Nikki Haley has since admitted (hell, proclaimed) that what she said was an attack on Trump. It was also, rather clearly, an attack on Cruz (who holds very similar positions).
So, the Republican rebuttal to Obama’s SOTU, where Obama opened fire on the two Republican frontrunners by implication, was to trot out a republican governor to make the attack on the republican frontrunners even more explicit. Perhaps the dolt was unaware of the meaning of “rebuttal”? Instead, it was even louder open-borders drivel than Obama had spouted.
Did anything said last night change my mind? Yes. I’ve been a Nikki Haley admirer for a very long time, but last night changed that. It also changed one other thing for me; Trump is now my 2nd pick for the nomination (Cruz is my current #1) which is a lot different to a few weeks ago, when I had several ahead of Trump. It’s seeing the GOPe in action that’s making me think more highly of Trump, precisely because those bastards hate and fear him so much.
Oh, one other thing; I flat out will not vote for a GOPe candidate in November, for any office. I’m now firmly in the “burn it down!” camp on that. (So hell no regarding Bush and Rubio).
I agree almost completely. I only differ on “flat out will not vote for a GOPe candidate”.
I could make a few exceptions, but reality is, I don’t have one to vote for or against. My Congressman did vote for the Omnibus, but I suspect he did so only for the additional NASA funding (although he claimed to do it only for the additional defense spending). Either way, it was the only vote cast that I was against. He is still well regarded by local TEA Party groups.
On the other hand, if Sheila Jackson Lee was running against John Cornyn, and it was a beautiful sunny day with a slight wind and 72 degrees; I’d stay at home. If I lived in Arizona, I would probably vote against McCain.
OK, what’s the deal with Senator Cornyn. I thought that at least under President Clinton that he was a strong-borders hawk?
Cornyn is a GOP porker. That is as simple as I can make it. If you are a libertarian leaning conservative/republican; Cornyn’s votes will routinely bother you. His leadership of the NRSC to harass anybody that might have libertarian sentiments from running as GOP senator hasn’t helped.
I’m still not sure how libertarian I am, but compared to Cornyn, I won’t give the finger to someone who mentions Ayn Rand had some good points about limited government.
Leland, it’s easy for me to make the “I won’t vote for any GOPe” due to my location. My congressman is Paul Gossar, who has been very much against things like the omnibus (and much other GOPe stuff). I’ll be voting for him, no matter what. He’s been largely good, and that’s all anyone can ask for IMHO.
Senate? That’s McCain this year. No way, no how. I’m voting against him in the primary, and won’t vote for him in the general if he makes it. I voted for that cretin in 2008, and had to hold my nose and swear “never again!” to make myself do it.
My vote alone doesn’t really mean much, but the fact I almost always do campaign volunteer work and election day GOTV work does, and the GOPe won’t be getting that, either.
I could be persuaded to vote for any of the candidates right now, Republican or Democrat (with the exception of the former SecState), but I am not voting for anyone to burn anything down.
Were I to vote for any of your choices, it would be for their constructive policies, not burning anything.
That brings me to the Chicago Question (to ask of the candidates) — who sent you? OK, of all the candidates Mr. Trump is by far “his own man” and Senator Cruz has made a sport of angering his brothers in the Senate Republican Caucus to the point where Mitch McConnell won’t give him the time-of-day.
But who sent you, meaning who is President Trump or President Cruz going to surround himself with? You’re not voting for one single person, you are voting for an Administration, for a small army of appointed (and not appointed) advisors and cabinet officers and West Wing Commandos.
With Mr. Obama’s dodgy friends like the inestimable Mr. Rezko, the hirsute Governor Blagojevich, and the irrepressible Jesse Jackson, Jr., M. C., I thought we would make a clean break with the past, that is, if these men from Illinois could stay out of prison. None of that happened (I mean the appointment part, not the jail part).
These men were props, objects used to advance through the Illinois electoral landscape, much as a pickup artist’s dates are purely utilitarian in serving certain needs, and President Obama pretty much brought in the usual suspects of Democratic Party office holders and job seekers at the national level.
I mean with John Ellis, we pretty much know he would (is there a stronger subjunctive I could use here to suggest his remote chances?) bring in the GOPe down the line, and probably the same with Senator Rubio or Governor Christie. But with Mr. Trump or Mr. Cruz, who sent you? Who are the people that will run things when you are in charge?
Ted Cruz was able to pull together a coalition to defeat the then Republican Lt. Gov. of Texas to even have a shot at being a US Senator. He did so by simply sticking to his beliefs. He is very principled. A person like that will be polar, but he can build a cabinet, because people know who he is by what he says.
The very real problem with Trump is you don’t know what President he will be by what he says. Trump will say anything, and often it won’t make sense or match past history. I’ll take Trump over Hillary or Sanders. And if I had to choose between voting for another Bush or Trump, I’d vote Trump. But Trump does concern me in building a cabinet. On the other hand, I hope Trump says “you’re fired” to a lot of career bureaucrats.
This conservative/libertarian actually gained a lot of respect for Gov Haley last night. A republican party that was good on fiscal policy, accountability, and not so blatantly nativist would probably start cleaning the Democrats clocks. As it is, so many Republicans are in the “let’s burn it all down” mood (Arizona CJ is literally the third Trump/Cruz fan I’ve heard use that exact phrase in the last 48hrs), that they’re pretty much guaranteeing themselves another 4-8yrs out of the White House.
My only hope for not having another President Clinton in the WH next year is that somehow Hillary will manage to sabotage herself even more thoroughly than the GOP base currently is.
~Jon
@ Jonathan Goff
To be clear, I’m not going to be voting for someone because I think they’ll “Burn it down”.
What I meant was I won’t vote for, or support (I usually donate, plus do volunteer/GOTV work) a GOPe candidate. I’m so disgusted with them that I’d prefer to see the party go down in flames than let them get their way.
The perfidy of what they’ve done leaves me no choice. There is no excuse, none, for opening fire on a fellow Republican during the official Republican response to the SOTU. What they were NOT supposed to do is make a fall campaign add for the other side. I thought Trump was a paranoid whiner when he threatened to run 3rd party unless treated fairly, but as they proved last night, he was right.
Let me put this in perspective by giving you an analogy; what if Haley had chosen to open fire on a different issue, say, abortion, and slammed candidates that have a hard line absolutist total-ban approach on that ? I’m more a libertarian than a conservative, so I’d have agreed with her on the subject (I’m pro choice) BUT I’d have found her doing so in that venue (response to the SOTU) every bit as reprehensible and unforgivable as I do what actually occurred. What’s worse is she’s claiming that her spiel was approved by Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel. If that’s true, they’ve got to go, the whole rotten lot of them.
“BUT I’d have found her doing so in that venue (response to the SOTU) every bit as reprehensible and unforgivable as I do what actually occurred. What’s worse is she’s claiming that her spiel was approved by Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel. If that’s true, they’ve got to go, the whole rotten lot of them.”
Exactly. Remember, Haley is attacking a person who has the support of 36 to 45% of likely Republican voters. When you represent the voice of your party (which is entirely what the SOTU response is), why spend that voice giving the finger to 1/3rd of your party. Does Haley, Ryan, and McConnell think they can win with 33% less support in the next election? Who again is burning down the party?
Let me go a little further, since Haley went a little further today. She made it clear she attacked Trump. She also claimed Rubio believes in Amnesty, so she attacked him too. And many noted that her attacks on Trump could also be classified as attacks on Cruz. Those three combine for 66% of the likely republican primary votes. So when asked, Haley gives two fingers to 2/3rds of her party’s base.
Jonathan, when you read someone like CJ say “burn it down”; he means not standing in Haley’s way when she does it. That’s how I read them. And I get it. If the Republican Party wants to continue attacking differing voices in their own party and not the differing opinions on the other side of the aisle; then I’ll stop the argument. I withhold my support, and they get their wish of pushing people like me out of the party. I’m cool with it. I don’t know how many elections they will win with that strategy. It didn’t work in 2006, 2008, and not to well in 2012 either. Yet, last night proved the GOP plans to stick with that strategy in 2016. And CJ and I already admitted going along with that strategy in 2008. Why should we keep supporting that failed strategy, Jonathan?
What did we get from the Republican majority gains in 2014? Obamacare is fully funded. Obama’s Executive Orders are fully funded. Planned Parenthood is fully funded. Hell, NASA got more budget than they requested, which is good only in that Commercial Crew is fully funded alongside SLS. I guess we can be happy US oil companies can now sell oil abroad. Glad we got that in a heavily supplied market with decreasing demand. Yeah GOP for getting 1 amendment added to Omnibus! I guess you didn’t burn it all down after all.
If Ryan and McConnell approved Halley’s speech then I’d strongly suspect they had a strong hand in writing it, or at least laying out what she should say. Since she’s not used to DC, I wouldn’t be surprised if they set her up.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the explanation is that she actually has principles and she said what she thought should be said.
She would have been a good addition Bob-1. Republicans have a deep bench this cycle. For all the racial stereotype attacks Democrats like to use, the GOP has real diversity of leadership and not just on race but background.
The sooner Democrats stop the identity politics, the sooner our country can heal from all the racial strife caused from hundreds of years of Democrat’s racial chauvinism.
Trump can win. Whether or not anyone will like how he governs, I don’t know. Aside from running as an an anti-establishment outsider, he strikes me as a guy that will govern like a center right or left establishment President.
The biggest difference between Trump and other candidates is his manner of campaigning, which is much more entertaining and insulting to the other candidates and their allies in the media. This is something we usually see from Democrats and I won’t lie, its refreshing to see someone play by their rules. Republicans always pull their punches while Democrats hit below the belt. Its like being bullied and finally having someone to stand up to the bully.
I don’t agree with the nativist attack but I do understand how people can think that.
I’d rather have Cruz but will vote for Trump or whoever the Republican candidate is. Out of the bunch, only Cruz or Paul are reformers. The rest are business as usual.
Right now, it looks like the Trump Sanders debates will be really entertaining.
Nikki Haley has since admitted (hell, proclaimed) that what she said was an attack on Trump. It was also, rather clearly, an attack on Cruz (who holds very similar positions).
So, the Republican rebuttal to Obama’s SOTU, where Obama opened fire on the two Republican frontrunners by implication, was to trot out a republican governor to make the attack on the republican frontrunners even more explicit. Perhaps the dolt was unaware of the meaning of “rebuttal”? Instead, it was even louder open-borders drivel than Obama had spouted.
Did anything said last night change my mind? Yes. I’ve been a Nikki Haley admirer for a very long time, but last night changed that. It also changed one other thing for me; Trump is now my 2nd pick for the nomination (Cruz is my current #1) which is a lot different to a few weeks ago, when I had several ahead of Trump. It’s seeing the GOPe in action that’s making me think more highly of Trump, precisely because those bastards hate and fear him so much.
Oh, one other thing; I flat out will not vote for a GOPe candidate in November, for any office. I’m now firmly in the “burn it down!” camp on that. (So hell no regarding Bush and Rubio).
I agree almost completely. I only differ on “flat out will not vote for a GOPe candidate”.
I could make a few exceptions, but reality is, I don’t have one to vote for or against. My Congressman did vote for the Omnibus, but I suspect he did so only for the additional NASA funding (although he claimed to do it only for the additional defense spending). Either way, it was the only vote cast that I was against. He is still well regarded by local TEA Party groups.
On the other hand, if Sheila Jackson Lee was running against John Cornyn, and it was a beautiful sunny day with a slight wind and 72 degrees; I’d stay at home. If I lived in Arizona, I would probably vote against McCain.
OK, what’s the deal with Senator Cornyn. I thought that at least under President Clinton that he was a strong-borders hawk?
Cornyn is a GOP porker. That is as simple as I can make it. If you are a libertarian leaning conservative/republican; Cornyn’s votes will routinely bother you. His leadership of the NRSC to harass anybody that might have libertarian sentiments from running as GOP senator hasn’t helped.
I’m still not sure how libertarian I am, but compared to Cornyn, I won’t give the finger to someone who mentions Ayn Rand had some good points about limited government.
Leland, it’s easy for me to make the “I won’t vote for any GOPe” due to my location. My congressman is Paul Gossar, who has been very much against things like the omnibus (and much other GOPe stuff). I’ll be voting for him, no matter what. He’s been largely good, and that’s all anyone can ask for IMHO.
Senate? That’s McCain this year. No way, no how. I’m voting against him in the primary, and won’t vote for him in the general if he makes it. I voted for that cretin in 2008, and had to hold my nose and swear “never again!” to make myself do it.
My vote alone doesn’t really mean much, but the fact I almost always do campaign volunteer work and election day GOTV work does, and the GOPe won’t be getting that, either.
I could be persuaded to vote for any of the candidates right now, Republican or Democrat (with the exception of the former SecState), but I am not voting for anyone to burn anything down.
Were I to vote for any of your choices, it would be for their constructive policies, not burning anything.
That brings me to the Chicago Question (to ask of the candidates) — who sent you? OK, of all the candidates Mr. Trump is by far “his own man” and Senator Cruz has made a sport of angering his brothers in the Senate Republican Caucus to the point where Mitch McConnell won’t give him the time-of-day.
But who sent you, meaning who is President Trump or President Cruz going to surround himself with? You’re not voting for one single person, you are voting for an Administration, for a small army of appointed (and not appointed) advisors and cabinet officers and West Wing Commandos.
With Mr. Obama’s dodgy friends like the inestimable Mr. Rezko, the hirsute Governor Blagojevich, and the irrepressible Jesse Jackson, Jr., M. C., I thought we would make a clean break with the past, that is, if these men from Illinois could stay out of prison. None of that happened (I mean the appointment part, not the jail part).
These men were props, objects used to advance through the Illinois electoral landscape, much as a pickup artist’s dates are purely utilitarian in serving certain needs, and President Obama pretty much brought in the usual suspects of Democratic Party office holders and job seekers at the national level.
I mean with John Ellis, we pretty much know he would (is there a stronger subjunctive I could use here to suggest his remote chances?) bring in the GOPe down the line, and probably the same with Senator Rubio or Governor Christie. But with Mr. Trump or Mr. Cruz, who sent you? Who are the people that will run things when you are in charge?
Ted Cruz was able to pull together a coalition to defeat the then Republican Lt. Gov. of Texas to even have a shot at being a US Senator. He did so by simply sticking to his beliefs. He is very principled. A person like that will be polar, but he can build a cabinet, because people know who he is by what he says.
The very real problem with Trump is you don’t know what President he will be by what he says. Trump will say anything, and often it won’t make sense or match past history. I’ll take Trump over Hillary or Sanders. And if I had to choose between voting for another Bush or Trump, I’d vote Trump. But Trump does concern me in building a cabinet. On the other hand, I hope Trump says “you’re fired” to a lot of career bureaucrats.
This conservative/libertarian actually gained a lot of respect for Gov Haley last night. A republican party that was good on fiscal policy, accountability, and not so blatantly nativist would probably start cleaning the Democrats clocks. As it is, so many Republicans are in the “let’s burn it all down” mood (Arizona CJ is literally the third Trump/Cruz fan I’ve heard use that exact phrase in the last 48hrs), that they’re pretty much guaranteeing themselves another 4-8yrs out of the White House.
My only hope for not having another President Clinton in the WH next year is that somehow Hillary will manage to sabotage herself even more thoroughly than the GOP base currently is.
~Jon
@ Jonathan Goff
To be clear, I’m not going to be voting for someone because I think they’ll “Burn it down”.
What I meant was I won’t vote for, or support (I usually donate, plus do volunteer/GOTV work) a GOPe candidate. I’m so disgusted with them that I’d prefer to see the party go down in flames than let them get their way.
The perfidy of what they’ve done leaves me no choice. There is no excuse, none, for opening fire on a fellow Republican during the official Republican response to the SOTU. What they were NOT supposed to do is make a fall campaign add for the other side. I thought Trump was a paranoid whiner when he threatened to run 3rd party unless treated fairly, but as they proved last night, he was right.
Let me put this in perspective by giving you an analogy; what if Haley had chosen to open fire on a different issue, say, abortion, and slammed candidates that have a hard line absolutist total-ban approach on that ? I’m more a libertarian than a conservative, so I’d have agreed with her on the subject (I’m pro choice) BUT I’d have found her doing so in that venue (response to the SOTU) every bit as reprehensible and unforgivable as I do what actually occurred. What’s worse is she’s claiming that her spiel was approved by Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel. If that’s true, they’ve got to go, the whole rotten lot of them.
“BUT I’d have found her doing so in that venue (response to the SOTU) every bit as reprehensible and unforgivable as I do what actually occurred. What’s worse is she’s claiming that her spiel was approved by Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel. If that’s true, they’ve got to go, the whole rotten lot of them.”
Exactly. Remember, Haley is attacking a person who has the support of 36 to 45% of likely Republican voters. When you represent the voice of your party (which is entirely what the SOTU response is), why spend that voice giving the finger to 1/3rd of your party. Does Haley, Ryan, and McConnell think they can win with 33% less support in the next election? Who again is burning down the party?
Let me go a little further, since Haley went a little further today. She made it clear she attacked Trump. She also claimed Rubio believes in Amnesty, so she attacked him too. And many noted that her attacks on Trump could also be classified as attacks on Cruz. Those three combine for 66% of the likely republican primary votes. So when asked, Haley gives two fingers to 2/3rds of her party’s base.
Jonathan, when you read someone like CJ say “burn it down”; he means not standing in Haley’s way when she does it. That’s how I read them. And I get it. If the Republican Party wants to continue attacking differing voices in their own party and not the differing opinions on the other side of the aisle; then I’ll stop the argument. I withhold my support, and they get their wish of pushing people like me out of the party. I’m cool with it. I don’t know how many elections they will win with that strategy. It didn’t work in 2006, 2008, and not to well in 2012 either. Yet, last night proved the GOP plans to stick with that strategy in 2016. And CJ and I already admitted going along with that strategy in 2008. Why should we keep supporting that failed strategy, Jonathan?
What did we get from the Republican majority gains in 2014? Obamacare is fully funded. Obama’s Executive Orders are fully funded. Planned Parenthood is fully funded. Hell, NASA got more budget than they requested, which is good only in that Commercial Crew is fully funded alongside SLS. I guess we can be happy US oil companies can now sell oil abroad. Glad we got that in a heavily supplied market with decreasing demand. Yeah GOP for getting 1 amendment added to Omnibus! I guess you didn’t burn it all down after all.
If Ryan and McConnell approved Halley’s speech then I’d strongly suspect they had a strong hand in writing it, or at least laying out what she should say. Since she’s not used to DC, I wouldn’t be surprised if they set her up.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the explanation is that she actually has principles and she said what she thought should be said.
Nikki Haley should have run for president
By Issac Bailey
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/13/opinions/bailey-nikki-haley-president/
She would have been a good addition Bob-1. Republicans have a deep bench this cycle. For all the racial stereotype attacks Democrats like to use, the GOP has real diversity of leadership and not just on race but background.
The sooner Democrats stop the identity politics, the sooner our country can heal from all the racial strife caused from hundreds of years of Democrat’s racial chauvinism.
Trump can win. Whether or not anyone will like how he governs, I don’t know. Aside from running as an an anti-establishment outsider, he strikes me as a guy that will govern like a center right or left establishment President.
The biggest difference between Trump and other candidates is his manner of campaigning, which is much more entertaining and insulting to the other candidates and their allies in the media. This is something we usually see from Democrats and I won’t lie, its refreshing to see someone play by their rules. Republicans always pull their punches while Democrats hit below the belt. Its like being bullied and finally having someone to stand up to the bully.
I don’t agree with the nativist attack but I do understand how people can think that.
I’d rather have Cruz but will vote for Trump or whoever the Republican candidate is. Out of the bunch, only Cruz or Paul are reformers. The rest are business as usual.
Right now, it looks like the Trump Sanders debates will be really entertaining.