The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense

“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

Monday, October 5, 2015

Foolish Voters Fall For Phony Conservatives Fiorina & Rubio - Pt. 2

The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense.

Let's repeat the Nonsense and Horse Sense from Part 1 before we get into Part 2:

Here's the Nonsense:  We can tell just from a good interview or a good speech that candidates like Fiorina and Rubio are conservatives who have good plans for America.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Very few people do their own homework to know much about candidates before supporting them.  The lack of effort made to do research on your own is the reason so many people fell for Bill Clinton in 1992 and Barack Obama in 2008.

If you're smart enough to have abandoned hope in Carly Fiorina, the place to move your support is not Marco Rubio.  Rubio represents as serious a threat to America's return to greatness as Jeb Bush and any other establishment candidate.  Those who haven't seen who Rubio really is need to look closer.  A good speech that makes you feel good, a quick answer to an interviewer that tickles your ears, and a handsome young face are not enough to make a candidate worthy of support.

Were you offended when John McCain referred to supporters of Ted Cruz as wacko birds or Donald Trump's supporters as crazies? If not, you should have been, even if you don't support Ted Cruz or Donald Trump.  The reason is that that is an attack on conservatives who put the future of our country over the importance of party loyalty.  Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are among the few who are willing to stand up against the establishment GOP that controls the Republican Party and that has worked hand-in-hand with Obama and the Democrats to advance their agenda.  And that's an agenda that is destroying America, as I outlined in my book, No Tomorrows, in 2011.  

Whether you support those types of candidates or someone else, if you love America then you should be offended when a politician attacks supporters of liberty loving candidates because it's an attack on you, too.  And when Marco Rubio recently said he wouldn't be part of Donald Trump's freak show he was calling you part of the freak show.  He has the same disdain for liberty loving voters that the rest of the establishment GOP has.

I've mentioned concerns over Rubio numerous times in the past such as here, here and here.

It appears that Marco Rubio is an opportunist, not a conservative. When he ran for the Senate as a Tea Party candidate he saw the opportunity to win the seat by embracing the Tea Party, but not long after he got to Washington he started courting the establishment GOP and even joined the Gang of Eight to try to introduce amnesty legislation.  Back in 2011 Politico reported that he was out to align himself with the establishment.  He even became a serious consideration by establishment candidate Mitt Romney as a running mate in 2012.

In 2012 Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch, a Florida resident, raised concerns over Rubio and has raised more again recently by pointing out Rubio's hypocrisy and deceit.

In 2013 Jack Kerwick, PhD, pointed out in The New American that: 

  • When Arizonans passed Senate Bill 1070 empowering "the state’s law enforcement agents to remedy the federal government’s dereliction of duty. Rubio opposed it. In fact, he likened Arizona to a 'police state' for allowing officers to ask those suspected of being here illegally for documentation."
  • "Rubio argued for permitting illegal immigrants the opportunity to pursue a college degree. He also contended that they should be able to pay “in-state tuition” rates for it."
  • Rubio has "gone on record as favoring the DREAM Act, he favors the same 'comprehensive immigration reform' for which establishment Republicans have been calling for years — i.e., amnesty by another name." 

Back in early 2014 The Hill reported that GOP insiders were already throwing their support behind Rubio.  That should have been another signal to conservatives that he isn't one of us. 

In June of this year reported that Rubio cast the key vote for Obamatrade and hadn't even read it.  Breitbart reported that he denied not reading it but they went on to report other times when he's made claims that were proven false.  Larry Klayman's claim that Rubio is deceptive seems to have merit.

Business Insider reports that when Scott Walker dropped out of the race Rubio benefited, which makes sense given that Walker, too, was an establishment candidate.  It's no wonder that Rubio would attract people when Walker got out.

And something many have missed is a report by Breitbart that with John Boehner's retirement announcement has come a call for Mitch McConnell's resignation, too, which could be damaging to Rubio because of his frequent efforts to advance McConnell's establishment goals in the Senate.

Rubio's no friend of liberty loving Americans and it's time people wake up and recognize him for what he is.  He represents Florida, which is a critical state Republicans need to win the election in 2016.  The establishment GOP saw in Jeb Bush a chance to win Florida.  But now that Bush is struggling they are looking to Rubio as someone who could also bring them Florida.  More than anything, even their errant belief that Rubio's Cuban heritage will bring them the Hispanic vote, bringing a Florida win is what the establishment sees in Rubio.

But America doesn't need another candidate to be supported just because of what state they can bring.  What America needs is someone who is willing to fight and tear down the politically correct system and replace it with a system of the people, by the people, and for the people as outlined in the Constitution.

Sunday, October 4, 2015

Foolish Voters Fall For Phony Conservatives Fiorina & Rubio - Pt. 1

The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense.

Here's the Nonsense:  We can tell just from a good interview or a good speech that candidates like Fiorina and Rubio are conservatives who have good plans for America.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Very few people do their own homework to know much about candidates before supporting them.  The lack of effort made to do research on your own is the reason so many people fell for Bill Clinton in 1992 and Barack Obama in 2008.

It's times like this when I wonder if it's worth even bothering to write because of the foolishness of American voters.  While we've seen some recent awakening of voters to the imminent destruction of America, it's very disconcerting when they don't pay enough attention to see the difference between candidates who can help America and those who will take us down the same old path of destruction.  And that's just what's happening right now.

As Jeb's campaign continues to falter, the establishment GOP is working hard to line up a few replacements in case they're needed.  They know that the candidates have to try to come across as conservative to get enough support to win the nomination.  

Initially they got people like Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, and George Pataki to enter the race but no one is buying the idea that they are conservative.  They had Scott Walker and it was even shown by the NY Times that they accepted he had moved to the right to win conservative votes but they knew he'd move to the left if he was nominated.  Thankfully his campaign already failed.

As they see their fair haired boy Jeb failing they have found others willing to do their bidding such as Carly Fiorina and Marco Rubio. And many voters are buying the sales pitch and giving rise to these two in the polls.

While I was initially impressed at how Carly handled herself on the campaign trail, as she started to get more attention I started looking more closely at what she really stands for.  My impression of her quickly turned to concern the more I learned.

An abundance of work is now being produced raising concerns over her positions on the issues and ties to the establishment GOP.  Far more than what I addressed in the past here.  In fact, so many that it would be too much to address them all in this post.   

Probably the best overall research I've seen into where Carly really stands comes from the PUMAbydesign001's Blog which has written 3 excellent pieces that you should click on and read to get their entire content.  You can read them here, here and here.  

Some of the information you'll find includes:

  • "So after watching the Presidential Debate 9/17/15 it seems we have another Barack Obama with makeup and gorgeous clothes snuggling down in our midst, probably because she thinks Americans are still sleeping at the wheel.  Could our Country endure another great orator who is glib of tongue who has brought a basket full of 'hope and change' to sell Americans."
  • In the last debate Trump said Yale Law's 'top man' (Sonnenfeld) criticized former HP CEO Carly Fiorina.  Sonnenfeld said this on CNBC's Squawk on the Street: "HP was in great shape when [Fiorina] got there and she left it in tatters....  She's never gotten a CEO job tenure since.  What does that tell you?  In 10 years, what has she learned?...  People learn a lot as they've had adversity... The comeback stories are very much the American dream but her comeback can't be from failure to the American presidency as the commander in chief of the free world when she hasn't proven herself."
  • On Sept. 10, 2015 "AZ’s chief Common Core pusher hosts exclusive private fundraiser for Carly Fiorina in Phoenix.  Craig Barrett, AZ’s chief Common Core pusher and Chairman of the Board at Achieve Inc. (architects of the Common Core standards), hosted a private fundraiser for Carly Fiorina in AZ on 9/10/15 according to the Maricopa County Republican Committee (MCRC) Briefs.  Craig Barrett, Arizona’s poorer version of Bill Gates, routinely supports candidates for Governor and Superintendent of Education who then go on to advocate for his position of supporting Common Core learning standards and the suctioning of our kids’ data to all of his buddies at the Chamber of Commerce.  Craig Barrett would not support anyone who is truly against Common Core in their actions…. The goal of globalists, which Carly Fiorina is an integral part of are moving rapidly to bring all human beings on earth under the control of a single global state.  This is known as the “New World Order” that Obama has mentioned frequently.  The movement has been initiated in the United States for many years and Common Core is a huge red flag."
  • "Fiorina was long and full of compassion for Hillary Clinton before she was against her. In a series of clips put together in a video by Buzzfeed, Fiorina praised Clinton during the 2008 presidential campaign while at the same time working pursuant to Forbes 2008 article employed as 'one of John McCain’s most ubiquitous campaign surrogates.' [One of Fiorina's comments about Hillary was:] 'I have such great admiration and empathy for Hillary Clinton…I have great admiration for her because I know what it takes in some small measure to do what she has done. She is obviously incredibly intelligent, focused, tough, determined, empathetic of all the tens of millions of people that she was trying to represent in her quest to become the first woman president of the United States…. And as a woman, I take great pride in the fact that Hillary Clinton ran for president. And I also watched with a lot of empathy as I saw how she was scrutinized, characterized, talked about as a woman…'”
  • "When asked earlier this year in an interview with Katie Couric 'Is manmade global warming a problem?'  Fiorina who has bought into the argument that climate change aka global warming exists was evasive in her response."  [In fact, Fiorina has expressed belief in man-caused climate change in the past, along with support for cap and trade legislation.] 
  • "As pointed out by D.C. McAllister earlier this week in The Federalist: 'Fiorina says she wants to throw punches at Clinton on the issues, but how can she when she has sometimes sounded just like Clinton?' As Daniel Horowitz writes at Conservative Review, 'During the 2013 Obamacare funding showdown, Carly ripped into Ted Cruz, echoing the Democrat talking points about the "Cruz shutdown." She also said she felt bad for John Boehner. If you look at her statement carefully, this runs a lot deeper than the issue of defunding Obamacare….'”
  • Fiorina was supported in her failed 2010 run for the Senate by such establishment Republicans as Senators Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Rep. Kevin McCarthy.

Along with all of this, we are seeing establishment money line up behind Ms. Fiorina as reported by Newsmax.  These people "shop" for candidates carefully and push for establishment candidates that will do their bidding.  
Any voters thinking Fiorina is a conservative are making a big mistake.  She and Rubio (which I'll write about next, in part 2 of this post) are leading their followers down a path that will only continue the disaster the establishment has supported for America.

Sunday, September 27, 2015

Cruz Wins Values Voter Straw Poll, But Can His Plan Get Him Elected?

The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense.

Here's the Nonsense:  Ted Cruz has the most appeal to people of faith and that will win for him in his 2016 presidential campaign.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Ted's an amazing guy, but does his plan have a flaw that could hold him back from success?

This weekend was the Values Voter Summit.  It attracts voters who put their values high on their list of priorities for the candidates they support.  They had a straw poll taken of about 1000 people and Ted Cruz won with a whopping 35% of the vote.  His nearest competitor was Ben Carson at 18%.  But does this win really say anything for Cruz and his chance of winning his 2016 election bid?  Probably not.

For the 3rd year in a row Ted Cruz won the Values Voter Summit straw poll.  While that's a nice record and a good group for him to have on his side, the win doesn't really say much for his 2016 bid for the presidency.  Values Voters would be people of conviction and values, many claiming they are people of faith.  And one of the key planks of Cruz's plan to try to win the GOP nomination is to court these people.  But it may be a mistaken concept.

In 2012 millions of voters stayed home and didn't vote.  They were fed up.  And for the most part, the pundits and media believed (and still do) that they were mostly evangelical Christians who didn't vote because they refused to vote for a candidate who was a Mormon.  

Let's take a minute here to clearly understand what that claim entails.  Mormons claim to be Christian, and in the sense that most Americans claim to be Christian they would be part of that cultural Christianity that includes most Americans.  Americans on the whole are cultural Christians, not theological Christians. 

 By evangelical definition, most Americans aren't truly Christian because they don't hold to and live by orthodox Christian theology.  To evangelicals, if your theology doesn't fit the orthodox definition of Christianity, then you are not a Christian.  

Mormon doctrine is not considered orthodox Christian doctrine.  Because of that belief by evangelicals, some were not willing to vote for Mitt Romney, although those who fall into that category seem to have been far fewer in number than the media led people to believe.  Most evangelicals, like any other group in America, were looking to elect a president, not a pastor, and to them voting for a Mormon was no different than voting for anyone else who wasn't an evangelical Christian.  They were not making religion a litmus test to determine who they would vote for.

What was far less focused on in 2012, and yet seems to have been a much bigger portion of those who didn't vote, was a high number of Ron Paul supporters.  They were upset that he didn't get the nomination and chose not to vote as a protest.  Many of those same people support Ron Paul's son, Rand, in the 2016 race.  And my guess is that in 2016 there's a fair chance that they won't vote again if Rand Paul doesn't get the nomination (something that appears to have less and less chance of happening as Rand implodes in his own campaign).

But the few million people who stayed home, whether evangelicals or Ron Paul supporters, or some of both, are not the key to winning in 2016.  Obama and the Democrats are working at a feverish pace to get the illegals in America to legal status so they can vote.  That will increase the size of the Democrat voting base far more than the votes lost by Republicans in 2012 when some evangelicals and Ron Paul supporters didn't vote.  

So, the key to winning for Republicans has got to be to get enough voters out to offset the actions of both the Democrats and the Rand Paul supporters who will throw a tantrum again and not vote.

Now, all that said, Ted Cruz is a favorite candidate of the conservative base.  He certainly is the most solidly conservative candidate running.  And Ted has set himself up so that he's attractive to supporters of candidates like Rand Paul and Donald Trump.  When and if either of those candidates drop out of the race, Cruz hopes to be the candidate their supporters move to.  

But at the core of Cruz's plan is the idea that he, as an evangelical Christian himself, will have the most appeal to evangelicals.  He takes a strong stand for religious liberty, which he believes is at the cornerstone of rights for Americans (and he's right about that).  He believes he can rally people to support him over that issue.

It is believed that he has so much appeal that it will attract two types of voters that he believes will give him the edge to win.  Those two types are the evangelicals who stayed home in 2012 and many of 20+ million evangelicals who never vote and aren't even registered to vote.

Cruz is hoping to enlighten and inspire the evangelicals who don't vote to change their ways, register, and head to the polls to save religious freedom.  He knows that if the majority of those 20+ million evangelicals register they would mostly register as Republicans and the sheer number of them would offset anything the Democrats are doing trying to get illegals to a legal status where they could vote.

It sounds like a pretty good plan... if he can do it.  

But that's where the question comes in.  Are enough Americans concerned about the threat to religious freedom to actually get out and do something about it?  Do they understand the impact that losing religious freedom really is to their lives, their future, and the future of their families?

Ted Cruz is a brilliant guy who can mop the floor with anyone in a legitimate debate.  (Please don't call the nonsense we've seen on Fox and CNN legitimate debates.  While CNN's was certainly much better than Fox's, both were not really debates and, as a result, the voting public is the one who lost.)  I think very highly of Ted Cruz and think he has a lot to offer our nation as a public servant. 

But getting people who've never voted to go out and register and then follow through to vote is a major task.  The Democrats are somewhat successful at it because they offer freebies that attract people.  After all, people love Santa Claus.  

That's not what conservative Republicans do, so people who aren't politically involved need other motivation to get involved.  

Evangelicals that don't vote, unlike other voters, don't get involved because they don't see the things of this world as important compared to their future in heaven.  They don't "waste" their time getting involved now because it doesn't matter to them.  Their focus is not on today or even this life.  Their focus is on where they're going to spend forever.

Now, some of you may think that's crazy, but whether you think that or not doesn't change their views.  And getting someone to change from that mindset to one that also sees the importance of being involved in the political process is, at best, extremely difficult. 

Yet without their involvement the chances of Cruz, or any other candidate who thinks they can rely on the evangelicals to turn out to vote for them, is questionable.

Could this be the mountain that Ted Cruz can't successfully climb?

While Cruz is somewhat known as a fighter and principled person, that doesn't mean he can inspire the evangelicals to action.  Those who aren't registered to vote are not angry about the threat to religious liberty like politically active Christians are (evangelical and otherwise).  

The thing that gets people motivated to take action more than anything else is anger.  Anger is an amazing motivator.  When someone is angry they are like a freight train that can't be stopped.  

Cruz to a minor extent and Donald Trump and Ben Carson to a much greater extent have tapped into the anger of the American electorate.  Trump certainly more than all of the others combined.  And part of the reason that Cruz hasn't tapped into it is that the uninvolved, unregistered evangelicals he's after are not, in many cases, angry.  They are content to wait upon the teachings in the Bible that promise them that one day Jesus will return and deal with the mess this world is in.  

So, the question for Cruz is how do you get those people angry enough to take action?

Stop and think about it.  Values aren't going to drive people to the polls in anywhere near the numbers that anger is.  The evangelicals certainly have the values that support religious freedom.  But if these people haven't been involved up to now, why would they suddenly feel their values are driving them to vote now? 

On the other hand, people who are really angry will take action when they usually wouldn't.  People who know me know that I don't get angry very easily.  I used to, but not any more.  It takes a lot for me to get angry, but when I do you better get out of my way.  

I think most people are that way.  When they get angry they are like a freight train racing down the tracks and nothing will stop them.  Their emotions are running high and they aren't stopping for anything.

Those are the people who are more likely to get involved and vote.  

And that's the difference between the unregistered evangelicals that Ted Cruz is trying to rally to get involved and the people who are actually getting involved.

That's where candidates like Donald Trump and to some degree Ben Carson have had more success than Ted Cruz.  Trump and Carson have tapped into the anger of the people.  The majority of angry people see Donald Trump as the catalyst for change.  And so that's who they line up behind.  

No other candidate is drawing the huge numbers from unlikely groups.  25% of blacks surveyed support Trump because they're tired of being deceived by the Democrat Party.  20% of Democrats have said they support Trump because they don't like where their party has gone.  Citizens who have never voted are registering to vote for Trump.  

I remember reading of one 92 year old woman in Tennessee who has never registered or voted in her life is now registered because she is supporting Trump because she doesn't like what America has become.  92 years old!  After all those years you'd think it would be impossible to get her involved, but Trump has done it.  

In another story young people just old enough to vote are paying money to hear Trump speak and standing in long waiting lines when they'd usually be spending their summer doing other things.  But they see in Trump something that is resonating with their anger.  They are angry that their future is questionable at best, but Trump gives them hope that America can be great again and give them opportunity.  Anger drives people more than anything else.

What is happening with Trump is not happening with any other candidate on similar levels.  He's attracting people from across the aisle, from groups that traditionally are controlled by Democrats, and people who aren't even registered to vote BECAUSE THEY ARE ANGRY!

It's the anger candidates must tap into if they are to succeed and America is to be saved from the collapse that is befalling us.  And if Cruz is going to tap into those unregistered evangelicals, which is critical for him to succeed, then he has to find a way to inspire them to anger about what is happening.  If they don't listen to him and just want to sit back and wait for God, he will have no chance at the nomination.  

At this point I'm sure some people are saying, "But Trump didn't do well in the Values Voter Summit straw poll!"  Don't think that people of faith won't support Trump.  Sure, he may not have done well in the Values Voters Summit straw poll, but on the other hand, well-known Christian Duck Dynasty star Willie Robertson just backed Trump at the Oklahoma State Fair (you can read about it here), so people of faith are not disregarding candidates based on their faith.

Trump may not attract many of the people from the Values Voter Summit, but the majority of Americans aren't those people.  Trump referred to Marco Rubio as a clown at the Summit and it's reported he received boos from the crowd.  Maybe he deserved it, but Trump fights like a Democrat and that's why they can't handle him.  

And I'm not so sure that the 13% of the people at the Summit who voted for Rubio in their straw poll have any clue anyway.  Trump is right that Rubio is a kid.  He's a young, immature establishment Republican and if those who voted for him at that Summit can't see that, then they need to do more homework before they should be voting in November 2016.  (Larry Klayman of Judicial Watch has just written a very good piece you can read here about Rubio.)  Rubio's no conservative and has been dishonest with voters so I don't know why someone who's been deceptive is even being considered at a summit named the Values Voter Summit.  

Cruz is an excellent person to serve our nation, but he is no longer my first choice for 2016.  I am not convinced he is electable for a host of reasons.  But this isn't about my reasons why I think that.  It's about the underlying motive that will drive people to the polls.  And I don't think appealing to the values of a nation whose majority populace are narcissistic and immoral is a winning plan.  

The candidate who taps best into the anger that Americans have is the one who will drive them to the polls.  When people are angry they take more action than any other time.  Happiness, duty, or anything else won't drive a person like anger does.  The real question for Ted Cruz is whether he can inspire that kind of anger within the unregistered evangelicals.  Without it can he really win?

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Would GOP Establishment Prefer Democrat Win Over A Non-Establishment GOP Candidate in 2016?

The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense.

Here's the Nonsense:  When the GOP leadership had the candidates sign loyalty pledges it was a way to guarantee that all Republicans would work together to win in 2016.

Here's the Horse Sense:  The GOP leadership hoped the loyalty pledge would run Trump out of the race.  When it didn't work, and nothing else is working, they are starting to panic.  They are considering desperate measures if they can't get their candidate nominated.

With GOPe (GOP establishment) candidates having a hard time getting traction against the likes of Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Ben Carson, the GOPe leadership that control the party have tried everything they can think of to stop their support.  This is especially true of Trump because he's in the lead and tearing down the establishment and political correctness at every turn.  

While this is not unusual for the GOPe, one has to wonder just how far they'll go to stop non-establishment candidates from winning in 2016.  Are they so against the candidates supported by the grassroots voting base that they would actually prefer a Democrat win if a GOPe candidate can't get the nomination?

Garth Kant at WND is reporting that the GOPe is so concerned that it's being suggested that if Donald Trump were to get the nomination they should run a 3rd party candidate like Mitt Romney to kill Trump's chances of winning the White House.  

President George W. Bush's chief media strategist, Mark McKinnon, is reported in the WND article to have said about the possibility of Trump winning the nomination:

"The Republican establishment completely freaks out.  They get together and say, this is unacceptable, but it looks like it's going to happen.  So we go off, and we create a new Republican Party as an Independent candidacy and draft somebody who's tanned, rested and ready to go and with a lot of money, somebody like Mitt Romney."

Yes, this is from the same GOPe that demanded Trump sign a pledge that he wouldn't run as a 3rd party candidate if he didn't win the nomination.

But should we be surprised?  Absolutely not.

These are the same people who Steve Deace wrote about in the Washington Times back in 2014.  He told us how the GOPe mobilized Democrat voters in Mississippi's open primary to save Senator Thad Cochran from losing to a conservative challenger.

These are the same people who the Tea Party has reported work tirelessly to destroy non-establishment Republican candidates.

These are the same people who Guy Benson wrote about on where he said Mitch McConnell vowed to crush Tea Party candidates in 2014.

If the GOPe were to run a 3rd party candidate neither the GOPe candidate nor Trump (or any non-establishment Republican candidate) would win.  

The Republican vote would be split and the election victory would go to the Democrat candidate.  

But the hatred of the GOPe for those who do not bow to their altar of power is so great that they are willing to lose to the Democrats rather than align themselves with the grassroots voting base.

Think of it.  The same grassroots voting base that has kept the GOPe in power for years is hated so badly that the GOPe are willing to help the Democrats win to keep the grassroots from getting their candidates into power.  

They are not willing to work together with the base for a common goal.  Why?  Because they don't have common goals with the rest of us.  

Just like the Democrats, the GOPe want big government and all that goes along with it.  They know that if the Democrats win, they will still be in positions of power and influence as the minority party leadership.  But if the grassroots candidates win, the GOPe will be out of power.  They'd far rather have limited power under the Democrats than no power with the grassroots determining who is in office.

This is not just a love of power, it's an outright wholesale sellout of our nation to a Democrat Party that has been taken over by progressives and their communist agenda.  

Did you get that?  The GOPe is willing to sell out America to a communist agenda to retain power instead of joining the American people to bring our country back from the brink of destruction.

These people are not our friends.  These people are the ones who have caused a revolt by the grassroots voting base.  They are the ones who have promised over and over again to do the will of the people and continually go back on their word and support the Democrat agenda.

The grassroots are fed up.  They will no longer accept business as usual from the GOPe.  The entire reason outsider candidates like Trump, Carson, and Cruz have gained popularity is because of the actions of the GOPe.

The American voters are so fed up that they want someone from the outside who will tear the system down.  In fact, I believe they would rather see the Republican Party lose if they have an establishment candidate than elect them once again to continue their madness.  That's why there's more enthusiasm for the upcoming elections than we've seen since Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980.

But unfortunately a lot of voters are uninformed and supporting candidates who they think are not tied to the establishment when in reality they may very well be.  

While Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, John Kasich, George Pataki, and Lindsey Graham are obvious establishment candidates, it's clear that many others like Marco Rubio and Scott Walker fall into the same category.  Even the new rising star Carly Fiorina has aligned herself with the establishment in the past and, as I wrote here, has some serious issues to address before anyone should throw their support behind her.

At this point the candidates who are unquestionably anti-establishment are Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, and Bobby Jindal.  All others, some of whom seem quite interesting, have questions to answer to prove themselves worthy of consideration.

Don't be deceived.  The fight has yet to really get under way.  The battle for 2016 is going to be nasty and hard to win.  We have enemies on all sides and we must be involved NOW.

This is not something you can afford to wait on.  You must be getting all the information you can now so you can make an informed decision to get the right candidates nominated in the primaries.  This means you need to be educating those around you, too, because most people won't do the homework required to do their civic duty responsibly.  

This is the crossroads many of us have been warning about for years.  Now is the time because if 2016 fails, there will never be another chance like you have now.  With the impact the American people are having on the system, if you lose this time there's no way either party is going to allow you the ability to do it again.  They will take action to restrict and restrain your ability to vote your conscience like Americans can still vote today.  

In the 2014 midterms the voters didn't get involved early enough and by the time they did, the GOPe already had the nominations all sealed up with GOPe candidates.  It was too late to get anyone else on the ballot.  America's future will be determined in the primaries, not the general election. 

The primary voting starts in only a few short months.  It's time to get educated and involved.

Sunday, September 13, 2015

Attacking Voters Is A Big Mistake

The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense.

Here's the Nonsense:  The Republican establishment, pundits, and media are letting the Trump supporters know how stupid they are.  That's going to drive them away from Trump, cause him to leave the race, and move those voters to support other candidates.

Here's the Hose Sense:  The foolishness of attacking the voters is unfathomable.  It's a great way to create even more resentment and certainly won't drive voters to other Republicans.

Anything they can do to get Trump out of the race is what we're seeing.  Attacks, innuendo, even setting up a stupid online ad that accuses Trump of cheating on his golf game are all things people are trying to weaken Trump's poll numbers and drive him from the race.  One of the most common comes from pundits and "conservative" media who are saying he's not conservative.  Even the GOP establishment's chosen one, Jeb "Common Core & Amnesty lover" Bush, is trying to claim Trump isn't conservative.  It's quite funny considering that Jeb is about as far from conservative as a Republican gets.  They are all using the same tactics trying to get rid of The Donald.

What it all boils down to is that these people are actually attacking the voting base that support Trump.  Somehow they think that by attacking the base, calling them stupid, and trying to belittle them that they will drive them to abandon Trump and move their support to the other candidates.  

They've got a problem in doing this.  The base are angry.  No, not just angry, but REALLY, REALLY ANGRY!!  And they are no longer willing to sit back and take abuse from anyone.  

Any attack on the base will not cause them to move their support to another Republican candidate.  In fact, if Trump isn't in the race they will most likely either not vote or take their vote to an independent because they will no longer support people who attack them.

It's no different than a company selling a product.  If a company wants you to buy their product and their competitor is far outselling them, the worst thing the company can do is attack the customers who are buying the competitor's product.  That will not win the customers, it will drive them away.  

It's simple to understand, but the GOP establishment, the pundits, and the "conservative" media don't either.  If, for some reason, Trump is not the nominee, his supporters are not going to move their support to another Republican candidate after being attacked like this.  They will either stay home or take their vote to an independent.  It would assure a Democrat victory.  

John Nolte at Breitbart has had an ongoing debate with Jonah Goldberg about this.  Goldberg has written numerous articles attacking Trump's supporters and calling Trump just about every negative you could think of.  He has questioned Trump's conservatism and even suggested that Trump's supporters aren't really committed conservatives.  (Nolte's most recent response to Goldberg can be seen in its entirety here.)

Nolte has made it clear that Trump is not currently his top pick for the nomination, but he is determined to defend and support Trump's supporters and their right to make their own decisions.  Here's is a lengthy and very worthwhile excerpt from his latest response about Goldberg's attack:

But if you think that I’m going to get the vapors over Trump hurling flurries of sucker punches to keep his opponents off balance after I’ve sat here for three decades watching us lose like losers; after three decades of watching our useless and corrupt mainstream media openly express their admiration for the degenerate behavior practiced daily by Obama and Reid and the Clintons — think again.

Trump doesn’t just fight. He fights like a leftist. He fights like Obama. He fights like the mainstream media. And so far he is winning. (I explore the appeal of this in much more detail here.)

This from [Jonah] Goldberg, I think, explains not just his blindspot but the blindspot of many who agree with him. And I’m not talking about an ideological blindspot. Goldberg is a rock-ribbed conservative. The blindspot is his inability to give Trump supporters credit for being just as pure:

[Goldberg writes:]
To wit: I don’t think Trump is a conservative. I don’t think he’s a very serious person. I don’t think he’s a man of particularly good character. I don’t think he can be trusted to do the things he promises.

That is exactly how Trump supporters view The Establishment. In fact, it is a PERFECT description of a Republican Establishment that for two decades has grown the size of the federal government, refused to secure the border, attacked the Tea Party, surrendered to Democrats, and appeased our evil media at almost every opportunity (see a full list of GOP sins at Conservative Treehouse).

With that in mind, there is nothing NOT conservative about supporting Trump.

Trump supporters believe, and for good reason (Trump has been consistent on these issues), that Trump will…

1.   Defeat an existential threat to the Republican Party and by extension America by finally securing the border. For good reason (history, evidence), they don’t trust the others, or at least not as much.
2.   Kill terrorists.
3.   Lower middle class taxes.
4.   Simplify the tax code.
5.   Fix the Veterans Administration.
6.   Finally annihilate the feckless, dishonest, cowardly, insulting, snobbish, appeasing, corrupted Republican Establishment — and with it all their toxic cronies and parasites in the grifter Consultant Class and mercenary Chamber of Commerce.

Getting the big conservative things right and burning the diseased village to save the village sounds conservative enough for me.

Nolte makes good points.  Trump may not be everyone's perfect definition of a conservative, but I also have no doubt that very few people have truly looked into his plans for America.  It's well worth the time to do so.  I did back in July and wrote this post to share some of his plans for America.  

Trump is an agent of change, which is what the voters are demanding.  They want to tear the system down and believe Trump can do it better than anyone.  Trump's plans for America appear to be solid ideas that could greatly help America.

Given the support Trump's attracting from not just Republicans, but independents, Democrats, people who don't usually vote, he has a good chance of doing just what Reagan did by attracting those who don't usually vote Republican.  Even minorities are showing an unusually high level of favor for Trump (25% of blacks support Trump.  In the last 10 elections the highest a Republican has ever gotten was Bob Dole at 12%, Romney got only 6%. And he has a 34% favorability rating with Hispanics.).

Attacking those who support Trump is a sure-fire way to undermine the election process.  Trump certainly represents far more conservative solutions than many of the establishment candidates.