Well, they’re not going to vote Trump or Kasich in the primaries. And they certainly won’t be voting Hillary in the general. So yeah, he’s certainly going to be close enough.
1 Like
And if so, that’s perfectly fine - just dispense with the true “constitutional conservative” litmus test that they pretend to demand, and dispense with the constant complaint that all these policy preferences are constitutional requirements, when they clearly are not, because they are politically negotiable.
Well then, I’m not getting my perfect candidate and neither is anyone else, ever, by your criteria. I don’t have to be furious because…I guess because you say so. I never signed any agreement about a CC litmus test. In short, I just don’t care about this that damn much.
In my voting lifetime, there has never been a candidate whom I could vote for who has come this close to the Presidency, and said so many things I completely agree with, and had a record that all but proves he will fight for those things when he gets there. I’m not going to discount all of that because you found one thing that does not adhere 100% to CC principles.
I personally don’t have any problem with your approach - but what I’m saying is they’re not my criteria, and the litmus test exists because CCs don’t simply look at policies as “good” or “bad”, but view nearly everything as “constitutional” or “unconstitutional”. If something is “unconstitutional”, it lacks the legitimacy to even exist, it isn’t simply a dumb or ineffective law. And CCs orient there entire approach to the role of the federal government on this foolish standard that - as we see even from Cruz - few will live up to.
If you want to go for the “hey, he’s close enough” approach, I applaud that. It’s just not what I have been hearing from CCs broadly that we need no-compromise, pure of heart CCs that rely on unwavering strict constructionism of the Constitution. Clearly, we do not.
That’s idiotic. Just because a candidate does not stack up perfectly, we should disregard a constitutional test for policy issues? Some things are negotiable. However, almost every political discussion and policy debate should start with the Constitution. Otherwise, why have one?
Remember in 08 and 12 we were told McCain and Romney were the only Republican candidates that could win in a general election? Kasich is the successor of those two, and is now making the same claim.
1 Like
Exactly.
The Establishment has had plenty of opportunities to move us gently back toward the center, if not somewhat into the right half of the spectrum. Every time they’ve been given the reins, the pendulum just keeps on swinging left. Only the speed changes. What started years ago as ennui and disappointment resulting in two terms of Obama (nitpick the details if you want, our side did not turn out), has now boiled into genuine outrage, on both sides. That’s why every other candidate who is type of moderate we “need,” isn’t generating any motivation, across the board. That’s why Trump and Cruz, and Sanders, too, are the frontrunners.
Yep, Sanders has a clear path to the nomination. Trump supporters are demonstrably idiots in the realm of domestic and foreign policy. Cruz is similarly a product of the GOPs ill fated reactionary campaign against President Obama. They are two Republican created Frankenstein monsters that are now strong enough to destroy the party. Moderate internationalist Republicans, who actually have valuable domestic and foreign policy contributions, are marginalized and alienated as “RINOs”. The United States is best served by a vigorous competition of cogent ideas and policies. That is not foreseeable with a Republican Party led by Trump or Cruz.
Is what someone would say if THEY wanted to be exclusionary. McCain, Romney, both lost. Now the Trumpsters and the Cruz’s get their shot.
A litmus test.
Sanders supporters aren’t?
Cruz would destroy the party?
If Sanders/Clinton vs. Cruz isn’t a competition of ideas, I don’t know what is. (Not that anything Sanders or Hilary say is cogent, but it would be a distinct choice none the less.)
Are you speaking only of presidential elections or all elections? The house and senate have lurched to the right recently.
I honestly don’t understand the logic of needing someone more to the right to appeal to people in a general election. There are not enough true conservatives to get Cruz elected, he has to appeal to more people. I know people are pissed McCain and Romney lost so they want something different, but who else did you want compared to them? Do you think Santorum would have won? Romney was the only challenger to McCain, not sure who else you would’ve wanted.
Losing this election is giving it away. Even the left doesn’t like Hillary, yet Trump and Cruz give her a path to victory.
Sorry, but the moderates are sounding a bit whiney now. Only the ‘moderates’ can save the party. Or, the “we don’t have room in the party for yadda-yadda, they’re exclusionary.” Ummm, irony?
What we now is someone who can rise above all three ideologies, conservatism, progressivism, and moderatism!
Sorry, I misspoke here. I meant to say “are so popular,” when including Sanders. I know he isn’t the frontrunner nor will he ever be.
Why?
(20 blah blah characters)
Because they don’t appeal to the general population.
Hillary has high negatives, but Trump has higher.
Cruz has little appeal beyond evangelical Christians and true conservatives.
I think Trump would lose in monumental fashion and Cruz would be close because Hillary equally has bad appeal beyond Democrat loyalists. The question becomes, who has looks better to independents, Hillary or Cruz? As I said earlier in the thread, independent voters will have to make that choice and it is not easy. So far polling shows Hillary would win, but polls this early don’t exactly predict results. Who knows, maybe Bernie supporters throw a fit and don’t turn out for Hillary, giving the election to Cruz.
Only to balance the most far left President that this nation has ever seen!
Furthermore, that is why we need someone like Ted Cruz. We need to pull the nation back to at least the center. Obama has really moved not only his party but the entire country to the left. His party is now considering a Socialist as an acceptable choice. And…no one is saying a word about it. It’s like he’s a legitimate candidate.
It makes me sick to my stomach.
This is schizophrenic. Is it constitutional or not? That’s a black or white issue - it is or it isn’t. Is it negotiable? It can’t be if it is unconstitutional.
CCs are now saying “we need someone who strictly adheres to the constitution, no exceptions! Oh, except when we feel like making exceptions.” Ok. That kinda defeats the point of strict constructionism, though, you would agree?
I don’t care who CCs vote for, and it’s perfectly fine to vote for a guy whose ideology is to drastically limit the size and scope of the federal government on policy grounds, if you’re so inclined.
It doesn’t work like that. The choice is not between Mr. sort-of conservative and Mr. true conservative. The GOP has to win the general election, which includes all types of voters.
I agree the GOP needs to balance out the moves Obama has made, and without winning the presidency that will be extremely difficult to do. The goal should be to win, but that is not what people are voting on (clearly shown by Trump’s success and his lack of appeal to ~70% of Americans).
You really don’t understand that Hillary Clinton is damaged goods. Yeah, I know Trump is a very poor choice but even he would beat Hillary. Should Cruz get the nomination and choose Kasich as his VP they will crush Hillary.
I think you will understand better if she gets the nod and moves on to the general election (that is of course barring any indictment by the FBI). The press so far has been very easy on her. Regardless of who the republicans put up she will have to answer some pretty tough questions. The public will start paying attention around Labor Day. They will see that the old con artist Hillary is running and either stay home or vote for the republican.
Hillary Clinton is not going to become President:
-
Too much serious baggage over the past 24 years. They used to call it “Clinton fatigue” and among many old enough to recall the 90’s they are still sick of them both.
-
Indictment threat from the FBI. Benghazi will also follow her around like a stalker. Remember the swift boat ads that sank Kerry in 2004? Of course you don’t so google it. Well…that will pale in the face of what the republicans will do to her regarding Benghazi.
-
Absolutely no charisma. In fact, I have never before seen a candidate at that level have less charisma than Hillary. Michael Dukakis is a close second (lost to GH Bush 1988-He put on a tank helmet and looked ridiculous google that too).
-
Bernie is pushing her to her limit physically and financially. Have you not noticed the coughing fits and the unsteady gate as she attempts to climb stairs? Pay attention…this woman is not going to do well physically during a 6 month grind of a national election. And…she is spending big bucks to convince all of the left wing nuts that she can give away more stuff than Bernie.
-
Bernie by pulling her left will leave a very weakened Hillary Clinton. She will have to defend why she attacked the coal industry, say bye bye to Virginia. Why she was against the Canadian pipeline she can kiss off many union votes. Why she was so far left regarding abortion. See ya Catholic voters. There is a host of wacky stances that she has taken in order to appeal to the far left to get the nomination. Bernie is a gift to the republican party that just keeps on giving! She is attached at the hip to the failed Obama administration. That might be cool with the far left who votes in the primaries. But in the real world people are not excited about a “third Obama term”.
-
Finally, when is the last time that a democrat won after a democrat served for two terms? We have to go back 71 years to 1945 when Harry Truman was sworn in after FDR died in office.
There is nothing that favors this woman becoming the next President of the United States. I don’t care how much knowledge she has about foreign affairs. Nor, do I care that she is the first woman to run for President. She is not suited for the job of running for President and THAT is what’s necessary to become President.
So to all who have claimed that all is lost because of all of the republican in fighting don’t worry about that one bit. There is one powerful force who will unite the party her name is Hillary Clinton and I maintain she is NOT going to be elected to the Presidency.