Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

GOP Arizona Sen. Flake Will Not Seek Re-Election in 2018

GOP Arizona Sen. Flake Will Not Seek Re-Election in 2018

“Mr. President, I rise today to say ‘enough.'”

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-jeff-flake-republican-party-lost-its-way/

Arizona Republican Senator Jeff Flake has decided not to run for re-election in 2018. He told The Arizona Republic he doesn’t think there is a place for him in the Senate:

He told The Arizona Republic ahead of his announcement that he has become convinced “there may not be a place for a Republican like me in the current Republican climate or the current Republican Party.”

Flake said he has not “soured on the Senate” and loves the institution, but that as a traditional, libertarian-leaning conservative Republican he is out of step with today’s Trump-dominated GOP.

“This spell will pass, but not by next year,” Flake said.

Among Republican primary voters, there’s overwhelming support for Trump’s positions and “behavior,” Flake said, and one of their top concerns is whether a candidate is with the president or against him. While Flake said he is with Trump on some issues, on other issues he is not. And Trump definitely views him as a foe, having denounced Flake publicly and called him “toxic” on Twitter.

“Here’s the bottom line: The path that I would have to travel to get the Republican nomination is a path I’m not willing to take, and that I can’t in good conscience take,” Flake told The Republic in a telephone interview. “It would require me to believe in positions I don’t hold on such issues as trade and immigration and it would require me to condone behavior that I cannot condone.”

He made these remarks on the Senate floor:

Flake and President Donald Trump has fought against each other since Trump came up as a possible presidential candidate in 2015. The Arizona Republic noted that Flake “refused to endorse or vote for Trump” and criticized Trump’s platforms during the presidential race.

He even took aim at Trump in his book:

Flake further antagonized Trump and the president’s supporters this summer by publishing a book, “Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle,” that took the Republican Party to task for embracing protectionism, nationalism and other tenets of “Trumpism” at the expense of traditional Goldwater-Reagan GOP values.

Flake won the Senate seat in 2012, but served in the House since 2001:

Something of a political maverick, he routinely angered fellow Republicans by highlighting their spending of taxpayer money on parochial priorities.

While in the House, Flake’s office ridiculed questionable pork projects with a series of “Egregious Earmark of the Week” news releases that usually included corny jokes and bad puns. In 2006, Flake was profiled by CBS’ “60 Minutes” in a flattering segment that compared him to the principled Jimmy Stewart character in the classic 1939 movie “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” His reform efforts are credited with helping lead to an earmark moratorium on Capitol Hill.

“If I’m remembered as the guy who killed earmarks, that’s a great thing,” Flake told The Republic in 2012.

Flake took up other fights during his years on Capitol Hill.

Flake was a free-trader who believed that the economic embargo against Cuba, which dated to President John F. Kennedy’s administration and was part of the U.S. effort to stop dictator Fidel Castro’s brand of communism from spreading to other countries in the region, had long ago outlived its usefulness. Flake worked for years to ease travel restrictions to Cuba, usually siding with Democrats on the issue and, early in the 2000s, drawing the ire of President George W. Bush’s administration and House GOP leaders. He found an ally on the Cuba issue in President Barack Obama.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

He’s a Republican? Good riddance.

    Observer in reply to UJ. | October 25, 2017 at 6:39 am

    He’s a fraud.

    I live (and vote) in AZ. Flake is widely despised here, and polls show that he has no chance of winning re-election in 2018. That’s why he’s not running again. It has nothing to do with his non-existent “principles.”

Viva Le Donald! ANOTHER VICTORY!!!!!!!!!!!

You KNOW this swamp a-hole is not running because internal polling shows him losing in a humiliation of clintonesque proportions.

We prove it AGAIN: the GOPe has NO VOTER BASE. NONE. NADA.

Hey Flake, there’s a place for you at the EU headquarters in Brussels. They’ll even give you a Nobel Prize for showing up Hell, you might even make it in hollywood. But in both venues, watch out for those pedophiles…

Former child sex slave sold into Belgian aristocratic paedophile ring reveals the horrors of her five years of abuse:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4136536/Former-child-sex-slave-sold-Belgian-recalls-abuse.html

Underage sexual abuse in the Hollywood-entertainment industry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Secret

OleDirtyBarrister | October 24, 2017 at 3:21 pm

His nose is always pointing to the left.

Perhaps AZ will replace Flake and the Fireball Of The Forestal with two conservatives with appreciable real world experience.

    The Forrestal fire was not caused by McCain. Get a fracking clue.

    Buying into that BS is like calling Trump a Nazi. You’re just spreading someone else’s libel.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to OleDirtyBarrister. | October 24, 2017 at 8:20 pm

    I agree with you except for the “McCain Started the Forrestal Fire” canard. McCain and Flake replaced in less than a year. Now THAT’s a two-fer!

G. de La Hoya | October 24, 2017 at 3:31 pm

What is Flake hiding and what is he afraid of??? I wish Lois Lerner was still around so she could look under his stones 😉

You will not be missed, RINO. You thought making earmarks your pet issue would give you enough cover to act like a Democrat the rest of the time.

Where were these guys, Flake and Corker, when Obama ran wild over the Constitution? Yes, normalcy is gone, but Trump’s rise did not occur in a vacuum. Unlike these “principled” people, Trump is real, not image and playing fake, insider games at the elitist club expense of the country. These guys will probably do more damage as they sanctimoniously move toward the exit door.

There are a lot of people in Arizona who are kinda-sorta-maybe democrats that are way more conservative than Flakey. He represented himself as one thing and then took peoples vote and worked against them. A&&holeism in the first degree.

Another Democrat sees the writing on the wall. Don’t let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.

OleDirtyBarrister | October 24, 2017 at 4:05 pm

Bob Corker is another worthless Cocktail Party Republican that needs to go. Someone got to his wikipedia page. Check out his political affiliation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Corker

Buh Bye, Jeff.

Flake’s got a new and better scam lined up. K Street profiteer? Grifter and Fixer? IMF banking scam?

It’ll be interesting to see who runs.

Just last week, the two Bannon alumni who were heading Kelli Ward’s campaign left in disgust, and said so.

So she’s swampy smelling before she even gets to DC. And in such a dry place.

Heh…!!!

    regulus arcturus in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 6:59 pm

    It’ll be Ward/Sinema.

    Sinema is a self-described socialist.

    Hopefully, there are not enough CA transplants to get suckered by Sinema’s new “moderate” charade.

I prefer the plain spoken and down to earth like President Trump over the McCains and Flakes, McConnells, and Corkers who speak in high sounding tones while stabbing people in the back, making back room deals, and mumbling lies under their breath. All these high sounding noble talking do nothing liars and charlatans are far, far worse than a person who is plain spoken and looking out for America First like President Trump.

These high sounding fools who have done NOTHING but look out for themselves and making themselves rich while they help sell the country out to the globalists and chamber of commerce lobbyists. In a just world as opposed to the world in which they hold office and make themselves rich, they would all be dead LONG AGO.

What is Flake really complaining about? He’s complaining that the voters, the citizens who are supposed to run this country and their government, won’t vote for him because he has shown himself to be a complete arse unworthy of the office to which he was elected. If Flake has a problem it is with the 72% of voters who disapprove of him.

Now Flake gives his sour grapes speech because it is Flake that has been rejected by the voters. Then we have the arses McCain and McConnell running up to praise this clown for having lost the faith of the voters. What is McCain babbling about ? How noble it is to screw the people who elected them to office. How rare and principled it is to LIE to voters to get elected and then do the opposite of what the voters sent them to Washington to do.

These useful idiots and self aggrandizing fools should all be called home to judgment by the almighty. Today !!

    Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 24, 2017 at 4:58 pm

    Donald Ducks is not a “plain speaker”. He’s a sad, broken child who uses lies and attack as a means to ineffectively protect a pitifully fragile ego.

    The last eight days put this on demonstration, for any who can see.

That speech was seven or eight years too late. Where was his outrage when Obama was orchestrating attacks on the Tea Party, when we were blamed for everything and ostracized for daring to disagree with Teh Won? Hmph.

This wasn’t a principled speech, if he believed any of it, where was he when we were the targets of White House and Congressional vitriol, name-calling, mockery, attacks, and demonization?

This is self-aggrandizing and self-congratulatory grandstanding at its most cynical and revolting.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 24, 2017 at 5:25 pm

    “That speech was seven or eight years too late. Where was his outrage when Obama was orchestrating attacks on the Tea Party, when we were blamed for everything and ostracized for daring to disagree with Teh Won?”

    You might want to look that up, Fussy.

    One thing is certain; Barracula was not his party’s leader, and he was no Donelle T-wamp, the mean gurl who lies about Gold Star families in his drive to protect his/her ego.

      Look what up? Jeff Flake’s announcement that the hill and politics had become too uncivil for him to continue on in the House and that he was not seeking reelection as a result?

      Wait, Obama was not the Democrat party leader, but Trump is the Republican party leader? How does that work?

      You wrote:

      One thing is certain; Barracula was not his party’s leader, and he was no Donelle T-wamp, the mean gurl who lies about Gold Star families in his drive to protect his/her ego.

      Hating Trump is one thing, being so blinded by that hate that you feel compelled to insist that Obama is somehow better than Trump because he’s no “mean gurl who lies about Gold Star families in his drive to protect his/her ego” is reprehensible.

      Obama’s narcissism and ego are legendary, just as obvious and yes, just as repellent as Trump’s. Are you seriously taking the stance that Trump’s boasts and exaggerations are worse than those of Obama? A man who saw himself in such an idealized, godlet light as to declare his election as the day the oceans stop rising and the earth begins to heal?

      Obama lied about Fort Hood, Rags. He lied about Benghazi. He lied about ObamaCare. He lied about Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. He didn’t know how to pronounce “corpsman” and probably had no idea what a Gold Star family even is. What he did was a million times worse, he actually tried to present a traitor as a hero. He lied about Bergdahl.

      He lied about the Iran deal. He lied about the IRS targeting conservatives. He lied about Fast and Furious. He lied. And he lied. And then he lied some more.

      Mean girl? Seriously? Obama mocked the Tea Party constantly, even calling us the vile, sexualized term “tea baggers,” and he was nothing but condescending to and dismissive of the very Americans that elected him, many of whom ended up voting for Trump in 2016.

      I read what you wrote twice because I couldn’t quite believe it. You are certainly right that Obama is no Trump, but not in the way you mean.

      You told me not very long ago that you lost respect for me, and while I was a bit sad, I did understand what you meant. I got it. But I can’t believe that you are, right now, suggesting that Trump is somehow worse than Obama. What respect I had for you has diminished immensely.

        Agree with this comment 100%, especially with regard to the hatred needlessly directed at Trump.

        Ragspierre in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 24, 2017 at 6:31 pm

        “Look what up? Jeff Flake’s announcement that the hill and politics had become too uncivil for him to continue on in the House and that he was not seeking reelection as a result?”

        No. And Flake is a Senator. I suggested you look up Flake’s comments on Obama, which you raised.

        “Wait, Obama was not the Democrat party leader, but Trump is the Republican party leader? How does that work?”

        Sorry if I confused you. T-rump is Flake’s party leader.

        “I read what you wrote twice because I couldn’t quite believe it. You are certainly right that Obama is no Trump, but not in the way you mean.”

        Try again, because you are torturing what I DID say. I have said many times that both are very similar. Both are narcissistic assholes of the most pathological type.

        “Mean girl? Seriously? Obama mocked the Tea Party constantly, even calling us the vile, sexualized term “tea baggers,” and he was nothing but condescending to and dismissive of the very Americans that elected him, many of whom ended up voting for Trump in 2016.”

        Yes. That does not address my comment.

        Obama lied. He still lies. I never suggested otherwise. I can recognize two liars at the same time.

        “Hating Trump is one thing, being so blinded by that hate that you feel compelled to insist that Obama is somehow better than Trump because he’s no “mean gurl who lies about Gold Star families in his drive to protect his/her ego” is reprehensible.”

        It would be. I never suggested that.

        “You told me not very long ago that you lost respect for me, and while I was a bit sad, I did understand what you meant. I got it. But I can’t believe that you are, right now, suggesting that Trump is somehow worse than Obama. What respect I had for you has diminished immensely.”

        Well, good, then, because I didn’t say, imply, or suggest that. So you can go on respecting me.

          Flake has only been a Senator since 2013, prior to that he was in the House (AZ06-R). My point was that Flake reserved his vitriol and withdrawal from public service until Trump was president. Where were these speeches when a Democrat president was (arguably) even more divisive and destructive?

