This is very interesting as it happens before the primary in New Hampshire, a somewhat libertarian place, where he could expect to get the most votes.
It must be that he wants to throw his support to one of the other candidates. Which one?
As I said yesterday: "Time for every GOP candidate who is not Cruz or Trump to endorse Rubio. It's that simple."
ADDED: Santorum is dropping out.
३ फेब्रुवारी, २०१६
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१४० टिप्पण्या:
About time.
Complete loon.
Rand was my #1 choice. I am sorry he did not do better but I think he did the right thing. He just had no chance of improving his standing.
He plays a valuable role in the Senate and I hope he can get re-elected there.
John Henry
Why Rubio?
Why not Carson?
I would really like Cruz if he had not been born Canadian/American.
I would REALLY like Cruz. I think he is so much better than Trump. However, I am still a Trump supporter since I do not see Cruz as eligible.
John Henry
Right. Endorse the Establishment candidate, because things are working so well in DC today, who would want to upset the applecart?
What it won't be is a joint Prime Minister of Canada and President of the USA candidate who speaks Spanish when addressing his south of the Border voting bloc.
Kentucky will go for Trump and dump the Paul clique.
I like Paul, but don't see him as Pres. Hard to see him endorsing Rubio, because of their foreign policy differences. Cruz? I don't know.
Paul would be the right guy to put in charge of dismantling parts of gov't that need it.
As Senator Rubio has the opposite political opinions to Senator Rand Paul, both on domestic government spending and on overseas policy, Senator Paul is very unlikely to endorse Senator Rubio.
Maybe he's dropping out now because he's obviously not going to be Pres and there are deadlines approaching to make sure he can be a Senator again?
The squirrel ran off with the acorn that fell too close to the tree.
I don't know who Paul could endorse. Everyone else is diametrically opposed on some major issue, but then Paul turned out to be sadly flexible in this campaign.
"Why Rubio? Why not Carson?"
Because Carson is not going to be the nominee. That's something that can be seen already, even if Cruz/Rubio jumped the gun saying Carson was quitting. Carson should quit and should support whichever of the top 3 he genuinely thinks is best, Cruz, Rubio, or Trump.
Rand Paul does have to worry about his Senate race back home in Kentucky, but in my view, that doesn't explain not holding out for one more week and making an impressive showing in NH.
If Rand Paul endorses someone, it is more likely to be Cruz or Carson than Rubio unless there is some sort of quid pro quo. I'm guessing Carson because they're both doctors and because they see eye to eye on most domestic issues.
@David Begley, Rand Paul is scarcely a "complete loon." He's dead right on many economic issues. His notion of a an isolationist foreign policy is sadly mistaken, however.
John Henry said...I would really like Cruz if he had not been born Canadian/American.
Like the Obama birthers who wouldn't let go even after the Hawaii birth certificate was released, I think it's funny that some people think it's up to them to decide whether someone is a natural born citizen. As though the definition is whatever they want it to be.
Cruz is Canadian? How foolish.
Paul is more aligned with Cruz than anyone. Not Booosh, Rubicon, Christie(gag), or Kas-sick,
His notion of a an isolationist foreign policy is sadly mistaken, however.
He's never stated he's a isolationist. He's perfectly fine with a strong defense. He's just not sure what regime changes in the Middle East have gotten us or the world. Sadly, he's been proven a bit correct over the past decade.
I will admit to being a Rand man. He's the only one who gives a shit (R or D) about civil liberties it seems. He seeks criminal justice reform, which also includes changing civil asset forfeiture laws to the benefit of the citizenry. He wants a sincerely smaller government.
He's also is not hypocritical about cutting spending but not touching or wildly increasing defense spending.
He is however, an awful candidate. And that is of his own making. He hates campaigning, and it shows. He's probably better off in the Senate anyways.
What sucks most of all is the best logo in the race is now out.
I don't know who Rand Paul throws his support to because Trump is no libertarian and Rubio has worked pretty closely with the establishment but Rand has been very critical of Cruz - though I think Cruz is the closest to libertarian of the group.
"His notion of a an isolationist foreign policy is sadly mistaken, however."
Not isolationist -- non-interventionist. Nobody's talking about pulling up drawbridges. It's very possible to have strong global relationships on many dimensions without deploying troops and carrier groups everywhere. Given how much conservatives profess to love the 'Founding Fathers' it is curious that there is not more respect for their fears of large standing armies and foreign entanglements. Would any Republican candidates besides Rand Paul endorse the sentiments of Washington's Farewell Address?
Ann Althouse said...
"Time for every GOP candidate who is not Cruz or Trump to endorse Rubio. It's that simple."
Other than stifling debate and ensuring the maintenance of the status quo, what would this achieve?
Does Rand Paul want a cabinet post?
Too bad. He was the real small government candidate in the field, and as such was closest to my own views.
"Rand Paul does have to worry about his Senate race back home in Kentucky, but in my view, that doesn't explain not holding out for one more week and making an impressive showing in NH."
Maybe he dropped out because he was headed to a good showing in NH. It would have been harder to do the inevitable if he did well.
Don't endorse anyone and wait and see who the nominee is (or when it's certain) and support that person.
Rand Paul's supporters won't turn to Rubio. They are polar opposites on defense.
Does Rand Paul want a cabinet post?
From Hillary? No.
Wouldn't Paul prefer Cruz over Rubio and either of those way over Trump? Scott Walker tried the "negative endorsement" with an implied shot at Trump on his way out. That appeared to damage Trump not at all.
In the end, although there is a high correlation between endorsements and who wins, Althouse may have cause and effect reversed. Major politicians want to ingratiate themselves with the winner more than they want to influence the outcome (or risk showing how little influence they have).
Endorsements are therefore like betting markets with only politicians wagering. Bush has more endorsements than anyone right now because he was the early favorite. Rubio is currently second because he has been perceived as the person most likely to emerge from the smoldering campaign wreckage.
Those with money should stay in the race and spend it and raise attention to the issues you think are important. Rand is smart to throw in the towel now money wise if he wants to run for re-election in Kentucky. He needs to raise money for that.
What does Ben Carson have to lose. He's raised a lot of money and can stay in and participate in debates. He's retired, like Jeb, so it's not like he has any responsibilities to the citizens of Ohio or New Jersey who elected him governor. Kasich and Christie will drop out after New Hampshire if I hey don't do well because of lack of funds and an obligation to fulfill their elected duties.
But Fiorina, Jeb, and Carson have a lot of free time and can afford to stay in the race and put forth their views.
I don't think he had any chance of winning, but I think it's unfortunate he's dropping out. He was the libertarian of the race, and raised a lot of key issues that could take on Hillary and Co. from a new angle--the anti-interventionist, anti-security state POV. Cruz picked up on some of this but Paul has long been more consistent.
I think him being out most likely helps Cruz, but who knows how it shakes out.
Rubio also supports bulk data collection by the NSA. That's a total non-starter for Paul, or does our hostess not recall Paul's filibustering?
The people who cling to this "Cruz is not a natural born US citizen" meme are difficult to take seriously. Do they believe that Sen Cruz, who is widely regarded even by his enemies as brilliant, is just doing this for grins and giggles and without any legal foundation for success? Is a former solicitor general who has argued and won cases before the Supreme Court really that ignorant of the law? Do they think all the money interests who support Cruz are just delusional?
The only people who seem to see any purpose in that line of attack are Trump supporters, and I have a feeling that they are going to be really disappointed when The Donald drops out of the race and parlays his erstwhile political campaign into a new reality series based on political campaigning. There's a much greater chance of that happening than Cruz being disqualified for the job.
The problem with Rubio is he isn't as intelligent as Cruz. Cruz may ultimately thwart Rubio and the status quo establishment.
Cruz! Cruz! Cruz! The finest candidate for ALL American.
Rubio is smart enough. He's certainly running a better race and comes off better than Cruz. If Cruz were smarter he'd improve his demeanor. He comes off like a know it all jerk. He's a good appellate lawyer. Not as good as John Roberts was but good. Smart at law doesn't mean overall smart. I wouldn't want the head of the physics department at Yale as president, although that person is super smart.
Overall smarts is important and Rubio has more overall smarts than Cruz. Better temperament and judgment and personality as well/
Lyle Smith:
I decided long ago that in my field, there's a threshold level of intelligence to be able to do the job. Above that, there's a very poor correlation between what we might call excess intelligence and degree of success. I think this applies with greater force to presidents. If Rubio's just not smart enough to do the job, of course, that is indeed a problem for him.
i don't know who Rand would endorse. He doesn't seem to have a lot of love for Cruz, and called him out a bunch of times on his hypocricy and outright lying. where will his voters go? maybe Trump. Trump always struck me as a more mainstream populist Ron Paul. If Paul were a democrat. Their ideologies are totally different, but does ideology matter that much if the goal is to be the outsider that takes on the system? How to achieve the revolution is less important, apparently than that there is one.
I know Bush's voters will go to Rubio though.
Ann,
I think you are right about Carson not going to be the nominee. I think he could be the nominee if he had been treated fairly. He has been #3 or #4 for quite some time, was even #2 for a while. Still #4 at 10% or so, he is 5 times more electable than Jeb Bush at 2%.
Yet who gets the press? You post 4-5 times more notes about Bush than Carson. The press is even worse.
Yet in spite of being ignored and not taken seriously, he still hangs in their at #4, ahead of 6-7 other candidates.
I think it is shameful the way he has been treated. No white man or woman would be treated like this. Only a black republican.
The "shameful" is not directed at you, Ann. You just follow what is in the news. Had Carson gotten more press instead of being shunned, I am sure you would have written more about him.
Carson is truly "The Invisible Man" of Ralph Ellison's book. The black man of accomplishment who is ignored because he is black.
John Henry
I would suggest the second tier candidates are looking at the electoral map, not necessarily the electorate and won't or shouldn't drop out.
I haven't looked at the roadmap recently, but I think R's still need to win Florida and Ohio.
That means possibly a Bush or Kasich VP. I don't know how Fiorina polls with women, but she is certainly as competent and conservative as most of the current candidates. I wouldn't have any problem supporting a Cruz/Fiorina ticket or Trump/Kasich or Trump/Carson.
At some point it comes down to the numbers and I think it's premature to fold.
I don't think Paul would help any ticket.
(cont) I mean by that that Trump strikes me as the 3rd party candidate. Just like Sanders. Neither one really belongs in the party they are running to be leaders of. Same as Ron Paul. He wasn't a Republican, so everytime he was on stage he came across like a weirdo. But if he was 3rd party it would make total sense.
The Donald may be starting to crack under pressure. He went from saying congratulations two days ago, to Iowa doesn't matter, yesterday, and today he is saying the election is Iowa was stolen.
He needs to stop posting on twitter. When he gets up and gives speeches, I can really appreciate the guy.
On twitter he is a real jack nob.
And I want him, desperately, to stay in the race. I think a three way race is the best shot for Cruz to get the nomination.
John Henry: Oh, please. Dr. Carson is a wonderful man, probably too good for the presidency. But he is the least qualified; by his own words has proven to be the least informed, and comes across very meek and mild. Which is nice in a human being but not what we need in a leader. (He also has many un-conservative positions, but apparently that's not actually a negative this year.)
Let's be honest, a white man in his exact position would never have been encouraged to run for President. For office, possibly -- state or federal congress, senate. But he initially attracted attention because he was a black man who criticized Obama at a prayer breakfast and those Republicans desperate to prove they aren't racists jumped all over him.
"The Donald may be starting to crack under pressure. He went from saying congratulations two days ago, to Iowa doesn't matter, yesterday, and today he is saying the election is Iowa was stolen."
Don't want to start another Trump fight, but this is standard behavior for him. I don't see a change.
Trump and Sanders were both smart to use the two major parties to launch what are third party candidacies.
Ron Paul figured it out awhile ago but, unlike Ron Paul, Trump and Sanders resonate with enough party supporters and probably bring in new people to vote in party primaries to make themselves competitive. It makes sense to do this. Almost half of voters in a general election don't identify with either party so you have a better chance as an independent if you can get the no until. Of one of the two major parties.
Cruz has tried very hard to co-opt the Paul faction, the most notable example being auditing the Fed. Another example is drug policy where Cruz has "evolved" on whether the federal government should allow states to legalize or decriminalize marijuana.
But if he is as much of an asshole as people say, Rand might just sit back and see if any of the other candidates try to win his endorsement.
JPS,
No candidate in a very long time has been as intelligent as Ted Cruz, and if Professor Althouse is right, Cruz's intelligence won't have mattered (which is basically what you're saying). That said, I wouldn't totally bet on Rubio just yet because of what Cruz might yet manage to pull off. Although, as Althouse has surmised, Cruz is up against it.
@BDNYC: What's Cruz's position on marijuana?
He's never stated he's a isolationist. He's perfectly fine with a strong defense.
@MarkW, I think you're mistaken. My understanding is that Rand Paul is against strengthening and expanding our military. FWIW my own position is that the world needs a policeman, and that the United States is the only country capable of filling that role that I'd trust filling that role.
What if the ticket is ultimately Rubio/Cruz or Cruz/Rubio. I really don't see it being any other possibility. If its cruz he might change it up, but if its Rubio my guess is he takes on Cruz to show he is not the establishment Repub who is for amnesty.
@Big Mike
"FWIW my own position is that the world needs a policeman, and that the United States is the only country capable of filling that role that I'd trust filling that role."
You trust the US in that role? Why? Where exactly do you think the US has done a good job? Afghanistan? Iraq? Encouraging the 'Arab Spring' (which has degenerated into civil war, slaughter, the rise of ISIS and a massive refugee crisis)? Even if you think US intentions are good -- what makes you think we have any idea what the hell we're doing?
Cruz is the ONLY one in the combined field (R+D) who believes the power of Government should be limited. ALL others have revealed a desire to use the coercive power of Government in one way or another.
Paul has done a fairly good job of maintaining an active Senate presence while campaigning; so much so that he's been able to make an issue out of Rubio's absence for recent votes. It's possible that Rand considered whether he could do what he needed to do in NH (and beyond) and still keep that going, and decided he'd rather be a successful Senator than an unsuccessful presidential candidate. As a supporter of his, I'm sorry to see him go, but I think he made the right choice.
