Bluegrassrivals

Just opened an email from the Carson Campaign. Within the email was a link to a recording of the message that the Cruz Campaign sent to all their precinct captains last Monday night during the Iowa Caucuses. You can listen for yourself, but if this is legit, Cruz has a big problem in laying claim to the high ground.

TheRealThing Wrote:Just opened an email from the Carson Campaign. Within the email was a link to a recording of the message that the Cruz Campaign sent to all their precinct captains last Monday night during the Iowa Caucuses. You can listen for yourself, but if this is legit, Cruz has a big problem in laying claim to the high ground.

From all reports I've read, yes it's legit.

Demarcus ware Wrote:From all reports I've read, yes it's legit.

Oh yeah!!! Oh Canada :lmao:

^^ This is what I have been saying about the deal with Trump getting slammed for some kind of perceived hypocrisy with regard to his faith. Anybody can see that Donald is not living at the foot of the cross. I was never convinced that he was a born again Christian and I pointed that out to some lengths about a month ago. I believe however, that he respects the sovereignty of God and recognizes that God is Creator, with at least some degree of reverence. The exact same mold that I believe other notable Presidents fit into perfectly BTW.

And yet, if one went by the measure of confrontation recently leveled against the character of Mr Trump, one might think he had represented himself as a modern day apostle or something. I'll tell you this, I have more confidence in the character or Mr Trump than I do the pundits, political foes and hacks, who have gleefully dog piled in an effort to diminish his campaign.

I heard Ted Cruz personally try to explain away the efforts of his campaign aides/staffers to steal votes intended for Ben Carson. I couldn't tell any difference in the level of sincerity in his delivery of said excuse, or his promise to Americans that "help is on the way." In saying that I am certainly not intimating Mr Cruz is not a born again Christian. All I'm saying is 'if', that state wide precinct announcement did in fact go out, (and it certainly looks like it did) when Ted is lying he looks a whole lot like he does when he's telling the truth.

I guarantee they've all got their skeleton closet locked as securely as possible

64SUR Wrote:Oh yeah!!! Oh Canada :lmao:

Maybe Trump will initiate a shovel ready project his first day in office to refurbish and reopen Alcatraz. Word has it that if everybody who has skirted the law in the present administration got busted, including Hil-lie-ry, they could fill the place up. :biggrin:

First off TRT, before I go into my thoughts on this, I'm going to state an observation.

You notice how critical we are of most of the candidates we support? Hoot has been awful skeptical of Trump, although you've expressed support you have questioned in many ways, and I have been in the middle. We have all been the same way with Cruz, to the point where things would certainly turn if it came out that this mess was legitimate.

Let's change names. What if this is Barack Obama? Unlike Cruz's supporters, many of whom would likely jump away should eventual details confirm this, Obama's supporters would be with him through the thick and thin. nicker:

Now, as to the situation. I'm watching with a close eye. I'm not sure who to believe at this point. I certainly believe CNN has a fault in this for revealing, not that it's a surprise, about Carson leaving too soon. I'm still making my determination on Cruz over this. Trump has been all over it like an attack dog and defending Carson despite attacking him heavily several weeks ago. Given that Cruz's eligibility has been verified now, Trump will very likely resort to this for his attacks.

I did think the "voter violation" sent out by Cruz was a mistake. Mitch McConnell did the same thing in his election with Allison Grimes sending out an "election violation" notice stating that she lied about several issues. I about freaked when I first saw it, the way it looked.

Corruption is such a big trap in politics and Cruz has to be more careful than any other candidate just because of his strong clinging to Christian values. The media is all over him, even more than Trump, because of that. I wouldn't be surprised if CNN threw that out as bait for Cruz.

TRT, I have another question for you on Trump. Here's a recent interview with a lesbian reporter where she asks Trump (Turn the video to about the 2:00 mark) if we can expect more "forward progress" with the gay and lesbian community. She mentioned redefining marriage and some of the other issues that gays and lesbians think they have won. Trump answered the question, "yes, we can," and briefly talked about uniting the country. What do you think of Trump's answer?


(If a moderator could get this video to show on the forum, it would be appreciated. Thank you!)

Ted Cruz apologized to Ben Carson for this incident immediately. Both CNN and Carson deserve much of the blame that they are not getting. If Carson had built a better ground organization, then his team would have checked with CNN and sent a clarification to his own supporters when Cruz's volunteers repeated the initial CNN report. It is crazy to think that all Cruz's supporters had to do was repeat a CNN tweet to flip Carson supporters to Cruz. Also, Carson has just cut his staff my more than 40 percent, so apparently, his campaign is on the rocks.

Cruz had more than 10,000 volunteers working in Iowa. It is unreasonable to think that Ted Cruz was prepared for the CNN tweet and personally orchestrated a political dirty trick in the midst of the Iowa caucuses. What he did personally was to accept responsibility for his staff and apologized for the incident.

What does Carson want, for Cruz to fire volunteers or a paid staff member for not doing the due diligence that Carson's campaign should have done? Nearly 190,000 voters participated in the Iowa caucuses. There are bound to be some incidents like this.

Contrast that with what Donald Trump did. He claimed that he lost the Iowa caucus because Ted Cruz lied and demanded a "do over." I have never heard a political candidate whine and make such an outrageous demand in my life. Trump lost Iowa because he failed to build a strong organization. Trumps big, vulgar mouth is no substitute for hard work and good campaign management.

The only thing that Cruz did in Iowa that I fault him for, which Rubio did as well, was to send out voter violation notices using publicly available voter information. I have seen these in previous elections and I do not like them. There is nothing illegal about them, but they are still a big turn off to voters who value their privacy. Cruz refused to apologize for the flyers, but I believe it was a mistake to send them.

Wide, as for your question, gay rights issues are not that important to me compared to other issues facing this country. I support equal rights for homosexuals but there is no right to marriage in this country. I oppose laws that make homosexuals a "protected class" and punish Christians and anybody else who wants to refuse to provide them with housing, wedding cakes, etc.

Whatever laws individual states want to enact regarding gay rights, including marriage, is okay with me but no federal court should be able to set aside the will of voters on gay rights, nor should federal courts allow homosexuals to trample our rights under the U.S. Constitution, regardless of state laws that may exist. I would oppose gay marriage at a state level, but absent a constitutional amendment, I would respect democratically adopted state laws.

Donald Trump is a liberal. If he is elected president, then all sorts of liberal goodies will be on the table when he sits down to sessions of Let's Make a Deal with Congress. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump would support federal laws to protect gays, lesbians, and transgenders from discrimination. He is no more of a constitutional conservative than Obama is.

Cruz may yet do something that disqualifies him from receiving my vote, but nothing has come close yet. There is absolutely nothing that Donald Trump can do to get my vote. Hardly a day goes by that Trump does not do something that makes me feel good about my decision. Dropping the F-Bomb during speeches to an audience that includes young children was the latest example. People deserve much more from a presidential candidate.

TheRealThing Wrote:Maybe Trump will initiate a shovel ready project his first day in office to refurbish and reopen Alcatraz. Word has it that if everybody who has skirted the law in the present administration got busted, including Hil-lie-ry, they could fill the place up. :biggrin:

Trump is not going to punish his very good friend, Hillary Clinton. If Obama does not pardon her, then Trump will, assuming the worst and he becomes president.

[YOUTUBE="My good friend"]93dw0-JpLNY[/YOUTUBE]

This will hurt Cruz in the long run. I was reading articles this morning about Carson supporters that would have voted for Cruz had Carson dropped out, but now say no way will they vote for him. Just like with any politician Cruz is as dirty as the rest plus the fact that he's just not very likable. It's going to be even more interesting going forward. If I was a candidate I'd be worried about Rubio, he's picking up some steam.

Rubio's campaign is picking up steam because the GOP establishment's first choice of pro-amnesty candidates, Jeb Bush, has been a monumental flop. Rubio campaigned against amnesty when he ran for the U.S. Senate. A year or so later, he teamed up with Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, and five others to form the Gang of 8, which pushed an amnesty bill.

Rubio is somebody who McConnell, Priebus, and other GOP leaders believe that they can work with to get an amnesty bill signed into law. Rubio is the establishment's pick for the nomination, so it is no surprise that he is picking up endorsements and free positive media coverage.

If working with Democrats and Republicans to get an amnesty bill signed into law is important to you, then Marco Rubio is your man.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:Ted Cruz apologized to Ben Carson for this incident immediately. Both CNN and Carson deserve much of the blame that they are not getting. If Carson had built a better ground organization, then his team would have checked with CNN and sent a clarification to his own supporters when Cruz's volunteers repeated the initial CNN report. It is crazy to think that all Cruz's supporters had to do was repeat a CNN tweet to flip Carson supporters to Cruz. Also, Carson has just cut his staff my more than 40 percent, so apparently, his campaign is on the rocks.

Cruz had more than 10,000 volunteers working in Iowa. It is unreasonable to think that Ted Cruz was prepared for the CNN tweet and personally orchestrated a political dirty trick in the midst of the Iowa caucuses. What he did personally was to accept responsibility for his staff and apologized for the incident.

What does Carson want, for Cruz to fire volunteers or a paid staff member for not doing the due diligence that Carson's campaign should have done? Nearly 190,000 voters participated in the Iowa caucuses. There are bound to be some incidents like this.