          Look, you can see Flake as some sort of bastion of conservative ideals or whatever, but the fact is that Flake, who served in the House until 2013, did not make any speeches on the House floor about civility and how icky and Republic-threatening he found Obama (who actually did want to destroy America. And still does). Flake is a rampant supporter of amnesty and open borders (he was a member of the Gang of Ocho, remember?).

          Flake needs to leave Congress, and I’m just bummed that he’ll be sticking around until his current term ends.

          Good riddance, I say.

          As to my reading and responding to the points you raise in your response to my comment: As much as I enjoy your comments, I do not have a photographic memory and don’t hang on your every word. I was just going by what you wrote. If I misread it, fine, but you can’t say that I misread it because of something your wrote a year ago (or whenever). What you wrote seemed to pretty clearly establish that Obama was somehow better than “mean gurl” Trump who lied about Gold Star families. Shrug. It’s all good.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 8:31 pm

          “Look, you can see Flake as some sort of bastion of conservative ideals or whatever, but the fact is that Flake, who served in the House until 2013, did not make any speeches on the House floor about civility and how icky and Republic-threatening he found Obama (who actually did want to destroy America. And still does).”

          Yah, no. I didn’t and don’t hold him up as anything but a guy. He isn’t some kind of demon because he is not sucking T=rump, either. It’s very like the hate rained down on W. the last few days. You can have very flawed people say things that you really NEED to hear.

          Or, as here, you can hate on them. (Not referring to you.)

          The hatred rained down on Bush 43 was well-earned. He exploded our deficit, doubled out national debt, restricted our freedoms, and made a mockery of fiscal conservatives with unfunded entitlements that are to this day breaking our national budget.

          He left office with a 24% (or less) approval rating for a reason. The Tea Party didn’t suddenly manifest against Obama; we were all here and fed up with the socialist turn our government was clearly taking . . . under Bush.

          For Bush’s numbers to be that low, he had to lose a lot of support. A lot. And he did. Not because people wanted Obama but because people didn’t want his outlandish, anti-conservative (progressive) policies.

      Trump lies about Gold Star families?

      Um, no. Sorry.

      Any other fantasies you want to flog?

    regulus arcturus in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 24, 2017 at 7:01 pm

    Exactly.

    Flake is McCain’s protégé, so not only was he losing his mentor, Flake is losing by double digits to Dr. Kelli Ward, which is the real reason for Flake’s concession speech.

    Where was his outrage when Obama was orchestrating attacks on the Tea Party,

    He was> the TEA Party movement. He was there fighting 0bama every step of the way. And now he’s expected to support an 0bama-lite, and betray every principle he championed in those years, just because the new guy is supposedly a Republican.

    Where was his outrage when Obama was orchestrating attacks on the Tea Party,

    He was the TEA Party movement. He was there fighting 0bama every step of the way. And now he’s expected to support an 0bama-lite, and betray every principle he championed in those years, just because the new guy is supposedly a Republican.

      Tom Servo in reply to Milhouse. | October 25, 2017 at 7:48 am

      You must not have family in Arizona, like I have, especially not family that used to volunteer for Goldwater every time he came up for re-election.

      There’s a reason that Flake, as of last August, only had an 18% approval rating in his own state. Democrats hated him because of his tea party past, when he was still in Congress; and most Republicans (except for the open borders / cheap labor lobby) hated him because he betrayed every one of his old Tea Party stands within 6 months of being elected to the Senate.

      He didn’t quit because of some antipathy for Trump – he quit because he was going to be humiliated in either the primary or the general.

      Over 80% of Arizona voters want to see Jeff Flake out of office. Explain that if he was such a good “tea party” stalwart.

When the going gets tough, the tough get cushy partnerships at K-street law firms!

Donald lies to Fold Star families?

Really?

I don’t recall that being a truth, he suppprts the military 100%.
If your talking about the most recent Gold Star and his fighting back, I’m all for that with the rhinestone cowgirl, but not with the family.

That’s a no win and tasteless situation

He in my opinion should have made one statement, let Kelly handle the rest, which I thought Kelly did a great job by the way., only to be attacked by rinestone again.

Flake seems to be confused about the three branches of government and their respective roles.

He’s disgusted with the POTUS so he quits his job as a Senator?

If he doesn’t realize that one of his jobs as Senator is to counter-balance the POTUS then I’d say the good people of the State of Arizona should be relieved he is quitting.

It seems he is aptly named.

    Ragspierre in reply to Paul. | October 24, 2017 at 6:43 pm

    IF you listen to his remarks, it becomes clear he’s disgusted with the state of our polity.

    This is EXACTLY what you’ll read, expressed slightly differently, from most of the commentators here.

      regulus arcturus in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 6:55 pm

      He is also down by double digits to Dr. Kelli Ward in the primary.

      That was the real reason for his concession speech today.

        Ragspierre in reply to regulus arcturus. | October 24, 2017 at 7:26 pm

        Assume, arguendo, that is true.

        The departure from Ward’s campaign of Stockton and Lawrence (both Bannonites and Breitbart writers) in open disgust at Ward’s swampy positions, would reinforce Flake’s disgust with the polity, rather than anything else.

          regulus arcturus in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 7:32 pm

          Or some other factor we aren’t aware of at this time.

          I found that strange as well.

          I will tell you on the ground in AZ that to most here, Flake is tainted by his association with McCain. He had dwindling support.

          That is mostly what did him in. His sanctimonious book didn’t help him any, either.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 8:21 pm

          I really hope you guys can find a real conservative to run a strong campaign.

          I have some level of concern that AZ will wind up with at least one Deemocrat Senator.

          regulus arcturus in reply to Ragspierre. | October 24, 2017 at 8:25 pm

          That is my concern as well.

          There are now significant CA transplants here, bringing the same insane political and policy preferences with them.

          “I have some level of concern that AZ will wind up with at least one Deemocrat Senator.”

          Hell, they already have two. One less would be an improvement.

          Wish I could up-thumb you, Barry.

          🙂

    Mac45 in reply to Paul. | October 24, 2017 at 7:11 pm

    Flake just epitomizes what is happening to sitting Republican Congress Critters. Trump has been calling them out and they can no longer hide from the truth.

    The GOPe controlled Congress could pass Obamacare Repeal, when Obama was the President and they could not override his veto. But. get a Republican President who says that he will sign a repeal bill, or any bill which moderates of eliminates Obamacare and they suddenly find themselves unable to do it. And, there is NO Congressional group who supports the President’s agenda. NONE. NADA. ZIP. ZERO. What does that tell us?

    It tells us that the GOP Congress Critters all belong to the same Uni[party as the Democrats. And that party is opposed tio the agenda of Trump and his deplorables. Even Ted “The Rebel” Cruz would not vote for any of the GOP Obamacare bills. Granted they were all terrible, face-saving attempts, but still…

    Well, as the Congressional obstructions continue to build up, the common folk, those who are not delusional, are realizing that it is the GOP Congress Critters who are the reason for the lack of action on these issues, not Der Donald. It is becoming clear that, despite their rhetoric, it is not just 2 or 3 Republicans who are blocking action, but6 the entire GOPe.

      Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | October 24, 2017 at 7:36 pm

      “Even Ted “The Rebel” Cruz would not vote for any of the GOP Obamacare bills. Granted they were all terrible, face-saving attempts, but still…”

      You’re an admitted delusional idiot.

      Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | October 24, 2017 at 8:22 pm

      I’m not the pitiful cultist that insists Mr. Establishment is the “ultimate outsider”.

      ‘Cuz I’m not insane, is why…

        You REALLY have to work on your reading comprehension. I said that Trump was the ultimate POLITICAL outsider. The key word is the one in caps: POLITICAL. Ted Cruz had been part of the Establishment for years, prior to winning his seat in the Senate. He was part of the Bush Clan. His wife has worked for Goldman Sachs for years. It was not until he got into the Senate in 2013, that he became a “rebel”. And, he still was for various Establishment positions, before he was against them. Also, his “rebellious” stand against Establishment bills did not result in a single one of them being blocked.

        Trump has been pragmatic, when it comes to associating with politicians. Virtually all of his associations were to further his business deals and Party affiliation does not seem to have played much of a part in that. Whatever his personal feelings, he is a political outsider.

regulus arcturus | October 24, 2017 at 6:52 pm

Flake fancies himself a traditional conservative in the Goldwater mold, hence the usurped title of his recent anti-Trump book Conscience of a Conservative: A Rejection of Destructive Politics and a Return to Principle.

Ironically, during Flake’s tenure, we have seen the rise of unaccountable administrative state bureaucracy and devastating governmental lawlessness. That was in fact a central driving factor in Trump’s election.

While Flake alone was not directly responsible for governmental malfeasance, he has little to show for today’s foot-stamping indignation, choosing instead to play along ineffectively with traditional political decorum, allowing government to expand virtually unchecked in its power. At least he was respected by his colleagues.

During his Senate tenure, Flake was McCain’s understudy, mirroring many of his stances and actions, with a slightly more libertarian bent. Some speculation is that Flake’s disastrous poll numbers which lead to today’s concession speech was at least in part a reflection of McCain’s broken campaign promise to repeal and replace Obamacare.

I found Flake’s speech today a pile of sanctimonious prevarication, and highly destructive to his already waning reputation among Arizona conservatives.

Flake came from the Goldwater Institute before winning a seat in the House. Now he can retire to Brookings, or some DC lobbying firm.

Trump won for many reasons, and Flake never understood them, in large part due to his proximity to McCain. Good riddance.

    “Ironically, during Flake’s tenure, we have seen the rise of unaccountable administrative state bureaucracy and devastating governmental lawlessness.”

    Yup, and the Senate’s entire reason for being is to check the power of the Federal government and represent State’s rights.

    But instead he quits.

ugottabekiddinme | October 24, 2017 at 7:07 pm

Reminds me of another sour grapes speech, after the game was up and under a cloud Torricelli (D-NJ) had to resign, banging on the podium and shouting:

“When we did become such an unforgiving people? How we did we become a society when a person can build credibility your entire life to have it questioned by someone whose word is of no value at all? When did we stop believing in and trusting in each other?”

The last line was especially choice.

Another “principled conservative” shows his true colors.

    Bashing conservatives is a bad idea. Bad.

    Not being able to identify them just makes you look silly. Flake is not a conservative.

      “Flake is not a conservative.”

      No, he’s a “principled conservative”. Notice the “scare” quotes.

      🙂

        Wrong. This is where you and your ilk will lose potential support. Conservatives are conservative. Period. We aren’t “principled conservatives” or whatever. Being conservative means being principled.

        Flake is not a conservative. Period. No scare quotes, no nothing.

        Bashing Trump’s coalition of conservatives is pretty stupid. Don’t you think?

          Fuzzy,

          There is no such thing as “conservative” anymore. Listen closely.

          The icon of the current Conservative movement, is Ronald Reagan. Reagan was never a conservative. He was a moderate. In order for Ronald Reagan to be considered a saint of the conservative movement, this means that conservatism has moved so far to the left, from where it was in 1980, that it is not even the same movement. For years after the Reagan administration, people used to call themselves Reagan conservatives, because that brand of conservatism was markedly different from that practiced by Goldwater and those before him. Now, those who would have called themselves Reagan conservatives simply identify as conservatives.

          The whole ideological spectrum has moved left over the last 30 years. Conservatives are now moderate. Moderates now hold the place that liberals used to hold. And, liberals are on the leftist radical fringe. As the old Goldwater style conservatives die off, they are not replaced, so what used to be the “conservative” end of the spectrum is almost gone. And, worse, political ideology has been replaced by political expediency.

          Enter the new political ideologies: the Establishment and the anti-Establishment. The Establishment is based upon globalist, Progressive philosophies. To succeed, nationalism and nations have to be destroyed. The anti-Establishment is based, largely, upon fairness, personal achievement and enlightened self-interest. And, that is where the current battle lines lie. Old-time conservatives naturally fall into the anti-Establishment group. While many Reagan conservatives fall into the Establishment group. So, depending upon what type of conservative one is will determine which group, Establishment or anti-Establishment, one is a part of. Conservative and liberal have little meaning today. New world, new names.

          tom_swift in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 25, 2017 at 2:14 am

          Conservatives are conservative. Period.

          This statement is just plain bizarre.

          The Left likes to pretend that all conservatives are the same. But this is a tactic, not reality. It allows them to rubbish the particular stands and opinions of one type of conservative—whichever presents an easier target at the moment—then pat themselves on their backs about how they’ve just demolished them all. It’s fantasy.

