TexasCHLforum.com

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.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

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.

dale blanker wrote:Ahh, here's a recent comment from conservative columnist David Brooks:

"The Lucifer comment really resonated with a lot of people. I thought it was a nicely understated, generous comment."

Of all the commentators, Brooks is my favorite and so I think this answers my question.

Pawpaw wrote:

Beiruty wrote:GOP .....the m̶e̶s̶s̶a̶g̶e̶ party will self-destruct in ... 3....2......1....

\
Fixed it for you.

mojo84 wrote:Boehner's comments equal a strong endorsement for Cruz in my opinion. The more the Boehners and McConnells dislike and trash Cruz, the more I like him.

Weak minded people do not like it when people with strong principles stand up to them. This kind of talk only does more damage to the faltering GOP.