropelight (596f46)

  43. Yeah, you are a f***ing nazi, ropelight.

    nk (dbc370)

  44. i’m not a rat or a pooper

    Me I’m a stand against the defiling of america

    Me I’m a stand against the repugnant and nasty slag what wants to abolish fracking and take away our freedoms

    this is how i do

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  45. Pat,

    I still a meaningful distinction between the Strumpet and the Red Queen. Hillary Clinton intends to expand Obamunism, this time on steroids; she will ignore the law, ignore the Congress (unless it agrees with her), rule entirely by decree, and set up a virtual Oogo-Chavestic fascism. She has an endless list of “enemies” who must be eliminated. She intends to confiscate our guns, obliterate our liberty, and steal our country.

    By contrast, Donald Trump only plans to loot our country.

    We can recover from a looting. We cannot recover from the of our liberty.

    Dafydd (d4fbf5)

  46. I thought the party leaders were largely on your side.

    They are not. While they don’t love Trump, they think they can survive with him. That’s why so many were falling in line. There is a reason Cruz got so little support from the party leaders.

    It’s the party rank and file who you are out of step with.

    The 60% rank and file who voted against Trump while the race was contested? Sounds like its the other way around, buddy.

    Either they come to believe that Trump has let them down (like if Trump were to start acting the way you want him to), or if Trump stays true to what his supporters think he is, but that turns out to be the huge catastrophe that you are predicting.

    Well we’ve pointed out the numerous ways Trump has and will let them down (H1Bs, the wall, touchback amnesty, etc, etc) and that hasn’t worked. And we’ve pointed out how he will be a huge disaster, but they are sucked into the con, and its hard to break out people who are there.

    sadfeet (e04f50)

  47. Dagnabbit. “I still SEE a meaningful distinction…”

    My apologies.

    Dafydd (d4fbf5)

  48. The 2nd amendment is a winning issue. All Trump has to do is let people know what clinton will do to individuals bearing arms. He wins in a landslide. I have been saying it for years make the 2nd amendment the no. 1 issue. And yes I do believe Trump holds the 2nd amendment dear to his heart. Romney could have won if he made it the issue, but he was getting de-pants by Candy.

    mg (31009b)

  49. Gaak. I’m just going to write the whole thing over. (In my blogging days, I could just correct my tyops.)

    Pat,

    I still see a meaningful distinction between the Strumpet and the Red Queen. Hillary Clinton intends to expand Obamunism, this time on steroids; she will ignore the law, ignore the Congress (unless it agrees with her), rule entirely by decree, and set up a virtual Oogo-Chavestic fascism. She has an endless list of “enemies” who must be eliminated. She intends to confiscate our guns, obliterate our liberty, and steal our country.

    By contrast, Donald Trump only plans to loot our country.

    We can recover from a looting. We cannot recover from the loss of our liberty.

    Dafydd (d4fbf5)

  50. Simon- my English is in moderation.

    mg (31009b)

  51. Leaving the GOP over one candidate is exactly the wrong response. How many primaries and other opportunities are you going to miss out on, in which you could be doing something productive like shaping the party back into something resembling its former self? Taking your ball and going home helps precisely nobody, least of all yourself.

    Captain Obvious (14cc4d)

  52. ropeliar, I’ll see your Kuhner “Why Trump Is Right About Judge Curiel” and raise you two “Hillary Clinton Did Nothing Wrong” by Madeleine Albright and Lanny Davis.

    If you listen to Hillary! as she runs around accusing everyone investigating her, and reporting on her wrongdoing such as the DoS IG, they’re doing so out of nothing but political animus against her as the presumptive Democratic front-runner.

    And now Trump has conjured out of thin a Vast La Raza Conspiracy against him.

    There’s really no daylight between the two, and none between their supporters. They operate under the same delusion that their precious candidates are innocent of wrongdoing yet they’re victims of powerful forces conspiring against them.

    It’s all a form of insanity because the illegality of their actions is obvious. In the case of Hillary! just based upon her own admissions (and those close to her) she violated the espionage act. It’s an incredible thing to listen to. Basically her defenses are admissions. She’s basically saying:

    “I did nothing wrong and was simply emulating the email and security practices of my predecessors when I serially violated paragraph (f) of 18 USC section 793.”

    Just like Trump’s defense against fraud is to essentially admit to the fraud.

    Here’s how bad it’s gotten. I’ll get into a discussion with someone and I’ll point out Trump has already been found personally liable for breaking the law in NY state that says it is illegal to call your business enterprise a university unless it has been evaluated, accredited, and chartered in the state of NY as an actual, no sh*t university.

    This isn’t my only proof, but as it points out here in this useful summary of the state of litigation concerning Trump University:

    …The supreme court of New York ruled earlier that Trump University, now renamed Trump Entrepreneur Initiative, LLC, is liable for its violation of state education laws in its illegally calling the program a “university” without the appropriate licensure or accreditation and for allegedly defrauding students of $40 million.

    It was an open and shut case. It’s illegal for Trump to do what he did. That’s why he was forced to change the name from Trump University, LLC to Trump Entrepreneurial Initiative, LLC. He’s on the hook for an estimated $40 million because he willfully and flagrantly violated the law.

    It’s gotten so bad that I’ll quote all sorts of articles that confirm Trump has already lost the case; it’s a done deal. And then I’ll say, “I know you won’t accept reality, though.”

    And sure enough, a great many Trumpkins will gloss over the fact that Trump has already lost the case, that he violated the law, and attack me as if I”m making some unsupported allegation that a “technical violation” of something or other is “worth” $40 million dollars or something.

    It’s hard for me to get my mind around such denial of reality so I’m not doing the typical such delusional thinking (if you can call it thinking) justice. I’m pointing out an established fact, that Trump had been found by a NY court back in 2014 to have violated the NY law against applying the name “university” to anything other than a university chartered by the state of NY.

    And the Trumpkin will shut their eyes and insist I’m making some unproven assertion about what should happen in the future.

    So, anyway Trump and Hillary! are like two peas in a pod, so why shouldn’t their rabid supporters share the same mental asylum.

    Vote Trump/Hillary! 2016 and fight the Vast Right Wing/La Raza Conspiracy!

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  53. “Presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump secured the last of the Republican primary states on Tuesday in California and a historic count of over 13 million primary election votes.”

    Colonel Haiku (111e13)

  54. #43, nk wrote:

    Yeah, you are a f***ing nazi, ropelight.

    nk (dbc370) — 6/8/2016 @ 11:34 am

    Funny, that’s what I think about you.

    ropelight (596f46)

  55. LOL!!!!

    So support the Republicans who allowed the Govt to grow unchecked last 50 years but grow new principles if now Trump is representing the Party.

    Mary Steyn nailed it on the head today while replacing Limbaugh … he basically called Conservatives with this attitude pu**ies. Navel gazing imbeciles.

    As much as it pains to me to agree with a self loathing bottom like Happyfeet, he is correct. This is a choice between an unknown with lots of misgivings versus more craptastic Leftism.

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  56. What is the significance of May 3rd?

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  57. #54 So the Nazi is the one who won the primary election fair and square, not the one who would deny the Voters b/c his guy did not win.

    LOL!

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  58. Nazi supporters = folks who came out to vote for a candidate Ted Cruz people don’t like.

    Awesome Conservatives = if same Nazis voted Ted Cruz.

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  59. #58 But we are super principled Conservatives!

    Cuz the last 50 years of Conservatism within the (R) Party has been so successful we can’t stand to support the Trump interloper nor his newly minted troglodyte nazi supporters.

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  60. Well, with all the hate brewing here, you need to take time to practice bowing to Queen Hillary.
    Dreamers.
    Fits.

    cedarhill (c1e1dc)

  61. All this talk about which is worse, Trump or Hillary, is besides the point.

    It’s like debating which is worse, constipation or diarrhea. You can raise points pro and con. But in the end it’s all just S–T.

    Bored Lawyer (998177)

  62. 60. Well, with all the hate brewing here, you need to take time to practice bowing to Queen Hillary.
    Dreamers.
    Fits.

    cedarhill (c1e1dc) — 6/8/2016 @ 1:01 pm

    Of course. Because of teh h8 brewing here, on Patterico’s Pontifications, Hillary! is going to be elected. I hope you’ll be able to point your finger at me personally, cedarhill, as one of the most influential of the h8mongers who brought that eventuality about.

    This is the sort of delusion I was talking about earlier.

    Meanwhile, out in the real world Trump is bringing the specter of a Hillary! presidency about all by his lonesome, with no help from me, because he’s a disastrous candidate who is no better organized now than he was when Cruz was “stealing” delegates by, you know, actually knowing how to win by the rules. And then there’s Trump’s criminal stupidity; we have to factor that in.

    As it turns out, the magic of the Trump endorsement has brought about his first GOP loss of 2016. South Carolina Rep. Renee Ellmers was the first GOP pol to endorse Trump when his nom was still in doubt. So Trump returned the favor, endorsed Ellmers, and… Ellmers lost.

    Fortunately she lost to another Republican, one not endorsed by Trump. She lost so badly that she was within 200 votes of coming in third. So but for the not-endorsed-by-Trump Republican, Trump could have flipped that seat to the donkeys.

    Now to be fair she didn’t lose solely because Der Donald endorsed her.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2016/06/07/trumpendorsed-renee-ellmers-loses-reelection-n2175238

    But if this is an example of Trump’s coattails Hillary! will have a Democratic Congress with which to rule.

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  63. I am correct!

    hah i told you guys

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  64. Patterico, your fraud is exposed. All this time you have put yourself forward as “Patrick” but I now see that your first name is John! That’s just as fraudulent as Rafael Edward Cruz misrepresenting himself as “Ted”. </trumpkin-parody>
    (You probably recall them making that ridiculous accusation a few months ago.)

    Milhouse (87c499)

  65. Come to think of it, I don’t believe you’re a pontiff either. Though perhaps you play bridge.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  66. Ah Simon, how naive you can be, you think the robbins firm and the other that paid red queen for her services, is doing this out of altruism,

    Huh? Who thinks that? Who has ever made such a stupid claim? Why would anyone suppose it for a second?

    Milhouse (87c499)

  67. Hugh Hewitt’s right…we need to change the rules at the convention so we can dump Trump and replace him with someone palatable.
    Otherwise, his mouth is going to lose the election.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  68. From the same source identified at #42 above: Jeffery Kuhner’s 6/8/16 article in the World Tribune

    The rest of the story: Why Trump is Right about Judge Gonzalo Curiel

    …The scandal began when Trump told CNN’s Jake Tapper that Judge Gonzalo Curiel might not be fair and objective because of his “Mexican heritage.” The context is everything. Prior to the interview, Judge Curiel had made numerous questionable and unethical decisions regarding the Trump University lawsuit. The suit was blatantly frivolous and should have been thrown out on several occasions. Judge Curiel refused to do so. In fact, he deliberately ruled that documents be released falsely alleging Trump was running a fraudulent operation. The goal was obvious: to humiliate and smear the Republican nominee.

    The judge’s defenders insist that he was born in Indiana, thereby making him an “American.” According to them, to even question the role played by his ethnic heritage is bigotry of the highest order. It’s “Un-American” shouted Paul Ryan. It isn’t — and Judge Curiel’s defenders are either willfully lying or ignorant. Either way, they should be ashamed of themselves.

    The fact is Judge Curiel is an anti-American, pro-Mexican radical leftist. His parents were immigrants from Mexico. More importantly, President Obama appointed him to the bench. The reason: Judge Curiel is a staunch supporter of open borders, amnesty and mass illegal immigration — especially, from Mexico.

    He is a seminal member of La Raza Lawyers, a militant pro-Hispanic legal organization devoted to promoting “the interests of the Latino communities throughout” California (the judge sits on a bench in San Diego). Judge Curiel is a pro-illegal immigration ideologue; he believes that U.S. immigration laws are fundamentally racist, oppressive and unjust. According to him (and La Raza Lawyers), American sovereignty and immigration statutes must be ignored and eventually eradicated.

    He has even participated in La Raza events where he granted scholarships to illegal aliens from Mexico — students, who could not speak a word of English. He is a rogue judge whose allegiance and political affiliation is not to America, but Mexico. He may be born in Indiana. His heart, however, is in Mexico City…

    ropelight (596f46)

  69. I love the guy. I enjoy seeing him run rings around self annointed speech code enforcers and miss manners etiquette drones.

    That’s my bias. You can see it, take it out of the box, roll it around in your hand.

    But these types of links showing the detail of RedState and National Review’s bile from their myopic perspective
    highlites and coagulate aspects of Trump that are admirable, cogent, and will serve a Republican President well versus the certainty of an adversarial press.

    For instance, Leon Wolf says,

    I get why Tapper and the rest of the media is doing this: it’s not often you have a major party’s nominee for President espousing openly racist rhetoric during the course of an interview with you, and if you can nail him down on it, that’s a major story. Furthermore, Trump has shown an amazing propensity throughout this campaign to distract reporters with side shows as a means of avoiding a tough question, and I am sure Tapper (and John Dickerson on Sunday) felt like they were really doing what journalists should have been doing all along – pick one question, stick to it, make Trump answer.

    Trump uses our common opponents own hypocrisy against them, dangling it like a fish in front of a seal. Tapper is so twisted up going after the fish that he misses the point. Curiel being La Raza’s judge/lawyer/advocate is a given.
    The real story is that a party hack District Attorney from New York, while attempting to extend the reach of that State’s Government to include the certification of for profit schools, couldn’t make a case in New York, so he shopped it out across the country, to a State that doesn’t involve itself in the certification of private schools at all, and picked the court operated by the La Raza judge.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  70. And so point out where he has shown bias against Trump?

    Also known as reversible error.

    Steve57 (8c934c)

  71. His bias was in accepting the case.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  72. The suit was blatantly frivolous and should have been thrown out on several occasions. Judge Curiel refused to do so. In fact, he deliberately ruled that documents be released falsely alleging Trump was running a fraudulent operation. The goal was obvious: to humiliate and smear the Republican nominee.

    I have no idea who this Jeffrey Kuhner is, nor what sort of publication the “World Tribune” is, but this is enough to show that he is a damned liar. Like Lillian Hellman’s work, every word in the cited paragraph is a lie.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  73. a party hack District Attorney from New York, while attempting to extend the reach of that State’s Government to include the certification of for profit schools, couldn’t make a case in New York, so he shopped it out across the country, to a State that doesn’t involve itself in the certification of private schools at all, and picked the court operated by the La Raza judge.

    More ridiculous lies.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  74. His bias was in accepting the case.

    Why should he not have accepted the case? And why, back in 2010, would he have had anything against Trump, who at the time was an open-borders Democrat and friend of Hillary?

    Milhouse (87c499)

  75. Oh, I see, “Word Tribune” is a kook birther web site like WND.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  76. There is a mistaken premise to this post, a very grave and important one.

    The premise — unstated, but clear — is that because Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee for the 2016 election cycle, that he represents the entire Grand Old Party, at least until the next election cycle.

    The mistake is to assume that the GOP — or the Democratic Party, for that matter — is all about, and only about, the nominee for POTUS.

    Yes, the presidency is the most elected important office in the country. It’s not more important than all the others put together though. And the point of the party — any party — is to elect as many of its partisans to public office as possible, at every level, state and federal, in every election cycle.

    I’ve been a Republican longer than Trump, and I’ll be one long after he’s gone, whether that’s in a month or eight years and six months. And I intend to help my party elect its candidates to offices up and down the ballot, including in my home state of Texas, where the Republican Party was doing quite well before Donald Trump ever decided that he’s pretend to be a Republican long enough to capture its nomination for the presidency.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  77. Thank you, Beldar. That means a lot. Pretty soon we’ll be drinking together over our many victories.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  78. The judge’s defenders insist that he was born in “Indiana” (whatever the hell that is), thereby making him an “American” (when he’s clearly a Mexican, I’ve heard). But we’re far too smart to fall for such pointy-headed intellectual elitism! The fact of the matter is that he makes me mad for because he’s so mean to Mr. Trump, and people that make me mad aren’t American(tm) because I’m a fascist chickens*t who only pretends to believe in the First Amendment.

    Welcome to Trumpmerica,(tm) where dissent gets your citizen-card pulled by executive fiat.

    Leviticus channeling Tropelight (efada1)

  79. Having the World Tribune exonerate your candidate’s behavior in the fraudulent college lawsuit is about as meaningful as having Media Matters for America exonerate Hillary Clinton in her email scandal.

    JVW (eabb2a)

  80. And why, back in 2010, would he have had anything against Trump, who at the time was an open-borders Democrat and friend of Hillary?

    It’s almost like AG Schneiderman knows more about Trump’s true political positions than you do.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  81. And why, back in 2010, would he have had anything against Trump, who at the time was an open-borders Democrat and friend of Hillary?

    It’s almost like AG Schneiderman knows more about Trump’s true political positions than you do.

    1. Schneiderman had nothing to do with this suit. He’s running a separate one, in NY.
    2. He had no more idea than anyone else that Trump was going to take the positions he had. Even Trump didn’t know that yet. The lawsuit he’s pursuing has no connection to Trump’s politics.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  82. There’s an opinion.

    As long as you’re handing them out, what do you think of this? (jpg)
    Is that a ship being thrown three quarters of the way up the side of a mushroom cloud?

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  83. Schneiderman suing Trump over the use of the word “University”, is like
    NASA suing Grace Slick over the use of the word “Starship”.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  84. That might be the dumbest false equivalence I’ve ever seen. Was there a law against Grace Slick calling her band Jefferson “Starship”?

    Leviticus (41ac17)

  85. OK, Patterico…. then don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out of the GOP.

    Be advised…. Texas disowns you and Trinity Valley School will disavow you as an alumnus.

    Congratulations… you’re now an official Hillarybot… no ethics, morals, or values.

    Pts (ce7fc3)

  86. What if Grace Slick had named the band “Jefferson University”?

    Starship – Sara

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  87. OK, Patterico…. then don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out of the GOP.

    Be advised…. Texas disowns you and Trinity Valley School will disavow you as an alumnus.

    Congratulations… you’re now an official Hillarybot… no ethics, morals, or values.

    Wow. TVS too?! How about that.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  88. But you still met Ann Coulter. They’ll never take that away.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  89. So the Nazi is the one who won the primary election fair and square

    Well, as long as you are making the comparison, Hitler won his election, too.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  90. haha you are official hillary bot

    sucks to be you

    happyfeet (831175)

  91. Beldar,

    We may be in greater agreement than might be evident at first. I almost expounded in the post on what it means to me to be #ExGOP, but it seemed so long already that I demurred. Had I written more, I would have explained that my position doesn’t mean that I won’t vote for other Republicans. Of course I will, and I did yesterday. I now apply an extra measure of scrutiny — primarily making sure that the politician in question has not endorsed Trump — but Republicans are still, with few exceptions, going to be better alternatives for the limited-government constitutionalist than anyone else.

    But we probably disagree, to the extent that we attach importance to two related factors, both of which I find crucial:

    1) The nominee becomes the standard-bearer and the face of the party. I can’t be a member of a party whose face is Donald Trump. As Nordlinger said: “A party that thinks Donald Trump ought to be president is not a party I should belong to.” And this brings me to the second and related point:

    2) The perceived need to support and/or endorse Trump is corrupting people, from Paul Ryan to Mitch McConnell to the hapless Dan Coats mentioned in the post. If you think a presidential nominee is repeatedly saying racist things, you don’t generally support them. If you cannot think of a way that a presidential nominee is better on policy than a hateful Democrat, you generally don’t support them. Yet, because they perceive that they have no other choice, these people are torching their credibility on the Trump pyre.

    So while I agree with the need to nominate and elect principled Republicans, I cannot associate myself with a party that would nominate Donald Trump. If you wish to continue to do so, I won’t criticize you for it; your reasons are sound and sensible, and your disgust for Trump is well-known. But as for me, I have disaffiliated, and I’m perfectly comfortable with the decision and unlikely to be talked out of it.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  92. The jungle primary almost demands smoke-filled rooms before the primary for a minority party.

    Yes, but there is no way to enforce party discipline. The filing fee is about a dollar. During the Gray Davis recall there were HUNDREDS of candidates — my musician (former) brother-in-law ran because his label thought it would be good publicity for T.S.O.L.

    There were about 18 GOP candidates. OF them, the guy who came in third had about 2% and “Others” had 27% last I looked.

    I got a mailer the day before the election absolutely TRASHING one of the candidates (a previous party chair) but it was hard to tell who it was from. Might have been the Democrat Sanchez.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  93. Any dipshit can call Patterico a Hillarybot for rejecting the lying Leftist Donald Trump. All that proves is the dipshit who called Patterico a Hillarybot is a dipshit who deserves all the Atomic Wedgies he got in High School.

    John Hitchcock (9f8ff9)

  94. Why would anyone be a member of the republican party? Dole, Juan, Mittens and Ryan. lol

    mg (31009b)

  95. Any dipsh1t can call Patterico a Hillarybot for rejecting the lying Leftist Donald Trump. All that proves is the dipsh1t who called Patterico a Hillarybot is a dipsh1t who deserves all the Atomic Wedgies he got in High School.

    John Hitchcock (9f8ff9)

  96. Pat and I live in California. If Trump wins CA, with or without our votes, he’s win the election in a landslide. So I feel free to vote for the Libertarian. You may say that this gives Hillary half a vote, but the real bummer in that analysis is that it gives Trump half a vote. Luckily, the truth is that it gives Johnson 1 more vote. I’d love to see the LP candidate share the stage with those two raging statists in debate.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  97. lol

    kneepads the pikachu™ calling anyone names what is hilarious

    pikachu at the goppy goppy convention

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnH5YRkqbns

    even figgy figgy newton smells the flop sweat and axe body spray

    trumpyfeet (4a63ad)

  98. I’ll go to the polls in November and write in Rand Paul. He’s not oerfect, but he’s a damned sight better than the corrupt Republican power structure and the mountebank on the ballot.

    radar (53d9d6)

  99. Speaking of principled leadership…NOT…Hugh Hewitt is now stirring caca by demanding the GOP change the rules to avoid nominating DJT. Where was this tool when it mattered? He had a unique opportunity to do something about him getting all those delegates and he insisted that he had to be “Switzerland” about the process. Why, if he were other, he may have lost his CNN and debate moderator gigs!

    I do love that DJT has forced a clarity in our polity we would not otherwise experience. His most recent inadvertent swerve into decrying identity law and politics is fabulously useful.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  100. Pat and I live in California. If Trump wins CA, with or without our votes, he’s win the election in a landslide. So I feel free to vote for the Libertarian. You may say that this gives Hillary half a vote, but the real bummer in that analysis is that it gives Trump half a vote. Luckily, the truth is that it gives Johnson 1 more vote. I’d love to see the LP candidate share the stage with those two raging statists in debate.

    I find Johnson so utterly deficient in anything approaching sound principles that I won’t vote for him. I will write in Ted Cruz.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  101. Hewitt’s a tool and Nordlinger – who I faithfully read until November 10, 2012 – is an effete, mincing tool.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  102. Ted Cruz is probably gonna end up winning cause of he’s the right man for the moment

    happyfeet (831175)

  103. Kevin M will vote for Mr. Spliff… a guy who vowed just the other night on national television he wouldn’t partake of any more stupefying blasts of intoxication should he be elected president.. and he looked high during the interview.

    Wow.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  104. We have fallen to new depths as a state and as a people and – speaking for my wife as well – our departure for a better environment is looking more and more likely. Kamala Harris as a US senator!?!?! They must be fu*king joking.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  105. So you did the post office a favor– that much less junk mail to deliver to you.

    AVENGE BOBBY RIGGS! VOTE TRUMP!

    DCSCA (a343d5)

  106. Hewitt’s a tool and Nordlinger – who I faithfully read until November 10, 2012 – is an effete, mincing tool.

    It sounds like there’s a story there.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  107. Today, June 8, 2016, Hugh Hewitt called for the GOP convention to change the rules to allow for an alternative candidate to be selected:
    Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt argued Wednesday morning that the Republican Party should make an unprecedented effort to change the Republican National Convention rules to allow them to dump Donald Trump as their nominee.
    “It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer. You can’t do it, you gotta go attack it,” Hewitt said. “And right now the Republican Party is facing — the plane is headed towards the mountain after the last 72 hours.”

    Hewitt said he disagreed with Republican senators like Lindsey Graham and Mark Kirk who said they could not vote for their party’s nominee. “I wanna support the nominee of the party, but I think the party ought to change the nominee. Because we’re going to get killed with this nominee.”

    DRJ (15874d) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:00 am

    Hewitt has not expressed any anti-Trump sentiments before today. He’s now officially hitting the panic button. People are starting to worry he’s taking the House with him.

    Gerald A (7c7ffb)

  108. I still think this is a false flag operation.

    Almost anyone could outdebate HRC, and nail her to the wall with sleaze charges.

    But DJT? Not so much.

    Simon Jester (4a63ad)

  109. Let’s help Hillary make history by sending back to the kitchen to finally bake those cookies!

    Why was she dressed like some huge feminine napkin strutting across the stage showing a film of 1970s feminists? All that was missing was a Pinto, a Pet Rock and an 8-track of ‘Disco Inferno!’

    Who wants to vote for a witch who reminds every man of their first wife from 1975 who’d badger them to take out the trash in the middle of the 4th quarter of Monday Night Football as Cosell goes on a rant about the Dallas cheerleaders shaking their pom-poms for Dandy Don?

    Who wants to hear aging feminists who now rinse out their support hose instead of burning their bras? Have you SEEN Gloria Steinem and Dianne Von Furstenberg lately? 1975 looks more like 75 years ago.

    AVENGE BOBBY RIGGS! VOTE TRUMP!

    DCSCA (a343d5)

  110. And so it begins, yet again.

    Simon Jester (4a63ad)

  111. “It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer. You can’t do it, you gotta go attack it,” Hewitt said. “And right now the Republican Party is facing — the plane is headed towards the mountain after the last 72 hours.”

    I’ve been known to mix a metaphor or two but that’s a real 24 carat train wreck.

    Rick Ballard (45aac8)

  112. Simon Jester, you can’t count DCSCA in your “so it begins” deal. He’s been an insane Leftist for at least the past 8 years.

    John Hitchcock (9f8ff9)

  113. We have fallen to new depths as a state and as a people and – speaking for my wife as well – our departure for a better environment is looking more and more likely. Kamala Harris as a US senator!?!?! They must be fu*king joking.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/8/2016 @ 6:04 pm

    We’ve sunk to the point that Loretta Sanchez is The Serious One in the Senate race.

    L.N. Smithee (b84cf6)

  114. @112. =yawn= The goal was to neuter conservatism. And we’ve succeeded.

    As Trump has said consistently, it is called the Republican party, not the conservative party.

    DCSCA (a343d5)

  115. Tragically, I thought by continuing my loyalty and support for the Republican Party I would somehow be party to a salvage team that would hold their noses and vote in order to allow the down ballot a chance and at least a receptive Republican Congress for Supreme Court candidates. Alas, there is far too mush division and derision between and among Republicans to salvage sh!t. So I too am quitting the Party. I’ve witnessed so many personal insults and verbal assaults launched from one “Republican” toward another this election cycle to last ten lifetimes. I have never seen such a thing. It’s been really, really ugly and I see no sign of it letting up and I no longer want to be a part of it.

    The Democratic Party began its slow move left decades ago and now is speeding toward the radical end we’ve seen so many times in modern history. They have supplanted individualism with statism and American Exceptionalism for the European Mundane. But no matter how bad they or their candidates are they never fail to support them and as soon as Sanders quits the race the entirety of the Democrat Party will embrace Hillary as the first President with a *****. Because lady parts are so much more important than ability and having “the first woman in the White House” is so much more urgent than securing our borders or winning our wars.

    Since I hope to be receiving a lung transplant in the future I will be forced to stay here and not retire as I had planned to our home in Hamilton, Bermuda. I don’t think it would be a good idea to be that far in distance and time from my doctors and since supporting June is more important than anything I’m going to have to stay here and watch Hillary finish what Obama began. I’d sell the damn place but I don’t want to give up the hefty rent it generates. So I’m stuck here some of you guys may not be. I will vote in November and it will be my final straight Republican Ticket vote. After that I’m officially through with my little slice of the American experiment. My family came here in 1752 and has fought in all our wars, worked, built businesses, plied their trades and earned their degrees, married their wives and made new little Americans. I don’t think they left Europe only to have America become Europe, or worse.

    Be under no illusion that the democrats/socialists/communists feel under any obligation to honor our ideas or policies or beliefs. Or even our Constitution. This Republic is kaput.

    Rev. Hoagie© (734193)

  116. Trump is old news. No Phil Donahue or Alan Alda he. Americans embraced a racist bigot and let him into their homes every Saturday night for a decade with some of the most consistently high ratings ever: Archie Bunker. Four years of Trump will be a virtual a rerun.

    DCSCA (a343d5)

  117. #99 Ed From SFV,

    I think in fairness to Hugh Hewitt, he did ask Trump tough pointed questions throughout the primary season, both on his radio program AND in the televised debates. I remember how people totally flipped out when Hugh asked him about the Al Quds forces on the radio and Trump responded by talking about the Kurds — exposing that Trump didn’t really know what Al Quds forces are. People accused Hugh of asking Trump a “trick” question. (LOL)
    The problem isn’t that Hugh didn’t expose Trump enough during the primaries, the problem is that there were too many primary voters who didn’t care that Trump doesn’t know very much “about history or biology.”

    Hugh’s radio program is much different than that of most conservative talk show hosts in that he actually interviews politicians, newsmakers, authors, and commentators pretty much every hour of every show.
    People go on his show because they trust Hugh will treat them fairly, and that’s an important factor in “the talking heads industry.”
    There are a lot of people who won’t go on O’Reilly’s TV show because he’s too confrontational, and there’s a lot of people who won’t go on Hannity’s show(s) because he’s referred to them on the radio in unflattering terms.
    Hardly anyone will go on Mark Levin’s show because Levin’s called everyone an “idiot” at one time or another during his cranky rants.
    If Hewitt were to go the route of Mark Levin and use his microphone to refer to the Senate Majority Leader or Speaker of the House as an “idiot” or “a RINO,” then they won’t accept future invitations to go on Hugh’s show…and Hugh would probably stop receiving those coveted invitations to appear on the Sunday TV talk shows.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  118. L.N. Smithee,

    Yeah, it’s disheartening that we actually reside in a world where Loretta Sanchez is the conservative (from a major party) on the ballot. Lord help us.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  119. I didn’t think it was possible, but I feel that on the blogs I read, the rancor among commenters, both for and against Shorty, has ratcheted up even further.

    I’m feeling it too, most of the time. At other times I think about how nice it was to be able to support a man of Ted Cruz’ stature. And that I wasn’t alone in supporting him.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  120. the conservatives neutered themselves with their macabre obsessions with fetal tid bits and their bathroom tranny obsessions and their weirdo affections for bigoted hick cake bakers

    they’re just too weird

    harvardtrash ted though he could tap into and exploit their neuroses

    he failed

    he has to own that

    happyfeet (831175)

  121. Trump is old news. No Phil Donahue or Alan Alda he. Americans embraced a racist bigot and let him into their homes every Saturday night for a decade with some of the most consistently high ratings ever: Archie Bunker. Four years of Trump will be a virtual a rerun.

    DCSCA (a343d5) — 6/8/2016 @ 7:02 pm

    Archie Bunker is a caricature of what Norman Lear thought a conservative was. Predictably the left ate it up. Trump is the real deal. The left doesn’t seem to like it so much any more.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  122. harvardtrash ted *thought* he could tap into and exploit their neuroses i mean

    happyfeet (831175)

  123. #91 Patterico, u wrote
    I cannot associate myself with a party that would nominate Donald Trump.
    ….. I keep asking the same question and no one has really addressed it.

    Cruz was hoping to ride the same wave of anti-establishment fervor to the nomination. Trump , however, executed Cruz’s strategy better.

    How could you NOW be so uncomfortable with the (R) Party and its Voters when 7 months ago you were hoping for SAME to put your guy over the top? Neither its Voters nor the Party has changed since December 2015.

    The flaws are the same as before. If you think them stupid now, they were stupid before. Mendacious now, mendacious before …. etc. Other than sour grapes (which I get), what is new in your mental paradigm to cause such consternation????

    I for one don’t view any of the players any differently. Neither the Party nor the Voters nor the Candidates. Most of the Party Elite are closet leftists with no testicular fortitude. All have sold out. The base has been what it is for the past 6 years — pissed off at the march of leftism. Racist or not, they are what are and what they have been since 2008.

    So I ask … what is new with the Party or its Voters to cause this?

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  124. lol

    pikachu is picking out a summery frock to make braggy motormouth lie lie what cannot read or think from too much blow and eurotrash hookers feel better

    world o’ weird is much more about trumpsteaks and trumpwine and trumpwater what with substandard concrete and bad toupees and piggy piggy pencil stabbing mafia pals

    kneepad up pikachu

    you just have to love him right and do his homework better

    it gets lonely for you

    trumpyfeet (098dc5)

  125. No sane person thinks that Cruz lost to Trump because of opposing letting men into women’s bathrooms.

    Gerald A (7c7ffb)

  126. #120 …. murdering viable babies for $$$$ and dudes showering with my daughter is precisely why folks want Trump. They believe he will put an end to it. I think your analysis is wrong.

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  127. If I believed that, I’d vote for him, RKS. But I have seen no there, there. He says anything and it means nothing.

    Not to mention that making him Commander in Chief of the armed forces is taking “gays in the military” too far, in my opinion.

    nk (dbc370)

  128. In Ohio you have to wait for the next party primary to switch registration. I can drop my Ohio Republican Party affiliation in 2018 at the earliest right now.

    Smelly Kat (ae28c8)

  129. How many primaries and other opportunities are you going to miss out on

    Well, there’s the one in 2020. Unless you count the mail pretending to be asking for my opinion on party matters, but are really just asking for money. If I’m lucky, maybe the phone calls pretending to ask my opinion on an important matter (but are really just asking for money) will stop, but I doubt it… I think those are because I donated to McCain/ Palin.

    malclave (4ddf38)

  130. I love the guy. I enjoy seeing him run rings around self annointed speech code enforcers and miss manners etiquette drones.

    That’s my bias. You can see it, take it out of the box, roll it around in your hand.

    But if the object of the exercise is to win the election, not to simply count coup against leftist apparatchiks (as they consolidate their power), then who the F cares what you enjoy?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  131. His bias was in accepting the case.

    You think they get to pick and choose?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  132. Changing party affiliation to “not specified” at the San Diego Registrar of Voters was almost too easy to do online. Maybe I’ll switch back when the GOP decides to pull it’s head out of Trump’s a*s.

    In Ohio you have to wait for the next party primary to switch registration. I can drop my Ohio Republican Party affiliation in 2018 at the earliest right now.

    Smelly Kat (ae28c8) — 6/8/2016 @ 7:51 pm

    Hopefully for you some sanity will have returned by then. I don’t hold the same hope here.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  133. @ papertiger (#77): No, you and I will never drink together, over anything. I despise Trump, and I despise Trumpkins, and I especially despise Trumpkin shills who lie for him and minimize his misconduct. You’re near the top of that list, and I wouldn’t poor a beer on your head if you were on fire.

    @ Patterico (#91): Thanks for the acknowledgement. I’m not trying to persuade you of anything, much less that you should practice party loyalty which you don’t genuinely feel.

    I’m just pointing out that it’s entirely possible and self-consistent to deny any support or encouragement — including a vote — for Donald Trump, while not renouncing the Republican Party. Your post casts that as an “either/or” proposition. That the nominee is the titular one-cycle leader of the party is a polite fiction of the past, and I’m not willing to be polite about it any longer. It will be the organizing fiction of the GOP 2016 national convention, but it is a fiction regardless: The facts on the ground — beginning with thousands of Republican incumbent office-holders at both the state and federal level scattered across the country, who are in no way bound to Donald Trump personally — are inconsistent with that faction. I repeat, I was a Republican before Trump decided to would claim to be one, and I’ll still be one after he’s given up any pretense of that.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  134. I find Johnson so utterly deficient in anything approaching sound principles that I won’t vote for him. I will write in Ted Cruz.

    I have found every candidate who ever ran deficient in many ways. Seeking power is almost a disqualification for having it. And some who I thought were pretty good turned out to be utter crooks. One thing I learned in my years in the LP was that “principle” is what crap artists use to beat each other up with. I also learned that anyone who says that there is no need for the State is a deluded fool, or thinks you are. In an election that contains the main choice of Trump or Hillary, Bozo the Clown would have principle enough.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  135. … I think those are because I donated to McCain/ Palin.

    Do what I’ve done. Go buy some play money. When you get those mailers asking “for your opinion”, stuff some of that money in their pre-paid envelope with a note briskly telling them that when there is a real conservative candidate for President, you will donate some real money. Snotty, you bet. But it gets the message across. I don’t get beg-a-thon pleas anymore.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  136. Beldar,

    I’d be interested to hear your response to the part of my argument regarding one GOP leader after another supporting Trump. To me that suggests that the rot and corruption of Trumpism is spreading in the party. Do you have a different view?

    Patterico (89c78f)

  137. Kevin M will vote for Mr. Spliff

    As I said, Bozo the Clown beats the two main candidates.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  138. I may write in Bozo.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  139. Watching the commercials during the NBA finals… I mentioned to my wife that I hope we have hit what will amount to rock bottom in the cultural decline, as I don’t think we can go any lower. Then I saw the twerking frog and what must’ve been a pole-dancing cat.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  140. Maybe I’ll switch back when the GOP decides to pull it’s head out of Trump’s a*s.

    If it was JUST the Trump nomination, I would probably not be tempted to switch to NPP.

    Unless California gets rid of the current primary rules, is there any point to being registered as a Republican? It lets you vote in the Presidential primary. When was the last time the California primary mattered in determining the GOP nominee?

    Does registering with the GOP in CA do anything else, assuming you don’t have political aspirations yourself?

    malclave (4ddf38)

  141. Patterico,

    I know you asked this of Beldar, and I’d like to hear his answer, too, but for professional politicians in a party system there is only so far you can take your opposition. At some point, after the decision has been made you have to fall in line and STFU. There are a lot of party officeholders — congressmen and state legislators, who have simply gone silent.

    Ryan and others like him cannot do that, they have to kiss the ring or step down. Now, perhaps Ryan should have said “You know, I can’t abide this. I never really wanted to be speaker anyway. I’m gonna resign the instant this toad is nominated and eff you all.” Maybe that might have turned the trick. Maybe he will have an opportunity next week when Trump calls the First Lady a “n****r skank” or something, pleasing Papertiger. I dunno. BUt if these guys want to continue in the party leadership, they cannot oppose the party leader. Who until something changes is Donald Trump.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  142. You know, many people project their own feelings onto BHO. That was his appeal, frankly—how the voters felt about themselves, casting that ballot.

    See, I’m not a racist…

    See, I believe in positivity and change….

    And on and on.

    Some Trump supporters (not the ones holding their noses) are doing the same thing.

    See, I’m not PC…

    See, I’m super tough and macho…

    And on and on.

    What bothers me is how well meaning people will simply insist that Trump will do things that they want…when there isn’t any evidence to support that assertion.

    Like, on transgendered bathroom follies:

    http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/21/donald-trump-says-transgender-people-should-use-the-bathroom-they-want/

    Like, on abortion:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsOlXidHXRE

    To pick just two hot button issues.

    Wait, wait, wait, I get told. He has evolved his opinions. How often? When?

    The good news is that, like HRC, all you have to do is wait, and the Huckster Wannabe In Chief will pander yet again.

    I’m not sure he knows what he thinks.

    I get it: everyone is angry with the system. Bernie supporters feel it, too.

    But a giant raised middle finger will, um, not have the effect you wish.

    Simon Jester (4a63ad)

  143. When was the last time the California primary mattered in determining the GOP nominee?

    It came close in 1976.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  144. @ Patterico (#136): I don’t dispute that Trump is corrosive. I don’t think it’s possible, or useful, to generalize by using terms like “support” without more context.

    If Trump were president, and I were a U.S. Senator, and he were to nominate Bill Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit (one of the names he’s mentioned, not that Trump can remember it from one day to the next), then I might well vote for that nomination. Would that mean I support Trump? Or that I support Judge Pryor? Heck, if I indulge myself enough to imagine that I’m a Senator, I can likewise imagine, without any further stretching at all, that I might simultaneously be willing to vote for nominees or legislation proposed by Trump on the very same day I joyously vote to convict his sorry ass of high crimes and misdemeanors necessary to remove him from office after impeachment by the House.

    I don’t see signs yet that Paul Ryan, to pick someone whom I respect and like, has been “corrupted” by Donald Trump. To the contrary, I see signs that he and other principled Republicans are drawing lines day-by-day, issue-by-issue, regarding the extent of their “support” for Trump.

    Now, by contrast, would I ever again trust Jeff Sessions’ judgment — which I previously respected, before he sold out to Trump — on anything? Nope, he’s dead to me; about the best I can say for him is I’d put him ahead of papertiger on my “who would I bother to pee on” triage chart. So is Trump corrupting some individuals, including some important individuals, within the GOP? Yes, I agree with that — or rather, that they’re selling themselves out. But that’s a reason for me to support different Republicans — like Jeff Sessions’ next primary opponent, if the old goat were somehow to run for reelection again. And I’ll donate $100 on general principle to anyone running against Chris Christie in any election anywhere for the rest of my life.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. I may write in Bozo.

    Kevin M (25bbee) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:17 pm

    I’m in for Zombie Adolf Hitler.

    Then I saw the twerking frog and what must’ve been a pole-dancing cat.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:19 pm

    Was it this frog?

    Bill H (971e5f)

  146. Of course, then there are people like Marco Rubio and Chris Christie who have simply shown they are simpering toadies unfit for the offices they have, let alone the big chair.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  147. If it was JUST the Trump nomination, I would probably not be tempted to switch to NPP.

    Unless California gets rid of the current primary rules, is there any point to being registered as a Republican? It lets you vote in the Presidential primary. When was the last time the California primary mattered in determining the GOP nominee?

    Does registering with the GOP in CA do anything else, assuming you don’t have political aspirations yourself?

    malclave (4ddf38) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:23 pm

    Actually, there is no reason to even attempt to vote GOP here. I did it for a lot of years, and up until Ahhhhnold it at least seemed to be a usable choice. After that, it became more of a chore than a choice. With Trump, screw it, I give up. The party left me several years ago, and I have no viable choice for the national offices. For the local stuff, city and county, since I live in what is a relatively conservative area (but turning bluer all the time), the genuinely conservative candidate still has a shot.

    We live in a state where Loretta Sanchez is considered conservative. Chew on that for a while. You can also consider that this is Sir Hillary’s state to lose during the general.

    Answering your question about California’s importance during primary season? It almost NEVER matters.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  148. It came close in 1976.

    Hmmm… and I was actually living in California at that time… I think I moved to Texas in June or July of that year.

    Of course, I was only 10 years old, so as someone who could not legally vote I would probably have felt obligated to cast a ballot in the Democrat primary.

    malclave (4ddf38)

  149. Was it this frog?

    Bill H (971e5f) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:34 pm

    And, naturally enough I screw up the joke.

    This link, I think.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  150. Actually, there is no reason to even attempt to vote GOP here.

    I don’t mind tilting at windmills. I will still vote Republican when I can. Maybe not Trump, but that’s my choice to make.

    I think it just hit me over the head today, when the morning news was talking about the historic Senate race between two Democrat women and no Republican option to vote for, that registering Republican is meaningless in California. Trump had already gotten the delegates to be nominated, so my vote for Cruz was just a protest vote.

    Whether I’m registered R or not makes no difference to my vote for a Senate or House primary.

    malclave (4ddf38)

  151. #148 malclave wrote,

    Of course, I was only 10 years old, so as someone who could not legally vote I would probably have felt obligated to cast a ballot in the Democrat primary.

    Very dry humor — love it.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  152. 133 … I despise Trump, and I despise Trumpkins, …

    Maybe you shouldn’t be a Republican if you despise 40%+ of Republicans.

    How do you feel about Obama voters?

    James B. Shearer (cbd2b4)

  153. I don’t mind tilting at windmills. I will still vote Republican when I can. Maybe not Trump, but that’s my choice to make.

    Absofreakinglutely on all that.

    I think it just hit me over the head today, when the morning news was talking about the historic Senate race between two Democrat women and no Republican option to vote for, that registering Republican is meaningless in California. Trump had already gotten the delegates to be nominated, so my vote for Cruz was just a protest vote.

    Yah, as I mentioned, it’s pretty amazing that Sanchez is considered the conservative. Good lord, I remember when she was a literal nobody from, where, Santa Ana? Fountain Valley? I take it you’re from Orange County.

    I’m in the exact same boat here- Cruz was my one shot at actually voting FOR someone rather than AGAINST the “other”. The November vote is going to wind up being a waste of time. I’ll go to the polls, but basically just for any local elections.

    Whether I’m registered R or not makes no difference to my vote for a Senate or House primary.

    malclave (4ddf38) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:00 pm

    That’s what I’ve been saying all along with the Presidential race. It won’t matter how the R’s vote- this state is a lock for Sir Hillary. You know it, I know it, and all the Trumpkins on board here know it.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  154. Maybe you shouldn’t be a Republican if you despise 40%+ of Republicans.

    How do you feel about Obama voters?

    James B. Shearer (cbd2b4) — 6/8/2016 @ 9:21 pm

    When were you awarded the title ‘gatekeeper’, James? Did someone in the RNC issue you a funny hat and instructions to keep all anti-Trumpers out? If so, I gotta say, James- you’re not doing a very good job of it. And yes, I know math is hard, but the last time I checked, if you take 40% from 100%, you’re left with 60%. That’s a rather larger percentage than 40%. And we ain’t happy, James.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  155. Beldar,

    You’ve got Sessions and Ryan backward. Jeff Sessions’ Alabama voted overwhelmingly for Trump. As a matter of self-preservation, backing Trump was undoubtedly a no-brainer. I didn’t like it that Sessions supported Trump early on, but it is not difficult to understand his calculus. On every other issue, right down the line, Sessions is much better than Ryan.

    Ryan’s Wisconsin, on the other hand, went overwhelmingly for Cruz. So what in the world is Ryan now doing throwing his support to Trump? I don’t get it at all. He has no excuse. You should read Jonah Goldberg’s comments of today about Ryan. Goldberg sums things up nicely.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  156. The problem isn’t Sessions; the problem is Southern evangelicals.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  157. Thor,

    You almost make it sound like Ryan has “thrown his support” from Cruz to Trump.
    Trump’s the last man standing between Hillary and the Oval Office, so yeah, Ryan’s going to vote for him. Just like most of Bernie Sanders’ supporters will end up voting for Hillary.
    Ryan’s the Speaker of the House, so he has to have a working relationship with a President Trump. He’ll have to have a working relationship with a President Hillary — that’s just part of the job description.
    The average Joe living in Peoria can be all indignant and stompy feet about our crooked lackluster nominee, whereas the Speaker of the House cannot.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  158. I suppose you are right, Cruz Supporter. Why should I fault Ryan for wanting to work with Trump, when he has already demonstrated a willingness to work with Obama. It’s just what a Speaker does.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  159. Though, come to think of it, I don’t seem to recall Pelosi following in those footprints.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  160. It’s illuminating to see who puts politics ahead of honesty. Of course that means most politicians. It also means a lot of the rest of us, obsessed with what they think is the real problem (democrats), but blind that they are actually the real problem. Just one more example of how we’ve lost our way.

    The bright side is that Trump has blown it. He’s played the game poorly. He will not be the nominee because of his many mistakes. I suspect this was Cruz’s plan B. Cruz already won the delegate war, but was unable to get to that second ballot he would need for this to matter. So he shut up and let Trump ‘be the nominee’ for a while, predicting Trump to be a racist liar trainwreck. Now the GOP has little choice but to rewrite the rules. The party’s future hinges on it.

    These are the same guys that wanted amnesty. They aren’t going to roll with a guy who is openly racist against mexicans.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  161. Dustin, Beldar and Simon –
    My English is in moderation.

    mg (31009b)

  162. @ papertiger (#77): No, you and I will never drink together, over anything. I despise Trump, and I despise Trumpkins, and I especially despise Trumpkin shills who lie for him and minimize his misconduct. You’re near the top of that list, and I wouldn’t poor a beer on your head if you were on fire…

    Beldar (fa637a) — 6/8/2016 @ 8:11 pm

    Wise choice; don’t waste a good beer.

    A better tactical decision is to drink the beer. That way you’ll be ready to pee on him and put the fire out.

    Just as soon as he stops violently thrashing around and is laying quietly on the ground. If you wouldn’t waste a beer on it, it’s not worth risking harm to the wedding tackle over it.

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  163. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/breaking-trump-support-latinos-now-37-4-points-behind-hillary-clinton/
    Who needs romney, ryan loving racists, not Trump. You clinton republicans are a small bunch, no need for you. Skid marks come to mind when thinking of you Clinton republicans.

    mg (31009b)

  164. This from Gateway Pundit, which is about two rungs down from weekly world news.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  165. What has DJT ever done for society or to cause you to believe he will do anything he claims he will do in his positions that change weekly and sometimes even daily? He’s a greedy, grasping, dirty little man who leaves a path of destruction in his wake. The only promises he keeps are his promises to sue and destroy people. He’s done it many, many times. Personally, I think he is non compos mentis.

    ocean (38f70a)

  166. Oops, the above was to happyfeet at post #17. The post time gave a link so I thought that would connect or quote my response. Guess I’ll have to work on figuring that out. :)

    ocean (38f70a)

  167. #120 …. murdering viable babies for $$$$ and dudes showering with my daughter is precisely why folks want Trump. They believe he will put an end to it. I think your analysis is wrong.

    Rodney King’s Spirit (e2dd8e) — 6/8/2016 @ 7:44 pm

    ?!?!?!

    The Trump can’t make abortion illegal and he’s not going to stop PP from selling the parts. The closest thing he’s come to a conservative position on the subject is saying he’ll defund it.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/18/trump-ill-sign-a-bill-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

    Defunding PP isn’t at all the same as putting a stop to their activities. They don’t actually need the money to operate which is precisely why the democrats insist on giveing them hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. Which might seem odd if you don’t know how the criminal enterprise that is the Democratic party operates. The point of funding planned parenthood is launder taxpayer money into Democratic party campaign contributions. It’s a nice scheme; defund your opposition through taxation, convert that tax money to personal gain.sinign coffers. And what’s the point of that if you’re a forward thinking Dem pol?

    And here’s the deal; most people don’t think he’ll even think he’ll defund PP since he won’t shut up about what great work they do.

    …As LifeNews’ Steven Ertelt notes, this isn’t really much of a change. Trump has repeatedly argued that he would defund Planned Parenthood, but the issue hasn’t gone away because he also repeatedly praises the organization for its other work. Ertelt links eight other public statements by Trump on the point…

    That other work Trump keeps praising PP for doing? Yeah, they don’t actually do that work; they just refer women to clinics that can. Really the only thing PP does in-house is abortion.

    So if your issue is murdering viable babies for $$$$, assuming you are opposed to it, it’s a really stupid reason to vote for Trump. What about dudes showering with your daughters?

    http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/04/trump_transgender_people_should_use_whatever_bathr.html

    Donald Trump said Thursday that transgender people should use “whatever bathroom they feel is appropriate,” taking the opposite view many of his fellow Republicans hold in a national debate on the issue.

    …Host Matt Lauer then asked Trump if he’d allow Jenner, maybe the world’s most famous trangender celebrity, to use “any bathroom she chooses” at Trump Tower in New York City.

    “That is correct,” Trump said.

    He also said he’s against the idea of buildings providing a third bathroom for transgender people.

    “I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way,” Trump said. “That would be unbelievably expensive for businesses in the country. Leave it the way it is.”

    OK, this is a stupid reason to vote for Trump, too.

    Trump never impresses me with his smarts; the “way it is” is that biological males can not legally use the women’s rest room, locker room, etc. in almost all states. Trump think the transgendered (but intact male/female) have been doing that all along with no problems. At least he hasn’t heard of any.

    And he hasn’t heard of any problems because the situation is exactly the opposite of how he imagines it. At least outside of NYC, SF, and I guess LA.

    But you know who else doesn’t impress me with their smarts? The Trumpkins sure haven’t because they think this Der Donald guy who is on the opposite end, the “NYC values” Bill de Blasio Chuck Schumer Anthony Wiener & Barney Frank end, of the spectrum on social issues will somehow give socially conservative middle America what they want.

    That’s just…

    idiotic.

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  168. …convert that tax money to personal gain.sinign coffers. And what’s the point of that if you’re a forward thinking Dem pol?

    The middle part which my self-aware laptop Skynet destroyed using the oh-so-convenient auto-mangle function was supposed to read “If PP actually needed the money to operate they’d spend it keeping the place up and running and there’d be nothing left to contribute to Dem campaign coffers. And what’s the point of that if you’re a forward thinking Dem pol?”

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  169. This is for Thor @ #159 & #160. That’s always been a one-way street. There is never any reciprocity of cooperation from the ‘rats when they’re in power (or out of power, for that matter). None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

    ocean (38f70a)

  170. clinton republicans love them some goldturd.

    mg (31009b)

  171. mg, your gateway pundit article quotes

    Numerous articles and Op-Eds have discounted his so-called “rise” among Latinos by pointing out the flawed nature of polls. Back in February, after claiming a win with 46 percent of the Hispanic vote in Nevada, critics quickly challenged the full sample size of voters captured to disregard the number. Most recently, Latino Decisions published an article called “Why Polls On Latinos Get It Wrong,” confirming that current ways of polling are under-representing Latinos’ voice.

    But they take this information, that their poll is not accurate, and strangely run with the idea Hispanics like Trump. Maybe they do, but they have no shown why anyone should think so.

    While we’re talking about polls, Trump’s favorite, Hillary, is leading by 11. The GOP can fix this by nominating a ham sandwich or anyone other than Trump.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  172. The Gop can’t fix stupid, Dustin.

    mg (31009b)

  173. The point of funding planned parenthood is launder taxpayer money into Democratic party campaign contributions.

    Steve is absolutely right. This is how they work. Trump has enabled this scheme for decades. His choice to be a Republican has nothing to do with his principles, but is just a cynical trick. His absurd antics are his idea of how republicans are bombastic bigots. I’ll give him points for pulling the con off to this point.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  174. The Gop can’t fix stupid, Dustin.

    mg (31009b)

    Maybe in this case they can. It will be painful and costly to change the rules this late and get rid of Trump. But Clinton is an absurdly weak candidate, and we aren’t going to win with Trump anyway.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  175. One problem at this point in somehow denying Trump the nomination is that probably the worst of the GOP that led us to this point will go on as it has been.

    If there ever was a time for a third party candidate to win it would be when the two major candidates are the two most disliked in history.

    I am probably being boring and irritating,
    but right now the presidency could be won by someone asking,
    “Are we out of our freaking minds or what? People should not be forced to share locker rooms with people of the opposite genitalia if they don’t want to, and we are doubly out of our minds when we let a couple of unelected bureaucrats in DC to tell us all what we have to do.”

    On the other hand, if that can’t get a person elected (assuming the rest of the platform is likewise common sense),
    then the country is already terminally ill.

    And I hope the discussion of letting people burn to death is hyperbole, but still…

    And twerking frogs on NBA commercials? Somebody got paid money to do that, and somebody paid money for it.

    MD in Philly (d8a244)

  176. I will once again not only risk, but will be repetitive. Clinton may not be the Dem nominee.
    The only thing that matters at this moment from the human point of view is Obama’s political calculation as to what is best to prolong his influence and his efforts at continuing the fundamental transformation,
    and a decision about the timing.

    MD in Philly (d8a244)

  177. 161. … The bright side is that Trump has blown it. He’s played the game poorly. He will not be the nominee because of his many mistakes. I suspect this was Cruz’s plan B. Cruz already won the delegate war, but was unable to get to that second ballot he would need for this to matter. So he shut up and let Trump ‘be the nominee’ for a while, predicting Trump to be a racist liar trainwreck. Now the GOP has little choice but to rewrite the rules. The party’s future hinges on it.

    Hi Dustin,

    I’m about as thick as mahogany when it comes to the rules of Republican nominee math, so take the idiot question below with a pound of salt:

    Hasn’t Cruz’s ship sailed on this? How can he realistically get back into the running? Has he only suspended rather than ended his campaign effort, then?

    Cheers.

    JP (bd5dd9)

  178. 62. Steve57 (e33d44) — 6/8/2016 @ 1:23 pm “This is the sort of delusion I was talking about earlier.”

    Dream on.

    Fact is either Hillary will be President or Trump. Not voting is the same as voting for the winner and if you don’t vote for Hillary or Trump, you lose. File that under “The Birds and Bees”.

    cedarhill (c1e1dc)

  179. JP, I don’t think that’s an idiot question at all. Cruz has only suspended operations. He’s still a candidate. People are even voting for him. He has a lot of delegates and even a lot of Trump’s delegates on the first ballot would vote Cruz if freed to.

    Though I think if the GOP is smart enough to pull a stunt, they will go with someone more like Romney (perhaps Ryan) than someone I like.

    MD makes a good point that Hillary may not be the democrat nominee. Both parties have gotten themselves into a difficult situation, one could be indicted and the other is an obvious bigot/moron.

    probably the worst of the GOP that led us to this point will go on as it has been.

    No doubt. This election was an opportunity for the conservatives who have been frustrated for ages to see a GOP run by the likes of Cruz. The possibility is scarier to the establishment than anything else, and that’s why the primary turned out the way it did. That opportunity has been missed, and now I would at least like to see the country led by someone who isn’t Hillary or Trump.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  180. 155When were you awarded the title ‘gatekeeper’, James? Did someone in the RNC issue you a funny hat and instructions to keep all anti-Trumpers out? If so, I gotta say, James- you’re not doing a very good job of it. And yes, I know math is hard, but the last time I checked, if you take 40% from 100%, you’re left with 60%. That’s a rather larger percentage than 40%. And we ain’t happy, James.

    Beldar can do what he wants but it seems to me that remaining a Republican while despising 40%+ of the party is not sensible. Like being a Democrat while despising black people.

    James B. Shearer (cbd2b4)

  181. I know little about this, but apparently they could do things in changing the rules before the convention by doing things like requiring a super majority on the first ballot out of Trump’s reach.

    But the GOPe has destroyed themselves whatever they do, they tried to straddle Trump and anti-Trump in hoping someone, anyone other than Cruz would overtake him.
    They deserve to lose, but the Dems need to lose.

    I could be wrong, but I don’t think it will be Cruz at this point, I will be surprised anyway if it is. Romney would be a mistake and a double down on everything that is wrong with the GOPe.

    MD in Philly (d8a244)

  182. the sniffypants harvardtrash elites of the Republican party are rapidly neutering themselves

    *rapidly*

    faster please

    happyfeet (831175)

  183. “I will once again not only risk, but will be repetitive. Clinton may not be the Dem nominee.”

    The thought is nearly as good as the thrill, MD!

    Colonel Haiku (029078)

  184. We won’t get Cruz because the Democrats don’t like Cruz and might snub Rove and Priebus at the Club.

    nk (dbc370)

  185. Just say “NO!!!” to teh “LOOK-I-HAVE-A-VAGINA STRATEGY” of teh Demoness Dowager Criminal Clinton. Stick it to teh Man! If not Cruz, Trump! If not now, THEN!!!

    Colonel Haiku (029078)

  186. We’re dreaming, anyway. The RNC will follow the path of least resistance. They’re as likely to try to knock out Trump as water is to flow uphill.

    nk (dbc370)

  187. Mr. Trump is the best choice I think Mr. Colonel

    that bloated awkward old woman and her voluminous excretions aren’t the future

    happyfeet (831175)

  188. I agree with everything you’re saying, MD. About Cruz being a futile hope, about the GOP’s state, and about what a Romney type result represents (Though that would be way better than Trump in my book).

    Both parties richly deserve a devastating defeat. As an organization steeped in betrayal and dishonesty, the GOP deserves it more than the democrats. As an organization that has traded away our nation’s future for more and more power for the bureaucracy, the democrats deserve it more than the GOP. The real problem seems to go a little deeper. Many, perhaps most voters are dumb and vote because they are afraid of the oooga booga boogeyman they have been brainwashed into seeing in the other political party.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  189. JP – I think everyone that ran has suspended their campaigns, which I seem to recall allowed them to continue to fundraise to pay off campaign debt.

    JD (7fd277)

  190. 180. … Cruz has only suspended operations. He’s still a candidate. People are even voting for him. He has a lot of delegates and even a lot of Trump’s delegates on the first ballot would vote Cruz if freed to.

    Ah. Thank you (and thank you to JD too) for the clarification.

    JP (bd5dd9)

  191. Right now Hillary’s candidacy is in the hands of FBI Director James Comey, and the clock is ticking, time runs out at the Democrat Convention which begins July 25th. If Comey recommends indictment before the Convention, Democrats will have time to replace Hillary. After the Convention, they’re stuck with their anointed candidate or looking at the Torricelli Maneuver.

    The ball is in Comey’s court, he can wait till after the Convention to recommend indictment and really stick it to the Dems – forcing Obama and Loretta Lynch to decline prosecution and face a revolt in the FBI and throughout the legal system.

    Or, Comey can recommend indictment between now and the July 25th convention which would allow Dems time to prepare a replacement for Hillary. There are a few other options but these seem to suggest themselves.

    ropelight (596f46)

  192. Maybe both Trump and Clinton will be dumped. That would be chaotic — and a presidential campaign for all of history.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  193. Re: 193 – I see Robert Goulet as Don Qixote singing Dream the Impossible Dream

    We are well and truly F’d.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  194. Like being a Democrat while despising black people.

    Right. High crime inner cities, broken families dependent on government checks, refusal to allow school choice, a planned parenthood in every ghetto to achieve Sanger’s eugenics goals, the racism of low expectations, the proliferation of drugs. And if these aren’t enough now the democrats want to price urban youth out of the entry level job market and bring in another 10 million immigrants to replace black Americans at the lower paying jobs. Yeah, them democrats really love them some black people. Just like they did back when they owned them or when they segregated them or when they started that pro-black social club, the KKK.

    My oldest friend (since we were 16), best man at my first wedding and a retired dentist (yet still owns part of a group that does implants in Montco, PA) is a life-long Republican (so’s his wife) and he’s said more than once if you’re black and democrat you need a brain transplant.

    Rev. Hoagie© (734193)

  195. that bloated awkward old woman and her voluminous excretions aren’t the future

    Maybe Mr. happyfeet but sporting a $12,000 outfit at an income inequality speech is the quintessential democrat move: stylish while hypocritically chic. She even out did my wacky wife’s $5,000 Chanel handbag.

    Rev. Hoagie© (734193)

  196. No matter how much money Hillary spends trying to look stylish she still looks like a bowling pin wearing a tent to cover her short legs and fat ass.

    ropelight (596f46)

  197. And Trump looks like ten pounds of pasty spray-tanned sh*t stuffed in a five pound bag.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  198. Leviticus is the eager and proud pup who has the criminal Clinton’s fatback .

    Colonel Haiku (029078)

  199. pasty? Now you’ve gone too far.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  200. Mr. Trump is very handsome whereas the organic hemp diaper woman is unpleasing to the eye and also the nose

    happyfeet (831175)

  201. “are afraid of the oooga booga boogeyman they have been brainwashed into seeing in the other political party.”

    Heh… National security breaches, co-author of the Road to Ruin for the Middle East, North Africa and much of Europe, and a general malevolence, incompetence and criminal nature will do that to some of us ‘fraidycats

    Colonel Haiku (029078)

  202. You are right, feets – this is all absurd. Thank you for being the voice of absurdity.

    You are my North Star.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  203. Pucker * Power!

    Colonel Haiku (029078)

  204. While Clinton may be especially corrupt and incompetent,
    what the Dem party of Obama stands for is a disaster for the republic no matter who they put up as a candidate,
    unless they have a road to Damascus experience along the way.

    How independent is Comey? IDK.
    Hard to believe Obama and co. would put someone in charge of the FBI that they didn’t think they could control.
    Who decided that there was nothing to prosecute in the IRS? Comey?

    MD in Philly (d8a244)

  205. Hillary is popular among women.

    ropelight (596f46)

  206. i’m so curious to see how it ends up this is even better than gaymo thrones

    happyfeet (831175)

  207. See, I get that mindset. It is the lens through which I interpret you.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  208. If Schneiderman was accusing Trump of charging $35K for his real estate seminar/correspondence course, then the woman who just dropped out of the Curiel case was looking to skim an extra $25k.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  209. Beldar can do what he wants but it seems to me that remaining a Republican while despising 40%+ of the party is not sensible. Like being a Democrat while despising black people.

    James B. Shearer (cbd2b4) — 6/9/2016 @ 5:30 am

    I can’t speak for Beldar on that point, but for me, I deregistered as an R yesterday afternoon. Like I told some full-blown Trumper at Breitbart last night trying to make the same point, I hope that works for him, ’cause I am all out of sackcloth and ashes.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  210. Jim Geraghty at NRO bugs me, but this is correct: “Two Contenders So Bad They Can’t Be Hurt by Mistakes from Here On Out”.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  211. Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/9/2016 @ 7:00 am

    May I +1 that comment, Rev.?

    Bill H (971e5f)

  212. I believe Dustin is absolutely right about Cruz’ current strategy: give him enough rope.

    Although I disagreed with Beldar, above, about Ryan/Sessions, I am in 100 percent agreement with him about being a Republican. For years we’ve talked about how the GOP is a big tent and there have been a number of presidential candidates to prove it, many with questionable claims on the office – I won’t name the ones I have in mind, but each of us have scorecards from past primary campaigns with L for loser next to half of the names on the card. So now we have nominated one of those big-L losers. Should that be a surprise?

    What is surprising in this last election cycle is that there was a truly remarkable candidate and he was widely supported. I couldn’t have been prouder that I trace my roots to Wisconsin, Idaho, Utah and Texas, states where the Republican lion roared for Cruz. Giving up on the Republican Party means giving up on these clear-thinking party faithful. I won’t give up on them and I won’t give up on the party. And then there is Ted Cruz; he’s not giving up either. When I eventually quit California, I’ll be moving to one of these states.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  213. From the Berkeley La Raza law journal;
    Sonia Sotomayor, A Latina Judge’s Voice, 13 La Raza L.J. 87 (2002).

    It just struck me as funny that Soto’s “wise Latina” speech was originally presented for public consumption on the La Raza L.J.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  214. Merely taking stock; Hillary would be a disaster. THE END.

    Trump has his faults. But if he can get a few big things correct-immigration, a thoughtless foreign policy on autopilot, and end to the PC nonsense-that might be enough to keep the Republic from the abyss for a time.

    Further when Beltway types like Brooks and Nordlinger get on their hind legs about Trump; they had no problem supporting McCain and Romney. They never stopped for a moment to question Bush Jr. about Dubai ports, the fiasco that was the Saudi caravan days after 9/11, his insane “yearning to breathe free’ 2nd inaugural, his complete indifference to spending and debt; wars fought timidly and aimlessly with PD RoE that got great Americans killed. NOW, you are actually going to tell us all about conservative limited constitutional governance, fiscal responsibility and principles? Sure.

    This all has the distinct smell of mandarins worrying that somebody might really end the gray train instead of merely pretending at election time.I’m voting for Trump, and it’s not even a decision. Wish he would worry less about this silly judge (about which bases on “wise Latina” Justice Sotomayor he is in fact correct) and more about the economy. Because under Clinton the economy is going to go to complete hell.

    Bugg (db3a97)

  215. When I eventually quit California, I’ll be moving to one of these states.

    ThOR (c9324e) — 6/9/2016 @ 9:11 am

    I am very seriously considering a move to Texas when my dad passes away. When I register to vote, I will likely return to the party, seeing as Texas still has some sanity left. Here in SoCal, it simply doesn’t make sense anymore. Trump’s taking of the state just sealed it for me. I’m sorry if it seems like I’m abandoning those who did vote for something resembling reason, but you know and I know, Thor that here, it just does not matter.Iv’e said it before: his state has gone so blue, that you can’t tell coastline from ocean.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  216. Thanks, Bill.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  217. @121- In fact, the Bunker character was a ripoff- hence Lear’s credit [‘developed by Norman Lear’] of a famous Brit sitcom and its lead character that ran for a decade- ‘Til Death Do Us Part.’ As a youngster living in the UK, we’d catch the BBC airing both the UK show and the CBS show back to back- often the plots were virtually identical, with only the slang changed. The shows star was so identified with the character, he fled Britain to live in Australia, if memory serves.

    Point is, Americans willingly accepted a bigot and racist literally into their living rooms every Saturday night, hence the popularity for a decade. Trump is hardly a conservative. He’s a pragmatist. A New Yorker–with all the ‘charm and eloquence’ that goes with being a New Yorker. Who likes ‘the way Glenn Miller played; songs that made the hit parade…’ 😉

    DCSCA (a343d5)

  218. #127 NK, I don’t believe Trump either but I acknowledge he has some qualities that are missing in every (R) Candidate out there. It is called a sack. And we GOP-types have been missing sacks for years. Which is why we have men peeing in stalls with my daughter. I am tired of getting along and I am 100% confident in an all out brawl they will back down. Just trying to get “our” side to brawl instead of talking crap about “compromise.” So if that is the best we can do? Then so be it.

    I also notice Hate Trump folks never addresses the profound irony that Trumpkins were natural Cruz supporters yet can’t acknowledge that had they voted Cruz, all the vices of these unter-menschen would have been waived off as smart Americans.

    I know uber alles d-bagism when I see it and many here have that sad quality while not acknowledging it. They are just like the many RINO Politicians who love their votes but disdain the voters themselves and betray them every chance they get.

    Rodney King's Spirit (e2dd8e)

  219. Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/9/2016 @ 7:00 am

    May I +1 that comment, Rev.?
    Bill H (971e5f) — 6/9/2016 @ 8:51 am

    Make that +2

    felipe (429749)

  220. Bill H (971e5f) — 6/9/2016 @ 10:10 am

    Come on down, you will find us most welcoming.

    felipe (429749)

  221. I also notice Hate Trump folks never addresses the profound irony that Trumpkins were natural Cruz supporters yet can’t acknowledge that had they voted Cruz, all the vices of these unter-menschen would have been waived off as smart Americans.

    That just doesn’t make a lot of sense.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  222. It is liberating to be #ExGOP, 25 months of liberation for me.
    I’m voting for Johnson because I agree with him more than disagree, he has an actual record in elective executive office, he’s a business owner, and there are no serious character/honesty issues against him. We could do a lot worse and, far as I’m concerned, we will do a lot worse with either Hillary or Donald as commander-in-chief.

    WarrenPeese (1df851)

  223. Hasn’t Cruz’s ship sailed on this? How can he realistically get back into the running? Has he only suspended rather than ended his campaign effort, then?

    Under the current rules, he can’t. But at any convention, of any party, the delegates are in charge. A majority of delegates can change or suspend the rules and do anything they like. So if a majority of the GOP convention delegates voted to suspend the rule that requires them to vote for whoever won their state, they would no longer be bound, and poof, there goes Trump’s majority. If they vote to allow anyone’s name to be placed in nomination, then that becomes the rule, and suddenly they can vote on Cruz, or Romney, or even Michelle 0bama if they so chose. It’s their convention, not anyone else’s, and nobody can tell them what they can’t do.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  224. By the way, the same would apply to a constitutional convention, such as you often hear various right-wing types calling for. Once it’s called, it can do anything it wants. It makes no difference what instructions the states gave the delegates in advance; they could rip them up and write new ones that they liked better. That, after all, is what happened in Philadelphia, which is how we ended up with the constitution we have. And given the political climate, it seems more likely than not that whatever emerged from such a convention would be worse than what we have now.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  225. After the Convention, they’re stuck with their anointed candidate or looking at the Torricelli Maneuver.

    No Toricelli Maneuver needed. Unlike an election for senator, where the candidate appears directly on the ballot, and therefore states have rules about how late a party can change its nomination, at a presidential election the candidates themselves are not on the ballot. The president is not elected by the people, but by the electoral college. What appears on the ballot is “n electors for A and B”, but those electors are actually pledged to support whomever their party says; the party can change its presidential candidates even after the election, and the electors who are pledged to that party will vote for the new candidates just as willingly as for the old ones. Thus the deadline for changing a party’s presidential candidates is the morning of December 19!

    Milhouse (87c499)

  226. Milhouse,

    Thanks for your comments, especially #223. There are far too many conservatives who mistakenly believe a convention will fix everything.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  227. The middle of the road is trying to find me
    I’m standing in the middle of life with my plans behind me
    Well I got a smile for everyone I meet
    As long as you don’t try dragging my bay
    Or dropping the bomb on my street
    Now come on baby
    Get in the road
    Oh come on now
    In the middle of the road, yeah
    In the middle of the road you see the darnedest things
    Like fat guys driving ’round in jeeps through the city
    Wearing big diamond rings and silk suits
    Past corrugated tin shacks full up with kids
    Oh man I don’t mean a Hampstead nursery
    When you own a big chunk of the bloody third world
    The babies just come with the scenery
    Oh come on baby
    Get in the road
    Oh come on now
    In the middle of the road, yeah
    The middle of the road is no private cul-de-sac
    I can’t get from the cab to the curb
    Without some little jerk on my back
    Don’t harass me, can’t you tell
    I’m going home, I’m tired as hell
    I’m not the cat I used to be
    I got a kid, I’m thirty-three
    Baby, get in the road
    Come on now
    In the middle of the road
    Yeah

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  228. Anything that came out of an Article V convention would still have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

    nk (dbc370)

  229. Which is what makes it supererogatory. If three-fourths of the states want a change, they’ll more than likely be able to have two-thirds of Congress propose Amendments.

    nk (dbc370)

  230. pervy mitt romney seduced wiscotrash paul ryan to the pervy pervy darkside a long time ago

    it’s pretty gross

    happyfeet (831175)

  231. Trump is a salesman. He will say whatever he thinks he needs to say to make the sale. And being a grifter he has no compunction about promising things he knows are not true.

    Which means that anything he says should be appraised as a bluff or lie. He might be for gun control or against it…but he will only do what is expedient for him at the moment. Right now it is expedient for him to claim he is pro2A, but come Jan 21, 2017, who knows?

    kishnevi (b1c03d)

  232. I’m pretty confident that he is pro-New York Style Second Amendment: The right of rich people with political influence to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed as long as they make large enough political donations to the right people.

    nk (dbc370)

  233. It’s something, isn’t it?

    nk (dbc370)

  234. Perfect description of Hillary’s position, and on that there is no doubt.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  235. You are being kind to Hillary. She wants rich people to have the right to hire bodyguards with guns, not necessarily to have guns themselves.

    If guns are your single issue,
    even if you do not want to prop-up Trump,
    you should want to hinder Hillary.
    Trump may be squishier than Melania’s silicone, but
    Hillary is violently, viciously, vociferously, virulently, verminously and vapidly anti-gun.

    If guns are your single issue.

    nk (dbc370)

  236. Hillary was giving away operational secrets over her insecure server.

    She’s full of leaks.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  237. Hillary went the full Geraldo.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  238. We all know Hillary should be nowhere near the Oval Office.

    Problem is, the same applies to Trump.

    kishnevi (b1c03d)

  239. well a certain tenor appears in these remarks,

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/hispanicleaders.asp

    narciso (732bc0)

  240. Who decided that there was nothing to prosecute in the IRS? Comey?
    MD in Philly (d8a244) — 6/9/2016 @ 7:50 am

    Holder

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  241. why would they, this is what lerner was put in charge to do, what fred malek was accused of doing for nixon,

    narciso (732bc0)

  242. By the way, the same would apply to a constitutional convention, such as you often hear various right-wing types calling for. Once it’s called, it can do anything it wants. It makes no difference what instructions the states gave the delegates in advance; they could rip them up and write new ones that they liked better. That, after all, is what happened in Philadelphia, which is how we ended up with the constitution we have. And given the political climate, it seems more likely than not that whatever emerged from such a convention would be worse than what we have now.
    Milhouse (87c499) — 6/9/2016 @ 2:49 pm

    Yet an Article V convention of the states can not actually do anything except propose amendments to the Constitution.

    Unlike the the Constitutional convention if 1787 an Article V convention can’t produce a Constitution nor can it alter the Constitution. Again, it can only propose amendments, which then have to be ratified by state legislatures or state conventions convened to ratify or reject those proposed amendments.

    Article V:

    The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

    So it makes about as much sense to fear a “runaway Article V convention” as it does to fear a “runaway” birthday party of three year olds on tricycles.

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  243. like the gang of keep left signs in monty python, of course it’s an exaggerated threat, the courts have moved to ammend the constitution by statute, it makes all that other work superfluous,

    narciso (732bc0)

  244. herein lies the difference, the lerners, the civil rights division officials at justice, the
    moles like pillar at the cia, all those have allegiance to the left, and will act accordingly, how many on the right, have done even close to a holding action, during the dem interregnum, probably gary aldrich and linda tripp, and we know how they were treated,

    narciso (732bc0)

  245. …There are far too many conservatives who mistakenly believe a convention will fix everything.

    ThOR (c9324e) — 6/9/2016 @ 3:25 pm

    Anybody who thinks there’s such a thing as a fix for everything is not a conservative. Which, again, is one of my beefs with the Trumpkins. Like all leftists the Trumpkins think if you put the right guy in charge and give him the pen and the phone and the power to rule by decree he’ll solve the problem.

    Note, the Trumpkins don’t care about Trump’s policies, if you want to call them that. They don’t care if he’s read them, or even if he knows those policy papers on his website are his, or if they’re only starting positions for negotiations with the Democrats.

    All they care about is he’s worth TEN BILLION DOLLARS!!! so he’s clearly a successful business man and therefore he knows what he’s doing so therefore if he can do that for his own company he can do that for (right about here is sales pitch all his fraud victims fell for) the country, so they want to hand him the keys to the federal Ferrari and go back to sleep.

    Which is how liberals think.

    Conservatives know there is no such thing as a fix. There are only trade-offs.

    As far as a convention fixing everything or anything, it can’t. But it also can’t make anything worse. To make things worse requires Congress working hand in hand with the President.

    Steve57 (e33d44)

  246. Well, the point is, and it may not be valid, is that there once was a runaway conventon in the United States – in 1787.

    It was supposed to be a forum to discuss and possibly propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation, none of which could be adopted except by ratification by all 13 state legislatures after first passing Congress.

    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/artconf.asp

    In Article XIII: (13)

    …nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State

    It was nothing but an informal get together. Congress alone had the power to start the amendment process.

    Instead, operating in secret, so that nobody could make plans to stop them, they drew up a totally new constitution, claiming as their authority “We the People” and provided in its text a new method of ratification – only 9 states were needed to bring it into effect between those 9 states, and on top of that they bypassed the legislatures by saying that conventions would ratify it.

    https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CDOC-110hdoc50/pdf/CDOC-110hdoc50.pdf

    ARTICLE VII.
    The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

    I see this last link gives a fuller history, saying in part:

    Despite repeated proposals that the Continental Congress revise the Articles, the movement for a new national government began outside the Congress. Representatives of Maryland and Virginia, meeting at Mt. Vernon to discuss trade problems between the two States, agreed to invite delegates from all States to discuss commercial affairs at a meeting in Annapolis, Maryland, in September 1786. Although delegates from only five States reached the Annapolis Convention, that group issued a call for a meeting of all States to discuss necessary revisions of the Articles of Confederation. Responding to this call and the endorsement of the Continental Congress, every State except Rhode Island selected delegates for the meeting in the State House at Philadelphia.

    This source is biased, trying to hide the fact that the whole process was sneaky.

    Sammy Finkelman (be1e2f)

  247. what I no is for a generation, the left has been laying waste to every american institution, the military, the church, the family, the flimsy circuitbreakers that have been in place, were burned to cinders,

    narciso (732bc0)

  248. That’s all very interesting, Sammy. Do you think things would have been different back then if they had cell phones, laptops and could get from Mt. Vernon to Philly via I95 in 3 hours rather than 5 days? Or conference call in their undies from home?

    Rev. Hoagie© (734193)

  249. narciso @249, you called that one!

    Rev. Hoagie© (734193)

  250. Actually, 2 generations, narciso.

    Otherwise spot on @249.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  251. Rev. Hoagie© (734193) — 6/10/2016 @ 5:39 am

    Do you think things would have been different back then if they had cell phones, laptops and could get from Mt. Vernon to Philly via I95 in 3 hours rather than 5 days?

    Getting from Mt. Vernon to Philadelphia in 3 hours would be somewhat similar to people all being in the same city. Signals aside, until the invention of the telegraph in 1844 *, there wasn’t a difference between the time it takes to travel and the time it takes to communicate so I don’t know how to evaluate telephones etc. People worry about electronic communications being eavesdropped on, though, so if people want to do things in secret, they still all get into the same room, and the back and forth is also faster when meeting in person. That’s why few businesses operate on the basis of telecommuting all the time.

    There are a lot more institutional barriers to doing this sort of thing now than there was then. And it helped that the Articles of Confedration were just about unamendable.

    Sammy Finkelman (be1e2f)

  252. * A story. Samuel F B. Morse set up a test run or demonstration betwene washington D.C> and Baltimore. After “What hath God wrought?” they pretty soon began transmitting news taht was being published in the newspapers (which had many editions in those days)

    Now the Democratioc National Convention was meeting in Baltimore, were the nomination had been stolen from Martin Van Buren although he had won a majority of the delegates. And later on the history of this was obscured and lied about. But they changed the rules.

    The principle actor was Senator Robert J. Walker, a person much more important in American history than most people realize. He can be credited with:

    1) Making Andrew Jackcon president.

    2) Making James K. Polk president.

    3) Expanding the territory of the United States.

    4) Lowering the tariff in 1846 – about the only thing he is remembered for.

    5) Corrupting Congress in the 1850s

    6) Causing the Civil War

    7) Saving the Union.

    And:

    8) The purchase of Alaska.

    He got started by marrying a granddaughter of Benjamin Franklin. After making Andrew Jackson president, he moved from Pennsylvania to Mississippi and became a slave owner and later a Senator.

    Anyway he proposed that the Democratic convention in 1844 adopt the rules of 1832. Now in 1832, a two thirds majority had been required to nominate anyone. And that, in turn, was done to make sre that nobody but Martin Van Buren could be nominated for vice president. Adoption of the 2/3 rule – which lasted in the Democratic Party through 1932 – deprived Martin Van Buren of the nomination. One result of that is that conventions became important. Before that, (since 1825) campaigns had lasted four years. Since everything could be reversed later, there was no point in starting too early. The Whigs and Republicans never had the 2/3 rule, but they didn’t have delegates chosen and committed way in advance.

    Anyway. In 1844, having picked the president, they went on to nominate a vice president. They nominated Senator Silas Wright of New York (a supporter of Martin Van Buren) as vice president. The news was transmiitted by telegraph from Baltimore to Washinton. Quickly a reply was sent back – the world’s first private telegram you could say – declining the nomination. Of course this was avery new thing and to ensure that the message was received, men on horses were also sent to Baltimore.

    Robert J. Walker had to have the convention name someone else. It was George M. Dalas, after whom the city of Dallas was named. He hadn’t counted in the telegraph being invented that day.

    The following Wikipedia article doesn’t lead with the rules change, but it is further in. Of course, the fact that these rules did not exist in 1836 and 1840 is easy to get lost when the nomination wasn’t contested in those years. But a rule that 2/3 was needed to nominate was certainly not expected by Martin Van Buren. It got lost to history because later on people who used the 2/3 rule didn’t want people to realize that the rules could be changed again.

    Also, I don’t think Martin Van Buren was quite an abolishionist at that stage, like teh wikipedia article has it. He was maybe by 1848, when he ran as a third party candidate (the Free soil party)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1844_Democratic_National_Conventiona

    Sammy Finkelman (be1e2f)

  253. Anything that came out of an Article V convention would still have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

    Not if the convention says it doesn’t have to. The convention could call a national referendum, one-person-one-vote, open to anyone resident in the USA, legally or not, and pass their new constitution on a simple majority. And there’d be nothing the states could do about it, just as there was nothing the states could do about the Philadelphia convention doing pretty much the same thing.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  254. Yet an Article V convention of the states can not actually do anything except propose amendments to the Constitution.

    Sure it can. It can do anything it likes. Who’s going to stop it?

    Unlike the the Constitutional convention if 1787 an Article V convention can’t produce a Constitution nor can it alter the Constitution.

    How does that make it different from the 1787 convention? That wasn’t give the power to produce a constitution either — and yet it did. It threw out its terms of reference and wrote a new constitution, and then it bypassed the state legislatures that had created it, and instead convened state conventions to ratify its work. None of that was permitted by the Articles of Confederation, nor had it been authorized by the state legislatures.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  255. I am now awaiting the mother of document/bad news dumps by HRC and BHO. There has never been a better opportunity to get such out.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  256. Good point, Ed!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7080 secs.