          But the obvious schism in American conservatism, with (to use oversimplified terms) the social conservatives on one side and the fiscal conservatives on the other, was one of the most significant political developments of the past decade … so much so that only the militantly unperceptive could have missed it. Other schisms have become pronounced in the last year or so. Some overlap, and none are mutually hostile, but that doesn’t make them the same.

          Reagan was never a conservative. […] For years after the Reagan administration, people used to call themselves Reagan conservatives, because that brand of conservatism was markedly different from that practiced by Goldwater and those before him.

          This is bizarre BS. Reagan was a Goldwater conservative.

          Ragspierre in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 25, 2017 at 9:38 am

          Yes, Fuzzy, listen closely.

          Your being exposed to the self-declaration of a delusional cultist.

          He’s just another nutter with some bad wiring.

          I hear it, Rags.

          Milhouse – “Reagan was a Goldwater conservative.”

          Not by any stretch of the imagination. If he had been then he would never have beaten Goldwater in the Primary, as they would both have had the same platform and you always go with the real deal rather than the knock-off, if the price is the same. Also, Reagan would be known as Goldwater’s disciple. Instead he is the icon of the Republican Conservatives.

          You might try harder to spin your statements.

          Rags – ”

          Yes, Fuzzy, listen closely.

          Your being exposed to the self-declaration of a delusional cultist.

          He’s just another nutter with some bad wiring.”

          Though his bono fides are impeccable, in the area delusional cultists, he is not correct. In my opinion, Fuzzy, you are simply a person who has a lot of time and sweat involved in being identified as “conservative”. There is nothing wrong with that. Up until about three years ago, conservatism was the only way to oppose Progressivism. However, if you continue to look at the current political situation as being couched in terms of conservative v liberal, you are never going to understand what is going on in American politics.

          The anti-Establishment movement is not peopled solely by “conservatives”. It is peopled by a large swath of people with different political positions on various topics who are uniformly opposed to the agenda of the current Establishment. The thing is that being “conservative” is not monolithic. And, this means that there are “conservatives” who support the Establishment and actively work against the anti-Establishment. Just look at the GOP Congress Critters. How many “conservative” Congressmen actively support the Trump agenda?

          The times have changed and politics has changed with them.

          I get what you are saying, Mac, about conservatives being irrelevant today. We are. I’m not arguing that point; we all learned that particular lesson painfully well when Cruz didn’t win the nomination last year. We could have had a conservative president, but we didn’t get one. That doesn’t mean, however, that conservatives ceased to exist or that we suddenly stopped believing what we believe. And it most certainly doesn’t mean you or anyone else can tell me that I am or am not conservative. I am a Constitutional conservative. (note the period.) That means I have a certain set of beliefs tied to the Constitution, limited government, and personal responsibility.

          You can call me anything you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that I believe what I believe and that those beliefs are conservative and rooted firmly in the Constitution. This means, by definition, that I do not support the GOP “establishment,” who are actually big-spending, big-government progressives and have been for far too long (it’s why I grew to dislike GW Bush-he was a big-spending, big-government progressive.).

          While I enjoy your lessons on what is going on in today’s politics, I do think that you are a bit narrow in your assessment of the big picture. Thinking in dichotomies is usually not a good idea because you limit yourself right out of the gate. You’re right in stating that we’re not liberal v. conservatives, but we are also not establishment v. anti-establishment or populists vs. [whatever]. This one thing v. another is limited thinking, it’s myopic and misses a bigger picture entirely.

          In case you have missed it, much anti-establishment activity on both sides of the aisle is absolutist and undeniably totalitarian. They both want to be the “new” establishment that “rules” with an iron fist that permeates every area of our lives. This is so because both sides are progressive, both want bigger, more powerful government that intends to force its concept of perfected humanity on the American people. The only point at issue is what does that perfected humanity look like?

          I oppose that with all that I am . . . no matter which “anti-establishment” side is in question because both are disastrous to our Republic.

          Your sense that Trump fits into any neat rubric is also worth noting (and challenging). Trump is not an ideologue. You are. Many of his more vocal supporters are. Heck, I’m an ideologue of sorts.

          What happened last year was pretty much the same thing that happened with Obama. Rather than being a “blank slate” with no substantive positions on anything as was the case with Obama, Trump tapped into the sentiments of patriotic Americans and used those values and fears (cynically, because very often he himself didn’t believe what he said).

          Rather than hope and change, Trump peddled greatness and winning. He promised a wall, but have you noted that the people who used to insist this was going to be a big, beautiful wall are now conceding that we don’t actually need a physical wall? The list goes on. Trump was a blank slate like Obama, and Trump’s most ardent fans are happily making excuses for him just as the Obots did for Obama. And like Obama, Trump has no intention of leading some sort of rebellion or “burn it all down” agenda. Trump’s no more going to stand with you than Obama was going to stand with the many many groups whom he promised to “march with side by side.”

          This just is. It’s not good or bad until people who want Trump to succeed start firing off insane accusations at other people who want Trump to succeed.

          “you and your ilk”

          You, and your “ilk” are humorless.

          Barry, is that supposed to be some kind of joke? 😛

      Flake is not a conservative? If he isn’t then who is?

        Tom Servo in reply to Milhouse. | October 25, 2017 at 8:00 am

        If Flake is such a “conservative”, the why do over 80% of Arizona voters want to see him gone?

        Fuzzy is correct. Flake is not and never has been a conservative. He is a democrat like McCain. Flake supported Kasich over Cruz in primaries and was member of gang of eight for amnesty and increased illegal and legal immigration. He is for pro globalist mega corp UNRESTRICTED open usa markets regardless of any reciprocity on the other side.

        He is not and has never been a conservative.

        Flake is a big-government “compassionate conservative,” i.e. not a conservative at all. He’s of the progressive variety that pushes more taxing, more spending, more, more, more government.

        That “compassionate conservative” crap was all smoke and mirrors intended to shame actual conservatives into supporting the GOP in its big-spending, big-bigger-biggest government progressive arc. It didn’t work. We actual conservatives can spot them a mile away. It’s not hard, you could probably do it, too.

        Any “conservative” who supports amnesty, ObamaCare, expanding Medicaid, and/or Medicare for all is not an actual conservative. Support for any one of those is an immediate disqualifier. Any “conservative” who thinks we need a $15/hr minimum wage (or worse, the communist-inspired “guaranteed income”) is not a conservative.

        Flake is not a conservative. He’s a Bush-style big government leftist wannabe. The sooner he’s gone, the better.

    Ragspierre in reply to murkyv. | October 24, 2017 at 10:22 pm

    Flake aligned with POTUS 92 percent of the time and that didn’t help him.

    Huh…

    Maybe you have to really suck hard to be approved by the T-rump cult.

    Like the cultists here.

Breaking news of Flake having either a pregnant mistress or a gay lover in 3…2…1…

Clearly nothing to do with his abysmal polling for the primary. /sarcasm 😉

Flake is a relatively young man. I hope the folks back home treat him like trash for a very long time.

In the larger issue of establishment republicans bailing instead of growing a spine and helping to do what they promised, as long as they’re replaced by conservatives it is no loss whatsoever.

Goodbye. Good riddance. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

This is the act of a political candidate that knows that they are going to be primaried, and they are GOING to lose because they have been ignoring their party constituents. Flake has been giving the middle finger to Arizona Republicans, and they are ANGRY with him. McCain might be able to get away with that because of his “war hero” and “war hero family” story (which he’s traded on for decades now). Flake doesn’t have that luxury.

I was looking at the numbers from last August – polling isn’t done very often in off years for Senators – but I just saw that the latest numbers came in yesterday.

Flake’s support has jumped in Arizona, he had been down to an 18% approval rating, but now he has jumped to a whopping 30% approval rating.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/jeff-flake-arizona-approval-rate/2017/10/25/id/822007/

according to this poll, 50% of state republicans disapprove and want him gone, as do 60% of democrats. Not clear where independents come in, but it is clear why Flake has bailed on running again. He had no chance.

“as a traditional, libertarian-leaning conservative Republican”

Libertarian-leaning Conservative?!?!?!? Flake??!?
Now I’d be the first to tell you I wasn’t on the Trump train to start but happily on it now. Trump’s no conservative, but is willing to do some conservative things in office. Flake is to the LEFT of Trump and an outright RINO and good riddance!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend