TexasCHLforum.com

stroo wrote:I wish someone could convince me that Trump will be better than Hillary but right now I just don't see it although I don't think they will necessarily be bad in the same way.

With Hillary, we get more of the Obama administration although I don't think she as quite as radical as Obama is.

With both Hillary and Trump, we get liberal judges including Supreme Court justices. This is of huge importance to me since the primary ways the President affects abortion and gun control is through the courts. Although Obama has shown that some can be done on those issues with the use of executive orders and regulatory actions. Hilary might be worse on those than Trump but I doubt Trump will rescind anything Obama has already done on those issues. So on two of my primary issues, I see Trump and Hillary as a toss up.

On my other major issue, government spending, I don't see any evidence that Trump will be significantly if any different than Hillary. And that is going to destroy this country.

On immigration Trump is probably better, but he could create trade wars that will destroy the world economy which I don't think Hillary will do.

Moreover, Trump will get Republican legislative all out approval for what he will do which may destroy not only the Republican party but also conservatism.

Finally I don't see any difference in character. They both are liars and crooks.

I certainly won't vote for Hillary but I am having a real hard time seeing how I can vote for Trump. I hate this election because I don't see how the Republic survives whoever wins!

psijac wrote:

parabelum wrote:If you don't vote for Trump, if he is the nominee, you are in essence throwing it to Clinton or whatever commie lib traitor they throw down our throats.
Trump may only give you 40% of what you are looking for, Cruz may give you 90%, Hillary and other lib buzzards will surely take away 100%, and that is a 140% departure from what Trump could deliver.

I get that people are fed up, I'm at the cusp of damning them all myself, but, gotta look what's coming if you choose to sit it out.

40% of something, or 100% of nothing.

Watching them come out of their little rat holes waving Mexican flags in my Country in an effort to suppress Trump, makes my blood boil. I'll do whatever it takes to push our nominee to the front.

I voted for Romney in the general and I will never again vote against my conscience in the name of party unity.

I am glad Romney lost, be would have had the political capital to pass universal background checks and another assault weapons ban after Sandy hook.

Side note: even if your go doesn't win the Nod, staying home only hurt candidates downstream. Write in or Voter libertarian or green for president. Canidates running for public office at local and state level still need your help

My political brothers from another mother.

I don't see the republican party surviving this election cycle as a major player. Now that the democrat party has dropped all pretenses and given itself over to socialism, I can see two things happening. One is that any remaining sane democrats (I'm thinking of Jim Webb, for example) will probably either become independents or republicans (where they will fit right in). The other is that the democrat party becomes the one monolithic party, while the opposition degenerates into coalitions of smaller parties of differing ideologies, but with one think in common and that is an enmity for the democrats.

Here's some "good" news...... https://www.conservativereview.com/comm ... n-24-years

FWIW, Obamacare, was the straw that broke the back of compromise, making it no longer possible while he is in office. If you stop to think about it for a moment, the refusal to compromise on both sides actually represents the will of The People......however ham-handed and clumsy. What has pushed republicans over the edge, completely destroying any possibility of future compromise, is Obama's use of executive orders to circumvent the will of The People. Actually, it has pushed democrats over the edge too, making them see totalitarianism as a good thing - at least when it's their guy in office.

As bad as Bill Clinton was as president, he knew how to communicate, bargain, and deal with the majority republican House he was dealt. He realized that, to continue to have even a modicum of success as president, he was going to have to work with that Congress, or his presidential legacy would be a disaster. For better or for worse, Bill Clinton did not believe in an imperial presidency. (His harridan of a wife is another matter entirely.)

Obama is very much his opposite in that regard. He absolutely IS an imperial president - domestically. (In foreign policy, he is a eunuch.) His ideology does not include a defense of national borders. It does not make room for the fundamental individual liberties guaranteed in the Constitution or on the limits it places upon gov't. It does not make room for the separation of powers. It does not make room for a due respect for tradition or the common virtues. It does not make room for reverence for founding principles. It does not make room for any kind of disagreement. It is always his way, or the highway.

The democrats in Congress feel no need to make the usual kinds of compromises that the minority party has always acceded to throughout our nation's history because they have an imperial president who is their champion, and who is willing to circumvent the Constitution so that they are relieved of the responsibility of doing their jobs.

THESE are the circumstances in which republicans find themselves, and yet there are people who think that republicans should compromise with uncompromising democrats - even when it has been decades of republican caving in to democrats every time republicans had the majority that brought us to this point.

Let me be clear: For republicans to compromise with democrats is to continue the downward slide into irrelevancy this nation is embarked upon. The republican hope is that by refusing to compromise any longer, they can arrest the downward slide. But for things to improve, the democrats have to start compromising. Until that happens (and I have zero hope that it will because everything they sell is predicated upon envy of what someone else has), the best we can hope for is for republicans to continue refusing any further compromise with democrats, and the worst that can happen is for republicans to relent and cave in to uncompromising democrats.

And that is not the biggest problem we have! The biggest problem we have is that Obama has transformed the nature of the presidency by ignoring his constitutional mandates and limits, and setting a precedent for future presidents. Oh sure, democrats LOVE his imperial presidency..... but how are they going to feel when someone from another party hostile to their ideology gains the office and starts ruling like an obama-esque autocrat? They're going to HATE it and complain miserably. But we'll be able to say "Shut your pie-hole! Where were YOU when YOUR guy was using the Constitution for butt-wipe. And you think that's bad? Consider Donald Trump as an imperial president. For better or for worse, that has a low probability because Trump gets his butt kicked in virtually every poll against Hillary Clinton........and Hillary Clinton will be even LESS shy about using the presidency as an imperial office than Obama was.

Yeah, we're screwed.

dale blanker wrote:In defense of Boehner see

http://www1.realclearpolitics.com/video ... sense.html

And Brit's list does not even include Immigration Reform which seemed pretty good and included a lot of additional border security.

Anyway the conclusion that Brit makes is that the inability to get things done is the fault of both parties and the result is a stalemate. Maybe a little less bigotry and a little more common sense would help.

You keep using the word "bigotry", and that is WAAAAAAAAYYYYY out of context. I am NOT a bigoted person, and I resent the accusation. I think ALL people are equally stupid. What I AM is firm in my political convictions. You might say that I have a closed mind, but I say that if your mind is TOO open, your brains will fall out.

What I am is one who is firm in his convictions and has been a politically active registered voter for 45 years, as a member of both major parties at different times. I believe that the republican party is where it is because when democrats say "compromise" it means that republicans get next to nothing and democrats get nearly everything they wanted.......and republicans are justifiably angry about that. The result is that republicans are tired of giving in on everything and are now digging in their heels and refusing to give in any longer, and democrats are going to have to learn that "compromise" no longer means they get to rape the republican party at their pleasure.

Of course, I'm no longer a republican, so you can't even logically say that I am bigoted party-wise. I'm a proud Liberative Conservatarian independent...... which means that I believe BOTH parties can go suck an egg......but the democrats can suck an ostrich egg.

I really wish you would start using the word "bigoted" in its correct context.......particularly when "unwavering" is a more accurate descriptive in this case.

Please note: Cruz did not call Boehner any names in return.

Boehner, McConnell, and crew are directly responsible for the GOP's internal battle right now by having been imperially unresponsive to the voice of the grass roots. And their response today is to respond to the two candidates who do represent those voters by calling them names, and trying to use party rules in a "rules for thee, but not for me" fashion to shut out one of the candidates, and to marginalize the others.

I'm not a republican any longer. Haven't been one since 2012. I'm a proudly independent Liberative Conservatarian, and more than willing to consider more libertarian options. I've been burned by the democrat party after years of membership, and I've been burned by the republican party after years of membership. I believe myself to be uniquely qualified as an impartial observer of both parties. And while I would prefer the nomination of Cruz over Trump, I will not be casting my vote for either of them. (In fact, this recent primary is the first time I've abstained from voting since I first became eligible to vote, a little over 4 decades ago.) This is my observation:

The GOP leadership has accused Trump supporters of wanting to "burn the party down" to get their man elected, but here's what really happened. The leaders liberally (I use that word intentionally) poured gasoline all over the party, passed out matches, and then dared anyone to strike a match. The Trump supporters - angry enough to do just that if pushed - struck the match. Now the party leaders are daring them to throw the lit match on the gasoline soaked party. And they will do exactly that if they don't get their way. Cruz is enough of a party man that he will likely accept the convention's outcome if it goes against him. Trump, who has been a GOP "party man" for about 5 minutes longer than Hillary Clinton (who may really be a man under the clothes and makeup, but has never been a republican), will not accept the outcome of the convention if it goes against him. His supporters will toss that lit match on the liberally-gasoline-soaked party, and that will be the end of the GOP as a relevant force in American politics. We will become a nation ruled by a monolithic democrat party, and the opposition (such as it is) will consist of coalitions of otherwise warring factions with a common enemy.

THAT is what the "wisdom" of the GOP elders has brought us to.......the end of the Republic. Boehner can go suck an egg.