Image 01 Image 03

Trump ally invokes Bill Ayers’ 1969 Days of Rage to protect claim to nomination

Trump ally invokes Bill Ayers’ 1969 Days of Rage to protect claim to nomination

Irony: Ayers participated in protests to shut down Trump’s Chicago event

While Donald Trump leads in delegates, it’s far from certain that he will obtain the needed 1237 delegates prior to the Republican convention. We may know whether Trump is on track to a majority after next Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary, or the New York primary on April 19.

If Trump falls short of that majority on the first ballot vote, even by one delegate, most of the delegates are released to vote as they want on the second and subsequent ballots.

The Trump campaign obviously fears that second ballot, because it is trying to create a narrative that if Trump is close to the majority of delegates, or leads others by a lot of delegates, he should be given the nomination. Anything less will be “stealing” the nomination from him.

Turning a plurality into a majority without actual delegate votes has no support in the most basic of convention rules, that an actual majority is needed to win. Trump predicted riots if he was close and didn’t get the nomination.

That Trump prediction is turning into action, with the call by Trump ally Roger Stone for “Days of Rage” to prevent Trump being deprived of the nomination:

A former adviser for GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday he is planning massive “days of rage” protests outside the Republican convention in Cleveland if the party tries to “steal” the nomination away from Mr. Trump.

Roger Stone, who left the Trump campaign in August, tweeted several times Friday evening about his plans, announcing a “Stop the Steal March on Cleveland” and calling on supporters to get to the city for the convention in July….

In addition, Mr. Stone told Buzzfeed that he is planning “#DaysofRage,” a reference to the 1969 Weatherman-organized Days of Rage protests in Chicago.

Mr. Stone said the protests will be “organized by Trump nation,” and that they will “stage protests at hotels of state delegates of states supporting the BIG STEAL.”

It’s curious that Stone referenced the “Days of Rage,” the 1969 anti-war protest organized by Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground in Chicago:

Stone made his call to action not only on Twitter, but on the Alex Jones show, where he tried to distinguish the two by calling for non-violence:

There is more than a little bit of irony that Stone uses the imagery of riots organized by Bill Ayers in 1969 to support Trump, when Ayers also participated in the protests that recently shut down Trump’s appearance in Chicago:

Language Warning

Of course, nothing is “stolen” from Trump if he has only a plurality of delegates on the first ballot, and loses on the second or subsequent ballots.

Is Trump’s obvious fear of a contested convention reasonable?

Nate Silver of 538 Politics thinks so:

….If Trump doesn’t win on the first ballot, he’s probably screwed.

The basic reason is simple. Most of the 2,472 delegates with a vote in Cleveland probably aren’t going to like Trump.

Let’s back up a bit. In most of our discussions about delegates here at FiveThirtyEight, we treat them as though they’re some sort of statistical unit. We might say a candidate “racked up 44 delegates” in the same way we’d say Steph Curry scored 44 points. But those delegates aren’t just a scoring mechanism: Delegates are people, my friends. Delegates are people!

And as I said, they’re mostly people who aren’t going to like Trump, at least if the excellent reporting from Politico and other news organizations is right….

There are various ways these delegates could cause problems for Trump. The most obvious, as I mentioned, is if the convention goes to a second ballot because no candidate wins a majority on the first. Not all delegates become free instantaneously,2 but most do, and left to vote their personal preference, most of them will probably oppose Trump.

Silver points out that even on the first ballot, Trump is not safe because the delegates can vote to unbind themselves, but he see’s that “nuclear option” as less likely:

The delegates have a lot of power, both on the convention floor and in the various rules and credentials committeesthat will begin meeting before the convention officially begins. If they wanted to, the delegates could deploy a “nuclear option” on Trump and vote to unbind themselves on the first ballot, a strategy Ted Kennedy unsuccessfully pursued against Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Although I’d place fairly long odds against this thermonuclear tactic, there’s also the possibility of piecemeal skirmishes for delegates.

I hope that there is a full-blown contested convention unless and until someone actually gets a majority of delegates.

Otherwise, it’s capitulation to the threats of riots and rage.

[Featured Image: Bill Ayers 1969, from video Days of Rage]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


If the GOP pulls some back-room crap and gives the nomination to an establishment candidate like Jeb or Mitt, the Republican party as we know it is dead.

Henry Hawkins | April 2, 2016 at 8:10 pm

I’m pretty sure the GOP could care less what’s going on outside the convention on the street, nor will it cause GOP delegates inside to act any differently. Protest groups and motivations will be many; none will affect what happens inside. It’s an empty threat, a bluff.

    Matt_SE in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 2, 2016 at 9:26 pm

    “It’s an empty threat, a bluff.”
    Gee, I hope not. Not only am I looking forward to seeing Trumpkins get smashed in the face by riot cops, but I’m also looking forward to exposing the thuggish behavior of Trumpkins to the rest of the base. I assume they’ll recoil in horror when they see who they’re being asked to partner with.

In the end it may work out pretty well if Cruz gains the majority after a couple of ballots. In perhaps no other scenario than Trump vs Cruz would Cruz come out with the nomination and be seen as the “reasonable, sensible” choice rather than the “scary, firebrand” candidate that he would otherwise be seen as.

    tom swift in reply to Brett_McS. | April 2, 2016 at 8:29 pm

    It won’t be Cruz.

    Any maneuver Cruz can pull against Trump, the party can also pull against Cruz.

    Once you’ve accepted the idea that the most votes don’t win, anybody can be a contender.

    Basic Slippery Slope 101.

      Matt_SE in reply to tom swift. | April 2, 2016 at 9:29 pm

      This is part of the Trumpkin Big Lie.
      Rule 40 will be enforced because if it isn’t it will be an open admission that the establishment will change the rules (i.e. cheat) to disenfranchise the top two candidates.
      The delegates will have a choice between Trump and Cruz, and nobody else. They will choose Cruz.

        rotten in reply to Matt_SE. | April 2, 2016 at 10:19 pm

        But the GOP is already cheating…. Locking the Trump people out of the delagate selection process in Tennessee for example.

        Trump can’t count on his own delagates to vote for him.

        That’s stealing!

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to rotten. | April 2, 2016 at 11:32 pm

          It’s not stealing. It’s the hump getting his comeuppance. Almost 70% of ‘pubs detest the hump. He’s not being cheated by the delegates. The delegates are doing the right thing by throwing the hump out on his arse.

          Most (not all, but most) of the hump’s support comes from trailer trash and ignorant hillbillies.

          Get over it. The hump will never be president – never gonna happen.

          Thank God the delegates don’t want him and look like they’re going to dump him the instant they can. I have no idea what sort of narcissistic thinking went into his and his supporters thinking that had some omnipotent tiger at the help. The hump’s supporters should be upset with themselves for such gross stupidity.

          Estragon in reply to rotten. | April 3, 2016 at 12:34 am

          Trump is incompetent and a buffoon who never bothered to check the rules on delegate selection or allocation. His stupidity doesn’t mean anything is “stolen” from him.

          The odds are if no one wins on the first ballot, it will be neither Trump nor Cruz in the end. Neither one’s supporters have show the slightest inkling towards unifying the GOP, they’ve preferred to gloat and taunt everyone not on their bandwagons. If they are both shut out, they have no one to blame but themselves and their “burn it down” attitudes.

        rotten in reply to Matt_SE. | April 2, 2016 at 10:25 pm

        The Romans would pit a starved enemy of the state armed with toy wooden weapons against a healthy top tier, fully armed gladiator. They would call it a fair fight to the death.

        That’s what the GOP is doing to Trump, giving Trump delagates who will not vote for Trump.

        I wonder if the convention vote can be filibustered.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to rotten. | April 2, 2016 at 10:52 pm

          Let me guess, you’re a Trump supporter.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to rotten. | April 3, 2016 at 12:10 am

          Fascinating. Tell me, was the starving enemy of the state one who bragged about his billions, lived in a golden penthouse in the sky and on a luxury retreat? Did he have a big, loud, crude mouth that he told lies from and could not stop running day in and day out? Did he insult the wives of men of stature in the Roman senate and those women who would ask him uncomfortable questions? Did he ask for judicial help in forcing those with less to abandon their goods and property to him?

          Be it in the colosseum or the convention, the hump will be held to answer in shame. So, should he cry “Havoc!” in Cleveland, THEY will let slip the dogs of war. Count on it.

          By threatening to riot, the hump has given the delegates a great reason to dump him from the git-go.

          It may well yet turn out that the hump is doing all this to help Hillary, his old friend.

          Mark in reply to rotten. | April 3, 2016 at 1:26 pm

          However, Trump chose to enter this arena and compete under this system. And only now that it is clear (to him) that the strong majority of delegates dislike him, his minions raise objections (and his supporters issue threats)?

          Trump deluded himself into believing he would end up as the delegates fully armed champion,but it is a little late to complain about a system ONLY after you discover your not the guy with the metal sword.

          If you don’t want to take the risk of alienating delegates, then don’t run.

        genes in reply to Matt_SE. | April 3, 2016 at 4:43 pm

        The DELEGATES set the rules for EACH convention. The 2012 rules MIGHT be kept by the DELEGATES.

      Lee Jan in reply to tom swift. | April 3, 2016 at 8:24 am

      It’s about America and saving our country from being dragged back to the old ugly days of America First.
      Learn some American history and see that tRump and his ilk are anathema to all we hold dear.

        I have absolutely no problem with an “America First” position, and any politician which tells you differently ought to be tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail.

        That being said, there’s a proper way to go about it, and I have doubts about Trump’s motives, integrity and proposed ‘policies’ which give me pause.

Henry Hawkins | April 2, 2016 at 8:30 pm

I fully support Ted Cruz, though my first choice was Scott Walker because of his highly effective executive experience in Wisconsin, a state much more deeply blue than the nation as a whole. I hold zero doubt that Cruz would do the same as president. Cruz’s people have been working the delegates from the beginning, while Trump and Kasich are playing catch up. Lawyers tend to read the fine print and know the ground rules. Having memorized the US Constitution as a teenager, Cruz intrinsically covers the pertinent details. Kasich, not so much, while Trump displays ignorance on this, only recently assigning campaign staff to pursue GOP open convention rules. Devil’s in the details.

Given Obama-drama fatigue, the growing national dislike and distrust of the likely to be indicted Clinton, and the pie-in-the-sky McGovernish silliness of the communist Sanders, a GOP candidate who is cool, calm, and collected may appeal to the nation as a comparative breath of fresh air, someone who doesn’t energize the Democrat voters by talking nuts all the time. Cruz can do this, but then, so could a Kasich, Jeb Bush, etc., in the minds of the GOP leadership. Basically, put up a competent, if bland, candidate, and let the Democrat nominee defeat his or herself with scandals, silly policies, etc.

If it goes to an open convention, it’ll be interesting. I’m old enough to remember the last time it happened in 1976.

Actually, Trump losing the nomination or the General by virtue of GOP jiggery-pokery will go far to eliminate the GOP as a first tier political party permanently.

    good enough morgan in reply to VotingFemale. | April 2, 2016 at 10:47 pm

    Can you explain how?

      After Trump wins NY, ( you don’t think Rafe “NY values” Cruz is going to win NY do you? ) he announces that the GOPe is so corrupt, evidenced by the stealing of his delegates, that he can no longer run as Republican. He then suspends his run and runs as a third party candidate.

      So while he is preparing for the general. Jeb! is getting back in. Jindal is getting back in. Marco is getting back in. Come the convention, Ryan, Mit, Marco, Jeb! Kasich, Cruz and all the others piggies go running to the presidential trough. Chaos ensues. Meanwhile the real Trump delegates abstain round after round making it hard for anyone to get 1237. With luck the convention will have to be extended because they can’t settle it in a week.

      In the meantime, the public get a very public display of just how disgusting all these GOPe and kingmaker wannabes are. Including all the governors, congressmen, senators. Guess what, Trumps favorablity may be low but congress is lower.

      Trump voters vote against any pol that opposed Trump. The Republicans lose the presidency, the senate, the house. Almost like 2008.

      After the election, the people on the blacklist change to the Trump party or become independent.

      The GOP becomes a party tring to fight out the Liberations.

        Pray tell: On which political party line?

        Unless there is a push for Trump to be adopted by a particular political party (and SOME parties in some States would have reason to do so, but by no means ALL), then it becomes impossible for Trump to even get onto the BALLOT in most states.

        Further, MOST of the parties that WOULD have Trump as a 3rd party candidate for vote-getting reasons are an anathema to the policies that Trump has discussed (being Illegal Immigration isolation via the ‘WALL’ and trade policy revision. Somehow I can’t see the Green party of NY welcoming Trump with open arms. If I remember correctly, the Independence Party of New York crashed and burned in 2013, after one of it’s founders was caught stealing $1.2 Million from the Michael Bloomberg campaign.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Chuck Skinner. | April 3, 2016 at 1:02 pm

          State-run Chinese newspapers are laughing at Trump for publicly admitting on national TV that his plan to set a 45% tariff on Chinese is a bluff, something he won’t acually do, a bluff to open negotiations with the Chinese put initially on their heels.

          Thank you for pointing out that Trump’s 3rd party threats are an equally empty threat.

          Quite the negotiator, this guy. He must be hugely welcome at poker parties.

          If he’s not the GOP nominee, he won’t be able to get on the ballot in Texas or Michigan. Too late to file and he was in a primary this election cycle. This means that a third party could not put him as their candidate in either state.

The convention will be contested, and Trump will lose. Our long national nightmare will finally be over.

Twitter Feed:

Fox News

.@KellyRiddell: “The people have gotten wise, they know the game is rigged and that’s why they’re going for Trump.”

5:24pm · 30 Mar 2016 · Twitter Web Client

1,356 Retweets 2,021 Likes

JackRussellTerrierist | April 2, 2016 at 11:21 pm

If Trump and Stone bring their protest circus to town, I want to see the delegates go full thermonuclear on them and vote to release delegates for the first ballot.

I will not have seen a tantrum like the hump will throw if that happens since my little granddaughter was 3 yrs. old, and she was a pro. 🙂

Henry Hawkins | April 2, 2016 at 11:28 pm

There seems to be a lot of confusion about how shit works.

1. The sky is blue and overhead, assuming one isn’t standing on one’s head.

2. If Trump holds a majority of the delegates before the convention opens, he will be made the nominee on the first vote. However, delegates are bound to their candidate for the first vote only.

3. Left is hot, right is cold, and shit runs downhill.

4. If Trump doesn’t have a majority of the delegates for the first vote, he won’t be named nominee. This is because he didn’t have a majority of the delegates. There are no trophies awarded for holding a plurality.

5. As regards grading in mathematics ability, fully half of all American public school students are below average.

6. There are 2,472 total delegates. A majority, meaning over half, would mean Trump needs at least 1,237 delegates to vote for him. 1,236 x 2 = 2,472. This is half. Not a majority. 1,237 x 2 = 2,474, which is more than half. A majority.

7. Math only appears magical. It is not. Just like conventions, math has rules and has had them for a very long time.

8. If Trump doesn’t get 1,237 delegates or more on the first ballot, meaning he hasn’t won the majority (see #2 and #7), the delegates are no longer bound to their respective candidates and may change their votes on the second ballot.

9. A decapitated head, assuming the brain itself has suffered no trauma, remains conscious for about 20 seconds.

10. While it may seem “unfair” that delegates are no longer bound to their candidate after the first ballot, this has been a standard rule for a very long time. The MSNBC report that this fact is available only to senators from the state of Texas is untrue.

11. Per NFL rules, the team in the lead entering the fourth quarter is not awarded the win because “hey, close enough, right?”. The game must be finished in order for the game to count.

12. If no candidate wins a majority of delegate on the first ballot, and the delegates are unbound, now able to vote for whomever they wish, they are still allowed to vote for their originally bound candidate if they choose. This is not “unfair”. This is called “fair”. “Fair” is the opposite of “unfair”.

13. I struggle mightily to understand why those who struggle to grasp any of this all support the same candidate.

14. If a candidate cannot win the necessary majority of delegates before the convention, and cannot win the majority of delegates on the first ballot, and cannot win the majority of delegates on any ensuing ballots, he or she has not been cheated. He or she has “failed to win”, often referred to as “lost”. This can be a very difficult idea to grasp because of America’s problems with math education.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 3, 2016 at 12:24 am

    In re #13, the answer is because they all reached their decision based on emotions, not logic; not careful, objective observation.

    And in the plausible event enough unbound delegates put Trump over the top? What then, Henry?


      The delegates of the other candidates recognize Trump as a narcissist liberal and an opportunistic RINO. In order for them to vote for Trump, they would have to abandon just about every principle that caused them to become convention delegates in the first place.

      The delegates of the other candidates merely generally dislike Ted Cruz because they think that he will be too Conservative in order to get along with Congress. In a head-to-head analysis on Republican / Conservative principles, the delegates of the other candidates will vote Cruz.

      Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 10:25 am

      Then the voting people of the US will be faced with voting for one old, pathological Collectivist or another, or choosing neither.

      I will choose neither. I will vote, of course, FOR anyone down-ticket who IS a conservative.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 1:07 pm

      Normally I am inclined to leave Trump supporters and trolls to their ignorance. I apologize for using words too huge for you to grasp in #12. I’d have used better, clearer language, but unfortunately Trump has a monopoly on all the best words, and it is impossible to dumb down posts enough so that every passing idiot can understand them.

        In other words, all semblance of objective analysis gives way to emotions in the end after all. Got it, Henry.

          gmac124 in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 2:02 pm

          You should know all about emotional analysis since you have been running on that for months. If you could actually state a coherent argument for Trump that isn’t based on cut and paste or emotion maybe we would take you seriously. Of course if you used object analysis on Trump you would come to the same conclusions that the people that don’t support Trump have. Good luck with your emotional roller coaster ride named Trump.

          If I supported your candidate, you would have nothing to say except in agreement.

          Right, Establishment-Pawn?

          gmac124 in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 2:15 pm

          Ah the ad hominem just as I expected. I don’t give a damn who you support, if you can articulate why. Saying I can’t comprehend or that I am illogical as support for your choice means you CAN’T support your choice. So until you can support your choice I WILL call you on it every chance I get. Have a blessed Sunday.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 2:26 pm

          Inability to forward an intellectual argument only proves the emotion-based credo consolans. Thanks for the evidence, but we didn’t need it.

          Nothing you boys say changes a single thing. Sad.

inspectorudy | April 2, 2016 at 11:56 pm

How is changing the RNC rules on the nominee different than the rules on immigration? I mean if you have a rule then you must obey it, right? Trump just said that his stupid remark on the abortion issue was hypothetical in that if you made abortion illegal then there would have to be a punishment for those who broke the law. But when it comes to the Republican rules about the nomination process Trump and his supporters want it to be based on “common sense”, not the rule of law. This is what we have had with obama! We never know what law he is going to ignore or follow. That is not how our nation was built and it will not survive if we make every law a “Suggestion”. If you don’t like the laws then go through the American process and elect the right people to change them!!!!!!!

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to inspectorudy. | April 3, 2016 at 12:31 am

    Apples and oranges.

    The RNC and the state parties are private entities, much like the Elks Lodge. They can do as they like. Immigration laws are…..laws, enforceable by the government (we the people).

    Estragon in reply to inspectorudy. | April 3, 2016 at 12:42 am

    Rules are changed every single cycle and at every convention. The RNC rules only affect going into the convention; the delegates themselves set special rules as they see fit, and are the sole judges of delegates’ credentials in any dispute.

    The fact that Trump and his supporters are too stupid to understand these long-standing facts don’t make it “unfair” in any way. But if they wish to leave the GOP, not many will cry over their departure. Many of them are a stain upon our reputation with the electorate.

      What you don’t understand is Trump supporters will hold the GOP responsible, regardless.

      There are a lot of them. A whole lot of them and they are across the demographic & political spectrum.

      This is why attacks on Trump backfire. May the useless bungling aristocratic GOP never get it.

        What you have to recognize is that the vast majority of the Trump supporting voters are NOT REPUBLICANS OR CONSERVATIVES. They are (at best) marginally disaffected independents, single-issue (immigration) voters and malcontents that are looking to disrupt a two-party system via the self-immolation of the Republican party, or worse DEMOCRAT voters looking to abandon the two socialists running on that line.

        Trump voters, as a general rule, are NOT otherwise politically active. They have an untapped anger, but are otherwise apathetic (I KNOW enough of them to know this for a fact). The SOLE AND ONLY reason that they have become active is Trump’s ‘celebrity’ status.

        Trump supporters WOULD NOT OTHERWISE VOTE in a general election between (Clinton/Sanders) and (Cruz / Any other Republican candidate), and thus should be disregarded in decision-making as to the party, as any other particular candidate or policy will have no push-or-pull to either draw them in or push them to vote for the other party.

          All just subjective rationale to discredit a preponderance of voters who know the Establishment is corrupt.

          Got it.

          I’ve never suggested that the Establishment is not corrupt.

          In fact, I’ve typed quite a few text characters here suggesting that the GOPe IS in fact corrupt, and is not to be trusted, was a big opponent of JEB!, as well as excoriating Mitch McConnell on my own blog for his “surrender” leadership.

          That being said, read between the lines and actually LOOK at the Trump supporters. No, don’t just THINK you know them, ACTUALLY go and TALK to some of the formerly non-affiliated supporters.

          Go and find 10 Trump supporters that have not voted in the last two election cycles (2012 and 2014). I will bet you NOT ONE of them can articulate anything other than “we’re going to make America great again” and that “we’re going to build a wall with Mexico, and Mexico will pay for it.”

          Dig a bit deeper, and I’d be willing to bet money that 7 out of 10 of those individuals think that Obamacare is good but needs only to be tweaked and that taxes on the rich should be raised to support social programs for the poor.

          Being against a johnny-come-lately RINO because he’s a RINO is NOT the same thing as supporting the GOP establishment.

        Chuck’s response to your comment is a good one, but I wanted to emphasize the folly of this line of thinking.

        The GOP has, effectively, two wings or branches: the establishment who tend to be big spending, big government progressives and currently dominate in party leadership and the Constitutional conservatives / TEA Party who tend to be for smaller government (and all that entails in terms of taxes and entitlements, etc.). It may help you to think of them in terms of candidates: Jeb is establishment, Cruz is Constitutional conservative / TEA Party.

        By your own admission, Trump does not fit in this picture at all; he’s a magnet for malcontents across the political spectrum and for celebrity hounds.

        The trouble with your bizarre fantasy about the GOP being torn apart by Trump and/or his supporters is that Trump has alienated both main wings of the party. GOPe hate him, and Constitutional conservatives hate him (even more).

        Because of this, the more likely scenario is that Trump does what nothing else can or has: unites the GOP . . . on at least this one point.

        In case you are playing along at home, this makes the GOP stronger, not weaker, and your dreams of indies and Democrats having any say whatsoever in what happens with the GOP are just that, dreams (maybe even delusions). Why on earth would anyone in the GOP stick their neck out for indies and Dems who have not only never voted Republican but have screeched from the rafters that they never will unless it’s for Trump? Ditto the Trump supporters. The GOP knows full well that they won’t support Cruz, or should they be as stupid as they historically are, Jeb or Kasich or Ryan.

        In short, the GOP doesn’t care about Trump supporters now, so what makes you think they’ll care if you pick up your toys and go home? That’s where Trump supporters would have been, anyway. No one cares if they go back to muttering impotently to themselves and shouting at the television.

          Excuse me if I ignore you. You are like a babbling brook.

          Chuck made a similar point (the same one, actually, I just elaborated on it); why not respond to his comment? Or is he a “babbling brook,” too?

          My guess, you have no intelligent response to make. If you did, we’d have seen it by now, but all you do is copy and paste tweets, type juvenile sing-song taunts, and engage in ad hominem attacks. You haven’t posted a single reasoned argument for Trump as president. Not one. Instead, you burble on about “blowing up the party,” but when it’s explained to you that this is a singularly fantastical notion, you stick your fingers in your ears and sing lalala in the form of silly little comments like this.

          I must really get under your Establishment skin, troll.


          Troll? I don’t think that word means what you think it does, VF. Try Googling it, then think about my comments . . . and your own.

          Twitter Feed:

          Avik Roy

          We have reached Peak Establishment, now that Cruz has been assimilated.


          Laura Ingraham

          GOP Establ delegate games in TN & LA proves that they wd rather blow up the party than change on issues driving @realDonaldTrump voters.

          12:58pm · 3 Apr 2016 · Twitter for iPhone

          224 Retweets 368 Likes

          VF, do you sincerely not understand what she is saying or are you trying to undermine your own position? So far, Laura has not endorsed either Trump or Cruz; she is anti-establishment and not happy with what the establishment is doing in trying to play delegate games that would deny both Trump and Cruz the nomination. You get that, right? She’s calling for Trump and Cruz to unite (a stance with which I don’t agree, but then, I don’t think she’s the brightest bulb.).

Roger Stone is a person who worked for Trump early on but was fired/resigned. He now regularly appears on infowars, which is where he first suggested it. Me I’m too old to riot.

Me I would take a different approach. The RNC is an organization which takes lot from the government and benefits much from government aide. For example I doubt very much they ran many of their own polling places. As such they are subject to FOIA requests.

I would simply, make FOIA requests of every delegate, their address.
, and their voting history at the convention. I would then make a web site where I publish this information. One of the fundamental
principles of a representational democracy, is that the representatives be responsible to those who elected them.

As for in general, we have words from a person who is smarter then me.

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

If you remember he was talking about violent changes. Again I won’t be particpating because I’m too old. But I will sit on my porch and watch. If a GOPe running from the villages with pitchforks and torches runs by me, I will be only too happy to lend a foot and trip him.

    Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | April 3, 2016 at 10:52 am

    “I would simply, make FOIA requests of every delegate, their address.
    , and their voting history at the convention. I would then make a web site where I publish this information.”

    You poor idiot. A FOIA request is not made on individuals. They’re ALSO not made on private organizations. Jeebus…

    And you come really close to suggesting the doxxing of the delegates in your ignorant fantasy, assuming they don’t vote “right” by your lights.

    Sounds perfectly fascist to me. AbUSE the POWER of BIG GOVERNMENT, and turn out the mob for the “get their minds right” exercise. This appears to be the way your poor, ill-informed and Collectivist mind works.

It is within the rules, Kip, but I’ve never
yet known a skunk to be welcome at a picnic.
RA Heinlein

I bet WJ must really fit in quite well with the liberal skunks at Cornell. Given that he considers the letter of the law so much more important then the spirit of the law.

I have no doubt that the corrupt and decadent GOP will do everything they can to prevent Trump from winning the nomination. That is why I advocate that he drop out and run third party .

In the end advocating this kind of thing, suggests that not only do you not respect Trump, but you don’t respect the people that voted for him either.

It seems like you do not respect your self either, This article is just a pathetic attempt to rationalize the manipulation of the rules to get your desire and to convince Trump supporters to vote for the GOPe despite screwing them over. Get a clue. We are done holding our noses when we vote.

    Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | April 3, 2016 at 10:39 am

    “Given that he considers the letter of the law so much more important then the spirit of the law.”

    See, this is one of those “tells” that sometimes get blurted out by Collectivists in “conservative” clothing.

    “The letter of the law” is where conservatives live. It’s, by its own terms, what the law is in reality…the part that people can rationally read and understand.

    Conservatives view the Constitution via the prism of “the letter of the law”, or the part you can read, study, and refer to for authority when a question arises.

    “…the spirit of the law” is where those who want the law to mean what it DOES NOT SAY hide. This way be penumbras. ANYBODY can say “the spirit of the law” is ANY-FLUCKING-THING. And Collectivists DO.

    Nice going, ace. You’ve shown your ass.

    What part of “private organization” do you not understand?

    The political parties are run by their own members. Those members are free to change their rules and elect leadership at their whim. If you don’t like it you have an option: LEAVE (and please don’t come back).

    And you’re right: Most of us in the CONSERVATIVE movement DON’T respect Trump OR the people who have voted for him. Trump is a RINO, and an opportunistic recent convert RINO at that. You need not go back more than 5 years to find VIDEO RECORD of him having changed on EVERY SINGLE POSITION that he currently holds. That is the sign of an individual with NO CORE VALUES.

    Most of us DON’T respect Trump’s supporters BECAUSE they are LARGELY disaffected independents, single issue (immigration or trade policy) voters and malcontents, or celebrity hangers-on, or Democrats that can’t stomach voting for the socialist-du-juor. They GENERALLY don’t vote. They have developed a cult of personality (much like Obama’s) where they refuse to look critically at Trump’s vast changes in position and his outright falsehoods in his speeches, as well as Trump’s general lack of detail in ANY position he’s provided. When this is pointed out, they spout platitudes and invoke ad- hominem attacks. Hardly a substantive response in the mix.

    Now, if Trump is the Republican nominee, I will be more than happy to vote for him in THIS election, because I can recognize that the alternative of Clinton or Sanders is worse. AFTER the vote, it may be time to destroy the Republican Party as no longer resembling the values of the Conservative base, and for them to prepare for a contested election in 2020 with an active TEA PARTY or some other newly-minted organization.

    However, you can STOP holding your nose, and go throw your temper-tantrum in another party if you don’t get your little cult leader. GTFO. Goodbye and good riddance.

    Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

    good enough morgan in reply to RodFC. | April 3, 2016 at 11:45 am

    Yes, please, third party right now. You could start the movement yourself!
    First you’d research the rules of every state for getting on the ballot.
    Next, you’d raise the funds for the signature drives and organize the same.
    A time out to complain about the unfairness of the rules could happen here.
    Finally, discover that the Man himself isn’t interested in a third party run because it’s a loser and because he doesn’t have Perot-level spite. He endorses Hillary, because that’s the best way back into the good graces of the media, and therefore remaking his brand.

    genes in reply to RodFC. | April 3, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    You might want to goggle “sore loser laws”. If Trump(or Sanders) is not the parties candidate, they will NOT have access to the ballot in several states. Texas and Michigan are 2 that come to mind. Trump would be going in unable to get 54 delegates.

Henry Hawkins | April 3, 2016 at 10:23 am

If you join, say, the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts, Moose Lodge, etc., and as a new member speak and work aganst the organization you’ve just joined, is it unreasonable or unfair for that organization to speak and work against you?

I’m no huge fan of the GOP, but it’s a private organization free to defend itself as it sees fit.

If Trump fails to win the GOP nomination, most of his supporters, one supposes, will rail against the GOP. As if they aren’t already doing so, duh. The GOP loses nothing additonal in opposing Trump for its nomination. However, 65% of registered Republicans haven’t voted for Trump and will continue to support their party regardless of what Trump and his supporters do.

Threatening backlash against the GOP is an empty threat when you are already fully in backlash against the GOP.

“We that hate you will continue to hate you!” Um, OK.

I don’t understand how anyone, at this juncture, can fully support Trump. Have they stopped watching him? In just the last couple of weeks there has been the Michelle Fields issue, the abortion kerfuffle, and getting owned by Anderson Cooper during a townhall. It’s like he has a big wheel in his head that he spins to see where his position on a subject is that day and if it causes an uproar he jumps to, oh my bad this is my actual position. Even Hillary would get skewered if she tried this. The guy is self destructing before our eyes. Hopefully it will be quick and happen before the convention so we can focus on the real issue of winning the presidency.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to gmac124. | April 3, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    As the primary season progresses and the slate of candidates grows smaller, media attention is placed on fewer and fewer candidates. The increased media attention creates more opportunities for the remaining candidates. Alas, the more time he spends before cameras the more stupid become Trump’s utterances. He’s blowing the opportunity, a direct result of being an empty shirt with a large, loud mouth.

    Credo consolans – beliefs that are held not because they are empirically or demonstrably true, but because believing them true is consoling to the believer, a victory of the heart over the mind. Since such beliefs are not formed on the basis of empirical evidence for their veracity, they are largely impervious to any empirical evidence that they are not true.

    A heartfelt, honest belief that Trump is The Answer To Everything Wrong is incredibly consoling to the angry supporters who hold it, and will not be easily abandoned, certainly not by any evidence to the contrary. That is waved off without consideration the minute the Trump believer realizes it conflicts with the base belief that Trump will fix everything. Sound familiar?

    The object of any belief formed by credo consolans can never fail on his own lack or merits. He may only be defeated by being cheated out of his victory. If he wins, it is because of his awesomeness. If he loses, he was cheated. Sound familiar?

    Such beliefs may be abandoned only after after slow erosion by a continuing drip, drip, drip of contrary evidence, but like the way it takes eons for rain to erode a mountain, this will inevitably happen with Trump, just not before the GOP convention.

      gmac124 in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 3, 2016 at 1:50 pm

      Thanks Henry that is exactly what is happening with Trump’s supporters. I am hoping that Cruz can win 6-700 of the remaining delegates and have a lead over Trump at the start of the convention. If that is the case maybe he can get Rubio and Kasich to endorse him to get him over the top on the first ballot. That may not wake them up fully before the convention but I think it would be a great start.

      My next thought is why in the hell is Kasich still in? Did he make a deal with the Donald? He is pulling support from Cruz not Trump so if Trump gets to say 1100 delegates he endorses Trump for the VP slot? I hope not but his run isn’t logical in any other way.

        Kasich is still in for one of three (bad) reasons (in my belief of descending order):

        1.) He’s arrogant enough to believe that if nobody wins on the first ballot that the delegates will fall to him as “the adult in the room.” Or separately after several contested rounds of voting where the Cruz and Trump delegates refuse to move off their candidate, that he will become the only “acceptable” nominee. His supporters certainly think that this is a highly likely possibility, even though it is a delusion.

        2.) He believes that by being a king-maker he can get onto the eventual winner’s VP position or cabinet (Sec. State, Sec. Def. or Sec. Treas.).

        3.) He thinks he can gain favor with the eventual winner by pushing them over the top, and get more Federal dollars flowing to Ohio. Further he can shape the remainder of the race by forcing Trump and Cruz to discuss issues that he thinks is important.

        Kasich SHOULD have gotten out of the race months ago. That he’s still hanging around shows his level of arrogance and self-delusion.

      GOP Elites Are Waiting on Sidelines to Push Paul Ryan as Nominee – Just Using Ted Cruz to Stop Donald Trump

      The Beltway Republican crowd – Weekly Standard, National Review, Townhall, FOX News – are waiting on the sidelines right now hoping to eventually push Paul Ryan at a contested convention in July.
      ryan obama

      Party elites understand Ted Cruz will be knocked out by the end of April but are hoping he can take enough delegates from Trump to prevent him from becoming nominee. reported:

      In recent weeks, there has been increasing discussion about the possibility that House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)56%
      could emerge out of a brokered convention as the Republican nominee if the donor class is successful in denying Donald Trump the requisite 1,237 delegates.

      Just as Paul Ryan’s ascension to House Speaker represented a total repudiation of the GOP electorate by GOP lawmakers, Ryan’s selection as the Party’s nominee would similarly represent the donor class’s silencing of voters and voters’ views on immigration, trade, and foreign policy that have transformed the country and its role in the world.

      Regardless, many in the “#NeverTrump” movement have indicated that they would support Ryan against the wishes of the Republican electorate that has voted for Trump.

      “If we don’t have a nominee who can win on the first ballot, I’m for none of the above,” said former House Speaker John Boehner, who exited the House shortly after teaming up with Ryan to give President Obama expanded trade powers. “I’m for Paul Ryan to be our nominee,” Boehner said.

      “If it’s an open convention, it’s very likely [the nominee] would be someone who’s not currently running,” Ryan’s fellow Wisconsinite Governor Scott Walker said last week. Walker’s declaration follows an earlier pronouncement that he would be “just fine” with leaving his state’s Sanctuary Cities in place.

      As conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly, who has endorsed Donald Trump, warned in January, “After months of waiting for Trump to self-destruct, the Washington-based Republican Establishment has finally found a way to take back control of the party from the outsiders and grassroots. The plan revolves around the newly empowered House Speaker, Paul Ryan.” Schlafly writes that through a brokered convention, “‘dark horse’ Paul Ryan could become our nominee. Such an outcome could destroy the Republican Party and guarantee a Democratic victory by causing disheartened grassroots voters to stay home.”


I’d like to take a moment to slightly disagree with some of my fellow non-Trump supporters.

I DO care what SOME T-rump supporters think, and do not lump all T-rump supporters in the same category.

Certainly, as I’ve amply demonstrated, I have utter contempt for the “T-rump sucker”, a few of whom darken this blog regularly and unfortunately. They are pretty much all liars, and I really DO hate a liar.

There are, outside that despicable band, a range of T-rump supporters who are vary widely in both the intensity and reasons for their support, and those people I do care about.

To the extent they really have or recently had ANY true conservative impulses, I would very much like them to come back to those by careful and thoughtful examination of why they should NOT support a man who I have made the case is a Collectivist BIG GOVERNMENT fraud.

Our republic is in jeopardy, and we all owe it our best and clearest thinking WRT who we support. There is only one Constitutional conservative in this race now, and that’s Ted Cruz.

    You and your Helicopter-Parenting Blog Mom are well known to every reader of Legal insurrection.

    Nothing you can do now will change that perception.

    Have a nice Establishment-hugging day.

    Good post and good reminder that not all Trump supporters behave as the ones who comment on LI do. In fact, I was just this morning chatting with one of my neighbors who sheepishly admitted that she had supported Trump until he started talking about health care and education being two of the three main jobs of the federal government. She said that she’d wavered after he made fun of the disabled reporter but that this statement was the last straw. She’s been leading the fight in our area against Common Core, and she just can’t reconcile the Trump she thought she was supporting with a guy who thinks the federal government is or should be in charge of education and health care.

    I was elated, of course, to hear this. Not only are many Trump supporters unlike the vitriolic and nasty ones we see online (all over, not just here), but some are really just not following the race that closely and/or haven’t listened to anything Trump’s said since he first started his campaign and they decided to go with him. When they start listening now, many are and many more will change their minds.

    Good reminder not to lump everyone together based on a few bad apples.

Twitter Feed:

Voting Female

Cruz Has Two Ultimate Forces Against Him: The GOP’s End Run Around Him & Trump Supporters

#WIprimary #maga #tcot


Fox News @FoxNews

.@tedcruz: “We are going to keep the federal government the heck out of the way & develop our resources.”

10:42am · 3 Apr 2016 · TweetDeck

Highlights of an essay sent by long-time GOP consultant Alex Castellanos to his mailing list:

When Tides Recede at Conventions


Most convention goers, especially unbound delegates, are proud members of the GOP establishment. They want to avoid conflict that might destroy their party — and their votes will never be as valuable. If Donald Trump is only a handful or two short of the delegates he needs, it is in both in his interest and also the GOP’s to announce a done deal before the party starts in Ohio. If he’s close, Republican regulars will mount a serious effort to avoid a battle on the convention floor.

However, if Mr. Trump is one hundred or more votes away from the nomination, it is unlikely he can find the delegates to get the ball in the end zone on the first ballot. He will turn the ball over on downs though nearly at the goal line. (OK, no more sports metaphors.) On the second ballot, he drops 200 or 300 votes or more and starts bleeding. Ultimately, he bleeds to death on the convention floor — which you think would be good news for the candidate in second place, Senator Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), unless, of course, you’ve met Senator Ted Cruz.

Neither this convention nor the Republican Party wants Ted Cruz as their nominee for President. Republican regulars suspect that in a general election, he would be Richard Nixon without the charm, Barry Goldwater with diminished powers of attraction. Cruz, they fear, is the narrowest possible expression of the Republican Party’s appeal and would lead the ticket to slaughter. It is a testament to the routine occurrence of the impossible this election that the candidate most party regulars initially feared as the worst possible nominee is now their both their runner-up and Miss Congeniality. If Ted Cruz really wants to win this election, he should buy a disguise and stop campaigning until Christmas. Perhaps Senator Cruz has also figured that out: His lead has grown in Wisconsin as he has ducked FOX’s Sean Hannity offer to give him an hour of free television for 10 straight days.

Senator Cruz has no value beyond being an alternative to Donald Trump. If Trump collapses, the need for Ted Cruz evaporates, so Cruz is at risk of collapsing, too. Senator Cruz is the unpleasant medicine the Republican Party is willing to swallow when it is sick, but not when it is feeling healthier. As Donald Trump backs out of the convention hall, Cruz is likely to get a run but then fall short, which gives John Kasich his moment. If Trump begins to lose altitude, the convention is likely to turn to Mr. Kasich, an experienced Governor with a solid conservative record and the strongest showing in general election polls against Hillary Clinton. And yet….


If GOP delegates start looking for an alternative to both Trump and Senator Cruz, why settle for Miss Ohio when you could marry Miss America? Why not wipe the slate clean and go for what delegates really want, the Republican Speaker? Former Vice-Presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is a larger political figure. He has national experience and appeal. The Speaker has also managed to bring together unruly Republicans in the House, the Capitol’s hotbed of insurrection. Most importantly, he is a fresher face, a new and more promising generation of Republican. He would have a better shot at uniting the Republican Party.


Would Ryan take the nomination? Would he accept a better-than-even shot at being handed the leadership of the free world? Republican can pray. It doesn’t hurt that the House Speaker made this speech last week calling for Party unity and setting himself up as the alternative to Donald Trump. As Ryan said, “This is the system our Founders envisioned. It’s messy. It’s complicated. It’s infuriating at times. And it’s a beautiful thing, too.”

And what about Donald Trump? Does he take the olive branch the convention will inevitably extend to him?

Trump’s threats and bluster have value only before the deal is done. After a nominee is chosen, executing his threats brings him nothing. Instead, a gracious exit would be a boon to the two things he seems to love most, his children and his brand, which is lifeblood of the business he is leaving them.


    RodFC in reply to VotingFemale. | April 3, 2016 at 4:04 pm

    No. Ryan is out. They are just deluding themselves thinking he is the answer. As polls for his primary race start coming in I think that will become clearer. Same the WI primary is after the convention. The GOPe ios just dumb enough to nominate someone who loses the race for president and loses the race for the House, thus losing his speakership.

    I’ve been racking my brain trying to think of a good substitute at the last minute. Newt maybe, but the GOPe won’t buy it. Sarah Palin? Hell no. Maybe Jan Brewer. The thing is that the GOPe will want someone light on immigration.

    The thing is that guys like Chuck who complain that Trump is only single issue, immigration, are being stupid. Immigration is the issue of the time. Complaining about a person being single issue and that issue is immigration is like complaining that Lincoln is single issue with slavery.

    I just don’t see the GOPe coming up with a good candidate.

    BTW an excellent point someone has made is that Ryan has not yet endorsed Cruz. Why? Such an endorsement would be embarrassing if he becomes a serious candidate.

      Just because Immigration may be “the issue of the time” does NOT mean that you can ignore the other issues that exist, but are not quite as sexy. Those immediate issues just off the top of my head being:

      – National Debt / spending (balanced budget, anyone?)
      – Obamacare imploding (repeal and … what, exactly?)
      – Common Core / Race to the Top vs. state control of education
      – Social Security / Medicare overspending and the impending bankruptcy of those programs (privatization).
      – National Defense (Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia and China)
      – Tax Policy / Reform (personal income tax, corporate income tax, FICA, estate tax and gift tax)
      – Monetary policy (easy money interest vs inflation control)
      – EPA overreach (carbon & water policy)
      – Terrorism policy (how to fight a non-national, religious based movement)
      – National parks vs devolvement to the states
      – any other 10th amendment principled positions

      And those are just the ones that I can think of while typing. I have not heard Trump say anything particularly substantive on ANY of the above.

      Further, I have yet to hear any of Trump’s SUPPORTERS have anything intelligent to say about just about any of the above, and most of them when you ask about said issues, they mumble about how they’re sure Trump will get “the best people working on it” and that he’ll have them develop a plan.

      As for Speaker Ryan not endorsing, that does not surprise me in the slightest. HE’S the one who is going to have to live with whomever wins, so he’ll support the party nominee, but he’s not going to grab hold of that particular live wire before hand.

      The equivalent of “do we have anything resembling a plan? Yes. Ride till we find them and kill them all.” is not going to cut it for the above, which

Folks who close their eyes and ears to the situation Cruz finds himself in are in for a sad outcome in this primary cycle.

Cruz & Karl Rove, Inc are momentary frenemies for the singular purpose of defeating Trump, not to nominate Cruz.

Sorry to give earnest folks bad news…

Twitter Feed:

Laura Ingraham

Also clear that if millions think their votes & victories didn’t matter, this will further erode already battered public trust in govt.

11:57am · 3 Apr 2016 · Twitter Web Client

7 Retweets 8 Likes

Again, where would Cruz be without Trump? Trump systemically wiped out the field. Until Trump attacked Heidi Cruz, I would not have been surprised to find out the two of them had been working in tandem. Trump did the tough work: he got Bush out. Did Cruz do that? No, he let someone else do the heavy, nasty lifting because the only way that field was going to be narrowed was the way Trump did it. Like it or not, and I don’t, Trump prevailed by being nasty. Secondly, by being politically incorrect about immigration, he drew out large numbers of malcontents.

Thank Trump for Cruz having the opportunity to work the delegates like he is. You are completely blind if you cannot see what an asset Trump has been to Cruz. Without Trump, Cruz would have fizzled long ago.

I am fairly new to the site but what a shame janitor was driven off. He seemed like a decent person to me.

    willow in reply to willow. | April 3, 2016 at 4:13 pm

    Down vote, but it is true. Trump wiped out the field. I don’t blame Cruz for it. Trump brilliantly played the media, and Cruz brilliantly let Trump brilliantly play the media.

    gmac124 in reply to willow. | April 3, 2016 at 5:24 pm

    Trump has done more harm than good this cycle. It’s amazing that everybody falls back to but he got Jeb out of the race. I don’t think Jeb would have lasted any longer than he did even if Trump wasn’t in the race. To much baggage with his last name. However Trump pushed out two solid conservative governors in Perry and Walker. Besides that Trump has brought out the nastiest primary season I have ever seen on either side. I understand that often times the general election will get down in the mud, but why is Trump knifing every other candidate in the back during the primary? He does realize that he will need to work with some of these people if he was elected president. Right? Right?

One more point that is been the most interesting. Huff Post and Legal Insurrection hate Trump to the same degree for diametrically opposed reasons. With the number of people who hate him with such vitriol, how has he been in the lead for so long? Trump another Hitler says Huff Post? Trump a liberal says LI. Wow.

More Trump people are willing to go to Cruz than Cruz people willing to go to Trump, IMO. The Establishment wants anyone but either of them. If the loyalties are split between Cruz and Trump, it is my understanding that the Establishment will find a way to pick the candidate. A Trump/Cruz alliance? That would be newsworthy. haha I would love to see the look on Rove’s face.

    gmac124 in reply to willow. | April 3, 2016 at 5:31 pm

    Trump has burned that bridge. In fact I am not sure Cruz would even let him try to be his apprentice at this point. I am positive Cruz would not even entertain the thought of being VP with Trump at the top of the ticket.

Which aspect was down voted anonymous person?

1. Huff Post and Legal Insurrection hate Trump to the same degree for diametrically opposed reasons.*

2. How has Trump been in the lead for so long when so many people hate him?

3. Trump Hitler (Huff Post); Trump a liberal (LI).

I am a big girl. Which is it?

*Do you know this note is on every Trump article?

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

Is LI going to make a note?

    Donald Trump is a RINO, and a recent convert of a RINO at that. As above, you need only look back 5 years for him to have changed out his position on EVERY SINGLE ISSUE, with VIDEO EVIDENCE of him doing so. Let us count the ways:

    – Abortion (used to be an anything goes abortion supporter, but he did say he hated the concept of abortion).

    – Big Government (he is for it, before he was against it. see Education and Health Care).

    – Education (thinks it is a core function of the Federal Government [recent]).

    – Health Care (thinks it is a core function of the Federal Government [recent]). Wants to “repeal and replace” Obamacare, but has been light on detail other than to say “competition across state lines,” which is better than nothing, but still vague.

    – Immigration (was all for illegal immigration before he tapped into the whole “build a wall” thing. Still inconsistent answers on what to DO with the illegal aliens who are here [amnesty, touch-back amnesty, get in normal line, expedited line, etc…]).

    – Taxes (has been for higher taxes for the rich before he was against higher taxes. His army of accountants could find him the most tax efficient ways to utilize funds).

    So, in short, YES, many of us CONSERVATIVES have issues with Trump’s inconsistency. People DO change, but not ever so fully, radically and systemically. Anybody who tells you differently is selling something. In this case, it’s the IDEA of Trump, and if you buy, I guarantee you you’re going to want your money back.

Alright, alright. You can stop water boarding me with down votes. I give! Uncle!

Not a gracious commenter I see. I am voting for either Trump or Cruz. Bernie Sanders will be a disaster; Hillary Clinton a disgrace. My serial posts were directed to whomever was down voting me.

    Down voting is a way of disagreeing. Don’t worry about it, Willow. Most readers here never comment and don’t have voting capability because the’re are not registered to comment.

    As you can see by the behavior of the Establishment pawns here it’s a bit like high school.

    No worries. Tell it as you see it and just down vote anyone who gives you crap and up vote who agrees with you.

    This blog post is so buried now they can kick off the shoes and let lose. Like I said… High School.

Alright! I up voted you. You have lots of fire in you. I will probably remain a lurker in the future. 🙂