Why @RealDonaldTrump #Indiana Win Makes @BernieSanders THE Big Winner Of #IndianaPrimary And #Hillary2016 An Even Bigger Loser

As predicted here a few weeks after Donald J. Trump announced his run for president, Donald Trump is now the Republican nominee for president in 2016 and that fact will become official at the Cleveland convention. For Donald J. Trump the importance of the victory is in the timing. For Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton the Donald Trump triumph has massive impact on their respective campaigns.

The timing of Donald J. Trump’s victory is that now Trump can achieve the aims we set out in our previous post about the total seizure of that clumsy artifact, the Republican Party. Donald J. Trump can now set about to recreate the party he destroyed into an effective, modern, clear-talking, fighting, machine that wins.

Of additional importance the timing of Trump’s victory means that Trump now has the luxury of sufficient time to (1) unite the Republican Party under his total control; (2) reorganize the fundraising operations for all elections, including his own, of the national government; and, (3) prepare a unified savage campaign against the opposition party.

Further, we suspect that any talk from Trump about vice presidential picks or cabinet picks will be feints as he sets about to achieve the three goals outlined above. Trump can now dangle prospective appointments like glittering balls to those he wants to bend to his will. With the nomination now beyond dispute his, especially as Governor John Kasich finally faced reality and quit the race, Trump has lot of time to do what needs to be done for every future twist and turn.

But Donald J. Trump is not necessarily the big big big winner of the May 3 Indiana primary. We suggest that Donald Trump’s victory in Indiana is a really big victory for Senator Bernie Sanders and a frightening blow against Hillary2016.

Consider the impact of Trump’s big victory in Indiana on Senator Bernie Sanders’ campaign. One of the similarities of the Trump and Sanders’ campaigns has been their strong support by political independent voters. With Trump no longer in need of votes, political independents (not to mention Republican mischief makers who want to hurt Hillary2016) might flock to Bernie Sanders. Winner? Bernie Sanders.

More importantly for Bernie Sanders is what Trump will now do. As Trump campaigns unopposed in the upcoming primaries will Trump aim all his fire against Hillary Clinton? Bernie Sanders has run a tepid opposition campaign thus far. If Trump attacks Hillary2016 and Sanders attacks Hillary2016 as well, the big immediate winner will be Bernie Sanders although Trump will be the long-term winner.

At his victory speech Donald Trump mentioned what we believe will be the death blow if Hillary Clinton ever becomes the nominee (which we doubt). Trump briefly discussed Hillary’s incredibly ugly promise to destroy the jobs of coal miners. Hillary subsequently said she “misspoke” but the massive damage to her has been done. If Hillary ever becomes the nominee (which we doubt) we believe the Hillary attack on coal miners will be the central advertisement by the Trump campaign against her. Those ads will air nonstop in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and New Jersey. In coal country and any county in the country with high unemployment the ad will also air. The damage to Hillary will be that she would willfully and deliberately destroy the livelihood of workers for her political ambition to court ideological crackpots.



A continued Trump attack on Hillary2016 for her purposeful unemployment of coal miners – alongside a Bernie Sanders demand that Hillary stick with environmentalist kooks against coal mining – will place Hillary2016 in an indefensible position especially in states like California. Winner? Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders won Indiana and in the following contests a Trump and Sanders assault will make Hillary2016 a bloody mess.

Then there is the world and thought process of the kook left to consider. Here, there are two schools of thought regarding Donald Trump which leads to the same conclusion which is a Hate Hillary world. On the one hand, some leftist kooks believe Trump will be easy to beat. On the other hand, some leftist kooks believe Trump will be hard to beat. What both these leftist kook camps agree on is that in both cases Bernie Sanders is the solution.

Bear with us as we explore the leftist kook mind. For the “Trump is easy to beat” leftist kooks the proposal is “Trump will be easy to beat so let’s nominate the best candidate Bernie Sanders because now Bernie can win because Trump is so weak.” For the “Trump will be hard to beat” leftist kooks the proposal is “Bernie is the only one that poll after poll shows is the strongest candidate against Trump so let’s bring in Bernie.”

Hillary2016 tries to combat the Bernie Sanders crowd with a focus against nominee Trump but the problem is that then Sanders is free to attack. Hillary2016 will be caught in a crossfire. That’s always an ugly position to be in because it is an indefensible dugout with grenades falling in all the time.

The grenades against Hillary2016 will continue to drop:

Bernstein: There Will Be ‘Very Damaging’ Leaks From Hillary Email Investigation, Her Actions Reckless and Entitled

On Wednesday’s “CNN Tonight,” Journalist and author Carl Bernstein stated that there would be “very damaging” leaks from the investigation into Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email, and described her conduct as “what she did was an act of recklessness, and entitlement, that there’s no excuse for.”

Bernstein began by stating that in the general election “all bets are off,” including the usual GOP-Dem breakdown as an important factor, celebrity might be more important than ideology, and “TMZ, Drudge, new media, [are] going to have a huge role in this, much more than the usual, fact-based media.”

He further said that GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign had expanded from a “nativist, almost neo-fascist campaign” to when where “there might be a kind of screw you vote, about Washington, about the process, that he could be the beneficiary of.” And that “a lot of Democrats around Hillary Clinton” that he had talked to were “very worried” about running against Trump, and that some “Republican regulars” who were part of the Stop Trump movement he talked to pegged Trump’s chances against Hillary at at least 25%.

Bernstein then said, “[T]he folks around Hillary, who are not the usual Clinton Kool Aid drinkers…they’re worried, they know that their candidate has performed awfully, and that [Democratic presidential candidate Senator] Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has drubbed her.

He added, that while he doesn’t believe there will be an indictment, “I think there are going to be some leaks that are going to be very damaging to Hillary Clinton. Look, what she did was an act of recklessness, and entitlement, that there’s no excuse for. And she’s going to have to go up to the FBI, under oath, and explain why she did this. And it’ll be the first time that she’ll have to give a really straight explanation, and it’s not going to be pretty.”

The potential deposition of Hillary Clinton by Judicial Watch just before the Philadelphia convention must send shivers across Brooklyn headquarters. Bernie Sanders has refused to attack Hillary2016 on issues such as the emails. Donald Trump will not be so reticent. Now that Trump is the nominee Trump might decide to attack Hillary2016 nonstop even as Hillary struggles go get delegates for her nomination. Winner? Bernie Sanders.

Our long time readers know that we are sure that Bernie Sanders will never be the nominee. But we also repeat that we doubt Hillary Clinton will be the nominee. Barack Obama will not allow that to happen. Towards that end, Bernie Sanders is the cats paw of both Donald Trump and Barack Obama. The big loser in this behind-the-tapestry game, is Hillary Clinton.

Share

119 thoughts on “Why @RealDonaldTrump #Indiana Win Makes @BernieSanders THE Big Winner Of #IndianaPrimary And #Hillary2016 An Even Bigger Loser

  1. Congratulations admin, for calling Trump’s campaign as it has turned out to be. I’ll need another “read” but I get your drift.

    Presumptive candidate is going to be on TV 2 -3 times tonight and same amount early tomorrow. Check his real Donald twitter about where he’ll be.

    I guess Hillary will be wondering what she’s doing wherever she thinks she currently is. I guess Kasich had a similar feeling upon waking up and figured he may as well get out of Dodge.

    Here in PA Bob Casey and Katie Mc Ginty (hoping to take Pat Toomey’s senate seat) have been on TV. From a HuffPuff entitled ‘Here Are 7 Reasons Why Donald Trump Could Really Win In November”

    Bob Casey will be working hard to keep his state out of Trump’s column, but there are no guarantees.
    Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

  2. He further said that GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign had expanded from a “nativist, almost neo-fascist campaign” to when where “there might be a kind of screw you vote, about Washington, about the process, that he could be the beneficiary of.” And that “a lot of Democrats around Hillary Clinton” that he had talked to were “very worried” about running against Trump, and that some “Republican regulars” who were part of the Stop Trump movement he talked to pegged Trump’s chances against Hillary at at least 25%.

    Bernstein then said, “[T]he folks around Hillary, who are not the usual Clinton Kool Aid drinkers…they’re worried, they know that their candidate has performed awfully, and that [Democratic presidential candidate Senator] Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has drubbed her.”
    —————
    Bernstein.

    Son of a card carrying member of the communist party.

    Chased down a rathole by Nixon.

    Which is why that repulsive fat fuck went after Nixon.

    Along with his scared of his shadow partner Woodward.

    The father of a friend of mine was president was a confidante of Ben Bradley.

    Bradley was very reluctant to publish their Watergate story.

    Hard to verify, fear of reprisals from Nixon, and was ready to fire Bernstein.

    But now of course Bernstein and his better half are legends.

    As the newspaper man in the western The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence said

    When the truth collides with the legend, print the legend.

    Which explains Bernstein.

    What it does not explain, however, is the non sequiturs that riddle his analysis–if that is what it is.

    He says Democrats, and Stop Trump fanatics are worried

    Why?

    Because Trump’s chances of beating Hillary are at least 25%

    Which means, by Bernstein’s wildly optimistic analysis

    That the chances Hillary will defeat Trump are 75%

    If that assessment is true, then they have little to be worried about

    Which that gadfly Bernstein assures us they are.

    A Las Vegas gambler would take those odds every day of the weak.

    And trust me, his reaction would be euphoria, as opposed to worry.

    Bernstein, it seems, would say anything to convince the world he is in the know

    Until you sit down as examine what he is saying

    And ask yourself does this make sense,

    Or is he still chasing Nixon, who is still chasing his dad, who is still chasing Marx

    In some parallel universe which can only exist inside the beltway?

  3. I don’t believe Bernie the commie will hit Hillary hard, it’s actually as if he’s winding down, must be tired, or been given the word, running low on $$$.

  4. Bernstein: There Will Be ‘Very Damaging’ Leaks From Hillary Email Investigation, Her Actions Reckless and Entitled
    ——-
    It is a presumptive fact that the FBI, Snowden and China have those emails.

    And so do others.

    So this is no great revelation.

    Neither is the fact that she will not be indicted.

    However the reasons for this are not political, but security related.

  5. The problem is that Biden beats Trump imo..he is now a beloved figure to the left and all dems will rally behind him…not only does Hillary lose (she will, however, likely get a pardon from Obama), but we lose again.

  6. If President Trump wishes to do so, he could try to expose Obama’s birth records, invalidate Obama’s presidency if the investigation shows that he never was an NBC and any pardon he issues to Hillary over the email server flap.

  7. jbstonesfan
    May 4, 2016 at 7:47 pm
    The problem is that Biden beats Trump imo..he is now a beloved figure to the left and all dems will rally behind him…not only does Hillary lose (she will, however, likely get a pardon from Obama), but we lose again.
    ———–
    Biden can’t beat Trump. If Hillary can’t beat Trump because she is Obama 3.0 then Biden is Obama 3.0 Premier Edition

  8. The only way it makes sense for the dims to nominate biden is if the rinos nominate paul ryan.

    In that case, it would be deja vu all over again.

    Biden would devastate Ryan with his maniacal grin and fool on the hill pose.

    Only he is not acting.

    And big media would run twenty panels all agreeing that Biden the conqueror

    Between chugs of Balentines Irish whiskey neat

    Mopped the floor with the boy scout (skud?) from Wisconsin.

    Thereafter not even the badger state would have him.

    And Biden would go on to be the greatest president since . . . . the big media beloved messiah.

    While the nation completed the tank

    Don’t you just love a frank capra movie like that.

  9. I think the GOP establishment chose to quit and regroup rather than get beaten, and they have more dirty tricks up their sleeve for the convention and beyond. Trump should keep working hard to get the 1237 delegates and the 2 or 3 more states he needs to win with a 50% majority.

    I tuned in to a couple of “conservative” (imo, globalist) talk shows today to hear their meltdown and it was quite entertaining. Michael Medved, who I despise, was still taking callers from the Never Trump people. He actually said Hillary was more conservative on foreign policy and international trade deals than Trump. He finished driving off the cliff by advocating for the Libertarian candidate.

  10. The Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs is eschewing the terms “felon” and “convict” when officials refer to individuals convicted of crimes, opting instead for less “disparaging labels,” Assistant Attorney General Karol Mason announced Wednesday.

    The Office of Justice Programs plans to substitute terminology such as “person who committed a crime” and “individual who was incarcerated” in speeches and other communications as part of an effort to remove barriers that officials say hinder progress of those who re-enter society after completing their prison sentences.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/4/justice-dept-no-longer-use-terms-felon-convict/

  11. valleyboy, I agree. There are too many potential twists and turns ahead to count our chickens before they hatch. I think it’s time for celebration, but also time for continued wariness.

  12. Admin: this guy Leon Wolf who took over Red State blog is complete basket case.

    He claims that with Trump as the nominee the chances are zero that the Republicans will win.

    He is a living example of the psychological principle of projection.

    He hates Trump and cannot fathom why millions of other feel very differently.

    He is lost in time and space.

    He fails to understand that we are going through a peaceful revolution.

    He cannot see past the narrow prism of his thinking.

    Under laughing Leon Red State has become a variant of that bastion of journalism Pravda.

    Free thinking there gets you lined up against the wall and terminated with extreme prejudice/

    Based on that logic he urges leadership to confirm Obama’s nominee.

    His statement is Judge Merrick is not the worst and not the best.

    Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but an endorsement by default.

  13. lorac

    May 4, 2016 at 10:55 pm

    The Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs is eschewing the terms “felon” and “convict” when officials refer to individuals convicted of crimes, opting instead for less “disparaging labels,” Assistant Attorney General Karol Mason announced Wednesday.

    The Office of Justice Programs plans to substitute terminology such as “person who committed a crime” and “individual who was incarcerated” in speeches and other communications as part of an effort to remove barriers that officials say hinder progress of those who re-enter society after completing their prison sentences.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/4/justice-dept-no-longer-use-terms-felon-convict/
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    With the left, its ALWAYS a “messaging problem”. Yuck it up assholes. Nine more months and you’re outta there. Hopefully as “individuals who [will soon be] incarcerated”.

  14. As for Merrick the negatives outweigh the positive.

    On the plus side, he clerked for Henry Friendly of the Second circuit who was a first rate legal mind. On the negative side he clerked for Brennan who was not.

    On the plus side, he is a chief judge, which means he has judicial experience unlike the last jamoke the big media beloved messiah appointed. On the negative side, he is yet another Harvard product, which we do not need more of on the court.

    On the really negative side, Obama appointed him at the suggestion of Orin Hatch. On the really negative side he hails from that cesspool of corruption Chicago.

    The point is Trump can do better. The cosmic order will not be thrown out of balance if that Obama appointee is denied confirmation. They need someone who is as conservative as Scalia to maintain any balance, whereas this jamoke has more in common with Roberts.

  15. blow, yes, and what gets me, is that when they change a term to avoid the accumulated stigma (or justifiable description), the new term eventually accrues that same stigma – because you’re talking about the same thing. Sorry guys, I get the distinction between people and behaviors, but REALLY? And they didn’t even create new terms, they took the Prince route, “the person who committed a crime, formerly known as a criminal”. Maybe were Trump not in the mix, they’d move on to some non-pronounceable symbol lol But…. eventually that, too, would develop a stigma – because it’s STILL the same behavior….

    And your last line cracked me up lol

  16. Trump who has never had a drink, smoke, or toke vs Biden the lush… one who succeeded hugely in the real world, and one who got vice president even though with multiple runs for president he never seemed to score above 4-10% IIRC.

    Trump will run rings around him in energy, Biden has the Obama stench on him. and Trump will not hesitate to be very blunt about Biden!

    Trump wins.

    I can’t help it, I feel bad for Hillary. She has done it to herself, but this whole campaigning crap is a whole lot of work, and she’s not her 2008 self in stamina, in ability to attract crowds. I’m worried they’re going to screw her again, and of course Trump will take it to her like no one has before.

    Hillary is supposed to be so smart, we all believed that. But she’s not acting smart at all in this campaign, even choosing to dump her base to go after Obama’s base, was I’m sorry just stupid. She left that space open for Trump to take, but if she had taken it she would have lost the crazies, but gained moderate dems. Most all dem candidates have won without the crazy left, it seems to me. Why capitulate and consequently decapitate yourself? Well, we’ve all gone back and forth with these big mysteries. It’s just popping up in my head again.

  17. Can anyone tell me – remember how Nixon fired Hillary for lying or cheating? I never heard the back story about that, I just was a good dem and figured Nixon screwed her back then. But does anyone know those details? Did she do something wrong, something unethical, even at the beginning of her career?

  18. lorac
    May 4, 2016 at 11:34 pm
    Can anyone tell me – remember how Nixon fired Hillary for lying or cheating? I never heard the back story about that, I just was a good dem and figured Nixon screwed her back then. But does anyone know those details? Did she do something wrong, something unethical, even at the beginning of her career?
    ——-
    http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/

  19. COUNSEL CONFIRMS HILLARY’S ‘FRAUDULENT’ WATERGATE BRIEF
    Clinton was fired for allegedly colluding with Kennedys to protect JFK legacy
    Published: 04/07/2008 at 2:25 PM

    16.4K
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email 16.4K
    image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif

    Print Print

    image: http://www.wnd.com/images/clintonwatergate.jpg

    Hillary Clinton, with chief counsel John Doar (left), bringing impeachment charges against President Nixon before the House Judiciary Committee in 1974
    Details of Hillary Clinton’s firing from the House Judiciary Committee staff for unethical behavior as she helped prepare articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon have been confirmed by the panel’s chief Republican counsel.

    Franklin Polk backed up major claims by Jerry Zeifman, the general counsel and chief of staff
    of the House Judiciary Committee who supervised Clinton’s work on the Watergate investigation in 1974, reported columnist Dan Calabrese in a column republished by WND.

    Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”

    He contends Clinton was collaborating with allies of the Kennedys to block revelation of Kennedy-administration activities that made Watergate “look like a day at the beach.”

    Her brief, Zeifman said, was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

    Polk confirmed Clinton wrote a brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But Clinton deliberately ignored the then-recent case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970.

    Moreover, Zeifman claims Clinton bolstered her fraudulent brief by removing all of the Douglas files from public access and storing them at her office, enabling her to argue as if the case never existed.

    Polk confirmed the Clinton memo ignored the Douglas case, but he could not confirm or dispel the claim that Hillary removed the files.

    Looking back on the case amid Clinton’s fierce battle with Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, Calabrese sees a picture emerging “of a very ambitious young lawyer who was eager to please her political patrons, and was willing to mislead and undermine established committee staff and senior committee members in order to do so.”

    The columnist, editor in chief of the North Star Writers Group, noted Zeifman has been “trying to tell his story for many years, and the mainstream media have ignored him.”

    Zeifman said Clinton, then 27, was hired to work on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who also was Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick case.

    When the Watergate probe concluded, Zeifman said, he fired Clinton from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. She was one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career, Calabrese pointed out.

    image: http://www.wnd.com/images/zeifman.jpg

    Zeifman told the columnist he fired Clinton because she was a liar.

    “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer,” Zeifman said. “She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

    Zeifman said Clinton collaborated with several individuals, including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel Bernard Nussbaum, who later became counsel in the Clinton White House. Their aim, he said, was the seemingly implausible scheme to deny Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

    The Kennedy allies, Zeifman said, feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by the president’s counsel. Hunt, according to Zeifman, had evidence of nefarious activities by President John F. Kennedy’s administration, including purportedly using the mafia to attempt to assassinate Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

    Polk regarded Clinton’s memo as dishonest because it tried to pretend the Douglas precedent didn’t exist. But, unlike Zeifman, he considered it more stupid than sinister.

    “Hillary should have mentioned [the Douglas case] and then tried to argue whether that was a change of policy or not instead of just ignoring it and taking the precedent out of the opinion,” Polk told Calabrese.

    But Zeifman argues that if Clinton, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded, House Judiciary members also would have been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses and denied the opportunity to even participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

    Polk recalls Zeifman told him at the time he believed Clinton’s primary role was to alert Marshall if the investigation was taking a turn against the Kennedys’ liking.

    “Jerry used to give the chapter and verse as to how Hillary was the mole into the committee works as to how things were going,” Polk said.

    Polk remembered some Democrat committee members, as well as nearly all the Republicans, were upset at the attempt to deny counsel to Nixon.

    Zeifman said top Democrats, including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, believed Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.

    “Of course the Republicans went nuts,” Polk said. “But so did some of the Democrats – some of the most liberal Democrats. It was more like these guys – Doar and company – were trying to manage the members of Congress, and it was like, ‘Who’s in charge here?’ If you want to convict a president, you want to give him all the rights possible. If you’re going to give him a trial, for him to say, ‘My rights were denied,’ – it was a stupid effort by people who were just politically tone deaf. So this was a big deal to people in the proceedings on the committee, no question about it.”

    Bill and Hillary Clinton on their wedding day in 1975
    Polk said Zeifman rightfully “went nuts,” as well, but “my reaction wasn’t so much that it was underhanded as it was just stupid.”

    Calabrese concludes: “Disingenuously arguing a position? Vanishing documents? Selling out members of her own party to advance a personal agenda? Classic Hillary. Neither my first column on the subject nor this one were designed to show that Hillary is dishonest. I don’t really think that’s in dispute. Rather, they were designed to show that she has been this way for a very long time – a fact worth considering for anyone contemplating voting for her for president of the United States.”

    The columnist noted Polk recalled something else that started long ago.

    “She would go around saying, ‘I’m dating a person who will some day be president,’” Polk said. “It was like a Babe Ruth call. And because of that comment she made, I watched Bill Clinton’s political efforts as governor of Arkansas, and I never counted him out because she had made that forecast.”

    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/#xIFEeUi5QuHaYYgy.99

  20. @Tony Stark

    More than likely, if Obama was invalidated, the Supreme Court would rule against invalidating any laws he signed. There’s no precedent for it, and British Common Law, which was highly referenced by the founders during the writing of the Constitution, has provisions to protect “public order” by making all laws valid even if a Monarch proves to be false. There’s no constitutional provision for how to handle a situation like this, so the courts would probably go with BCW.

  21. Thx, wbboei — verrry interrrresting….

    So she worked to prevent Nixon from having counsel to try to have her own side win, and is against voter ID again so that her own side can win with lots of illegal votes diluting the true results.

    Thank goodness we have Trump now.

  22. Valleyboy, our last article expounds on the need for Trump to seize total control of the convention and the party. Here’s another bit of evidence for why we suggest that:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/ted-cruzs-zombie-campaign-222818

    Ted Cruz’s run for president is over, but this weekend, his operatives will fight on, heading to a pair of state conventions to push the campaign’s preferred delegates to the Republican National Convention.

    According to a GOP source familiar with the Cruz campaign’s decision, staff will be on the ground in North Carolina and South Carolina, where 56 delegates will be selected. Some will even fan out next week when a dozen more states — including Cruz’s home state of Texas — pick their national delegates. It’s an effort, two Cruz sources told POLITICO, to pack the convention full of conservatives who can stand up to any attempt by Donald Trump to weaken conservative planks of the GOP platform or rework the rules that govern the presidential nomination process.

    “It’s still important that we have a conservative convention … I think we would be doing Ted Cruz a disservice if we gave up that fight,” said Rob Uithoven, who helmed Cruz’s operation in western states. “It’ll be even more difficult now with the campaign suspended to try to get our [delegates] elected.”

    Uithoven sent a letter Wednesday to the Cruz leadership teams in each of the western states he oversaw urging the delegates he helped elect to attend the national convention rather than cede the floor to Trump.

    It’s not, however, about trying to take the nomination from Trump — and there won’t even be Cruz-specific delegates slates, according to one of the campaign sources. “It’s more about conservative/non-establishment folks having a voice in the upcoming rules and platform,” said the source, “especially since Trump has said he wants to change the platform.”

    But while Cruz has given up on being the party’s nominee, his campaign’s continued efforts represent a desire to exert influence over the party — both in the 2016 election, and in elections to come.

    “He’s very much, I think, the leader of the conservative movement in this country,” said Uithoven. “There’s not a single other person who’s better positioned to lead the conservative movement – and continue to lead the conservative movement – in this country than Ted Cruz.”

    It’s unlikely to be a sustained effort — staffers are only on the payroll until the middle of the month — but the post-mortem moves of Cruz’s 2016 campaign offer a first window into the candidate’s long-term thinking.

    Cruz is looking to expand his leverage over aspects of the convention in a way that could shape the party for years – and perhaps jolt it away from the insiders that have dominated it for decades. His delegate work comes as aides are already musing about the prospect of a Cruz presidential bid in 2020, and any success in shaping the nomination process for the future could be significant.

    Convention veterans and Cruz campaign allies noted that there are ample opportunities for Cruz to exert influence over the convention proceedings. He has already succeeded in stacking most state delegations with allies, initially part of a strategy to prevail if the convention became a multi-ballot grudge match against Donald Trump. Even in states where Trump won the popular primary votes – Virginia, Missouri, Arizona, South Carolina and more – Cruz had rammed through slates of loyal delegates who appeared poised to break from Trump at a contested convention.

    Now, those delegates may have a subtler, but equally significant role to play in shaping the procedures that select the GOP nominee in future cycles. The most prominent example would be the Convention Rules Committee, a 112-member panel of delegates, where Cruz has already installed a slew of allies – most notably, Utah Sen. Mike Lee, a former Supreme Court clerk. A Lee aide declined to indicate whether the senator intended to participate in the convention despite Cruz’s decision to drop out.

    The panel has featured perennial fights over whether Republican primary contests should be closed to Democratic or independent voters. And although moves to do so have generally failed, they may find new currency in a panel controlled by Cruz, popular with the GOP activist base. Similarly, the rules committee has long debated the ability of states to hold winner-take-all primaries, granting all of their delegates to a candidate who wins a plurality of votes. And of course, the primary calendar itself is a regular source of debate – from whether Iowa and New Hampshire should continue to drive the early part of the nomination process to the introduction of regional primaries.

    Guy Short, a Cruz supporter and member of the rules panel from Colorado, said he’s eyeing a slew of changes, though he emphasized they were not being directed by Cruz’s campaign team. Among them: penalizing states that allow Democrats and independents vote in Republican primaries by cutting their delegate totals and inserting a “conscience clause” to let delegates opt out of supporting candidates they’re bound to vote for over policy disagreements.

    Cruz may also seek to influence the Platform Committee, which is the guardian of the GOP base’s policy vision and could be targeted by Trump’s forces, who are less rigid on social issues. Here, Short, a six-time convention delegate, said he intends to stand in Trump’s way – and the Cruz source indicated that its effort is primarily focused on preventing Trump from rolling back the platform’s conservative planks.

    “I’ve heard concerns from fellow conservatives about the Trump campaign trying to weaken the pro-life plank,” Short said. “There’s a concern about weakening of the pro-marriage, traditional marriage … It’ll be interesting to see what other stuff will come up in terms of trade, which has not been at the top of previous conventions. I think now that we have a presumptive nominee, platform might be more contentious than if we were going to a contested convention.”

    Ryan Williams, a longtime staffer to Mitt Romney, noted that the party’s presumptive nominee typically controls the national convention committees – as Romney did in 2012. But Trump, he noted, isn’t as organized for the convention as Romney — or even Cruz, and that could break the historical pattern. “I just don’t think the Trump campaign has an apparatus,” he said. “I don’t think the Trump campaign’s going to have the bandwidth to monitor the actions of those committees.”

    Added Short, a six-time convention delegate, “I don’t think you’re going to have a presumptive nominee that’s got as much control over these committees as they have in the past.” [snip]

    “As a practical matter, what usually happens is the presumptive nominee’s team comes in and tells people what they want,” he said. But that prospect is now unclear. Munisteri predicted last week – prior to Cruz’s decision to quit the contest – that the senator would appoint loyalists to all 155 delegate slots, an enormous haul that would cement his edge over Trump in the delegate hunt.
    [snip]

    In all likelihood, Trump will take control of the public portions of the convention. The decision by the Republican National Committee to anoint him as presumptive nominee – followed by Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s exit on Wednesday – removes any obstacles to the argument that he shouldn’t set the convention agenda, dictating the primetime speakers, the positioning of delegates in the arena and the stagecraft of the event – which he’s indicated that he’d like to spice up.

    That’s why the previous article insisted Trump take total and absolute control of the convention, the party, and the finance and victory committees.

  23. It’s not, however, about trying to take the nomination from Trump — and there won’t even be Cruz-specific delegates slates, according to one of the campaign sources. “It’s more about conservative/non-establishment folks having a voice in the upcoming rules and platform,” said the source
    ———
    The way I see it, these people bought into the fiction that Cruz was a Goldwater conservative, like them, when in fact, he is a Bushie pretending to be a Goldwater conservative. They ignored all the clues, such as TPP, his bible toting act, his promotion of John Roberts, his wife’s attachment to Wall Street which taken together are the antithesis of conservatism, as I understand the term. Now that their champion has abandoned the field, they are left to wonder where do we go now? If we could get them to understand that the term conservative is neither informative, descriptive or predictive and reboot their computer around the concepts of nationalist vs. globalist, then perhaps they would realize that Trump is not their enemy. Where Cruz is concerned they would do well to reflect on the wonderful old saying which goes like this: never wish for anything too much because you may have the misfortune of getting it.

  24. Whenever I hear one of these Romney slimeballs sound off all I can think of is why should we waste our time listening to a loser. From top to bottom they have got loser written all over them. But of course, they keep their name in the floodlights when they talk to the scumbags at Politico.

  25. wbboei
    May 5, 2016 at 3:37 am
    “It’s more about conservative/non-establishment folks having a voice in the upcoming rules and platform,” said the source

    The donors still want what they paid for. “Conservative” still means national Chamber of Commerce globalism and non-establishment means nothing. The eGOP is trying to pay back the money they already took, spent, and wasted at 10 cents on the dollar. Manafort is already inside the RNC freezing the assets. Rinse Piebus, Paul Ryan, benefactors and functionaries at the National Review, toady think tanks, state and local party stooges, etc are not only being cut off from the cash flow but the river of useful intelligence and insider influence is drying up with the ability to place spies in jeopardy. They are froze out and there is nothing they can do but whine. What the hell did these “indispensables” think was going to happen in a hostile takeover in which they were throwing shit? Everyone is replaceable and no you can’t have a cocktail and bore anyone with your “ideas”. Hit the street. Cause and effect. They seem stunned. Idiots. They thought Trump, Icahn and Manafort were playing patty-cake?

  26. What the hell did these “indispensables” think was going to happen in a hostile takeover in which they were throwing shit? Everyone is replaceable and no you can’t have a cocktail and bore anyone with your “ideas”. Hit the street. Cause and effect. They seem stunned. Idiots. They thought Trump, Icahn and Manafort were playing patty-cake?
    ———–
    Then they thought we can destroy him, and if that doesn’t work we can cheat him out of delegates, and if that doesn’t work we can out control key committees at the convention and dilute him, and if that doesn’t work we can co-opt him, and if that does not work we can throw our support for Hillary before she self immolates . . .

    And if none of that works, they can reflect upon the words of the Roman poet Virgil who lived from 70 to 19 B.C. as they contemplate their future fate:

    “Death twitches my ear
    Live I am coming.
    I have lived the course fortune allotted me
    And now my shade shall descend to the grave”

    And ancient saying to be sure.

    However: plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

  27. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-57-say-america-first/article/2590448

    Americans are adopting a foreign policy much closer to Republican Donald Trump than Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, saying in a new survey that they want an “America First” focus that fixes the U.S. before other countries.

    A comprehensive new Pew Research Center poll found that 57 percent agree that America should deal with its own problems. Just 37 percent disagreed. And more than not said America is too helpful internationally.

    “The new survey, conducted April 12 to 19 among 2,008 U.S. adults, finds the public remains wary of global involvement,” said Pew.

    The Republican has pitched his foreign policy as “America First,” and wants to review the country’s relationship and funding of groups like NATO and the United Nations. He also wants to beef up spending at home, and that could come at the price of fewer tax dollar subsidies of foreign nations.

    The public also wants to trim U.S. economic involvement overseas. Pew said:

    The public’s wariness toward global engagement extends to U.S. participation in the global economy. Nearly half of Americans (49 percent) say U.S. involvement in the global economy is a bad thing because it lowers wages and costs jobs; fewer (44 percent) see this as a good thing because it provides the U.S. with new markets and opportunities for growth.”

    Trump recently said that past trade deals, like NAFTA, hurt American workers. Former President Bill Clinton approved NAFTA.

    And all parties saw an increase in the number who want defense spending to increase, endorsing another Trump platform.

    In the poll, Trump supporters stood out as “America firsters.”

  28. On the Republican party now that he was sewn it up,

    Trump said, “I am confident that I can unite much of it. Some of it, I don’t want. There were statements made about me that those people can go away and maybe come back in eight years after we serve two terms. Honestly, there are some people I really don’t want. I don’t think it’s necessary. People would be voting for me, they’re not voting for the party.”

    That is so classic corporate takeover. Get rid of deadwood, streamline, keep the good, ditch the bad, don’t like it get out, AUDIT!, you don’t produce you are gone. Hurty feelings don’t matter if you are out. The Bushes and their ilk will be purged like yesterday. Trump IS now the Republican party. It will be transformed by his management style and no more “purity” tests as defined by some changing standard to keep only insiders afloat.

  29. Outris, that’s a good clip. You can hear in Meathead’s voice that he wasn’t expecting pushback.

    I’m glad Trump calls himself common-sense. He’ll make the parrots on both sides crawl back into holes. He really will be bringing freedom back to America.

  30. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/05/paul-ryans-primary-opponent-releases-ad/

    That’s okay. Ryan is a boy scout. He creates jobs too. Only they are in China, Mexico, anywhere and everywhere EXCEPT in the United States. Paul Ryan has also cut a deal with Obama which will undercut social security and medicare. But he is too much of a coward to talk about it until after the November election. That is the kind of traitor Paul Ryan is. RINO Ryan. The best friend he Chamber of Commerce ever had.

  31. I would love to see a take down of Ryan same as we saw with the take down of former Majority Leader Eric Cantor. The same dynamic is in play now, only more so. They stopped Trump in Wisconsin, but after the convention that state party will fall in line. Seeing Ryan’s decapitated head on a poll would send a message that the le bon temps roule days are over for the establishment. Who would replace him? McCarthy, Scalise and Rogers are total dead wood, holdovers from the Boeher regime and RINOs to the core. Boehner’s primary selection criterion was to never put someone underneathe him who was smarter than he was, and so what you have now is three complete mushballs, utterly incapable of carrying forward the Trump agenda. Those three need to spend more time with their families.

  32. Admin,

    you have said that you don’t believe Hillary will get the nomination and you may be right. But you have also said that Bernie wont get it. How can the Dems possibly not give the nomination to the only other candidate running? Unlike Cruz and Kasich, Bernie has won MANY states and has very strong support.
    I don’t see how the D Party could possibly deny him if Hillary is out.
    I think there would be serious rioting at the convention.

  33. I am not happy about what’s about to happen to Hillary as affection runs deep, but she is simply not the same candidate as in 08. I blame the party more than her as the Dems really have gone far left. When Bill Clinton gets booed and small audiences, you know our once great party has been lost forever. I think administrator said often that Obama would destroy the party as we knew it and it came to fruition.

  34. And, according to Michael Savage, Obama will destroy the country after Trump wins a landslide victory. Since Obama is by all credible accounts delusional a regency should be imposed.
    ——–
    If Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination and defeats likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in November, President Obama will sabotage the economy in his final months in office, predicts talk-radio host Michael Savage.

    “If Trump wins – and I think he will – there will be an economic crash,” Savage told listeners of his nationally syndicated show, “The Savage Nation,” Monday.

    “The reason I say that is not because of his policies, but because of what Obama will do on the way out the door.”

    Savage said that if anyone thinks that a President Trump will be able to easily “turn this huge ship around, you don’t know much about navigation in turbulent waters.”

    “Wait until you see what happens in the last few months if Trump wins,” Savage said.

    “Wait until you see what that nice guy in the White House does.”

    The ‘Stop Hillary’ campaign is on fire! Join the surging response to this theme: ‘Clinton for prosecution, not president’

    After the show, Savage elaborated to WND in an email on what he thinks the lame-duck period between the election and the inauguration might look like if Trump wins.

    “(Federal Reserve Chairman Janet) Yellen ups interest rates, Obama and his band of unmerry pranksters – Sharpton and company –unleash the mobs,” Savage said. “(George) Soros makes a last-ditch effort to distract Trump and the new Justice Department from currency manipulation and other financial games he may have been playing. Spends tens of millions on social agitation.

    “Obama floods the U.S. with Central Americans, Syrians and Africans, mainly Muslim, mainly young males, and grants pardons to 10,000 more Central American drug dealers,” Savage continued.

    “Let’s see what else might these decent Americans do? Release a few more billion pork barrel ‘green’ projects? You can guess!”

    Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

    ‘Fidel in a dress’

    Prior to his remarks about Obama’s final days in office, Savage told his listeners he believed Trump would defeat Clinton in a landslide, describing the former secretary of state, senator and first lady as “Fidel Castro in a dress.”

    Savage cited the new Rasmussen poll of likely voters showing Trump with a 41-39 lead over Clinton nationally.

    “And this is only an early poll,” Savage noted on his show Monday. “I said a long time ago that when it comes down to Trump vs. Clinton, he would win by a landslide, 60-40, 59-41, something like that.

    “No matter how many illegal aliens Obama tried to flood into this country, Trump will win by a landslide,” he said.

    Michael Savage’s primer for the 2016 election, “Government Zero: No Borders, No Language, No Culture,” is available at the WND Superstore

    In February, Savage warned that the banking deregulation under the Bill Clinton administration that led to the 2008 recession appears to be on the verge of impacting the economy again.

    “We’re being set up for an economic meltdown similar to the one that triggered the Great Depression,” he said.

    This time, however, Savage continued, “it’s going to occur on a global scale, and it’s unlikely that we’ll be able to recover within even the next several decades, once it happens.”

    In the 2016 presidential election, he said, the subtext for most Democratic votes is a distrust of big business and banks.

    “And they think that their savior is Bernie the Commie,” Savage said.

    But Sanders is and always has been a politician, Savage said.

    “If you have faith in him, you’re a fool. If you actually have faith that he’s going to do something different than the others, you’re crazy,” he said.

    “You’ll get more of the same. You’ll get the same nonsense.”

    Sign up now for the free “Savage Nation” daily email newsletter!

    “He’ll do nothing to the banks, because they control the presidenc

    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/michael-savage-obama-will-sabotage-economy-on-way-out/#B4GPeAy6lIcKU5OX.99

  35. JB
    I disagree. Hillary has no one to blame but herself. A leader would not allow herself to be derailed. Trump has shown real leadership as did Bill Clinton back in the day. Trump has advocated for what he believes is right….no matter how controversial. Some people shared his beliefs and others have gotten on board as he “led” them to see certain issues clearly.

  36. True, but she was caught between a rock and hard place. If she ditched Obama completely she had no shot of getting the nomination. Unfortunately, she sold her beliefs for political purposes and lost a lot of people like those here who fought so hard for her in the past.

  37. No Jb, she made her first mistake joining Obama as SOS…then her second with Benghazi…she sealed her fate with those 2 decisions. ..She dumped us before the 2008 convention, probably 6/1/2008

  38. Most of us were against the SOS move as it resulted in the things you describe. I still miss shadowfax and hope she pops in once in awhile.

  39. I think Admin should change the name of the site if he / she plans to continue this political blog. Hillaryis44 doesn’t seem appropriate any more…..

  40. I heard Donald talking on the morning business CNBC show this am…and they were asking him all kinds of questions and stated that some of the things he has said were not typical conservativew views…and they asked if he would now start pivoting towards more conservative views…

    and Donald said…he did not care if it was right or left…but that he cares about doing what is right…and that is what he intends to do…

    how long have so many of us been waiting to hear someone talk like that…

    …someone who will do what is right…and let the chips fall where they may…for both corrupt parties…

    ****************

    I wish Hillary had been that person…but she is not…and she won’t be…she is too entrenched…too beholden…too controlled…

  41. Paul Ryan just said he cannot support Trump at this time…

    Unfreakingbelievable…the speaker of the house and the man who will be managing the convention…cannot support the republican nominee…Donald Trump

    while millions of voters are voting for Donald

    the freaking republican party is tryint to sabatoge Donald…

    Donald…get rid of them all…start your own new…upgraded and updated Republican party…

  42. Yeah, poor Hillary is doing so badly in this election:

    Hillary
    Total votes: 12,559,275; Pledged Delegates 1704, Superdelegates 498

    Bernie
    Total votes: 9,443,615; Pledged Delegates 1414, Superdelegates 41

    —–
    Trump
    Total votes: 10,716,280; Pledged Delegates 1014, Superdelegates 43

    ———-
    Game on.
    May the best woman win!!!

  43. totally disgusted

    I think Admin should change the name of the site if he / she plans to continue this political blog. Hillaryis44 doesn’t seem appropriate any more…..

    ——-
    I completely agree. This is no longer a Hillary site and there isn’t a trace that it ever was from the header to anything on either side of the main post.

  44. No, I think His44 should stay. It is like a monument to political betrayal of the citizens.

  45. …Naturally, Trump did not let Ryan’s comments slip by without a response. And what he says may signal some very interesting times ahead.
    Donald Trump says he’s not ready to support House Speaker Paul Ryan’s agenda — a pointed counterpunch after Ryan criticized the presumptive GOP presidential nominee.
    “I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan’s agenda,” Trump said in a statement.
    “Perhaps in the future we can work together and come to an agreement about what is best for the American people. They have been treated so badly for so long that it is about time for politicians to put them first!”
    Trump’s comments are likely to generate some cheers from his fervent supporters. Many suggest one of the key drivers behind Trump’s unexpected and unprecedented rise is the fact that many GOP voters feel the representatives they’ve sent to Washington have failed to live up to their promises — and failed to represent the constituents who sent them there.
    The notion that the so-called Republican “establishment” is disconnected from its constituents and/or unwilling to represent the will of the people has only been reinforced by attempts to thwart the Presidential frontrunner.
    http://www.allenbwest.com/michellejesse/whoa-trump-responds-to-paul-ryan-not-ready-to-support-him

  46. I noticed that too, Shadowfax. I’m new here, and assumed it was a pro-Hillary site from the name, but it actually seems pretty anti-Hillary. What’s the deal?

  47. Watching Trump’s rally today in West Virginia, and once again, he referenced Hillary’s statement about closing down the coal mines. Looks like this is going to be part of every speech he will give in his rallies.

  48. Tony – There’s a picture out of Donald wearing a miner’s hard hat!
    —————————-
    Speaker Ryan’s up for re-election this year. Here’s his competition.
    Nehlen for Congress – Truth Resurrection
    Join Paul Nehlen to help defeat Paul Ryan this August 9th
    http://youtu.be/rcVsuCgYf0U

  49. He waved the miners hat at the cheering crowd at the end of the rally in Charleston, WV before tossing it to someone in the crowd. From the look of the enthusiasm of the crowd, Hillary2016 can pretty much write West Virginia off the list of states that she would win in November if she somehow manages to become the Democratic nominee.

  50. Trump is “lucky” that he can say that Hillary is playing the woman card, or trying to win based on being a woman. Hillary didn’t have that opportunity about Obama being (half) black (or anyway, wasn’t bold enough to take it), because it’s often still okay to demean women in general (particularly in our choice of words), but anything smelling of racism (or even if it doesn’t, if someone is black it’s often automatically construed as racism) is a huge crime.

    Having said that, I HATE what the younger generation/the left has done in the name of “feminism”. I think probably a lot of conservatives always ridiculed feminism, but the women who do it and may have their entire life, don’t seem to grasp that “feminists” got them their right to vote, to go to school, etc. Before you could just laugh at them, but this younger generation has given them a genuine reason to scoff. I so wish that (what I would call) real feminism had a separate name from the “feminism” that embraces pole dancing, prostitution, Muslims (they don’t care that they oppress and physically deform women), and all the other issues they now focus on instead of plain womanhood (racism, environmentalism, ableism, etc). I mean, a lot of laws have been passed, a lot of enlightenment has happened – but if they were bored they could have found a better direction to move in than the crap we have today for “feminism”.

  51. If I were advising Trump, I would tell his this lady should be on his short list for vp–McCaughey, not Walsh. She gets it where so many others do not. Job creation is alpha omega–the beginning and the end.

    In Praise of Trump: Betsy McCaughey Defends The Donald
    BY MICHAEL WALSH MAY 5, 2016 CHAT 18 COMMENTS

    Betsy McCaughey, the former lieutenant governor of New York and one of the first to intellectually eviscerate the fraud known as Obamacare, rises to the defense of Donald Trump’s economic program in the pages of the New York Post:

    The rap on Donald Trump is he’s all bluster. The New York Times says he’s offering “incoherent mishmash.” Former GOP rival Ted Cruz claimed Trump has “no idea” how to fix the economy. Don’t believe it.
    Trump slashes the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, down from the current 40 percent, the highest rate in the industrialized world. Not all American companies pay that staggering rate, but even after deductions and accounting maneuvers, companies in the United States end up clobbered by taxes nearly twice the global average (24 percent).

    Trump also proposes a one-time 10 percent repatriation tax on profits US companies made overseas and kept there to avoid the 40 percent rate. That bargain could lure back as much as $2.5 trillion in capital urgently needed here. To promote investing in plants and equipment, Trump would allow companies to write off the purchases the year they’re made, rather than over several years, as current law requires.

    Economist Larry Kudlow predicts that if Trump’s corporate tax plan becomes law, you’ll see “a tremendous movement of capital and labor back to the United States.”

    Trump’s lower 15 percent business rate would also apply to small businesses that usually get taxed at individual income tax rates. That would give a break to mom-and-pop operations, startups and other small businesses that are the source of most jobs.

    SPONSORED

    For those who think (?!?) Hillary Clinton would be better, McCaughey advises them to think again:

    Compare Trump’s blueprint with Clinton’s nightmare scenario: Higher taxes, more tax complexity and an avalanche of new regulations. Over-regulation has depressed economic growth for the last 15 years.
    The Obama administration suffocated business with 81,000 pages of new regulations in 2015 alone. Hillary is pushing for even more — with controls on hiring, pay, bonuses and overtime to promote “fairer growth.” Translation: gender and racial preferences, plus meddling in how much you get paid.

    Remember Obama’s statement, “You didn’t build that.” Hillary assumes “You don’t own that.” Government will run your business. Hillary wants companies to stop maximizing quarterly earnings for shareholders — what she derides as “quarterly capitalism.” She wants “farsighted investments” (whatever that means). Companies that can get out of the United States will rush for the exits.

    She’s even promising an end to “the boom-and-bust cycles on Wall Street.” As plausible as ending rainy days.

    For all the tiny foot-stamping, the issue now isn’t whether Trump is a good GOP candidate; it’s that he’s the only GOP candidate, up against a manifestly unqualified, greedy criminal whose very candidacy mocks our nation’s history and values and disgraces the Democrat Party, if such a thing were possible. And is anyone really prepared to argue otherwise?

    Amazingly, yes.

    Trump, Your New Republican Stan

  52. And she speaks the truth. The way you lead a mule in the direction you want is with a carrot in front of it, and as stick behind it. On the issue of bringing jobs back into this country, the carrot is the low tax rate and the stick is tariffs when Ford, Carrier et. al. try to market their goods here. A 15% tax rate is the carrot. A 35% tariff is the stick. And don’t ask me to explain this to a leftist. They are dumber than owl shit, and will argue at a 15% tax rate is a sell out to corporations, when in fact it is a boon to job creation in this country. But a leftist is not concerned about job creation, except for government jobs. They are a morbid group of sub humans.

  53. Tony 3:58

    Wow, what an article. Lying to us to get the Iran Deal made, and announcing it so proudly. It reminds me of the Obamacare rollout, and that guy (maybe it’s a good thing his name has slipped my mind) spoke at a convention, basically bragging about how they lied to us to get it passed (you can keep your MD, keep your insurance, you will see a $2500 deduction in costs each year).

    It seems these special conniving snowflakes need to eventually come out, they just have to shout from the rooftops, “look at me! It was me! Aren’t I the cleverest one of all??!!”, with no awareness that outside of their bubble life, the people, the majority of our country’s citizens, we don’t find their anti-Americanism cool. We know what they did benefitted themselves, those in the bubble. We know they never even considered the choices they could have made to benefit us, the taxpayers who fund their Most Excellent Anti-American adventures. What a group of sophomoric narcissists.

    I hope Trump brings both up topics up; they’re both related.

  54. Wbb,

    “Hillary, “you don’t own that”…couldn’t have said it better, must have found that in her book “”It takes a village to raise a child”.

    APPARENTLY Hillary can’t do anything without a government handout, and make no mistake, they think your children belong to them.

  55. Hmm yeah, Trump has had to deal with 16 other candidates and Hillary,.. really one..
    He has received more votes than any other Republican nominee EVER…
    Democratic voter turn out is down 20%…
    Has had to deal with an openly hostile RNC, MEDIA, and GLOBALISTS from the beginning. ..
    We, shall see…
    Game on..

  56. Well put gonzo. And although I don’t think the blog name should change… if it did… it could be Hillaryis17.

    Trump already defeated 16 opponents. Hillary is 17. 🙂

  57. wbboei, do you by any chance know how old that Betsy is? People keep saying Sessions should be VP, but apparently he’s he same age as Trump (both 69), and would be starting the term after Trump’s 2 terms at age 78. I’m not sure that would go over well.

    Anyway, I don’t know this Betsy, but I’m voting for her today, based on her name. Her name is going extinct, like mine is (you only hear our names generally unless the woman is north of 50). If she were elected, Betsy would become popular again. So I’ll vote for her to get one of the old names back into circulation lol Way better than La’Taneeshqua or – hmmm are Muslim women even allowed to have first names? lol

  58. I think it’s fair for everything to shake out before admin decides what, if anything, s/he wants to do with the blog name.

    There’s only one rule. The blog and its insights must continue 🙂

    Although (feeling snarky here) a guest post by a former PUMA who now supports Obama III, explaining why they were against Obama but now his decisions and worldview are acceptable when mouthed by Hillary. Hillary who campaigns with the mothers of criminal kids killed in self defense when attacking another, but playing the game that they were walking innocently and were killed for walking while black. Explaining why “more of the same” is going to better economically, socially, culturally, and in foreign affairs. Explaining why enabling and pushing the status quo instead of putting America first is better for the elites, and why that should make up happy.

    A guest post explaining what we all aren’t able to understand could be very illuminating.

  59. gonzo, do you remember when Obama put out that flyer, “The Life of Julia”? (I may not have the name quite right.) I may have it saved on the computer somewhere. That thing horrified me.

    There are so many times during Obama’s reign that have made me wonder why people didn’t rise up (of course, I didn’t either, other than on the internet). “Fundamental transformation”, “you didn’t build that”, “we’re going to spread the wealth around”, and his more covert shenanigans (“lies” cough “lies”). But Life of Julia should have horrified all but those most highly dependent on taxpayer monies. Anyway, I don’t remember where Hillary’s association with Obama corresponds with that masterpiece “Life of Julia”, but I’m sure she’ll get around to it. She’s basically reading his old teleprompter feeds.

  60. @Shadow

    Trump will probably beat Hillary by a landslide. Trump had 17 competitors and still broke Republican records for votes. More than Romney, and expected to have more than Bush by the time the final votes come in from remaining states. Meanwhile, turnout has been 20 percent lower in many states for the Democrats. Your stats look cool but fail under inspection.

  61. Apollo – and not all of the primary Sanders voters will vote for him in the general.

    And in terms of total votes, on Greta tonight she had two women on who were emphasizing that more people voted against Trump than voted for him. Of course, they were conveniently ignoring the fact that the polls always showed Trump as most people’s second choice. The final primary numbers don’t represent a true anti-Trump vote number, because if, let’s say, 15 of those primary candidates had never run, many of them would have voted for Trump. Most weren’t anti-Trump, they just had a different first choice. But I’m sure I’m just remarkably brilliant, and those two women just didn’t understand – I’m sure they weren’t trying to push a narrative lol

  62. wbboei
    May 6, 2016 at 12:30 am
    ————————————
    One thing that video makes very clear is that Trump has been thinking a lot about the problems of this country for the last 36 years or so and has now decided that he can no longer wait for a politician to appear who could actually fix those problems.

  63. lorac
    May 6, 2016 at 3:04 am
    Apollo – and not all of the primary Sanders voters will vote for him in the general.

    Oops – I meant to say, not all of the primary Sanders voters will vote for Hillary in the general… sorry for any confusion…

  64. lorac
    May 6, 2016 at 3:04 am
    Both are those “ladies” are paid shills. One, A B Stoddard, is an dyed in the wool Obama-ite and has been since 2007. The other one is a Republican hack. Both are counting votes of the other 37 destroyed Republicans candidates as if none of those voters will vote for Trump NOW which is a misinterpretation of intent, bad math, Rove spin and the ability to ignore about eight months of polling analysis. We wonder how “elites” like these goofs can convince themselves what their paymasters want them to say so convincingly and with such “bad temper”? They are math, logic and statistics illiterates. If they both had not been so hateful and full of spleen I would have been embarrassed for them. DC needs a cleanout. A huge Roto-rooter to power through the stupid, useless, and malicious slime clogging any kind of progress and to suppress the what the public wants AND needs.

  65. Paul Ryan must tinder his resignation as Speaker. If he can’t get with the program he has to go. This is hostile takeover 101. Since he has never hit a lick at a snake outside of his government sponsored life Manafort needs to explain what a “man” does to this *****. If his Davos sponsorship is more important to him than the US House of Representatives then he needs to move to Switzerland with his shoe shine box.

  66. Moody’s, the international credit and bond rating behemoth, has determined that the European Union is basically dead. Not in trouble, not teetering, but dead. The costs of the migrants in care, etc and the sharp contractions in consumer spending, productivity, Greek, Italian (and Iberian) fiscal folly, the inclusion of a couple of hundred million new migrants from Turkey and Ukraine (which will be a gateway for Russian criminals with shiny new Ukraine passports and Putin won’t let them back in), a complete breakdown of Schengen this summer (with tanks! and troops with live ammo!) and a complete collapse of EU TTIP talks because of French cheese and wine (or so they say), and the uselessness of Brussels with Caliph Erdogan fucking everything up with Merkel is obvious. Brussels is DC with even dumber, uglier and snottier people. The bonds are soon to be worthless. Couldn’t happen to a nastier bunch of globalists. There isn’t going to be any money left to pay Bobo the Obama any honorarium for post-prez speeches. And Trump said the US doesn’t need or want the money suck of a UN! Lucky Trump.

  67. Lorac,

    I just finished watching “Hell on Wheels”, a Western drama centered on a man trying to deal with his demons post Civil War as a Confederate soldier and working on the railroads to complete the East/West line to connect America. It’s an amazing series, and I for one, am very sad this June is its last, but it’s well worth your time, the writing, acting and historical correctness is spectacular.
    The incredible fortitude one needed to succeed during that time..I think of the “Julia and “Pajama Boy”…we don’t have a prayer.
    By the way, Netflix has the first 4 seasons of Hell on Wheels and AMC has the 5th.

  68. That interview with Tapp Toes shows him to be–a globalist, a dog in a manger, but most of all a political neophyte. This may be something someone might confess to a trusted confidante. But it is not the kind of this you say to the world, at a time when Trump has not only the votes, but the wind at his back and is trying to unite the party. Here however this dufus gives the institutional left all they could have hoped for. This was a routine gut check, and he puked all over himself. He ignored his institutional responsibilities, and gave them all the ammunition they needed to keep alive their Republican civil war meme. On a personal level why stick your head above the fox hole when the bullets are flying? How willing will Trump be to cooperate with him after he has publicly rebuked Trump? And just who the hell is he, a rookie speaker to tell the leader of the party that he must come crawling to him. Thought this ill considered act of defiance of the will of the voter, he has put a target on his own back and on the backs of those in the House who voted to make him speaker. They are all enemies of the people now, unless and until he issues a retraction.

  69. heard on the news this morning Trump will send his consigliere, the big guy from NJ, to assist Ryan in his decision to support the GOP nominee. be careful Mr. Ryan, waking up with a horse-head would be a nasty experience.

  70. Trump Was a Spark, Not the Fire

    The establishments, both media and conservative, failed to anticipate how they’d be consumed.

    By PEGGY NOONAN
    May 5, 2016 6:41 p.m. ET

    God bless our beloved country as it again undergoes one of its quiet upheavals.

    Donald Trump will receive the Republican nomination for the presidency and nothing will be the same. How we do politics in America is changed and will not be going back. The usual standards and expectations have been turned on their head, and more than one establishment has been routed.

    A decent interval should be set aside for sheer astonishment.

    We face six months of what will be a historically hellacious campaign. Yes, we picked the wrong time to stop taking opioids.

    Before I go to larger issues I mention how everyone, especially the media, is blaming the media for Donald Trump’s rise. I hate to get in the way of their self-flagellation but that’s not how I see it. From the time he announced, they gave Mr. Trump unprecedented free media in long, live interviews, many by phone, some possibly from his bathtub. We’ll never know. It was a great boon to him and amounted, by one estimate, to nearly $2 billion worth of airtime.

    But the media did not make Donald Trump’s allure, his allure made for big ratings. Mr. Trump was a draw from the beginning. If anyone had wanted to listen to Jeb Bush, cable networks would have been happy to show his rallies, too.

    When Mr. Trump was on, ratings jumped, but it wasn’t only ratings, it was something else. It was the freak show at its zenith, it was great TV—you didn’t know what he was going to say next! He didn’t know! It was better than everyone else’s boring, prefabricated, airless, weightless, relentless word-saying—better than Ted Cruz, who seemed like someone who practiced sincere hand gestures in the mirror at night, better than Marco the moist robot, better than Hillary’s grim and horrifying attempts to chuckle like a person who chuckles.

    And it was something else. TV producers were all sure he’d die on their show. They weren’t for Mr. Trump. By showing him they were revealing him: Look at this fatuous dope, see through him! They knew he’d quickly enough say something unforgivable, and if he said it on their air he died on their show! They took him down with the question! It was only after a solid six months of his not dying that they came to have qualms. They now understood they were helping him. Nothing he says is unforgivable to his supporters! Or, another way to put it, his fans would forgive anything so long as he promised to be what they want him to be, a human bomb that will explode by timer under a bench in Lafayette Park and take out all the people but leave the monuments standing.

    In this regard today’s television producers remind me of the producers of 1969 who heard one day that Spiro Agnew, the idiotic new Republican vice president, was going to make a big speech lambasting the media for its liberal bias. They knew Agnew was about to make a fool of himself. Who would believe him? So they covered that speech all over the place, hyped it like you wouldn’t believe—no one in America didn’t hear about it. It made Agnew a sensation. The American people—“the silent majority”—saw it as Agnew did. “Nattering nabobs of negativism,” from the witty, alliterative pen of William Safire, entered the language.

    The producers had projected their own loathing. They found out they and America loathed different things.

    That’s a little like what happened this year with TV and Mr. Trump.

    My, that wasn’t much of a defense, was it?

    The Trump phenomenon itself would normally be big enough for any political cycle, but another story of equal size isn’t being sufficiently noticed and deserves mention. The Democratic base has become more liberal—we all know this part—but in a way the Republican base has, too. Or rather it is certainly busy updating what conservative means. The past few months, in state after state, one thing kept jumping out at me in primary exit polls. Democrats consistently characterize themselves as more liberal than in 2008, a big liberal year. This week in Indiana, 68% of Democratic voters called themselves liberal or very liberal. In 2008 that number was 39%. That’s a huge increase.

    In South Carolina this year, 53% of Democrats called themselves very or somewhat liberal. Eight years ago that number was 44%—again, a significant jump. In Pennsylvania, 66% of respondents called themselves very or somewhat liberal. That number eight years ago was 50%.

    The dynamic is repeated in other states. The Democratic Party is going left.

    But look at the Republican side. However they characterize themselves, a majority of GOP voters now are supporting the candidate who has been to the left of the party’s established thinking on a host of issues—entitlement spending, trade, foreign policy. Mr. Trump’s colorfully emphatic stands on immigration have been portrayed as so wackily rightist that the nonrightist nature of his other, equally consequential positions has been obscured.

    In my observation it is a mistake to think Mr. Trump’s supporters are so thick they don’t know his stands. They do.

    It does not show an understanding of the moment to say Donald Trump by himself has changed the Republican Party. It is closer to the mark to say the base of the party is changing and Mr. Trump’s electric arrival on the scene made obvious what was already happening.

    For this reason among others, I do not understand the impulse of the NeverTrump people to anathametize and shun those Republicans who will not vow to oppose Mr. Trump and commit to defeating him. They have been warned that if they don’t do these things they will not be allowed to help rebuild the party after Mr. Trump destroys it. Conservatives love to throw conservatives out of conservatism; it’s like an ancestral tic. But great political movements should not be run like private clubs. And have the anathemitizers noticed they aren’t in charge anymore? That in the great antiestablishment disruption of 2016 they have been upended, too?

    We don’t know what’s coming in 2016, or what happens to the GOP if Mr. Trump wins or loses. If there is a rebuilding of the party, as opposed to an ongoing reinvention, we don’t know when that will commence. If it is a rebuilding, on what grounds do the NeverTrump forces think it will be rebuilt? As a neoconservative, functionally open-borders, slash-the-entitlements party?

    I am not sure, whatever happens in 2016, that there will ever again be a market for that product. All this cycle I’ve been thinking of what Lee Atwater said when he wanted to communicate to a politician that a policy was not popular: “The dawgs don’t like the dawg food.”

    Centers of gravity are shifting. The new Republican Party will not be rebuilt and re-formed in McLean, it will be rebuilt or re-formed in Massapequa.

    Finally, can Mr. Trump win? Of course. Uphill but possible. If this year has taught us anything it is what Harrison Salisbury said he’d learned from a lifetime in journalism: “Expect the unexpected.”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-was-a-spark-not-the-fire-1462488099

  71. Does Ryan aka Davos Boy realize that he has put himself on the wrong side of history?

    What a de ranged thing for him to do, all things considered.

    He will probably lose his election, his speakership and his reputation.

    What’s left?

    He could become the piano player in a whore house.

    Or a K street lobbyist if the piano player job is filled.

  72. Noonan makes a good point:

    The reason big media gave Trump all the air time, i.e. rope, is they were sure he would hang himself on their show. $2 billion dollars worth of air time trying to make a fool out of him and laugh him off the stage. THAT WAS THEIR MOTIVE. For them, having long since lost sight of their audience, it was an inside game between big media SUPER STARS to compete with each other to see who got the prize—his head on a stick. They totally lost sight of the fact that the issues he was raising were verbotten under the doctrine of political correctness, and when they were raised they SCREAMED racist–to an audience who had lost their jobs and was sick of being called racists. The Harvard degrees which are coin of the realm in their realm are box office poison to their audience, and all they have managed to do through their collective ineptitude is reduce their stature. They have been thoroughly discredited by their own hubris, machinations and failure to realize that in Trump they have met their match and then some.

  73. This is where unbridled partisanship and advocacy masquerading as journalism always leads: to pure sophistry, and a denial of what common sense tells us. You can write the narrative, but yuo cannot control reality, because, in life in general, journalism in particular you must expect the unexpected. What is amazing to me however that this group of people who fancy themselves as the vanguards of history, failed to realize what was happening, and in the words of an old arbitrator I knew, if Trump did not exist, the people would have to invent him. Bottom line? These people are worse than careerists, they are traitors to this nation.

  74. When I started practicing law in 1975 we were admonished not to engage in so called ad hominem attacks against an adversary. Stick to the issues themselves. That was theory. The reality of trial work even then was you would find opportunities to attack the credibility of your adversary–subtly. But the general understanding in those days was that to do this blatantly was bad form. The same sort of self restraint applied in the field of journalism. You could be biased but you would not let it go so far over the top that your motive became obvious. That was for hacks, yellow journalist and ambulance chasers. Obviously, that is no longer the case. Even with a guy like Tapper, if you spend a few minutes listening to him, it becomes obvious that he is biased, and perhaps the best example was when he slipped subconsciously into that beltway narrative that war is such a waste, forgetting (just like Paul Ryan did) who his present audience was—in that case a special forces survivor who saw something more in the death of his comrades at the hands of the Taliban than Tap Toes breezy dismissal of their sacrifice as simply a waste of life.

  75. All of Paul Ryans mail box’s are full and no human will answer the phone…hmmm, wonder why?

    Pretty sure he thinks he is going to be the nominee. I say BS…we meet at midnight and ride…

  76. gonzotx
    May 6, 2016 at 2:26 pm
    All of Paul Ryans mail box’s are full and no human will answer the phone…hmmm, wonder why?

    Pretty sure he thinks he is going to be the nominee. I say BS…we meet at midnight and ride…

    Not anymore.

    He THOUGHT there would be a brokered convention.

    And he THOUGHT he would be the nominee.

    And it shocked him to find that neither was true.

    Between now and Tuesday when the Ice Man Cometh

    He needs to decide: do I want to be a politician

    Or do I really harbor a secret desire to be a lobbyist.

    Maybe he should ask his priest, since he is Catholic.

    And maybe the advice will be rend unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and get out.

    Join the priesthood on K Street.

  77. Now, if we can find that ace investigative reporter Brian Ross from ABC to do a little what he calls investigative reporter which consists of surfing the internet, finding a name and spinning a conspiracy theory around it which big media can then run 24-7 as he did in the Giffords case, blaming–who else a white conservative and Sarah Palin, then I am sure he can find some causal connection between this maniac and Donald, even if he has to invent one.

  78. I have nearly the same viceral reaction to big media that I have for their messiah.

    They make me want to puke and reach for the channel changer.

  79. I am stunned.

    My world is toppling

    Mary Matlin–Cheney snark for the ages is leaving the Party because of . . .

    Trump??????

    What has this idiot wind holdover from the Bush Adminstration done

    Other than run her mentally bracing Mutt and Jeff routine with her hubby

    For the infinite amusement of Washington insiders

    If she is leaving the party fine

    Don’t let the door hit you in the derrier on the way out

    Mary Mary quite contrary

    But how about we stop blaming Trump and start blaming

    Tone deaf elitist assholes like you

    Who ignore the deteriorating state of the nation

    And your people who gave us the Iraq War and all that has come after

    And tell us everything is coming up roses because our unemployment figure is 5%

    I guess when you are part of the Marie Antoinette entourage.

    A strategic retreat is prudential

    But do it quietly please, lest you get noticed and hung by the roadside.

    And notice how they interpret this revolution in a self serving way

    They say the American People are trying to get even with them

    They flatter themselves

    What the American People are saying to hold overs like her is this

    The country is failing, you are the cause, so get out of the way.

    And if you prolong your exit with curtain calls

    They will elicit not roses but rotten tomatoes.

    Your day is over.

  80. Mexican’t Fox just called Trump supporters lazy drunks…

    Hmmm, that will go over well…

Comments are closed.