Contrast that with what Donald Trump did. He claimed that he lost the Iowa caucus because Ted Cruz lied and demanded a "do over." I have never heard a political candidate whine and make such an outrageous demand in my life. Trump lost Iowa because he failed to build a strong organization. Trumps big, vulgar mouth is no substitute for hard work and good campaign management.

The only thing that Cruz did in Iowa that I fault him for, which Rubio did as well, was to send out voter violation notices using publicly available voter information. I have seen these in previous elections and I do not like them. There is nothing illegal about them, but they are still a big turn off to voters who value their privacy. Cruz refused to apologize for the flyers, but I believe it was a mistake to send them.

Wide, as for your question, gay rights issues are not that important to me compared to other issues facing this country. I support equal rights for homosexuals but there is no right to marriage in this country. I oppose laws that make homosexuals a "protected class" and punish Christians and anybody else who wants to refuse to provide them with housing, wedding cakes, etc.

Whatever laws individual states want to enact regarding gay rights, including marriage, is okay with me but no federal court should be able to set aside the will of voters on gay rights, nor should federal courts allow homosexuals to trample our rights under the U.S. Constitution, regardless of state laws that may exist. I would oppose gay marriage at a state level, but absent a constitutional amendment, I would respect democratically adopted state laws.

Donald Trump is a liberal. If he is elected president, then all sorts of liberal goodies will be on the table when he sits down to sessions of Let's Make a Deal with Congress. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump would support federal laws to protect gays, lesbians, and transgenders from discrimination. He is no more of a constitutional conservative than Obama is.

Cruz may yet do something that disqualifies him from receiving my vote, but nothing has come close yet. There is absolutely nothing that Donald Trump can do to get my vote. Hardly a day goes by that Trump does not do something that makes me feel good about my decision. Dropping the F-Bomb during speeches to an audience that includes young children was the latest example. People deserve much more from a presidential candidate.

Not any more unreasonable than to deny somebody is running Ted's campaign. Precinct Captains got the message, that proves a top down chain of command which on its face seems well organized and focused. Now, is that Ted, or is it somebody else? Either way it's like being a head coach, you don't allow unethical tactics to go down, and I doubt sincerely that Ted was otherwise occupied that night. He might not have had his hand on the tiller, but he was calling out course corrections. Are then we to believe that the 'message' got by him? At any rate, if we're back to plausible deniability again I'm gonna need a break to get off the ride and puke before we go on. If you're the man of integrity that Ted represents himself to be, and I would just say right here that I am a fan, you can't then do the same stuff Hillary and the rest of the Dems do with shenanigans like the 'dead vote' and the illegal vote, and then just say sorry or deny it outright.

When Trump is properly vetted, and I submit that will be soon, one would hope that Cruz has not besmirched himself to the point where all the Trump lemmings looking for another cliff to go jump off, will not mindlessly choose the one marked Rubio. Trump is right about a great many things, and he has at bare minimum popped the establishment's politically correct bubble. That alone has served to refresh the Republican 'page,' something for which I am very grateful. My fear is that in the end, sanity will have made only the briefest of appearances as it was visited upon us in the face of a man somewhat flawed, and the same masses that have groped about in moral darkness will ultimately reject the truth yet again because of it.

All, and I mean all the Republican field who has even a ghost of a chance, have to some degree adopted Mr Trump's vision and sense of reality IMHO. But, you know I will never vote for a man who is pro abortion and/or gay rights. However, the more we see the person of Donald Trump maligned, the more the idealistic conservative renaissance associated with his candidacy will be diluted. Tell you what, Ted can make this up to me by giving his word to legalize voter ID's and repeal abortion and gay rights laws. :biggrin:

TheRealThing Wrote:Not any more unreasonable than to deny somebody is running Ted's campaign. Precinct Captains got the message, that proves a top down chain of command which on its face seems well organized and focused. Now, is that Ted, or is it somebody else? Either way it's like being a head coach, you don't allow unethical tactics to go down, and I doubt sincerely that Ted was otherwise occupied that night. He might not have had his hand on the tiller, but he was calling out course corrections. Are then we to believe that the 'message' got by him? At any rate, if we're back to plausible deniability again I'm gonna need a break to get off the ride and puke before we go on. If you're the man of integrity that Ted represents himself to be, and I would just say right here that I am a fan, you can't then do the same stuff Hillary and the rest of the Dems do with shenanigans like the 'dead vote' and the illegal vote, and then just say sorry or deny it outright.

When Trump is properly vetted, and I submit that will be soon, one would hope that Cruz has not besmirched himself to the point where all the Trump lemmings looking for another cliff to go jump off, will not mindlessly choose the one marked Rubio. Trump is right about a great many things, and he has at bare minimum popped the establishment's politically correct bubble. That alone has served to refresh the Republican 'page,' something for which I am very grateful. My fear is that in the end, sanity will have made only the briefest of appearances as it was visited upon us in the face of a man somewhat flawed, and the same masses that have groped about in moral darkness will ultimately reject the truth yet again because of it.

All, and I mean all the Republican field who has even a ghost of a chance, have to some degree adopted Mr Trump's vision and sense of reality IMHO. But, you know I will never vote for a man who is pro abortion and/or gay rights. However, the more we see the person of Donald Trump maligned, the more the idealistic conservative renaissance associated with his candidacy will be diluted. Tell you what, Ted can make this up to me by giving his word to legalize voter ID's and repeal abortion and gay rights laws. :biggrin:

To be blunt, TRT, anybody who still supports Trump after his long string of lies and constant stream of personal insults, is not in a good position to question Ted Cruz's morality. You can argue that he should have fired somebody for not following up the first message after CNN issued a clarification but there is no evidence that Cruz was directly responsible for that not happening, nor is there any reason to think that his apology was not genuine.

For all the lies that Trump has told so far, how many times has he apologized to anybody? I do not recall a single time but maybe I missed one. Here is just one example:

[YOUTUBE="Another Trump lie - let's go to the tape"]rj8mpdY0fE0[/YOUTUBE]

Hoot Gibson Wrote:Rubio's campaign is picking up steam because the GOP establishment's first choice of pro-amnesty candidates, Jeb Bush, has been a monumental flop. Rubio campaigned against amnesty when he ran for the U.S. Senate. A year or so later, he teamed up with Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, and five others to form the Gang of 8, which pushed an amnesty bill.

Rubio is somebody who McConnell, Priebus, and other GOP leaders believe that they can work with to get an amnesty bill signed into law. Rubio is the establishment's pick for the nomination, so it is no surprise that he is picking up endorsements and free positive media coverage.

If working with Democrats and Republicans to get an amnesty bill signed into law is important to you, then Marco Rubio is your man.

Rubio isn't my man, just saying he's coming on strong.

WideRight05 Wrote:First off TRT, before I go into my thoughts on this, I'm going to state an observation.

You notice how critical we are of most of the candidates we support? Hoot has been awful skeptical of Trump, although you've expressed support you have questioned in many ways, and I have been in the middle. We have all been the same way with Cruz, to the point where things would certainly turn if it came out that this mess was legitimate.

Let's change names. What if this is Barack Obama? Unlike Cruz's supporters, many of whom would likely jump away should eventual details confirm this, Obama's supporters would be with him through the thick and thin. nicker:

Now, as to the situation. I'm watching with a close eye. I'm not sure who to believe at this point. I certainly believe CNN has a fault in this for revealing, not that it's a surprise, about Carson leaving too soon. I'm still making my determination on Cruz over this. Trump has been all over it like an attack dog and defending Carson despite attacking him heavily several weeks ago. Given that Cruz's eligibility has been verified now, Trump will very likely resort to this for his attacks.

I did think the "voter violation" sent out by Cruz was a mistake. Mitch McConnell did the same thing in his election with Allison Grimes sending out an "election violation" notice stating that she lied about several issues. I about freaked when I first saw it, the way it looked.

Corruption is such a big trap in politics and Cruz has to be more careful than any other candidate just because of his strong clinging to Christian values. The media is all over him, even more than Trump, because of that. I wouldn't be surprised if CNN threw that out as bait for Cruz.

TRT, I have another question for you on Trump. Here's a recent interview with a lesbian reporter where she asks Trump (Turn the video to about the 2:00 mark) if we can expect more "forward progress" with the gay and lesbian community. She mentioned redefining marriage and some of the other issues that gays and lesbians think they have won. Trump answered the question, "yes, we can," and briefly talked about uniting the country. What do you think of Trump's answer?


(If a moderator could get this video to show on the forum, it would be appreciated. Thank you!)

I think in your analysis you have it about right.

I don't agree that Trump's protests are simply meant to defend Carson in the obviously hypocritical sense that is being suggested. I believe that Trump would have preferred that Carson supporters had not been coerced into voting for Cruz, and then substantiating said coercion by telling them that 'Carson is dropping out and why waste their vote?' I mean, I try to be a thoughtful man and if I went to caucus for Carson and was told he was getting out, I know I wouldn't just turn around and go the house. I'd stay and caucus for Cruz or Trump. Carson has a right to be upset and frankly, Trump does too. He is in it to win, right? The inescapable outcome was that Carson lost voters and Cruz was the likely benefactor, and that Cruz's margin of victory was therefore somewhat inflated.

In other words if I have this thing right, under normal circumstances, given the hypothetical situation that Carson or any candidate for that matter should drop out, at least a portion of the supporters of that candidate would logically break for Trump. So, Trump thinks an appreciable number of those who intended to vote for Carson but who instead wound up voting for Cruz, might have chosen to vote for Trump had they not been coerced under fraudulent circumstances to go with Cruz. It's really not all that complex a situation to me.

And not that it's exactly a hanging offense either, nor is it likely to become a deal breaker for most voters but, it was decidedly sneaky and enflaming to Carson and his supporters to be sure. So, I'm not willing to call out Trump's inequities while I gloss over Ted's, and not willing to call out Ted's while I gloss over Trump's. Below is a link to see what unbiased media have to say about what happened in Iowa. I intend to hold all public officials accountable for their actions, and I want to be an equal opportunity advocate, or critic, of both Trump and Cruz.


BREITBART NEWS
"New audio obtained exclusively by Breitbart News indicates that as the Iowa caucuses began on Monday night, the Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), campaign called precinct captains informing them that Dr. Ben Carson was suspending campaigning, and instructing them to tell voters they should “not waste a vote on Ben Carson and vote for Ted Cruz.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...ive-audio/

Now, and I'm saying this in a respectful manner, I don't think it would be fair to compare Cruz or Trump to Mitch, who is a dyed in the wool establishment guy. But whom I none the less held my nose and supported to get Harry Reid out of the way, and dodge yet another mushroom of a senator to represent Kentucky. Sometimes one has to accept the fact that you can take a baby step forward, or fall back a mile, I generally prefer the baby step forward. After all, is that not what the elective process is all about? We winnow out the obviously flawed, and we firmly vet that one candidate we wind up voting for. And even though we can never realistically expect to get the perfect candidate, that candidate is however, the least flawed of the flawed.

You already know what I think about Trump's answer. I don't like it. And the reason more than any other is that in Trump's answer, (and the rest of the evidence which exists supporting the fact that it looks like we have become a society which has accepted the homosexual lifestyle), an awful indictment must be accepted along with it. And said indictment comes directly from God's Word and goes like this: when any society finds itself in such state of moral default that it openly embraces the practice of homosexuality, like Sodom, God washes His hands of that society. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, He did so in a manner which would best define the finality of being turned over to a reprobate mind. That of being destroyed in a fiery shower of burning brimstone. Were the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah worse than those of the US? Technically yes, but only in the measure, or progression if you will, of their decadence. At the point where the population of any people accept as lawful or justifiable the homosexual lifestyle, the end is near. It is with the most distasteful but inescapable irony then, that I note the sad reference of the reporter in your piece, in which she analogizes the movement we have seen by way of acceptance to the homosexual lifestyle as "moving forward." And I hate to think this is where we Americans find ourselves. At any rate, I intend to go down fighting in the spiritual sense, and as that pertains to my civic duty, I intend to speak out against it and call it what it is, sin. As I watch mankind "moving forward" I shudder, because I know what he is moving toward, and it is the mother of all nightmares, not the brotherhood of mankind. Therefore, I am a bit reluctant to hang that particular political albatross around the neck of Mr Trump for his having said the three words in question, "yes you can." Maybe he was just dodging the question. Or maybe he thinks same sex marriage is ok. In either case we really need to get to the bottom of it.

But at least you did cite your source and I did get to hear with my own ears, what could be damning evidence that Trump may ultimately support gay rights, although there is a sliver of ambiguity in his answer. And in saying that, everyone must ask himself a question. If Trump were to get the nomination, would he vote for Trump who may be lacking on the gay rights front, and hope that he continues to evolve, or would he vote for Clinton in whom exists no chance that she will ever evolve and who has demonstrated an unswerving commitment to continue the butchery, and support unashamedly the gay, and increase the hand outs, and got her inspiration on how to be an effective Secretary of State from the fictitious Staples advertisement which featured an "easy" button to pare down any job that seems hard?

That is among other reasons why I recently asked, who voters will ultimately choose once the primary voting begins, Cruz or Trump? And I'm saying if we're going to call out our candidates for their distortions and hypocrisies, and well we should, let's make sure we're right and the criticisms are founded in truth.

Demarcus ware Wrote:Rubio isn't my man, just saying he's coming on strong.

I agree that Rubio is coming on strong but it was inevitable that the last standing GOP establishment candidate would move up. I think that Rubio is the most electable of the candidates who the GOPe could stomach. Jeb, Christie, and Kasich are still standing but I just don't see any of them overtaking Rubio.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:I agree that Rubio is coming on strong but it was inevitable that the last standing GOP establishment candidate would move up. I think that Rubio is the most electable of the candidates who the GOPe could stomach. Jeb, Christie, and Kasich are still standing but I just don't see any of them overtaking Rubio.

After tonight debate you can begin to moved Bush and Kasich to the the front. eriously:

64SUR Wrote:After tonight debate you can begin to moved Bush and Kasich to the the front. eriously:

You obviously do not know much about Republican politics. Bush's campaign is going nowhere. He has blown a fortune and the votes he received in Iowa cost him more than $2.800 each.

I expect Kasich to do pretty well in New Hampshire because he has spent much more time there than most of the other candidates. He seems to do pretty well with small crowds. However, he has staked his entire campaign on doing well in New Hampshire and any finish worse than a strong 4th place will be a big disappointment for him.

Unless Bush or Kasich shocks everybody and finishes in 3rd place in NH, neither one will enter SC with much money or momentum. IMO, the race is already down to Cruz, Rubio, and Trump. Everybody else seems to have been focusing almost entirely on Iowa and/or New Hampshire instead of building a national organization.

When a party nominates a weak candidate, no amount of money can win the election. Regardless of who Republicans nominate, the nominee will be facing a very weak candidate in November.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:You obviously do not know much about Republican politics. Bush's campaign is going nowhere. He has blown a fortune and the votes he received in Iowa cost him more than $2.800 each.

I expect Kasich to do pretty well in New Hampshire because he has spent much more time there than most of the other candidates. He seems to do pretty well with small crowds. However, he has staked his entire campaign on doing well in New Hampshire and any finish worse than a strong 4th place will be a big disappointment for him.

Unless Bush or Kasich shocks everybody and finishes in 3rd place in NH, neither one will enter SC with much money or momentum. IMO, the race is already down to Cruz, Rubio, and Trump. Everybody else seems to have been focusing almost entirely on Iowa and/or New Hampshire instead of building a national organization

When a party nominates a weak candidate, no amount of money can win the election. Regardless of who Republicans nominate, the nominee will be facing a very weak candidate in November.

Let's see you're saying the top 3 is going to be.
Cruz- The Canada man.
Trump- The Bully
Rubio- The Stripper and playboy..Hmmm!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

This will hurt Cruz.

64SUR Wrote:Let's see you're saying the top 3 is going to be.
Cruz- The Canada man.
Trump- The Bully
Rubio- The Stripper and playboy..Hmmm!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

Careful there 64, you're in danger of letting your intellect overshadow your intentional spelling and grammatical errors. :biggrin:

64SUR Wrote:Let's see you're saying the top 3 is going to be.
Cruz- The Canada man.
Trump- The Bully
Rubio- The Stripper and playboy..Hmmm!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

No, my guess is that it will be Trump, Rubio, and Cruz, in that order. Kasich has a shot at slipping into the #3 spot - maybe even #2. If Trump loses NH, then he will start working on an exit strategy, IMO.

There are a lot of undecided voters and independents can vote in either the Republican or Democrat election. With Hillary Clinton running such a bad campaign, many Democrats may decide to vote in the Republican race.

Tonight's debate will also have a big impact on the outcome of the NH GOP primary. Anybody who predicts the 1-4 finish correctly before the debate has been held will just be lucky. Several candidates will take some big risks tonight because they are desperate.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:You obviously do not know much about Republican politics. Bush's campaign is going nowhere. He has blown a fortune and the votes he received in Iowa cost him more than $2.800 each.

I expect Kasich to do pretty well in New Hampshire because he has spent much more time there than most of the other candidates. He seems to do pretty well with small crowds. However, he has staked his entire campaign on doing well in New Hampshire and any finish worse than a strong 4th place will be a big disappointment for him.

Unless Bush or Kasich shocks everybody and finishes in 3rd place in NH, neither one will enter SC with much money or momentum. IMO, the race is already down to Cruz, Rubio, and Trump. Everybody else seems to have been focusing almost entirely on Iowa and/or New Hampshire instead of building a national organization.

When a party nominates a weak candidate, no amount of money can win the election. Regardless of who Republicans nominate, the nominee will be facing a very weak candidate in November.

No question. My hope is that Trump and Cruz are about done running over each other and Rubio's Mo will begin to fade. He is unquestionably the fall back nominee for the establishment types who were goofy enough to bank the whole roll on Jeb.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:No, my guess is that it will be Trump, Rubio, and Cruz, in that order. Kasich has a shot at slipping into the #3 spot - maybe even #2. If Trump loses NH, then he will start working on an exit strategy, IMO.

There are a lot of undecided voters and independents can vote in either the Republican or Democrat election. With Hillary Clinton running such a bad campaign, many Democrats may decide to vote in the Republican race.

Tonight's debate will also have a big impact on the outcome of the NH GOP primary. Anybody who predicts the 1-4 finish correctly before the debate has been held will just be lucky. Several candidates will take some big risks tonight because they are desperate.

The front three at least, need to call a cease fire and quit shooting up the tent. And that is the danger of the food fight. Everybody winds up with a pie in the face.

ABC mods will be looking to invoke all the infighting they can.

Trump's role, whether he realizes it or not, is to prevent Cruz from running away from the establishment's pick. That pick is currently Rubio. The GOPe is happy to have Trump and Cruz taking shots at each other. They have asked Jeb to ease up on Rubio and stop spending so much money attacking him.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:Ted Cruz apologized to Ben Carson for this incident immediately. Both CNN and Carson deserve much of the blame that they are not getting. If Carson had built a better ground organization, then his team would have checked with CNN and sent a clarification to his own supporters when Cruz's volunteers repeated the initial CNN report. It is crazy to think that all Cruz's supporters had to do was repeat a CNN tweet to flip Carson supporters to Cruz. Also, Carson has just cut his staff my more than 40 percent, so apparently, his campaign is on the rocks.

Cruz had more than 10,000 volunteers working in Iowa. It is unreasonable to think that Ted Cruz was prepared for the CNN tweet and personally orchestrated a political dirty trick in the midst of the Iowa caucuses. What he did personally was to accept responsibility for his staff and apologized for the incident.

What does Carson want, for Cruz to fire volunteers or a paid staff member for not doing the due diligence that Carson's campaign should have done? Nearly 190,000 voters participated in the Iowa caucuses. There are bound to be some incidents like this.

Contrast that with what Donald Trump did. He claimed that he lost the Iowa caucus because Ted Cruz lied and demanded a "do over." I have never heard a political candidate whine and make such an outrageous demand in my life. Trump lost Iowa because he failed to build a strong organization. Trumps big, vulgar mouth is no substitute for hard work and good campaign management.

The only thing that Cruz did in Iowa that I fault him for, which Rubio did as well, was to send out voter violation notices using publicly available voter information. I have seen these in previous elections and I do not like them. There is nothing illegal about them, but they are still a big turn off to voters who value their privacy. Cruz refused to apologize for the flyers, but I believe it was a mistake to send them.

Wide, as for your question, gay rights issues are not that important to me compared to other issues facing this country. I support equal rights for homosexuals but there is no right to marriage in this country. I oppose laws that make homosexuals a "protected class" and punish Christians and anybody else who wants to refuse to provide them with housing, wedding cakes, etc.

Whatever laws individual states want to enact regarding gay rights, including marriage, is okay with me but no federal court should be able to set aside the will of voters on gay rights, nor should federal courts allow homosexuals to trample our rights under the U.S. Constitution, regardless of state laws that may exist. I would oppose gay marriage at a state level, but absent a constitutional amendment, I would respect democratically adopted state laws.

Donald Trump is a liberal. If he is elected president, then all sorts of liberal goodies will be on the table when he sits down to sessions of Let's Make a Deal with Congress. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump would support federal laws to protect gays, lesbians, and transgenders from discrimination. He is no more of a constitutional conservative than Obama is.

Cruz may yet do something that disqualifies him from receiving my vote, but nothing has come close yet. There is absolutely nothing that Donald Trump can do to get my vote. Hardly a day goes by that Trump does not do something that makes me feel good about my decision. Dropping the F-Bomb during speeches to an audience that includes young children was the latest example. People deserve much more from a presidential candidate.

Trump dropping the F-bomb was disappointing to see. Having looked at it closer since I last posted, Ted Cruz received about 34,000 more votes than Carson, having received 3 votes for every one person who voted for Carson. Cruz received almost 52,000 votes, Carson received over 17,000. I just can't see the voters Carson supposedly lost making enough impact on the election and also agree that Trump is going off about it too much. When you consider that Trump was slamming Ben Carson very recently, it shows how quick he is to change when he wants to side with somebody for personal gain, which would be damaging Cruz's reputation. Considering that Cruz gained some considerable ground this week when it comes to the issue of his citizenship, Trump had to find something to pounce on.

The percentages are pretty close between Cruz, Trump, and Rubio in Iowa - 28, 24, and 23 respectively. The numberical vote difference, however, is that Cruz received almost 6,500 votes more than Trump and 8,500 more votes than Rubio. Looking at the actual numbers, it isn't as close as the percentages indicate. Cruz ran a strong ground game in Iowa and was able to pull it out. Whether he will carry it in New Hampshire - that will be a lot harder to win - remains to be seen.

I have always held the view that marriage is between one man and one woman, but it has never been one of the larger issues with me until the past two or three years when the LGBT movement has grown significantly due to big business, the media, and activist judges. Homosexuality has run rampant in this country, the legislation ultimately being the stamp of approval. This is definitely a movement that can be used to punish Christians and others who merely disagree with it and choose to live a life based on the values of The Bible.

Just last night in the super bowl the halftime show practically was all about Beyonce slamming police officers and LGBT pride. Social liberals never seem to be satisfied with just agreeing to disagree, they have to insert their views into public events or organizations designed for a different cause.

I have never been so frightened for the future of our country, I have never been so frightened for the now of our country. We are morally bankrupt and as much as I wish we could turn things around, I think we have gone too far down now to be able to turn this around.

WideRight05 Wrote:Trump dropping the F-bomb was disappointing to see. Having looked at it closer since I last posted, Ted Cruz received about 34,000 more votes than Carson, having received 3 votes for every one person who voted for Carson. Cruz received almost 52,000 votes, Carson received over 17,000. I just can't see the voters Carson supposedly lost making enough impact on the election and also agree that Trump is going off about it too much. When you consider that Trump was slamming Ben Carson very recently, it shows how quick he is to change when he wants to side with somebody for personal gain, which would be damaging Cruz's reputation. Considering that Cruz gained some considerable ground this week when it comes to the issue of his citizenship, Trump had to find something to pounce on.

The percentages are pretty close between Cruz, Trump, and Rubio in Iowa - 28, 24, and 23 respectively. The numberical vote difference, however, is that Cruz received almost 6,500 votes more than Trump and 8,500 more votes than Rubio. Looking at the actual numbers, it isn't as close as the percentages indicate. Cruz ran a strong ground game in Iowa and was able to pull it out. Whether he will carry it in New Hampshire - that will be a lot harder to win - remains to be seen.

I have always held the view that marriage is between one man and one woman, but it has never been one of the larger issues with me until the past two or three years when the LGBT movement has grown significantly due to big business, the media, and activist judges. Homosexuality has run rampant in this country, the legislation ultimately being the stamp of approval. This is definitely a movement that can be used to punish Christians and others who merely disagree with it and choose to live a life based on the values of The Bible.

Just last night in the super bowl the halftime show practically was all about Beyonce slamming police officers and LGBT pride. Social liberals never seem to be satisfied with just agreeing to disagree, they have to insert their views into public events or organizations designed for a different cause.

I have never been so frightened for the future of our country, I have never been so frightened for the now of our country. We are morally bankrupt and as much as I wish we could turn things around, I think we have gone too far down now to be able to turn this around.

I don't think anybody is saying Cruz's caucus tactics actually changed the results though, the results were modified depending on how many Carson voters actually switched because of the announcement that he was hanging it up.

Breitbart News has the timeline established as to how and when the Cruz campaign sent out the messages. According to the article, Carson had already clarified his intentions to stay in prior to the time that the Cruz campaign sent out their messages directing poll workers to recruit Carson supporters. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...-iowa-cnn/

Carson took another day off from the campaign trail - the day before the NH primary. It (almost) looks like he has withdrawn from the race. A candidate who was still serious about winning the nomination would not be taking a day off in the heat of battle.

^
As he should. Everyone not named Trump Cruz or Rubio should drop out. I hope Bush and Kasich stay in though just to keep votes from Rubio.
Bloomberg is getting more serious. I can't believe the guy is actually considering hurting clinton. Almost all of his votes will certainly be dem voters.
I think today will be Trump, rubio, and a bad showing for cruz.

I've had a lot of time on my hands today, which usually translates into reading, or getting myself in trouble. Today I decided to read some. After seeing Ford announce their intentions to expand in Mexico, and then see Carrier announce today that they will be moving from Indiana to Mexico costing 1400 more jobs, I've decided that there is no way in hell I would vote for anyone that was in favor of this TPP. With Rubio refusing to say if he is in favor until after the primaries that knocks him out of my vote, with Cruz in favor of fast tracking before becoming another flip flopper that knocks him out of my vote. So my choices are pretty much Trump or don't vote this election. I refuse to give my vote to the same old politicians over and over anymore. That's my story and I'm sticking to it :biggrin:

Demarcus ware Wrote:I've had a lot of time on my hands today, which usually translates into reading, or getting myself in trouble. Today I decided to read some. After seeing Ford announce their intentions to expand in Mexico, and then see Carrier announce today that they will be moving from Indiana to Mexico costing 1400 more jobs, I've decided that there is no way in hell I would vote for anyone that was in favor of this TPP. With Rubio refusing to say if he is in favor until after the primaries that knocks him out of my vote, with Cruz in favor of fast tracking before becoming another flip flopper that knocks him out of my vote. So my choices are pretty much Trump or don't vote this election. I refuse to give my vote to the same old politicians over and over anymore. That's my story and I'm sticking to it :biggrin:

Bush wants a few good men Demarcus Ware. alute: