Ted Cruz isn't cheating, he's winning----Rush Limbaugh

I'll vote but it's probably another third party year for me.

 

lol didn't I just say that if Cruz is beating Trump on the last day, even by 1 delegate, that he should get the nomination?

Of course Trump should concede if he is losing. But if the GOP uses a "super delegate" tactic to gang up on him then I will call them out just the same way as I am calling out the democrats and how they are skewing the results on their side.

Thats just a personal opinion of mine though, in my opinion there should be no super delegate or giving your delegates to another candidate. The people should simply vote and whoever is ahead should be the winner . No need for a magic number or Establishment politicians trying to skew the results to get their way. I find it very dishonorable and very undemocratic. It's "We the People" and not "We the Establishment" .

 

If Trump wins the Nomination...and his polls remain abyssmal....you'll eventually resort to "Dean Chambers" mode and claim they are "skewed by the Lib'rul Media"....as Chambers did in 2012 when the polling showed Romney was going ot lose.

Hillary Clinton has some bad polling....but Trump's are worse. And even if they were "tied"....she is clearly politically smarter and more knowledgable and RATIONAL about policy (especially foreign policy)....and would stomp him in the Debates....

where Trump would use simplistic pap and yelling and screaming....and Hillary would use logic, facts, etc.

And the people would look at them and say "Which one do I want having the nuclear codes?"

 

Lol. Please, dude. Trump used the existing laws used by thousands of other people. His was not a special case, as the bailouts were. And those were 4 unsuccessful ventures compared to hundreds of successful ventures by his company. Trump wasn't trying to defraud anyone. He legitimately wanted those ventures to be a success, and did everything possible to make them a success. But no one can win 100% of the time.

Meanwhile Goldman Sachs is committing crimes and deceiving investors for their own personal gain. Now who in Washington is going to send any of them to jail? I think Trump would if he were President. I highly doubt Cruz would put his wife's buddies and former coworkers in jail, but that's where they belong.

 

LOL...you think a life long crony capitalist like Trump is suddenly going to morph into a Ralph Nader/Ron Paul clone once he assumes the office of the presidency and take on institutions like Goldman Sachs and de-fang them? Really?

I guess as long as you believe it that's all that counts.

 

Trump has fully explained his relationship with the government. He's had to pay them off to protect his business interests. Are you honestly criticizing people for protecting themselves in this way against the rabid Washington bureaucracy? Give me a break.

And Trump has already stated some of his intentions against the big boys on Wall Street:

TRUMP: Hedge funders don't do anything but 'move around papers' — and it's embarrassing we don't tax them more

Do I think he'll "morph into Ralph Nader"? Of course not. But I think he'll do more to clean up the corruption there than any other Presidential candidate.

 

Do I think or believe that cutting checks to Hillary Clinton and the DNC was somehow helping out his business? And that without those legalized bribes Trump's career as a developer of luxury hotels and such was somehow threatened? I do not.

Taxing multi millionaire hedge fund managers won't end the games that Wall Street plays. It will simply make them a little more expensive for some of the players. Ted Cruz has proposed abolishing the entire IRS and going to a simplified tax code that cannot be gamed or exploited by armies of tax lawyers.
That's real change!

 

Any loyal partisan Republican or Democrat who does not earn a living through government just doesn't get it.

“[T]he running existential contradictions of D.C., a place where “authenticity and fantasy are close companions”, as the Washington Post’s Henry Allen once wrote. It misses that the city, far from being hopelessly divided, is in fact hopelessly interconnected. It misses the degree to which New Media has democratized the political conversation while accentuating Washington's insular, myopic, and self loving tendencies. It misses, most of all, a full examination of how Washington may not serve the country well but has, in fact, worked splendidly for Washington itself– A city of beautifully busy people constantly writing the story of their own lives.” Mark Leibovich, This Town, Penguin Books, 2013, p. 10.

 

I'm not sure what that second sentence was supposed to mean.

Donald Trump has never taken any part of the political process seriously enough to learn how it works.

He knows how to produce a television show, and peddle fear, bigotry, and white resentment to the sort of people who speak bumper sticker.

But that's not all there is to it, even if he thinks it is.

 

Then you're quite naive about political reality. Politicians can put people out of business. Obama is doing a damn good job of this with the coal industry:

U.S. Coal Giant Peabody Energy Files For Bankruptcy

Paying for protection by those who can afford to do so cannot be seen as an unwise policy. And you are using the same deceptive tactic as Cruz - you're focusing only on Hillary and the Democrat candidates Trump contributed to while ignoring Bush, Romney and the hundreds of other Republican candidates that he contributed to. He was doing the intelligent thing and covering his bases no matter which side won.

No, but it's a start.

I do like Cruz's tax plan better than Trump's. However, I don't know if Cruz has the savvy to get it passed. The political reality is that you're going to have to get some Democrat support, and they simply won't go along with abolishing the IRS. I think Trump's plan is a very good plan and a more pragmatic solution. And if he can get that through then I would be the first one to tell him to start building on that and work towards abolishing the IRS. That would be the best for all Americans.

 

Barack Obama is putting the coal industry out of business?

I know you see that on signs on billboards in West Virginia. But facts never much mattered to that audience.

Since you're the truth bringer, tell us which of these things (from your own post) are Obama's fault?

Oh, and before you cite "ongoing regulatory challenges", note taht the electric power industry was shifting away from coal when Obama was still in the Illinois State Senate.

In fact, coal's share of the energy production pie has been shrinking steadily since the Coal Strike of 1901.

Coal is labor and capital intensive to product. It requires a lot of handling in transportation. It must be crushed and screened. It generates a lot of solid waste that must also be handled.

Natural gas has none of these disadvantages, and it burns cleanly in plants that are relatively cheap to build

That reality was not brought to you by Barack Obama.

 

It means that the rules that are in place are manipulative, and in the favor of the party no matter what the people actually want. They can be over ruled at any time during the process. That is called a stacked deck and that is cheating. Can't say it any plainer.

He is a clown, and yes he plays to the base that he believes will vote for him, just like all politicians do. AND I haven't heard one yet who doesn't play the boundaries of fear mongering, playing the race baiter game, and the talking points/bumper sticker mentality.

Honestly if you don't see this from every candidate, you are either lying to yourself or blind as a bat.

 

You guys just get so flustered when your lover boy Obama is questioned. Do everyone a favor and try to curb your butt hurt. Oh he's playing quite the role:

"This rule was a huge deal, serving as the backbone of Obama's broader plan to address global warming. At the international climate talks in Paris in December, the United States pledged to slash its greenhouse gas emissions at least 26 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. It'd be extremely tough to hit that target without the Clean Power Plan.

Yet as soon as the Clean Power Plan was finalized, it was challenged by 27 states, led by West Virginia and Texas, who called it "the most far-reaching and burdensome rule EPA has ever forced onto the states."

Full Article Here

But, nah, that wouldn't have any effect on the coal industry...

 

Since it is the party that selects the candidate, the rules favor the party. Nothing unusual or illegal about that.

Contrary to your claim, the only change in the rules in Colorado was eliminating the beauty contest election, which was NEVER binding. So nothing has changed.

I'm still waiting for you to document cheating. So far, you haven't.

 

I never said it would not have an effect on the coal industry.'

What I said was that coal's decline has been a constant for over 100 years now, long before Obama was ever born.

First it was ships.

Then it was heavy industry.

Then it was railroads.

And it has been electric power for the last 40 years.

Scrap the Clean Power Plan, and the electric power industry will still continue it's march toward gas.

None of which have to do with Obama.

 

First of all your statement doesn't prove that. Let's see some proof of this from an unbiased source. And let's also see that mandated government regulations haven't played into that loss of demand. And yet America still uses a lot a coal. We get over 9 times more energy from coal than wind and solar combined.

Other technological innovations in the market caused the decline of those industries. NOT government mandates. There's a big difference.

Again, I'm sorry that criticisms of your lover boy apparently sting deeply. But there's a difference with an industry being naturally in decline and policies intended to kill off an industry.

 

We have yet to see an anti-establishment candidate in this race. An anti-establishment candidate wouldn't join an established party in order to get voter data and other advantages in exchange for ???. A true anti-establishment candidate would just run independent. These guys are trying to fool you into thinking they are anti-establishment, because the establishment needs them, because they know that America is fed up, and they need to claim the anti-establishment banner before someone real does, which is inevitable if the status quo continues.

 

That's definitely a valid point, but a businessman like Trump is going to do the pragmatic thing and run in a way that gives him the best chance to win. While I would have preferred to see him go start to finish as a third party candidate, I understand why he's going through the GOP.

And while I like a lot of what Trump has said, he's definitely not the perfect candidate, so I may end up voting for McAfee. I won't know for sure until we're close to November.

 

Then they should just say that rather than creating a bunch of wishy-washy rules that are contradictory and can nullify anything that happens up to the main convention in July. But they can't because that would be an admission that the system is rigged, AKA cheating. If you cannot grasp the concept of unethical or cheating I know a couple guys who would love to play cards with you. I don't gamble myself, but somebody gullible enough to allow others to mislead and take full advantage of them while claiming they are just following the rules they know are specifically designed to give them an unfair advantage, might be worth taking advantage of.

I don't care about one individual incident, I am more concerned about the entire system, conning people into believing they have a choice and will be the determining factor when it is a bold faced lie, and these are the people who control almost half or most of "OUR" government on any given day. That if nothing else should scare the hell out of everybody. Charlatans and crooks conniving and manipulating for personal gain. these are the people you want running the country? Really?

They have created rules that allow them to rig the election in their favor if it becomes necessary (the people fail them), that is the act of arranging, establishing a course of events dishonestly to obtain a particular result for personal gain/benefit. That "IS" cheating. Honestly, you were never taught what cheating is?

 

That's right.

The steady march away from coal to oil, and now to natural gas has been constant for a century.

As for government regulation, the general public decided that it was tired of dying of diseases caused by coal dust and soot a couple of generations ago, so you lost that argument 50 years ago.

 

if donald trump becomes president, rush limbaugh doesn't have a job anymore.

he was the one always saying what republicans could not say, but always thought.

 

Are you an attorney? Lol. You just ignored everything I asked for and responded as if you answered me perfectly. Either you're an attorney or you're delusional.

 

IF you can't document your claim, your assertion has no validity.

There is not one word anywhere in the Constitution that gives your vote any validity in a primary election. NOT ONE!

There is not a word in the Constitution about political parties at all.

In fact, there were no primary elections at all before about 1910.

Parties choose candidates.

Donald Trump is both too lazy and too arrogant to bother to figure out how politics and government works. He never built a campaign organization, and now he's trying to play catch up against a guy who has been working on his campaign for years.

He's also up against the party he chose to run in, which does not trust him (he has given the GOP an entire catalog of reason not to), and is shamed at the idea of this bullying, panderer to fear, authoritarianism, bigotry and xenophobia.

Primaries are for picking candidates, but the ultimate decision will always be up to the party,

NOONE is elected in a primary election.

If you can't prove that Cruz or anyone else violated established rules, you have no case for asserting that any cheating is going on.

Trump thinks hes smarter than everyone else. He was warned about his slipshod ground game and amateurish and tiny campaign organiztion.

But he was too smart to listen to people with experience.

 

Rush Limbaugh may not have a job after Jan 1 2017 anyway.

That's when his contract expires.

He's lost half his stations and most of his listeners in most major radio markets.

If he gets a new contract (and I would imagine he would), it will be for a whole lot less money. Clear Channel lost money on him, and they're not going to keep doing it.

 

If that were true Trump wouldn't be getting caught short in state after state because of his amateurish and slipshod campaign.

Trump never had much of a chance in the first place, and he certainly would never have a chance as a third party.

- - - Updated - - -

I answered you perfectly.