Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Jeb Bush / Chris Christie 2016: INEVITABLE!

I mean, the national GOP would have to be absolutely crazy not to run a guy who appeals to so many major Democrat donors.  Compromise!  Bipartisanship!  No labels!

NJ Star Ledger:

Gov. Chris Christie is cashing in donations from top Democratic fundraisers and other traditionally liberal donors across the country, even nabbing the support of a handful of rainmakers aligned with President Obama and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a Star-Ledger review of state and federal records shows.

The checks are flying into the Republican governor’s war chest from all sorts of unlikely places — the hedge fund run by liberal billionaire George Soros, for example, and the politically progressive halls of the University of California, Berkeley.

The nascent support from Democratic donors is an early sign of Christie’s fundraising prowess in a potential run for the White House in 2016, experts and Democratic donors said, and dovetails with recent polls showing him gaining popularity nationally among Democrats and independents.

Christie’s partnership with New Jersey Democratic leaders and his warm relationship with Obama after Hurricane Sandy could be enticing donors who don’t often give to GOP candidates, even if they are closer ideologically to Democrat Barbara Buono, Christie’s lesser-known challenger, political scientists and Democratic fundraisers say.

“While I do not agree with his stance on every issue, he is one of the best political leaders I have talked to in a long time,” said Ken Rosen, a UC-Berkeley professor who cut a $3,800 check to Christie after chatting with him at two events. “He is willing to take on tough issues such as pension reform, education reform, mental-health issues, even if his views are not politically correct.”

[…]

Brigid Harrison, a political science professor at Montclair State University, said much of Christie’s Democratic support stems from a recent fundraiser in California with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

[…]

Harrison said Christie’s support from Democratic donors cuts both ways. The conservative wing of the GOP, already unhappy with Christie because of his friendly appearances with Obama, may not look kindly on it. On the other hand, money talks in presidential politics. “(For) many Republicans who haven’t had a victory since George W. Bush in 2004, that’s enormously tantalizing,” she said.

Soros front groups, liberal professors from Berkeley, left-wing entrepreneurs using the label “conservative” for their organizations hoping to magically turn 55 million illegals into Democrat voters — why, if the Republicans can’t win by running someone who appeals to liberal Democrats and leftists like these, they’ll never be able to win!

And here you thought partisan politics was difficult.  Meanwhile, the secret was staring the GOP in the face the entire time:  just run Democrats as Republicans, and have Ann Coulter go on the TV a bunch to insist that they’re really very very very conservative, more so even than Reagan!

#winning!

(h/t JHo)

 

 

106 Replies to “Jeb Bush / Chris Christie 2016: INEVITABLE!”

  1. Gulermo says:

    “more so even than Reagan!”

    HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!!

    Wipes tears from eyes. Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

  2. cranky-d says:

    Here’s a theory: they put up candidates like this to force the real constitutional conservatives out of the running, so that either way the election goes the statists’ way. I think the establishment GOP would prefer a Democrat win than a conservative Republican, because the latter might upset their applecart.

  3. Gulermo says:

    “#winning!”

    SWEET!!!

  4. DarthLevin says:

    Presidents Dole, McCain, and Romney think this strategery is teh awesome!

  5. Gulermo says:

    Second look at a third party?

    Tentative name; HEY! Had Enough Yet?

  6. The best thing Christie can do to cement the nomination is to put a Democrat even more liberal and corrupt (BIRM) than Lautenberg in the U.S. Senate.

    What’s Flim-Flam Florio doing these days?

  7. leigh says:

    Stay out the Bushes!

    I Stand with Rand.

  8. Libby says:

    No. just no. Nonononononononono! NJNBHN.
    No more Bushes, no more Clintons, no more Kennedys.

  9. dicentra says:

    Anyone listening to the IRS hearing?

    The Dems are trading between “So you don’t have ACTUAL EVIDENCE that the White House ordered this?”

    (R. George: “Not in that report, but the investigation is ongoing.” [Meaning don’t count ya chickens, lady!])

    and

    “That one SCOTUS decision that we hate hate hate!”

    and

    “Rape is despicable but she was asking for it.”

  10. leigh says:

    Well, di, if she’s going to go out dressed like that! Well!

  11. dicentra says:

    Or my favorite: “Just because the IRS admitted that it was targeting conservatives doesn’t mean that they were targeting conservatives. NOT ALL of those targeted groups were conservative.”

  12. leigh says:

    Even David the Plouffe couldn’t come up with a liberal group that was targeted.

  13. Ernst Schreiber says:

    If that’s the ticket, do you know what else is inevitable?

    President Rodham.

  14. happyfeet says:

    ironically when the jersey trash go to cast their votes for their choice for the presidential nomination they will be voting in closed primaries

    which is ironic

  15. LBascom says:

    They know Christy can’t win. They’ll probably stick Paul in there instead of Bush, just for their own amusement at suckering some light weight conservatives, but they know Christy will get the same as Romney and McCain for turn out.

    Anyone else find it odd that Bengasi is almost forgotten in the wake of the IRS/reported wiretapping scandals of the lame duck president and his AG, while Hillary Clintons name hasn’t appeared in print for a month?

    I think we’re being set up big time, and it’s Ms Clintons turn in 2016. The GOP will probably get the Senate, and congressional leaders McCain and Boehner will cross the isle in a bipartisan effort with Madame President to consolidate the transformation Obama blessed us with.

    Not that it matters, we’re already a post constitutional fascist state, and George Washington himself couldn’t turn it around without a new revolution.

  16. leigh says:

    If that’s the ticket, we certainly could.

    I certainly hope Mrs. Rodham-Clinton’s many on-camera fuck-ups show up in heavy rotation during the primaries.

  17. LBascom says:

    Ha Ernst! GMTA.

  18. Squid says:

    I hope Christie takes a hard look at what his new “friends” did to McCain, and realizes that they only set him up so that they can knock him down. He’ll be nothing but “reasonable” and “common sense” and “bipartisan” and “leadership” through the primary season, and then — overnight! — he’ll be just another bloodthirsty stormtrooper for fatcats and Jesus, bent on subjugating teh wimminz and teh brown folk.

    I’d love it if he soaked up a good hundred million from the Vast Soros Machine and then stuck his finger in their eyes, but I know it would never happen. Nothing ever happens the way it ought to.

  19. LBascom says:

    ReportER wiretaps…

  20. Libby says:

    Ugh, Christie and Rubio are being duped. They will never get my vote, which is a feature of corrupting them, not a bug. McCain still hasn’t woken up to the fact that hes been a useful idiot for the Left for decades.

  21. Rich Fader says:

    Bush 2016: Can’t Sleep, Chris Will Eat Me. Can’t Sleep, Chris Will Eat Me. Can’t Sleep, Chris Will Eat Me. Can’t Sleep…

  22. William says:

    By then Christie might be down to a slim 250 because of the plastic he inserted into his belly to make him sick if he eats too much! If that’s not the man to lead us into the future, well.

  23. Pablo says:

    The best thing Christie can do to cement the nomination is to put a Democrat even more liberal and corrupt (BIRM) than Lautenberg in the U.S. Senate.

    What’s Flim-Flam Florio doing these days?

    Corzine doesn’t seem to be doing much. But he’ll probably pick Cory Booker.

  24. sdferr says:

    Pretty good proof of concept I think. The Republican Party will not be reformed in any meaningful sense at any time relevant to the preservation of the Republic that was known as the United States. It’s kinda like the IRS in that respect. Want change? Meaningful change? Then abolish or remove the thing. It’s the only way feasible.

  25. geoffb says:

    What Manchin did to Toomey, Schumer to Rubio, Obama did to Christie, schmoozing them into losing.

    Someday you’d think they would learn, the progressive stink is forever.

  26. SBP says:

    Hey, why go with Florio or Corzine when Torricelli is tanned, rested, and ready?

  27. SBP says:

    sdferr: “The Republican Party will not be reformed in any meaningful sense at any time relevant to the preservation of the Republic that was known as the United States. ”

    Agreed. So what can we do about it?

  28. SBP says:

    “But he’ll probably pick Cory Booker.”

    I expect the Dems to run Booker next time, so yeah, a partial term in the Senate would fully qualify him to be president, by modern standards.

  29. sdferr says:

    So what can we do about it?

    I’ve advocated building a new party from the ground up which truly represents our political views and interests.

  30. RI Red says:

    I am so opting out of the next election. Of course, the dems support of Christie is intended to do just that, isn’t it?

  31. cranky-d says:

    I was thinking the same thing, RI Red.

  32. mondamay says:

    sdferr says June 3, 2013 at 5:22 pm
    which truly represents our political views and interests.

    In the wake of a certain recent 300 post thread, I’m not so sure that’s possible.

  33. sdferr says:

    In the wake of a certain recent 300 post thread, I’m not so sure that’s possible.

    I don’t think I understand the consequent you draw. But then I tend to be both dense and simple. So, forgive those faults I beg, and possibly expand what you mean?

  34. mondamay says:

    Just the usual lament about herding cats, I guess.

    I know for my own part that I’ve been called a “purist” and a “pragmatist” (both intended as insult) in political discussions (meaning arguments) with people who called themselves conservative. When you throw in libertarians and classicals, we “Constitution supporters” make for a pretty fractious bunch.

  35. sdferr says:

    . . . we “Constitution supporters” make for a pretty fractious bunch.

    Could be I’m too optimistic, but I believe we’re more reasonable than may appear at the surface, particularly where it comes down to the nubbier bits.

  36. LBascom says:

    “we “Constitution supporters” make for a pretty fractious bunch.”

    This, summed up as “herding cats”, is our Achilles heel. Add in most on the right still hold on to the concepts of honor and dignity, and we’re really at a disadvantage against the left.

    The most glaring example is when one of ours proves themselves to be corrupt and crooked, we (rightly) throw their ass out of office. The proggs, faced with similar circumstances, circle the wagons and defend the indefensible to the death.

    It’s a problem without a solution I know of, short of sacrificing our principles and mores. And I ain’t going there.

  37. mondamay says:

    I’d rather we throw out the crooked. I think it makes us stronger, not weaker.

    It chaps my nether parts that Mark Sanford is still among the politically viable. He’s a like a living “Anthony Weiner for mayor” ad.

  38. sdferr says:

    By throwing out the crooked, are you referring to the make-up of the Republican Party as it stands here, or merely averring to the people who offer themselves to stand for office as nominal conservatives?

    ‘Cause if the party, I regret to say I don’t think there will be many people left there, if crooked is the measure.

  39. newrouter says:

    “It’s a problem without a solution I know of, ”

    sustained attention is getting rid of fed gov’t agencies boosts morale

  40. newrouter says:

    we are already visgoths. let’s be vandals destroy the alphabet fed gov’t.

  41. They know Christy can’t win. They’ll probably stick Paul in there instead of Bush, just for their own amusement at suckering some light weight conservatives, but they know Christy will get the same as Romney and McCain for turn out.

    Do you really think they wanted McCain and Romney to win?

  42. LBascom says:

    Sdferr, actually Mark Sanford, mentioned in the comment above yours, is a good example. Compare and contrast what happened with him, and what happened with Bill Clinton.

  43. LBascom says:

    I wouldn’t say they wanted McCain and Romney to win, but they were certainly covering their bets.

  44. LBascom says:

    Which is what they are doing in promoting Christie.

    Six of one, half a dozen of the other…

  45. mondamay says:

    Scribe of Slog (McGehee) says June 3, 2013 at 7:53 pm
    Do you really think they wanted McCain and Romney to win?

    I think they really wanted them to win the primaries.

  46. mondamay says:

    LBascom says June 3, 2013 at 8:03 pm
    Compare and contrast what happened with him, and what happened with Bill Clinton.

    Very similar scenarios to me. The infidelity was secondary to the embarrassing immaturity revealed (Bill: Bimbo eruptions – Mark: who ‘falls in love’/cheats with someone in another hemisphere?!) and the obvious misdeeds that followed that should have been enough for both to go: Bill: perjury and obstruction of justice – Mark wandering off to Argentina and lying about his whereabouts.

  47. leigh says:

    At least Mrs. Sanford womaned up and took her four children and her Skil tool fortune with her.

    Take a note, Cankles.

  48. LBascom says:

    Point was, Sanford was disgraced, roundly criticized by his own party, and run out of office.

    Bill is a hero of the left then, and to this very day.

  49. mondamay says:

    Point was, Sanford was disgraced, roundly criticized by his own party, and run out of office.

    When did this happen, especially the last? He finished out his second term as SC governor, and now he’s a US Representative. He resigned as head of the council of governors or some such. He got off very lightly if you ask me.

  50. palaeomerus says:

    Ted Cruz was crazy to run against a well loved and experienced polticial giant like Dewhurst. Nobody want to take a chance on a creepy extremist like that in the US. Senate. Hah!

  51. LBascom says:

    Oh, I thought he lost his next election and went away til recently. Amid great scorn and disgust.

    I guess it was just me.

  52. palaeomerus says:

    “Rape is despicable but she was asking for it.”

    Also, rape can mean anything. Someone check your math and find an error? So humliating! Feels like rape. Tell someone about Jesus who didn’t ask? Spiritual rape. Cornholing a 13 year old sedated girl in your poolhouse? Well you know. Those Hollywood people get kind of wild. No harm no foul. Better hide in France just in case the unsightly Bourgeoisie get their dander up though.

  53. mondamay says:

    In all fairness, I was (once) confused about him also ,as I had thought that he had resigned the governorship (which I think was the whole point of resigning the governor’s committee). Then I got embarrassed in an argument with a prog about his fate during a debate about Anthony Weiner.

  54. LBascom says:

    That must have been embarrassing. Well, the republicans are trying to be big tent I guess.

    And here we are, right back on topic!

  55. palaeomerus says:

    Even a scary cartoon husky dog sports logo can be rape. And even if you don’t ever rape anyone, you are still classified as a rapist because you are made of the same parts that a rapist is…or something.

  56. Ernst Schreiber says:

    If given the choice between voting for a Democrat or voting for a Democrat, vote for the Democrat –the real one. Force them to own the failure when we run out of Other People’s Money,™ which we will.

    The only problem with that is the GOP will take it as proof that the party is still too conservative –despite the fact that the 2016 ticket will get fewer conserative votes that the 2012 ticket, which got fewer than 2008.

    That of course will be taken as evidence that the GOP needs to get right with the Hisanic vote because all those white men clinging to their guns and their religion are dying off.

  57. sdferr says:

    If given the choice between voting for a Democrat or voting for a Democrat. . .

    . . . [metaphorically] shoot the Democrat — either one, or both — so as to get their attention that they’ve got a serious political problem on their hands.

  58. LBascom says:

    I don’t think that will work, metaphorically…

  59. mondamay says:

    If given the choice between voting for a Democrat or voting for a Democrat, vote for the Democrat –the real one.

    I can’t do this. I can maybe ignore an election, I can definitely vote 3rd party, but Democrats are still who they are.

    Force them to own the failure when we run out of Other People’s Money,™ which we will.

    I think we already have, that’s why we’ve moved on to imaginary money (QE &#8734).

  60. The recall is an election. All that has happened with Morse is they’ve submitted petitions.

    Now the Secretary of Leviathan gets to work disqualifying signatures. Anyone know what party he/she is?

  61. happyfeet says:

    The Recall Morse effort was 100 percent grassroots.

    Rob Harris, the leader of the effort, has never been involved in politics before.

    that is terrifying

    these people could disrupt the fascist agenda

    they must be stopped

  62. Curmudgeon says:

    I can’t do this. I can maybe ignore an election, I can definitely vote 3rd party, but Democrats are still who they are.

    This.

    3rd parties may be a joke, but voting for the Commiecrat, in any circumstance, will be subject to liberal media spin.

    If a 3rd party shows enough votes, it will get co-opted.

  63. Curmudgeon says:

    At least Mrs. Sanford womaned up and took her four children and her Skil tool fortune with her.

    Take a note, Cankles.

    Three words: Marriage of Convenience. Cankles has her own affairs by all accounts.

  64. sdferr says:

    Fascist Representative Jim McDermott of Washington State right explains to the Tea Party groups how there is no separation between the state and civil society, and that the state is the sole source of political opinion. He is at least consistent, and happy to expose his monstrous pretensions.

  65. sdferr says:

    “right now explains” — that should read

  66. SBP says:

    “these people could disrupt the fascist agenda
    they must be stopped”

    Not to worry. I’m sure the IRS is on the case.

  67. Curmudgeon says:

    I am so opting out of the next election. Of course, the dems support of Christie is intended to do just that, isn’t it?

    Shall we see who else is running? Three years is a long time in politics.

    That said, if it’s Tubby, or another Bush scion, or any other Hispandering RINO, well, fuck it. :(

  68. sdferr says:

    The Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee are unanimous: the 501c [4] law is flawed, and the flaws in the law are more important than the violation of the rights of speech and assembly suffered by the groups hounded by the IRS.

    They are unanimous on this as well: they have no interest in delving into the sources of those purported wrongdoings in the IRS. They ask no questions designed to bring to light what occurred. None. Not one.

    One might cynically think they collude to bury the facts of the story. But that would surely be unlawful political thinking on our part, to the extent such thinking would undermine the powers of the political class, and the political class is the sole source of legitimate political thought.

  69. Curmudgeon says:

    The Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee are unanimous: the 501c [4] law is flawed, and the flaws in the law are more important than the violation of the rights of speech and assembly suffered by the groups hounded by the IRS.

    They are unanimous on this as well: they have no interest in delving into the sources of those purported wrongdoings in the IRS. They ask no questions designed to bring to light what occurred. None. Not one.

    This is why I was a little bit glad that Mark Sanford won election again. He’s a bad husband? Sure. But he’s against the Commiecrats.

    They want to play the Chicago Way? It’s time we play back–hard.

  70. LBascom says:

    This as good a theory as any I’ve heard.

    I believe that the Obama administration is conducting psychological warfare on conservative Americans. Not only that but it is also waging this war on all Americans who previously viewed themselves, their country, their Constitution and their overwhelming belief in God as a force for good in the world. […]

    The psychological warfare began with an apology tour […]

    The psychological warfare has continued, I believe, with other opportunities the president has had to make American’s question their individual freedoms and autonomy.

    This has included misrepresenting horrific crimes, such as the one which unfolded in Newtown […]

    My belief that psychological warfare is being deployed on Americans by this American president and his administration has been solidified as news has come out of the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

    This black ops targeting doesn’t just have the effect of slowing the financial momentum of these groups. It has the goal of dispiriting them and making them feel helpless to achieve their goals. […]

    Seen through the lens of psychological warfare, the failure to defend our embassy in Benghazi need not be understood simply as a screw-up. It could reflect an actual strategy on the part of the administration to reinforce the notion that homicidal violence born of hatred toward America is understandable—even condonable—because we have generated it ourselves and are reaping the harvest of ill will we have sown. In other words, we should take our punishment.

    The president said as much when he blamed the murder of our Ambassador to Libya on a film that criticized Islam. […]

    The wiretapping of journalists would be, then, just another black ops technique in an ongoing war against our freedoms. […]

    But I assert that this administration is engaged in a coordinated attempt to dispirit, disarm and disenfranchise large portions of the American population and to weaken our founding principles through what is best understood as psychological warfare

  71. sdferr says:

    That’s a carpenter with a hammer Lee, seeing nails.

  72. sdferr says:

    Now Fascist Rep Blumenthal of Oregon puts in his word that only the political class can determine what is legitimate political thought. He too believes only the state determines, and that no civil society should be possible. It’s good to see the Fascists step forward to reveal themselves, drawing sharp lines where the boundaries between the rulers and the ruled will be found.

  73. LBascom says:

    I don’t see it that way sdferr. The guy announce right up front he wants to transform America; seems like if there’s a carpenter hammering nails, it’s Obama.

  74. sdferr says:

    No partisan or political motivation on the part of the IRS, says Fascist Rep Kind of Wisconsin. The tax law 501 c [4] is flawed, the poor tax agents were burdened by a deluge of applications, mistakes were possibly made. But certainly all these conservative groups were determined to defraud the people of the United States, and to that extent the IRS can only be seen in a shining light as it attempted to expose this wrongdoing on the part of these dastardly political operations.

  75. sdferr says:

    He’s a psychologist Lee. I only thank our lucky stars that there weren’t any such people in Convention in Philadelphia in 1787.

  76. sdferr says:

    And yes, I’m looking at you, Thomas Jefferson.

  77. LBascom says:

    The overburdened by a avalanche of applications dodge is the funniest I think. As if when you are overburdened by work, the thing to do is ask for truckloads of extra-constitutional additional paperwork.

    Assholes like McDermott like need to be jailed for aiding and abetting.

  78. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee are unanimous: the 501c [4] law is flawed, and the flaws in the law are more important than the violation of the rights of speech and assembly suffered by the groups hounded by the IRS.

    The obvious retort to that is that it’s the application of the law that’s flawed. If it was the law itself, there wouldn’t have been a presumption of innocence, so to speak, for liberal groups applying for 501c [4] status, would there?

  79. sdferr says:

    . . . there wouldn’t have been a presumption of innocence, so to speak, for liberal groups applying for 501c [4] status, would there?

    Oh, but according to Fascist Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, so-called “liberal” groups weren’t accorded a presumption of innocence either, but were hounded relentlessly by the IRS during the tenure of the George W. Bush administration! But no one came forward to sound the alarm! And now it’s too late to discover these nasty violations of progressives’ civil rights!

  80. sdferr says:

    Oh sweet! A Fascist Rep., Joseph Crowley of N.Y. calls out the silence of the Republican congressmen who said not a word on these alleged depredations by the IRS during the last election cycle! Thereby proving, of course, that there were no depredations by the IRS!

    Of course, we’ve trod this ground ourselves, long before Fascist Rep. Crowley, and well know why such as Rep. Issa were silent. Yet the Fascist Crowley thinks he’s on to something. I do too. It’s just that it’s the wrong something. And it won’t work.

  81. newrouter says:

    impeach lois lerner

  82. leigh says:

    It’s probably time to start breaking some thumbs. Ms. Lerner, pick up the white courtesy phone.

  83. newrouter says:

    make harry reid try lois. lots of fun for all.

  84. leigh says:

    Rand Paul is running a new banner on his RSS feed showing Ted Cruz as his running mate for 2016.

  85. Slartibartfast says:

    I am not super-enthusiastic about Jeb! in the White House, but he was a pretty decent governor. I admit his feckless successors are making him more razor-sharp, competency-wise, though.

  86. leigh says:

    He’s a psychologist Lee.

    Dr. Ablow is a psychiatrist, like Dr. Krauthammer. He went to med school at Johns Hopkins and did his residency at Tufts.

  87. sdferr says:

    Dr. Ablow is a psychiatrist, like Dr. Krauthammer. He went to med school at Johns Hopkins and did his residency at Tufts.

    Quite so: I was not careful with the designation of his specialty. That, however, doesn’t affect the sense at which I was aiming.

  88. leigh says:

    Not all, sdferr. Many people, not you of course, tend to confuse the two. We psychologists are partly at fault for insisting on being called “doctor”. I do not do this as it is pretentious. I blame Kissinger.

  89. leigh says:

    Not at all.

    Stupid keyboard/fat fingers/no preview.

  90. Rand Paul is running a new banner on his RSS feed showing Ted Cruz as his running mate for 2016.

    They can pursue the Hispanic vote as Pablo/Cruz.

  91. leigh says:

    Viva Pablo/Cruz!

  92. Pablo says:

    Now Fascist Rep Blumenthal of Oregon puts in his word that only the political class can determine what is legitimate political thought.

    NOM’s John Eastman puts a boot in his ass. Applause ensues.

  93. Slartibartfast says:

    They can pursue the Hispanic vote as Pablo/Cruz

    Awesome

  94. LBascom says:

    I don’t think Cruz is eligible. he’s not a natural born citizen.

  95. leigh says:

    We have a Kenyan in the WH. I think it’s a moot point.

    Didn’t we determine that he was a citizen and natural born because mom is American? Cruz not Presbo.

  96. Slartibartfast says:

    I don’t think Cruz is eligible. he’s not a natural born citizen.

    There’s some debate about that. I’d think this would have to be established by court ruling. There would be pitchforks, probably.

    We have a Kenyan in the WH. I think it’s a moot point.

    No, we don’t.

  97. Slartibartfast says:

    I mean: we have a Kenyan in the WH in the same sense that we had a Mick in the WH back in 1962.

  98. I’d think this would have to be established by court ruling.

    Before the election the courts would say it’s a political question and not a judicial one. After the election they’d say that even if they found he wasn’t eligible Congress hasn’t prescribed a remedy.

  99. If Congress tried to prescribe a remedy the courts would say JUST IMPEACH HIM. YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT POWER.

  100. sdferr says:

    I’ve asked before, but I’ll ask again. Does anybody who took surprise at the results of the 2012 elections begin to see an answer to the missing information which would have accounted, at least in significant part, for the gap between your expectations based on your observations of the general political tenor of the times and the apparently quiescent turnout of contemporaneously active groups, like the Tea Party groups?

    I think the relationship between the hounding at the IRS (and other executive agencies) and the relative withdrawal of newly activist Americans, outraged at the “stimulus spending”, the usurpation of fundamental American rights, the deviance from formerly ordinary procedures by Congress and by the Executive, the imposition of a mandatory “Healthcare” monstrosity, all these ongoing drivers of political interest, and yet the energy and turnout was missing in 2012, and the outcome puzzling — so, I think, it begins to dawn to open minds what has happened. And this realization will continue to grow.

  101. John Bradley says:

    I remain convinced that there was unimaginably massive vote fraud going on in all the states that mattered (PA, OH, VA, FL, etc.) I fully believe that those reports we were seeing of >100% voter turnout (with zero Romney votes) in some districts were just the tip of the iceberg.

    And even if the election were completely fair-and-square, the refusal of the GOP to hammer any of the scandals (Benghazi, obviously, and they knew there was an IRS scandal to ignore), any one of which could have effected a 2pt swing in the results, indicates to me that they didn’t especially want to win.

    As if the nomination of Mitt Romney wasn’t enough proof.

  102. They didn’t want to risk empowering those filthy, filthy, Visigothy Tea Party types by putting even a squisherry-publican in the Melanin-Deficient House, because even that squisherry-publican would have been pressured to do filthy, filthy, Visigothy Tea Party type things, and being a squisherry-publican he might have given in and done those filthy, filthy, Visigothy Tea Party type things.

    Horrors.

  103. Curmudgeon says:

    I’ve asked before, but I’ll ask again. Does anybody who took surprise at the results of the 2012 elections begin to see an answer to the missing information which would have accounted, at least in significant part, for the gap between your expectations based on your observations of the general political tenor of the times and the apparently quiescent turnout of contemporaneously active groups, like the Tea Party groups?

    I think the relationship between the hounding at the IRS (and other executive agencies) and the relative withdrawal of newly activist Americans, outraged at the “stimulus spending”, the usurpation of fundamental American rights, the deviance from formerly ordinary procedures by Congress and by the Executive, the imposition of a mandatory “Healthcare” monstrosity, all these ongoing drivers of political interest, and yet the energy and turnout was missing in 2012, and the outcome puzzling — so, I think, it begins to dawn to open minds what has happened. And this realization will continue to grow.

    At the local, state and congresscritter level, definitely this happened, as we now see. Commiecrat Lawfare (legal warfare).

Comments are closed.