It is a measure of how fascist this country has become that principled opposition to military adventurism is declared "isolationist."
Continuing to repeat a lie doesn't make it true, no matter how much one wishes. The fact that people are still talking about Cruz' eligibility indicates nothing more than how widespread Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is within the American electorate.
With Paul's departure, at this point, neither major party fields a candidate that I can support.
@Big Mike:
"My understanding is that Rand Paul is against strengthening and expanding our military. FWIW my own position is that the world needs a policeman, and that the United States is the only country capable of filling that role that I'd trust filling that role."
What is a world "policeman?"
As to the Cruz citizenship issue, that was settled by the candidacy of McCain (and possibly Obama as well).
Expect however, the issue to be flogged mercilessly from all sides.
All other remaining candidates and the special interests (medical, media, energy, transportation, whatever) that sponsors them have a huge common interest in keeping the coercive power of Government available for loan or purchase.
Cruz is no more intelligent than Obama. They both went to Harvard Law within a few years of each other and were both good students there (magma cum lauds but not summa cum laude so there were better students ahead of each of them).
They are both smart but the "Obama is the most intelligent" or "Cruz is the most intelligent" is idiotic fan girl hyperbole. Both these guys were political science majors in college and have law degrees. Bill Clinton and Nixon were more intelligent. W was as intelligent; so were Romney and McCain.
Obama graduated magna cum laude?
Citation needed.
"What if the ticket is ultimately Rubio/Cruz or Cruz/Rubio."
I can see Rubio in the VP role, but Cruz would be a terrible VP. He does not have a second-chair mentality.
Cruz might get impeached. Who would defend him in the Senate if they all hate him, esp if they are OK with the establishment VP?
Viola, Rubio.
But if Rubio wins and Cruz is VP, he's impeachment-proofed himself.
John Henry,
Would a court ruling convince you that Ted Cruz qualifies as a natural born citizen? NBC is not defined in the Constitutional, causing us to turn to the courts for clarification.
mccullough said...
Cruz is no more intelligent than Obama. They both went to Harvard Law within a few years of each other and were both good students there (magma cum lauds but not summa cum laude so there were better students ahead of each of them).
They are both smart but the "Obama is the most intelligent" or "Cruz is the most intelligent" is idiotic fan girl hyperbole. Both these guys were political science majors in college and have law degrees. Bill Clinton and Nixon were more intelligent. W was as intelligent; so were Romney and McCain.
This was all sort of debatable in a nobody can prove it sort of way until you got to McCain. Then I knew you were just pulling our legs.
McCain's military records show he had an IQ of 133. He was a lazy student in college but is intelligent.
@mc
Then he has lost 50 points since then.
And, I would not believe that score unless I saw the proof.
Professor,
Rubio is a liar and a complete tool of the establishment. Your analysis is wrong.
Trump absolutely loses it:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/trump-cruz-stole-iowa-tweet-deleted-218674
Is there any adult supervision within the Trump campaign?
I like Ted Cruz. Rubio has already proven that he can't be trusted. A Democrat lite.
I think the Donald has peaked.
"As to the Cruz citizenship issue, that was settled by the candidacy of McCain (and possibly Obama as well)."
And George Romney.
"Trump absolutely loses it:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/trump-cruz-stole-iowa-tweet-deleted-218674"
Donald Trump: I am big. It's the election that got small.
Joe Biden is the only national politician in the last generation who seems like he has a relatively low IQ. Maybe it's from his brain surgery in the 1980s but he comes off as not particularly bright.
Hillary Clinton seems smart but not anything to write home about. She flunked the DC bar exam back in the 1970s, which is embarrassing. She was old enough to know she needed to study hard to pass. She wasn't an adolescent at the time.
"He plays a valuable role in the Senate and I hope he can get re-elected there."
Not to worry Rand Paul doesn't have any serious competition in the KY Senate race.
Actually you kind of said that a while ago while naming Bush. It is that simple - unless one has doubts about Rubio's ability to be president. In the end, this is not going to be about winning, but about governing. A sobering thought.
Blogger Chuck said...
Trump absolutely loses it:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/trump-cruz-stole-iowa-tweet-deleted-218674
Is there any adult supervision within the Trump campaign?
I kind of reminds me of Ross Perot accusing the Bushes of wanting to assassinate him.
But, I'm not a political genius. I just pretend to be one. Maybe there is a plan here to pick up Carson's support? I mean, you've got Carson accusing Cruz of dirty tricks. You've got Cruz apologizing. Now you've got Trump jumping on Carson's side.
Perhaps Trump thinks he can pick up more evangelical and black voters and get people to doubt Cruz at the same time?
The deleted tweet part is just dumb though. He deleted a tweet and replaced it with another tweet along the same lines. That's just media noise trying to make things seem more sinister and cover up than they are.
"@David Begley, Rand Paul is scarcely a "complete loon." He's dead right on many economic issues. His notion of a an isolationist foreign policy is sadly mistaken, however."
The well respected supply side economist Arthur Laffer has said that Rand Paul has been terrific as a Senator.
dreams said...
"As to the Cruz citizenship issue, that was settled by the candidacy of McCain (and possibly Obama as well)."
And George Romney.
How did that settle it?
""As to the Cruz citizenship issue, that was settled by the candidacy of McCain (and possibly Obama as well)."
And George Romney.
How did that settle it?"
Yeah I don't really see how "people let them stay on the ballot so that settles it". It's not like there's a clear statute or a Supreme Court case covering this.
Not that I think Cruz (or George Romney) were ineligible based on being born overseas. But there does seem to be disagreement over what makes someone a natural born citizen. Growing up, I seem to recall learning that it meant "born in U.S. or U.S. territory" (e.g., Guam, or Canal Zone for McCain) or "born to a U.S. Citizen" though I don't know whether that means both parents have to be citizens or just one.
"How did that settle it?"
George Romney was born in Mexico.
"Is there any adult supervision within the Trump campaign?"
I get the feeling this is what it'd be like if Kanye West ran for president.
"George Romney was born in Mexico."
Right, but he dropped out of the '68 race before the issue was raised as a legal matter. I don't think any court ever ruled on that form of eligibility to be president.
Too bad. Rand Paul is the only Republican worth listening to for more than five seconds.
Interesting article about Cruz. It seems people that really know him have a different opinion than the RINOs in the senate.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-top-10-things-you-need-to-know-about-ted-cruz/
Hmmm. I need to learn how to hyperlink.
"Right, but he dropped out of the '68 race before the issue was raised as a legal matter. I don't think any court ever ruled on that form of eligibility to be president."
He dropped out after admitting to having been brainwashed in Vietnam.
"Anyway, the other thing we usually hear about Romney’s political demise is that he was ruined politically because he had confessed to being “brainwashed” in Vietnam. Romney’s “brainwashed” statement ranks pretty high in the list of famous political gaffes, so much so that you might not know that Romney’s statement made perfect sense and that he was obviously using “brainwashed” as a perfectly reasonable metaphor."
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2011/12/politics-gaffe-recalling-brainwashing-george-romney
I remember the 1968 race and when Romney made that statement about being brainwashed.
@Brando If you hadn't heard, Kanye West has already said he wants to run in 2020, no doubt inspired by the electorate's massive support of entertainers with narcissistic delusions to head cabinet meetings, decide whether or not to bomb other countries, name the chairman of the Federal Reserve, the CIA and all that kind of shit.
Don't look at me, I've been unhappy about that trend since Bill Clinton played sax on Arsenio.
Grumpy is good. (But is Good grumpy?)
Hmmm. I need to learn how to hyperlink.
Blogger could help but they maintain an antiquated comment system because the cost of upgrading isn't worth any revenue, really.
(a href="http://whateveryourlinkURLis" ) What you want the text to say that is linkable (/a)
Replace the parentheses with < >
With Rafael, Marco, Hillary and Bernie America is certain to slide into Third World-dom. With Trump we stand a chance.
garage mahal said...
Too bad. Rand Paul is the only Republican worth listening to for more than five seconds.
Rand, unfortunately, lost months ago when he began deviating from his father's hard-core libertarianism in an attempt to appear more 'electable'. This backfired badly for him. Once he be began mixing his message his appeal dimmed for anyone with a libertarian bent.
@Brando If you hadn't heard, Kanye West has already said he wants to run in 2020, no doubt inspired by the electorate's massive support of entertainers with narcissistic delusions to head cabinet meetings, decide whether or not to bomb other countries, name the chairman of the Federal Reserve, the CIA and all that kind of shit.
It will be so much fun to see everyone get their knickers in a twist if he does actually run.
"Right, but he dropped out of the '68 race before the issue was raised as a legal matter. I don't think any court ever ruled on that form of eligibility to be president."
I misread your comment, reading before as because. Sorry about that.
About Rand Paul in the Senate; I agree that Senator Paul is an invaluable voice for liberty and the constitution and small government, and I am glad he is there. He has to get going with Kentucky filing and campaigning for re-election in 2016.
Marco Rubio, on the other hand, is all-in for President in 2016. Or Vice President. He can't (under Florida law) and won't run for his Senate seat while he is running for President. And it would be bad, to see that seat go back to Democrats.
I love having Rand Paul and Ted Cruz in the Senate. I'd like them both to stay there.
Rand Paul would have been my first choice. I hope he gets a chance to serve in a useful capacity if a Republican is elected. He understands the tyranny of regulation that we are living under.
I had to laugh at Trump today. Spent the past few weeks mocking Cruz, the Canadian. Then rails against Cruz's campaign tactics. Too funny. Crybaby.
After getting schlonged Monday, I think Trump has blood coming out of ears or somewhere.
EMD,
Thanks
Texas Monthly explains Ted
"He dropped out after admitting to having been brainwashed in Vietnam."
Romneys have a gift for saying incomprehensibly stupid things that ruin their candidacies. How can using "brainwashed" to describe being mis-led possibly be the right term when describing yourself?
Though he likely would not have gotten the nomination that year anyway. Nixon had all the party bosses lined up.
"I had to laugh at Trump today. Spent the past few weeks mocking Cruz, the Canadian. Then rails against Cruz's campaign tactics. Too funny. Crybaby."
I love how he thinks Iowa should have a do-over because Cruz did some dishonest campaigning. Besides the pot calling the kettle black, does he really think lying during a campaign is enough to get an election overturned? Does he really think his supporters are that crazy or stupid? (Though he did say he could murder someone in broad daylight and his supporters would stick by him, and meant that as a compliment...)
Boy, Trump looked "low energy" on election night.
@AReasonableMan:
Rand, unfortunately, lost months ago when he began deviating from his father's hard-core libertarianism in an attempt to appear more 'electable'. "
Hard-core libertarians don't get elected president in this country. Ron Paul got by because he mostly expressed his libertarianism in a populist manner on issues like war, the Fed, and the financial industry.
eric:
Your unending defense of Trump actually inspired me to do something that turned out to be delightful.
Anyone can do this, of course.
Google the words . (You don't need the arrows; I just didn't want to use quotation marks, because you don't need them either and it would diminish the search if you used quotes.)
When you get the results, click on Images. And then, in glorious digital imaging, you get a fabulous collection of various Tweets deleted from The Real Donald Trump Twitter account. You'll remember a lot of them from various scandals over the past six months, but some of them are earlier, and heck, there are so many that no one could possibly can keep track of them all.
OOOOooops. In my post just above, it should have read "Google the words Trump deleted Tweet. But because I put the words inside of the two arrow symbols, they disappeared as html code.
So, sorry all.
Anyway, the Google search terms are "Trump deleted Tweet" without the quotation marks as noted above. You'll thank me later.
About Rand Paul possibly suggesting supporters switch to Trump...
I had been unaware previously of the vicious Trump Tweet alleging that Senator Paul was a "spoiled brat" lacking a "properly functioning brain." It's part of the Cavalcade of deleted Trump Tweets as I described above.
As the Republican field narrows -- it surely will, and soon -- I can't imagine anyone in the field who would urge supporters to go with Trump. Not after each of them have been personally insulted by The Donald.
So Trump is calling attention over the next few days to Cruz Voter Violation mailings and his campaign telling caucus goers that Carson was quitting the race. So Cruz is going to be apologizing again and explaining his sleazy campaign tactics for the next few days. This will be fun. I have to think the RNC will pay Trump over $100 million to end his campaign.
"Boy, Trump looked "low energy" on election night."
He actually was gracious. It impressed me, and since the guy has/had a real shot at being President, I found it very encouraging. Oh, well.
"Texas Sen. Ted Cruz secured two major victories Monday, winning the Republican Iowa caucuses and also receiving a favorable decision from the Illinois Board of Elections, which confirmed his U.S. citizenship met the state's primary ballot requirements."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ruling-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/article/2582259?custom_click=rss
Paul, as a senator, would prefer a president he could work with, and I don't think he feels that way about Cruz. Remember how hard he came down on Cruz when Cruz called McConnell a liar?
Paul criticized Cruz for breaching Senate decorum, saying the Texan could not accomplish any of his legislative priorities because of how much his GOP colleagues despise him.
Blogger Chuck said...
eric:
Your unending defense of Trump actually inspired me to do something that turned out to be delightful.
You will appreciate it more when Cruz wins the Presidency.
Blogger Lydia said...
Paul, as a senator, would prefer a president he could work with, and I don't think he feels that way about Cruz. Remember how hard he came down on Cruz when Cruz called McConnell a liar?
Paul will almost certainly endorse Rubio. Rubio likes to make deals. Gang of 8 showed that. Paul likes to bring the bacon home to Kentucky. He knows who butters his bread. If it were Bush or Kasich or Christie in the lead, he would endorse them too.
I like Rand Paul.
He needs a new haircut though.
tits.
Rush Limbaugh speaks highly of Rubio.
"I'm gonna tell you something, folks. I'm a lone wolf on this, but I know everybody is assuming that Marco Rubio is the chosen establishment candidate and they're doing so on the basis that Rubio has experienced the Gang of Eight and amnesty and so forth, but Marco Rubio I really like. I like Ted Cruz. There are any number of people in this campaign, two or three people, if they win, I'd be happy.
But it doesn't matter because the establishment does have their candidate, and it looks like it is going to be Rubio. And, as such, Rubio is gonna end up becoming an enemy of several Republican -- or many perhaps potential Republican -- voters. I just remember the days that Marco Rubio was in the state of Florida, local politics, state politics, and then going national. He was considered, perhaps, one of the greatest potential heirs to Ronald Reagan, and now he's being derided as a sellout member of the establishment.
I thought his speech last night... He was the first to get out there. He hustled to get out there. As such, it made him look like the winner. He had energy. I thought it was a great speech that Rubio gave last night. It was energetic. I'm not choosing sides on anything here, folks. Nothing's changed in that regard. Simple observations I share with you as the program unfolds. I just find it stunning"
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/
eric you and mccullough need to talk things over.
(I feel like a beat generation poet, writing sentences without any capitalization. I guess capital letters are just a GOP Establishment thing.)
Tim Maguire:
When I was a kid, the accepted notion was you could only be president if you were born in the United States. There was no talk of these exceptions etc. It was plain and simple - you had to be born in the USA. As kids, we talked about it for some reason.
So you want to scoff at John Henry - go ahead and do so. But I am with John Henry.
And I will add the recent re-thinking of anchor baby status leads me to believe that the accepted interpretation re automatic citizenry was tweaked in the last 30-40 years so we would accept the babies of illegals. Just my two cents.
I'm surprised at how few votes Paul was able to garner.
Rubio is the heir to Reagan, who pushed for and signed the last amnesty bill. Rubio is as conservative as Reagan, maybe even more conservative.
Original Mike said: "He actually was gracious. It impressed me, and since the guy has/had a real shot at being President, I found it very encouraging. Oh, well."
Yep, gracious. For all of 24 hours. Then back to the same old Trumpslinger.
And Santorum is supposed to bow out today, too.
Jeb Bush barely brought Florida in for his brother in 2000, and he probably can't bring it in for himself today if he's the Republican presidential nominee. Time to quit, Jeb.
Boosh's support will go to Rubio. The increase will go unnoticed.
Blogger Chuck said...
eric you and mccullough need to talk things over.
(I feel like a beat generation poet, writing sentences without any capitalization. I guess capital letters are just a GOP Establishment thing.)
There is another Eric who posts here and he is capital E Eric, I'm lower case e eric. This distinguishes his opinion as superior to mine. Therefore, I can safely be it ored and dismissed as just another internet troll.
Carry on.
"And Santorum is supposed to bow out today, too."
What ever convinced Santorum he had a shot in hell is beyond me. The only reason he got any traction at all in 2012 was voters were ready to latch on to anyone who wasn't Romney. This time around, there are plenty of candidates for every political issue.
"Jeb Bush barely brought Florida in for his brother in 2000, and he probably can't bring it in for himself today if he's the Republican presidential nominee. Time to quit, Jeb."
If Jeb does poorly (comes in 4th or lower) in NH, I expect he'll drop out. The guy has given no one a good reason why he should be nominated. He's similar to Hillary that way--name recognition and "it's my turn".
Bah. Safely be ignored.
See! There's your evidence.
Also, I'm the guy who has worked on the border for 20 years and want to see our nation secured. Clinton didn't do it. Bush didn't do it. Obama didn't do it. Cruz would and I believe Trump would. The others I have serious doubts about, including Rubio.
"Boosh's support will go to Rubio. The increase will go unnoticed."
He seems to hate Rubio now, for having the gall to run this year. And I'm not sure what the point is of his attack ads on Rubio--so he can replace Rubio as the third place candidate? It's still an embarrassment for someone of Bush's level of funding and name recognition. He might have been better off running in 2008, coming off of his governorship and trying to convince everyone he wasn't his brother.
Santorum wanted a platform. He can go home now.
PS: I was a fundraiser for Santorum in 1994. Love the guy. Time to hang it up.
Bush will be out after New Hampshire.
Dan Hossley said...
Rand Paul's supporters won't turn to Rubio. They are polar opposites on defense.
Rand Paul is just like his dad and unlike any other candidate in the GOP race. So - if not Rubio, then who else among the candidates is a Peacenik worthy of the libertarian vote?
The Libertarian Party is reprocessing Gary Johnson yet again. Johnson thinks we should substantially pull troops out of Europe, Japan and South Korea - a good idea for better spending our limited resources, but surprisingly he doesn't address Afghanistan.
Oh geez, this really escalated quickly.
Carson is having a press conference Terence today and is purportedly going to quote the Bible, "you will know them by their fruits" in reference to the Iowa rumors. That can't be good for Cruz.
Trump is screaming fraud all over twitter to whoever will listen. Which isn't good for.... Trump.
And Cruz is now saying that Trump is losing it. Which is fine, but then goes on to say Trump will nuke Denmark. Oh geez.
My top three candidates fighting.
I swear, if they give this election to Rubio, or worse, I'm going to buy a boat and go sailing for the rest of my years.
"My top three candidates fighting.
I swear, if they give this election to Rubio, or worse, I'm going to buy a boat and go sailing for the rest of my years."
Considering their behavior, maybe they shouldn't be your top three candidates (and I say that as a guy who wants Cruz to be a good candidate).
On the other hand, how do we know Trump won't nuke Denmark?
While I agree with a lot of the criticism of Jeb, I think he could win Florida, lots of putative Democrats here like him.
On the other hand, how do we know Trump won't nuke Denmark
Cruz is the Manchurian Candidate. Will nuke Denmark on behalf of Canada over Hans Island.
Jeb's thinking before running for President was that the Dem nominee was going to be Hillary, the one person in the country he might be able to beat since she has more baggage than the Bush name. He sold his donors/fundraisers on this.
Rubio is thinking before the race that Hillary Clinton is going to be the nominee and she's very beatable and that Jeb and his donors don't realize that Republican voters will never vote for another Bush and that none of the other Repunlicans who will run can beat him.
That Jeb Bush thought he had any chance in a Republican primary shows his judgment is as bad as his brother's.
Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, Rick Santorum....the candidates are always the last to know.
People keep dropping out who I didn't know were still in. I'm not surprised that Paul was still in, but I was surprised to learn that Huckabee dropped out the other day. "He was running?" "You didn't know that." "No, I don't keep up with his news. Does he run all the time? Like a hobby?"
Honestly, sometimes my first thought is, "Oh, that person was serious when he said he was running before."
Carly Fiorina said today in a conference call and email to supporters that she's still in through NH for a "marathon" and that her next goal is to force the RNC to put her back on the stage for this Saturday's debate.
Rubio is a tool of the GOP, he is not conservative and it be business as usual on the National Political Scene. DO NOT VOTE for Rubio.
garage mahal: "Too bad. Rand Paul is the only Republican worth listening to for more than five seconds."
Which corresponds to 4.9786 seconds of content beyond your absorption and comprehension range.
As I said yesterday: "Time for every GOP candidate who is not Cruz or Trump to endorse Rubio. It's that simple."
You also said "Isn't it obvious Trump is going to win the nomination". I think it's interesting which predictions we keep returning to.
Humperdink said...
Original Mike said: "He actually was gracious. It impressed me, and since the guy has/had a real shot at being President, I found it very encouraging. Oh, well."
Yep, gracious. For all of 24 hours. Then back to the same old Trumpslinger.
I find myself wondering if this isn't Trump's Dean Scream. It completely plays to type that he's unpredictable - or predictably awful - when things don't go his way. It shows him small and petty which contradict his brand.
Santorum threw his support to Rubio. Both Catholics.
Santorum has endorsed Rubio. Guess he's taking your advice, Professor.
Ron Snyder: Detail why Rubio is "NOT conservative."
Heritage Action gives Rubio its fourth-best rating in the Senate.
The American Conservative Union has Rubio with a lifetime 98 out of 100 scoring.
Rubio has a 100% score with the National Rifle Association in the Senate.
And his scores from the Family Research Council are 100 (2011); 71 (2012); 100 (2013) and 100 (2014).
As the National Review says, if Rubio is the now GOP "establishment," then the fight is over and the conservatives have really won.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429088/marco-rubio-conservative-record
Rand Paul drops out.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it...
"I find myself wondering if this isn't Trump's Dean Scream. It completely plays to type that he's unpredictable - or predictably awful - when things don't go his way. It shows him small and petty which contradict his brand."
But when has anything like this ever made Trump's followers give up on him? He was right when he said he could shoot someone in broad daylight and his supporters would stick by him. Not that this says anything good about his supporters, but of course they would never take that as an insult, because it came from Trump. And so the world turns.
Brando said...
But when has anything like this ever made Trump's followers give up on him?
Everyone can say this until it happens the first time. We're not talking about his hardcore supporters, but rather about the lukewarms who came to accept him. His core supporters won't drop him unless it becomes clear he won't won, but they aren't enough to win states much less the nomination.
Trump is screaming fraud all over twitter to whoever will listen. Which isn't good for.... Trump.
I think Trump provides a public service by raising the issue of Cruz’s dirty tricks. Poor Carson doesn’t have the platform to do it properly.
Also it has been a delight watching certain talking heads twisting themselves in a pretzel by defending Carson’s justified anger at Cruz’s dirty tricks but belittling Trump’s condemnation of the same. The usual MSM bullshit.
Yep, gracious. For all of 24 hours. Then back to the same old Trumpslinger.
Magnanimous in defeat, fierce in battle seems to be Trump’s method.
Cruz is the ONLY one in the combined field (R+D) who believes the power of Government should be limited.
If Cruz believes government should be limited why does he want to impose a value-added tax(VAT) on the taxpayers and then hide the fact of his VAT proposal under the euphemism of a “business flat tax? This doesn’t sound like “limited government” to me. It sounds like the same old bait and switch that we have seen all too often.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा