Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Boston Globe anti-Trump mock Sunday front page

Boston Globe anti-Trump mock Sunday front page

Liberal paper will only help Trump, and hurt conservatives fighting Trump.

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE/status/718893221242347520

The Boston Globe published a curious tweet yesterday, warning of a front page it “hope[d] never to publish.”

Drudge has obtained images of what purports to be the Sunday front page, plus some:

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE/status/718893221242347520

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE/status/718880067833561088

Prediction:

Assuming The Globe runs this, it will not hurt Trump.

Instead, it hurt conservatives who have serious concerns about Trump and are fighting to keep him from the nomination based on conservative principles, but who now will be lumped in with the anti-Trump left.

Thanks for nothing, Boston Globe.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Liberal media teaming up with Establishment “Republicans” to give SCOTUS to Socialist democrats:

“Birds of a feather…”

    Henry Hawkins in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:36 pm

    A wall, if at all feasible, stops only walk-ins. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of tunnels already. So this wall has to go underground too. And then there’s those two pesky problems called ‘the sky’ and ‘the Pacific Ocean’.

    If anyone has a design for a wall that covers all that, and it’s economically feasible, I’m all for it.

    —–

    Do not let the media or leftists (but I repeat myself) force feed you the false dichotomy that it has to be either a wall or open borders.

    Here’s a plan that is economically feasible and doesn’t involve the politically unpalatable media blitz of poor immigrant families being marched off to camps to await deportation:

    You enforce existing laws. Being in the country illegally is already, ahem, illegal. When police or any other government agency encounter someone who cannot establish their citizenship, you deport them, one at a time. You heavily fine employers who employ illegal immigrants. You close down repeat employer offenders so they don’t simply pass on the cost of fines to consumers. It would be a trickle dynamic, one by one, taking a long time to catch and return them all. It might take 15-20 years to send the bulk back. It took 40 years of increasingly open borders to get their numbers so high. The leftist media could only highlight one case at a time, all anecdote, 24/7. They’d fail to win hearts and minds beyond their existing choir. Meanwhile, more conservative media would be reporting the decline in all the costs of illegal immigration to our schools, hospitals, social services, etc. It would be a PR wash between liberal and conservative media, no longer perceived political poison to simply enforce the law.

    You enforce existing laws. What a concept.

      Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 9, 2016 at 5:52 pm

      Don’t forget the Gulf Of Mexico!

      Kinda BIG opportunity for making a landing.

      Then, for mass deportation, how’s that look? I mean, do we round up all people with Hispanic names? But what about all the Chinese visa over-stayers? They comprise a big fraction of about HALF of all illegals.

      BIG population of people who all get some due process, huh? What’s that cost? Or do we just put them on transport in the night and screw all that legal stuff?

      But WAIT! I know Mexicans with Irish last names, and what about all the other Caucasians…say from Russia, the Baltics, etc.

      Which is not to even MENTION the T-rump amnesty.

      Or the fact that, if you are facing people who are coming to challenge a boundary, it’s cool to SEE them, which a wall kind of precludes.

      Just for those who CAN think still…

      We agree on almost of what you stated. I’d add a few things like ending taxpayer supported benefits for illegals and penalizing “sanctuary cities” and we probably wouldn’t disagree on those either.

      However I feel that a physical barricade to re-entry is essential to keep out those who are deported and new entrants. Nothing will work 100% but a wall makes entry more difficult, and sends an important message both internally and abroad — “We are serious about our borders, period.”

      BOTH Cruz and Trump will do this imo, which is why I will enthusiastically support either in November vs the Democrat.

        Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 6:16 pm

        How many times have you read me saying we should level the gradient that draw illegals here by ending ALL federal benefits to illegals and making employment…on both ends…WAY too expensive?

        THOSE measures cost almost nothing in any form of capital. PLUS, they can be done in perfect concert with LAW.

        DaMav in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 6:44 pm

        My response was to Hawkins. Fine with me if you agree.

      conservative tarheel in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 9, 2016 at 7:24 pm

      makes to much sense … would never work ….
      I agree with you whole heartedly …
      you know .. it is possible .. only possible
      that Trump wants to divide the GOP
      and hand everything to the Dems …
      I will also agree that the GOPe has done nothing
      which has caused all this … they make mouth noises
      and DO NOTHING …
      Trump has at least shined a big bright light and
      all the cockroaches try to hide.

      #TheWall …is an American symbol of sovereignty.

      In addition, it is a future tourist attraction and a demonstration of Washington’s care for this nation’s citizens and their personal and economic well being.

      Now? people walk across the border line like crossing a street.

      I am personally living in the southern Arizona Sonoran Desert, saguaro cactus and all, on a main artery used by dope mules and human-trafficking coyotes.

      So… I have a lot more skin in this game than a lot of out of state folks.

        Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | April 9, 2016 at 9:53 pm

        Poor old, daft thing…

        you’ll never see your “T-rump” wall built. It’s just boob-bait for boobs.

        Unless we change the gradient, which we can so readily do, nothing that we build will be more than an impediment.

        As Patton said; “Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man”.

        You keep the magnet in place, and motivated people will find a way to reach it. Remove the incentive, and they just won’t.

      Righteous purists with no leadership and executive managerial skills or experience are frozen into inaction like a computer caught in an endless loop. All because they can’t understand not to let the perfect become the enemy of the good or the great.

      To some extent, the term “wall” is metaphorical. In some places a physical wall, supplemented by chain link and razor wire fences and a patrol road will be necessary. In other areas a four strand barbed wire fence with signs will be enough. No obstacle is an absolute barrier to passage. It is a hindrance, a force multiplier. It makes the patrol force more effective. It is the patrol force that defends the border. The tunnels aren’t particularly significant, and can be dealt with one by one as we find them. In my nastier thoughts, dump a gallon of mustard gas in them and wait for the fun.

      And yes, enforce the existing laws. Enforce the laws against employing illegals. Deny welfare and other government assistance to non-citizens. They will self deport.

The Globe beclowns itself by becoming the Onion. Let the Onion do Onion and the Globe get back to publishing incoherent op-eds about the glories of socialism.

    casualobserver in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 9, 2016 at 5:05 pm

    Traditional newspapers are so desperate they will try anything for audience. Testing tabloid waters, parody like the Onion, and even the print/web version of “shock jocks” are all an attempt to survive for them.

    There is a reason why they are in a death spiral. Print readership steadily drops for nearly all of the long time papers. But digital traffic does not make up for it. So even their advertising models suffer. Things like this only worsen the spiral. But desperation means you try anything and everything.

    C’mon now. They are one of your beloved #NeverTrump allies, out to help throw the election to the Democrats if you don’t get your way. Be nice and they might give you an “I helped Hillary Win” OpEd.

      Sometimes I feel like Trump fans are talking some other language that I just don’t get or living in some parallel but alien universe. I was disparaging the Globe for this bizarre Onion turn, and you respond by telling me I’m on the wrong side of this issue?

      Bizarre, illogical, and an unnecessary, unearned attack.

        You and the Globe will try to throw the election to the Democrats if Trump is the nominee. What is the challenge in comprehending that?

          Again, you are in some sort of weird world of your mind. I was responding to the prof’s piece about a stupid Globe issue, and I posted that I thought it was a bad idea.

          Next thing I know, you’re all over me saying that I’m voting for Hillary.

          It’s just bizarre how your mind works. Maybe it’s an idea or word association exercise your shrink taught you? The Boston Globe, Trump parody, Trump parody is like an Onion issue, onions makes me cry, thinking of Trump losing makes me cry, the Globe wants Trump to lose, so does Fuzzy! Fuzzy probably owns the Globe! It all makes perfect sense now.

          Not.

          DaMav in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:35 pm

          Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
          — Arthur C Clarke

          Fret not about not understanding my mind; ask instead if you understand the logical impact of your own thought processes. 🙂

          Look, your attack was unwarranted and rather than simply admitting it, you are pretending that there is some link between the Boston Globe and me. That’s absurd on its face. Only in the fantastical world of a Trump fan is a true Constitutional conservative the same thing as a Hillary supporter or whatever other nonsense you people tell yourselves and each other. I don’t have to defend that because anyone who’s been reading LI for years–and I mean years, going back to the Blogger days–knows exactly what my politics are; more importantly, I know what they are. Schoolyard taunts of “UR 4 Hillary” and “U heart the Boston Globe” are just asinine. Everyone who matters knows that; if you don’t know that . . . follow that thought to its logical conclusion.

          I just can’t wait until this election is over, and you people go back to doing whatever it was you did before you started trolling LI.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:39 pm

          Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
          — Arthur C Clarke

          ?

          Are you suggesting your otherwise incoherent, nonsequitous connections are because your intellect is so great, it appears to be magic to we mere mortals?

          Yikes.

          DaMav in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:42 pm

          Note the smiley accompanying the pinprick of the hot air balloon insulting my psychiatric health. What’s good for the gander is good for the goose

          I posted a comment AGAINST the Trump parody issue the Globe is considering; you attacked me. Rather than simply admit you were wrong, you continue to attack. Is it really any wonder that I respond in kind? You are not on the high ground here, DaMav, you just look petty, small, and nasty.

          DaMav in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 6:06 pm

          I will support Trump or Cruz in November. You will help Hillary get elected by refusing to vote against her if Trump is the nominee.

          Chatter all you want, basic math says I’m right.

          It will be Cruz, so all other discussion is moot.

          That’s what you said about Rubio, Fuzzy. How’d that turn out?

          Fuzzy Slippers | April 9, 2016 at 6:08 pm

          It will be Cruz, so all other discussion is moot.

          Um, since we don’t have a nominee and haven’t been to convention, VF, it hasn’t turned out at all. Are you okay? Seriously, I’m worried about you.

          And for the record, I have not supported Rubio since his 2010 run for Senate. My support then was only tepid because he had used the state GOP credit card for his own personal use and only paid it off two years later when he got caught. I saw this as a major character flaw. I wrote about it back then and I’ve posted comments about it since then. I don’t expect you to hang on my every word, but if you’re going to accuse me of supporting someone, you probably should know what I’ve said about that person.

          I’ve supported Ted Cruz consistently since this cycle began. Cruz. Not Rubio. And #NeverTrump

          Actually, I was mistaken. It was not a “lie.”
          I went back to vet your claim and it holds water.

          This blog has been supportive of Rubio, if only to beat Trump, and I conflated that support with you.

          Since your knee jerk reaction is to launch personal attacks, you open the door to personal attacks on yourself.

          You exhibit a rather crappy personality, baby girl.

          I didn’t call it a “lie,” so I have clue what you are ranting about. I didn’t think your erroneous statement about my supporting Rubio was a personal attack nor did I say that it was; I simply stated that it’s not true and hasn’t been true since 2010.

          You seem to imagine things quite often, VF, and then go off on wild-eyed tangents about your imaginings. It’s very odd but of some interest to me as a casual observer.

    CloseTheFed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 9, 2016 at 7:52 pm

    Jeeze, the paper made me very happy. I’m looking forward to it in real life!!! OMG!

    Except, deportations were the norm before Bush 2 and Obama.

PS: You don’t like being “lumped in” maybe you ought to “opt out” of #NeverTrump or #NeverCruz and pledge to support the Republican Party nominee chosen by the voters, be that Cruz or Trump. Otherwise lie down with your liberal dog pals and expect to wake up with vicious backbiting fleas.

Here’s a clue — Benedict Arnold was not a hero.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:19 pm

    You might want to look up the term ‘relativity’.

      I believe the issues are weighty.

      And, I sincerely respect your courteous and rational disagreements with me.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 6:50 pm

        What I meant is that whether Benedict Arnold was a hero is relative, depending on whether you are British or American. That anyone who doesn’t support Trump by definition wants Hillary for president is nonsense, and is not analagous to the Benedict Arnold story in any way.

        Whenever you see me gig a Trump supporter, it is unserious and just for fun. My fun, of course, not theirs. And it works. If you check the archives for recent posts, you’ll find one where I teased Gary Britt for his constant use of ALL CAPS and the apparent belief it somehow MAKES a post MORE better, OR something. He immediately stopped using all caps and hasn’t used them since, except for acronyms and other appropriate uses. Trump supporters can be moved, changed, managed.

    conservative tarheel in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 7:28 pm

    I am going to support the GOP nominee as long as it is
    Trump OR Cruz … not someone the GOPe shoehorns in ..
    ie Ryan or Romney …

ONE of the things that CONSERVATIVES need to start saying VERY clearly is that the T-rump demagoguery about a “T-rump wall” and mass deportation is NOT supported by conservatives.

It’s stupid, WAY too expensive in every possible way, and its counter-productive.

Read up, peeps…

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/07/how-feasible-is-trumps-proposed-wall.html?intcmp=hpbt2

AND

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433877/donald-trump-border-wall-plan-ridiculous-guaranteed-failure

T-rump’s “plan” is boob-bait for the boobs, illegal, and it actually HARMS real efforts to control our southern border and deport illegals.

    DaMav in reply to Ragspierre. | April 9, 2016 at 5:18 pm

    Liberals in both parties in a panic that someone might actually reject open borders and enforce the law. Nice confession that you side with the open borders position. Yeah, we built the Interstate Highway system and sent men to the moon and built skyscrapers and sent complex probes to Pluto but OMG building a few hundred miles of wall OH NOES! We can’t do that! America is helpless to defend ourselves against illegals!

      Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | April 9, 2016 at 5:31 pm

      Your usual pitiful squad of straw men in place of any cogent argument showing you understand the issues I raised, much less have any counter-argument.

      I am MORE committed to securing our southern border and deporting illegals than you or the T-rumpian bullshitter you support.

      I not only DID NOT say “we can’t do it”, I referenced people who know how we CAN do it.

      They are not the demagogue you suck. But their ideas WILL work.

Assuming The Globe runs this, it will not hurt Trump.

I have to say I agree.

This is a very strange thing for the Globe to contemplate.

    It’s being circulated digitally already.

    Meanwhile on HBO, Bill Maher had a thing or two to say about Trump’s campaign manager v Michelle Fields episode…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJBIqUF7nds

      Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | April 9, 2016 at 7:50 pm

      Golly, I get all my cues for opinions from Bill Maher, Gerry Rivers (¡En español!), and that stupid Brit fluck whose name I can’t (thankfully) remember.

      You’ll apparently resort to any Collectivist puke for support.

      And you’ll ALSO try to thread-jack any threat for your Mr. Establishment.

        CloseTheFed in reply to Ragspierre. | April 9, 2016 at 7:58 pm

        No one should underestimate the usefulness and the public service of a liberal cad like Bill Maher taking the side of western civilization against muslims.

        If he’s right once in a while, be thankful that he puts something other than 100% debauchery in the minds of his viewers.

        P.S. I have really gotten to the point I find Ragspierre utterly loathesome. Talk about a cad.

“Liberal paper will only help Trump, and hurt conservatives fighting Trump.”

Which is just what they want. According to general election surveys, Trump loses badly against Hillary or Bernie. So yes, liberals in the media want to do everything they can to ensure that he’s the GOP nominee.

Trooper York | April 9, 2016 at 5:22 pm

The anti-Trump conservatives are lumped together with the left. They are two sides of the same coin. They need to protect their rice bowl.

Sometimes 2 + 2 = 4

Well… I have been a Cruz supporter, but the way it has been going I am just about ready to shift to Trump just for kicks.
If it makes them crazy, it has to be good.

Trooper York | April 9, 2016 at 5:59 pm

I have finally figured out why I can’t with Ted Cruz the Most Conservative Man in the World.

He is A Rod.

Trooper York | April 9, 2016 at 6:01 pm

Of course Trump is George Steinbrenner.

So you pay your money and you make your choice.

    conservative tarheel in reply to Trooper York. | April 9, 2016 at 7:33 pm

    actually George Steinbrenner knew what he was doing …
    Trump knows how to push peoples buttons and get
    free air time ….

Gotta love it…

“Prediction:

Assuming The Globe runs this, it will not hurt Trump.

Instead, it hurt conservatives who have serious concerns about Trump and are fighting to keep him from the nomination based on conservative principles, but who now will be lumped in with the anti-Trump left.

Thanks for nothing, Boston Globe.

stevewhitemd | April 9, 2016 at 7:38 pm

There are a few things we can do very quickly if only we had an administration and a Congress who took the situation seriously:

1) go after those who over-stay student and tourist visas. As it turns out, that’s one of the big ways people get into this country and then hang around.

2) deport each and every illegal who is caught with any kind of arrest record

3) put a tax on out-going remittances. You wouldn’t be allowed to single out one country (cough Mexico cough) but a 10% excise tax would do wonders.

A wall, properly done, will take years. The planning and engineering alone will take time. But the three points above? You could start those tomorrow.

    CloseTheFed in reply to stevewhitemd. | April 9, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    Listen, nothing personal, but a 10% tax on remittances is peanuts. I personally pay 15% self-employment tax, property tax, the income tax, licensing taxes, taxes for an employee, et cetera. Tax those foreigners 45% and let’s even this damn playing field!!!

    Why should Americans be tax-slaves to support foreigners? Every time I think about hospitals giving OB-GYN services for no charge to illegal aliens, my head explodes!!!

      Quick question: What do you think about the proposed minimum wage hike to $15 an hour?

      Do you think it’s wonderful and that all costs of living will remain stagnate while the income of minimum wage workers rises? Or do you think that those costs will be passed on to the consumer and that the cost of living–across the board–will rise as well? I doubt the former, and if the latter, how do you imagine imposing taxes on foreigners will somehow not result in higher costs to Americans? If the Indian or Chinese economy is expected to pay increased import tariffs or whatever, do you honestly think that in any way “levels the playing field”? Who pays? Not the Chinese or Indians. Right? You get that, right?

      American manufacturing is dead for a few reasons, two main ones: one, unions made it completely unprofitable to manufacture in the U. S. with their crazy wage and pension demands, and two, tax burdens placed on American businesses who exported their product abroad. Gee, if it’s cheaper to have the thing made abroad and it’s going to be sold abroad, no brainer. It’s insane, leftist logic to image that charging one group more will not affect anything else.

      If a business has to pay 10$ in ObamaCare taxes, do you think they will “absorb” that or pass it on to the consumer? D’oh.

        CloseTheFed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 9, 2016 at 8:42 pm

        Gosh, Fuzzy Slippers, you are totally off the rails.

        Frankly, I find what you have written offensive and arrogant and detached from what I wrote.

        Wake up. Go have a cup of coffee, then come back and tell me why Americans should pay MORE TAXES than illegal alien foreigners, who typically consume FAR more in government services than Americans.

        I mean really, why do you think illegal alien foreigners should be able to steal from me?

        Now I understand why you folks support Cruz. You don’t understand the difference between an apple and a banana. To you, it’s all the same.

        This explains everything. My God, the condescension and arrogance based upon such self-induced blindness. You want me to be a slave to illegal aliens. You want them to pay less than Americans. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO HAVE THE GOVERNMENT POINT A GUN AT ME, TAKE MONEY FROM ME, AND THEN TELL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN, YOU DON’T HAVE TO PAY – GIVE YOU MONEY TO YOUR FAMILY AND WE’LL MAKE AMERICANS PAY THE DIFFERENCE.

        My God.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to CloseTheFed. | April 9, 2016 at 9:50 pm

          Um, reread her post. All she’s doing is pointing out that mandated items like hikes in minimum wage are simply passed on from the employer to the customer. It’s wealth redistribution. It also has a long clear established record of costing jobs.

          Similarly, if tariffs are placed on Chinese goods, those Chinese companies will simply increase their prices to cover it. Chinese companies won’t pay the price of Trumpian tariffs, you will.

          Your response is just a squad of straw men. You’ve completely missed what was said. You do this constantly, to one degree or another in every post response. You rant against things nobody’s saying.

          On the other hand, you’ve used ALL CAPS, a certain way to make what one posts automatically true, because words that are shouted mean more than those spoken in our indoor vocies, so.. hell, never mind. You’re right by default. Dammit, I should have used ALL CAPS with this post.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to CloseTheFed. | April 9, 2016 at 9:55 pm

          And by the way, Trump has already said he has no intention of actually setting any 45% tariff on Chinese imports. He admitted that’s just a negotiation-related scare tactic, a bluff. It seems to me that identifying your bluffs in advance on national TV in an interview eliminates the value of said bluff, but who am I to question the great dealmaker, right?

          In other words, you’re arguing and defending tariffs Trump has already said he won’t use. Why does a Cruz supporter like me know more about Trump’s policies than you do?

          Ragspierre in reply to CloseTheFed. | April 9, 2016 at 10:03 pm

          Plus, what in the wide, wide wonderful world of sports makes you think that people who work all day in the sun are going to stand still for paying that kind of tax?

          They’re ILLEGALS, remember. As Andy McCarthy notes in the piece I linked to above, these are people who have made a life wiring around our laws, and there are WAY easy ways they can find to defeat the T-rumpian “plan” or your tax.

          Look up the Laffer Curve. Basic economics. Learn it, live it, love it.

          No, the way is not via a tax such as you suggest. It’s through making both the employee and employer pay too high a cost, and in removing the federal benefits from all illegals.

          Note this is ALSO effective FOR EVERYONE, not just Mexicans. Everyone.

          Sound economics is like magic to people who have no understanding.

So, The Boston Globe supports anti-native policies? Probably the progressive “final solution” or pro-choice religious doctrine, too.

It’s not immigration when millions of people leave their homes. That is a mass exodus that anti-native factions seem desperate to deny.

It was not a “refugee crises”, but rather a president desperate to obfuscate the consequences of premature evacuation, progressive wars, impulsive regime changes, and a social justice humanitarian disaster.

Let’s not be too hostile about the Boston Globe headline. If Trump gets into the general election, we will see this kind of attack journalism everyday until the last vote is cast in November.

There is indeed a lesson there for the Trump Hive to absorb.

The Mainstream Media is nothing but the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, just like Pravda and Izvestia. The Völkischer Beobachter was more balanced. Goebbels would be so proud. His Big Lie continues to work.

Twitter Feed:

The Hill
@thehill

Trump warns GOP leaders of consequences if he’s not treated fairly

http://hill.cm/1jzBd7B

http://pic.twitter.com/Uf1RH2ge8r

9:19am · 10 Apr 2016 · SocialFlow

27 Retweets 25 Likes

    Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | April 10, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    ZOMG…!!!

    “Pre-pubescent girl stomps feet, threatens to hold her breath if not given her way”.

    Puurrrrrr Donelle Trump…

    Piss on him/her and his/her fragile ego.

On page two the Globe should run a piece about Cruz appearing with the bigot Iowa pastor advocating the killing of gays as part of the gospel of Jesus.

Then they could cut to Cruz with his bible held high and preaching from the campaign stage quoting Cruz’s favorite beatitude

“Blessed be the gay killers for they are not afraid to follow the gospel of Jesus Christ”

Instead, it hurt conservatives who have serious concerns about Trump and are fighting to keep him from the nomination based on conservative principles, but who now will be lumped in with the anti-Trump left.

May be some of the regular Joes opposed to Trump are doing it for conservative principles, but pray tell – who are the “conservative” alternatives who have conserved anything worth saving, much less reinstated anything worthy of civilization?

Cruz looks OK on paper, and I could at least support him if he came out ahead, but various rumblings indicate if the convention is contested, the GOP establishment, the leaders of “The Stupid Party”, so skilled at snatching defeat from the mouth of victory, will shove Ryan or Mittens, or worse, into his place.

It’s worth mentioning how much of his potential to win is back room deals… and that he gives the heebie-jeebies to myself and others I trust who’ve had experiences with Narcs and Borderlines.

But who are the political conservatives. Who are the politicians running for office or in leadership of the Establishment GOP that have not sold out “conservative” interests over and over again? Immigration? We’ve been sold up the river for decades, including Cruz and Lindsey Ghramnesty, and the senate and house leadership. Heath care? Taxes? The budget?

Over and over again.

And those same GOP types have made their contempt for the base clear.

Maybe, to echo Reagan, the republican party hasn’t left it’s leaders, it’s self-appointed leaders have left the party.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend