Category Archives: Jeb Bush

I’m Not Buying the Utah Poll by Y2 Analytics Showing Cruz Up +24

Y2 Analytics did a poll in Utah showing Ted Cruz up by 24%. I have Cruz winning Utah, but I don’t think he will get 50% of the vote. The poll shows Kasich in second place with 29% of the vote and Trump 3rd at 11%. I believe the order of finish will be Cruz, Kasich and Trump, but Trump will get more than 11% and Kasich won’t get 20%.

In reading the story in the Salt Lake Tribune, it mentions Scott Riding. Looking up som information on who this guy is, Linked-in says he is:


Scott Riding

Managing Partner at Y2 Analytics

Salt Lake City, Utah
  1. Y2 Analytics
  1. Jeb 2016,
  2. Y2 Analytics,
  3. TargetPoint Consulting
  1. Brigham Young University

Up until last month Scott worked for Jeb Bush. And taking a look at his Twitter feed, he has a lot of pro Bush tweets and re-tweets and a lot of anti-Trump tweets and re-tweets. Natural for a guy working for Jeb Bush, I suppose. But he began re-tweeting pro Cruz tweets on February 24, just 4 days after Jeb suspended his campaign.

So this guy that conducted the poll is anti-Trump, a former Bush employee and prior to this poll, found anything positive about Cruz worth re-tweeting.

The SLT report also states:

Scott Riding with Y2 Analytics said it appears that a bulk of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s supporters went to Cruz after he dropped out earlier this week.

“It is fascinating to see how close Cruz is to wrapping it up,” he said. “It is also surprising how discouraged Republicans are with the direction of the national party.”

The poll found that 81 percent of respondents said the Republican Party had gotten off on the wrong track and 64 percent said Trump would make the party weaker if he became the nominee.

Only 29 percent of the respondents promised to vote for Trump in a general election, while 25 percent said they would write in another candidate, 15 percent said they’d vote for a third-party candidate and 7 percent said they’d back the Democrat.

“It is fascinating to see how close Cruz is to wrapping it up”.
Seriously? has Riding looked at the delegate count? And the remaining delegates?

And the last line of the story tells me a lot

Y2 Analytics did not poll in Utah’s Democratic caucus.

You don’t say.

Utah is a “winner take all” state, but only if one candidate gets more than 50%. Otherwise, the delegates are split proportionally. And they are split evenly among the candidates who receive more than 15%. With the winner getting the benefit of the rounding.

So if Cruz gets >50%, he will win all 40 delegates. However, if he does not hit the 50% mark, the delegates are evenly divided among all of the candidates with at least 15% of the total. Which means if Cruz gets 49% and Trump gets 15% and Kasich comes in somewhere in between, Cruz will get 14 delegates and Trump and Kasich will get 13 delegates each.

Strange how this poll places Cruz above the magic 50% mark and Trump below the 15% threshold.

I believe we are looking at the 14-13-13 split as all three get above 15% and no one reaches 50%.

Y2 Analytics is, by my research, a partisan polling outfit that was with Jeb Bush until he quit. And there is evidence that they are both Anti-Trump and pro Cruz. It cannot be determined if they were paid to conduct this poll, what the internal data was, how the poll was weighted, what areas were called, etc. etc.

It is entirely possible that this poll was conducted properly and intended to measure, rather than influence voting. But there are far too many partisan attributes to the people conducting the poll to say for sure it is not biased.

You glean from this poll what you will, but I’m not buying it. And I believe that as more polls are releases – and I am sure we will see some tomorrow – we can see if this poll is an outlier or not.

But as it was the only poll released in time for the Sunday Political Shows, I am sure the networks will be buzzing about it.

We will know for sure on Tuesday. Or Wednesday.


Article written by: Tom White

Barbaric Idea: Women Have to Register for the Draft

I cannot believe it:  Bush, Rubio and Christie all indicated in the GOP NH debate that they favored requiring women to register for the military draft:

Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie indicated support for opening Selective Service up to women in case the draft is ever reinstated, the three Republicans said Saturday.

“I have no problem whatsoever with people of either gender serving in combat so long as the minimum requirements necessary to do the job are not compromised,” Rubio said. “I support that. Now that that is the case, I do believe Selective Service should be opened up for both men and women in the case a draft is ever instituted.”

Bush made it a point to note that there is no draft currently, but did say “I do, I do,” when asked if young women should be required to sign up for Selective Service.

“The draft’s not going to be reinstituted,” he said.

Pressed by host Martha Raddatz, Bush replied: “We don’t have a draft, I’m not suggesting we have a draft,” but he is focused on military readiness and high morale, and has no objection to women serving in combat roles.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie didn’t directly express his views on requiring women to register for the Selective Service, but said more broadly, “There’s no reason why one young woman should be discriminated against for registering for the Selective Service.”

I’m done with all three of those candidates for the primary.  I can assure you if young women – mothers especially – get required to register for the draft – I’ll find every appropriate and legal way to peacefully protest this barbaric outrage.  I’ll hit the streets.  Be the world’s oldest hippie.  This country MUST NOT send women to war.  It is because of Jeb Bush’s brother that we have women and even mothers being deployed to what was in effect combat roles.  But at least those ladies chose to join the armed forces.  But it was not right.  Not to meddle in other people’s business.  Not to build nations.

But a draft is different:  it’s involuntary.  There should not even be a draft unless there is a clearly declared war and imminent danger to the United States.  Not to do good or to stop alleged genocide or to build nations and other meddling (That ought to cover all the wars since 1992 we have been in with the possible exception of Afghanistan but we expanded that mission beyond what was necessary); if we draft women, this may force the people to consider if these wars are worth it.  But too often war gets started by Presidents and Congress does nothing – gave no approval – will not stop it – and these wars are not in our interest.  And women will be drafted and serve in combat involuntarily.

There was one candidate who said no:  Ted Cruz.

“The idea that we would draft our daughters to forcibly bring them into the military and put them in close combat, I think, is wrong,” Cruz told a crowd –unprompted – at a campaign rally. “It is immoral. And if I am president, we ain’t doing it.”

Cruz is right.  It is immoral.  It’s barbaric.  And two REPUBLICAN Congressmen have actually introduced a bill to REQUIRE women to register for the draft:

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a Marine veteran, and Rep. Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., a retired Navy SEAL, filed the Draft American’s Daughters Act to stoke debate over the military’s historic move to fully integrate female troops into all combat roles. If passed, women from 18-26 years old would for the first time have to join men in registering with the Selective Service program and potentially be forced to fight in future wars.

If you live in the district if either of these representatives (who I think did it to start a debate rather than because they favor it but a bill is a bill and it could pass in spite of them!) tell them:  NO DRAFT FOR WOMEN.  Period.  No compromise here.


Article written by: Elwood "Sandy" Sanders

Cruz Drops to 5th in New Hampshire in Brand New Emerson Poll

Ted Cruz seems to be losing steam everywhere.

In a brand new Emerson Poll in New Hampshire, Trump is still leading by a mile – a 17 point lead of the next contender at 35%, but that lead is over Jeb Bush surprisingly enough who received 18% of the responses followed by Kasich at 14% and Rubio at 9%.

The bad news for Ted Cruz is that he has fallen to 5th place with only 8%. Cruz has been on a seek and destroy mission against Donald Trump and has apparently ignored the rest of the field as they have made major gains.

Article written by: Tom White

Remember Policy? John Kasich Does

I’ve often been bothered by the lack of policy and experience exhibited by the Carson and Trump camps. They resonate with voters. They speak our language. Yet, they refuse to run on actual policy. I think this is why they are winning in the polls, however. Voters aren’t looking for policy or reason or thoughtfulness. They want contrariety and aggression and verbiage. Trump and Carson are speaking to the average voter. The average voter who doesn’t understand policy or political principles. They just want someone that talks like them and to them and who, in general, agrees with them. I get that. I really do.

I’ve long felt that this campaign ought to be Bush v. Cruz, because I think that Bush adequately represents the moderate Republicans and Cruz adequately represents conservative Republicans. However, Bush has disappeared. If you want a constitutional conservative, you want Ted Cruz or Rand Paul. You probably like Ben Carson, but who knows how he really feels about the Constitution? He doesn’t have a record. Neither does Trump, if you’re leaning in that direction. Yet, what about the establishment voter? They were told they had to be for Bush, but Bush hasn’t given them anything to vote for.

Kasich has.

In fact, in the real world of Republican Politics, we might be looking at a battle no one saw coming – a battle between Trump, Kasich, and Cruz, assuming Carson’s and Bush’s money don’t keep them in the game until the end (which it’s likely to, but humor me). We all know what Jeb Bush means for the Republican Party. It means the same thing we’ve seen for years. The same people in the father’s circle were in W’s circle, and will be in Jeb!’s circle.

The new establishment candidate may be John Kasich. He is a big government, pro-state candidate. His biggest failings have been on Medicaid Expansion in Ohio and on his quasi-pro-amnesty rhetoric. But, Kasich isn’t Bush. Kasich’s people aren’t Bush people. Take a look at his platform. Unlike Bush and Christie, Kasich is looking to return power back to the States. Yes, as Governor, he’s done things the grassroots can’t stomach, but he has backed it up with a fighting platform against the federal government.

Maybe Kasich is the Federalist-Establishment Candidate? Personally, after studying Kacish’s Presidential Platform, if it weren’t for his awful positioning on immigration, I would consider him to be heads and tails ahead of the rest of the establishment elite gunning for the GOP nomination. I can’t support him, because where he’s bad on policy, he’s really bad; but where he’s good, he’s really good.

Considering his policy proposals and experience, I am a bit surprised that the establishment, in abandoning Bush, have gravitated to Marco Rubio (a Pro-Amnesty TEA Party corundum with a fairly conservative voting record), instead of Kasich, who has much more experience and is rolling out bold plans for reforms that might actually make it through the current United States Congress. Yes! Even this Congress.

I won’t be voting for Governor Kasich, but my estimation of him has greatly increased. He is a serious candidate. Unfortunately, like Rand Paul, whomever is orchestrating the melody of his campaign persona has failed completely to grasp the mood and motivation of his target audience. Kasich needs more than just smart ideas. He needs to reach across the aisle to conservatives and offer them something they can latch on to – and being soft on illegal immigration is exactly the wrong tune to play. Kasich is a smart man, it would seem, with great ideas and bold policy initiatives – but his team miscalculated what it would take to win the Republican Nomination.

They have not, however, miscalculated how to make their candidate an outstanding Vice-Presidential Nominee (if an outsider like Trump, Carson, or Fiorina, or a constitutional conservative/libertarian like Cruz or Paul, win the nomination.






Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

Hillary Clinton, The Lesser of Two Evils, and The Pertinacious Right

While Republicans rip their cloaks and gnash their teeth over the executive abuses of the Obama Administration, the Hillary Campaign is doubling down on authoritarian executive power; and she isn’t being shy about it. Worse even, this is exactly why Democrats still love her, scandals and all.

Hillary Clinton knows what Democrats want from their next president: someone who uses the bulked-up power of the presidency to drive a progressive agenda.

From closing the gun show loophole to tightening the “Volcker Rule” to cut down on risky speculative investing, Clinton is crafting plans to go it alone in major policy areas. That’s important because in an era in which Congress can’t function — particularly when power is closely divided between the parties — the executive actions a president takes unilaterally are among the most consequential policies enacted.

Sure, there are some Democrats who chew their nails when thinking about Clinton’s Machiavellian side, but most are nonetheless glad to see signs that she’s not going to get rolled by a Republican Congress. The scope of what she’s promising to do by herself is unprecedented from a top candidate for the presidency.

The view from inside the campaign, said one official, is that it’s important to be specific about how Clinton would use the unilateral powers of the presidency “because of the level of frustration” Democrats have felt when Obama’s priorities have been blocked by Republicans in Congress. Even if Democrats are able to elect one of their own as president in 2016, he or she is all but assured of facing a Congress in which one or two of the chambers are controlled by Republicans. – VOX

While Republicans gnaw at each other, Hillary Clinton is looking to become Lord Emperor of these United States of Government-Worship. Let’s just take a few moments to recognize the threat to the Republic Hillary Clinton represents, and consider whether or not we can allow such an individual power. Is she bad enough to vote for a Republican we don’t like?

jeb!The question this brings me to is whether or not Bush people can vote for Cruz, or Cruz people vote for Bush, or Bush or Cruz people vote for Trump? Sadly, I’m the problem with the Republican Party. I probably won’t vote for Jeb Bush or Donald Trump in a general election, essentially throwing away my vote in pursuit of a Hillary Clinton Presidency (if such a degrading choice even materializes). People like myself need to begin taking responsibility for the conundrums we cause. The Pertinacious Right, whether Constitutionalist or Populist, have to be honest and willing to explain themselves to a nation willing to choose the lesser of two evils in an important Presidential Election.

I haven’t always been this way. I voted Libertarian in 2000, not being able to discern a reasonable difference between Bush and Gore; but I voted for Bush against Kerry, McCain against Obama, and Romney against Obama. So as a principled voter, I have an embarrassing and untrustworthy track record. That said, here I am, back to my old ways, unwilling to break for the lesser of two evils. That said, I am desperately hoping that moderate Republicans will break for a Cruz candidacy, after he overtakes the Republican field, as I predict he will. How hypocritical.

How can I want Jeb! supporters to back Cruz or Carson or Paul, if I won’t back Bush? The reality is, that I can’t.

I must offer this in my defense, I can’t tell the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Bush, Trump, and Hillary Clinton all use different rhetoric, but will they govern differently? Well, I don’t know. I have established for myself a litmus test: does this candidate willingly abide by the Constitution – the original intent of the Constitution? See, I’m not an idealistic or democratic kind of guy. Liberty requires strict prohibitions on government, no matter how popular or persuasive that government may be.

I believe in the rule of law, the Constitution, Republican Federalism, and Liberty. I don’t see how voting for Jeb Bush or Donald Trump promotes what I believe in. This is hard to say out loud, because I know what it means. It means, I expect the Republican Party to agree with me or else I won’t support their candidates. It’s a hard line, it is uncompromising, and it is pragmatically unfair. But it is true.

So here I am – pointing out that a President Hillary Clinton will be far worse than a President Obama and declaring that I will not support the lesser evil. Here’s the thing though; I’m not alone. I’m nowhere near alone. Also, I voted for Bush’s second term and it was devastating. I voted for McCain and he lost. I voted for Romney and he lost. I sacrificed my integrity each time for nothing. In the meantime, the Republicans in Congress have been funding every abuse of the Obama Regime. So this is a plea for help. Tell me, why should I vote for the lesser evil, when the lesser evil never wins – or when it does, does more harm than good?

Looking for comments of good sense, without actually expecting it.


Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

Debunking Conspiracy Theory Driving Droves of Conservatives to Trump

In my pursuit of understanding the inexplicable, I finally stumbled across a conspiracy theory posted at The Last Refuge detailing the RNC’s plan to nominate Jeb Bush. Before I begin quoting this theory for you, please understand that I am in no way endorsing this theory, nor am I even remotely bothered by its assertions. My hope is that you too will read this, understand what it is being used for, and then have a cup of herbal tea. Fearmongering gives the theorist power over your decision making abilities and robs you of your rational thought. It’s why conspiracy theories are so popular and effective and almost never true. I’ll explain the theory and quickly debunk it.

The theory begins….

In a very general sense the broad construct begins around a very specific premise: The GOPe knew they would need to devise a strategy to elect Jeb Bush with around 15 – 25% of the primary vote, depending on the state – through the first nine calendar primary races.  [Dixie states at the low end, and New England states at higher thresholds.]

The idea here is to ensure that in more liberal states, the winner of the primary gets 100% of the delegates and in conservative states, the delegates are split.

Each voting sub-set or ideology within the Republican base, within a specific state, would need multiple options in order for the ‘Not-Jeb’ vote to be kept in check below the “risk margin” allowing Jeb’s small vote count to be victorious.  We called this “fracturing the block“.

If a single part of Not-Jeb (remember he/she’s a group) began polling higher than Jeb, then add another similar candidate and split Not-Jeb again.  Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul seemed to be the biggest risk to Jeb.

[Example: Tea Party conservative type voters would need multiple candidate options to fracture their voting block: (Walker, Cruz, Jindal, Rubio etc.)]

Obviously with 17 candidates, it goes without saying the key and essential tripwire was easily triggered.  However, if it had not been – we would have stopped tracking.

This part of the theory details how the RNC would choose multiple candidates to split various subsets of the Republican Party. Obviously, this prediction has already faulted with Rick Perry dropping out of the race, leaving Ted Cruz a wider opening in Texas. If someone really is pulling the strings at the RNC, they forgot to fund the Perry campaign. Oopsy Daisy.

Again, the goal is to keep Jeb afloat by introducing a candidate into the larger “Not-Jeb” group who can remove support from any other larger growing bit of the “non-Jeb” candidate.   Hence, South Carolina (Graham), Ohio (Kasich), Texas (Perry), and Florida (Rubio) – with further insurance policies in Virginia (Gilmore) and New York (Pataki).

Sticking with their theory that this is all about math and not ideology (because, of course, the voters are really machines programed and predictable?) it is obvious that the RNC is pushing candidates in important states to steal votes away from Conservatives. Except that Pataki in New York isn’t a conservative and is more likely to draw votes away from Bush and not away from the grassroots. Lyndsey Graham in South Carolina is a hardliner for the GOP Establishment. Again, not that anyone in SC will vote for him, he’d draw votes away from Bush, not Cruz or Paul. Kasich in Ohio is running as the fair left compassionate conservative and the only people that like him are also Bush supporters. No one is supporting Kasich instead of Cruz or Paul in Ohio. Perry likely would have split votes with Cruz and Paul in Texas, but the masterminds at the RNC forgot to fund his campaign and Perry is out. So, oops. Rubio in Florida could still be a problem for Cruz and Paul, however, it is important to remember that all three have been considered TEA Party candidates. Also, unless Rubio really does get his fundraising together, he might not be in the race come the Florida Primary.

If this is the establishment’s strategy to defeat conservatives, its horribly conceived and poorly executed.

This GOPe Jeb Bush roadmap also explains the timing of Kasich (Ohio), Pataki (New York) and Gilmore (Virginia) – although Fiorina is also registered homestead in VA.

These candidates are like Pac-Man gobbling up delegate votes from more conservative candidates, and planning to drop them back off in the bucket of Jeb Bush after endorsement at specific dates.

Gilmore? Really? If the RNC is so smart, why are they choosing fake candidates to derail conservative candidates who can’t poll double digits in their own States? And why isn’t the RNC choosing conservative candidates in Virginia, South Carolina, New York, and Ohio?

All you really need to know is how this conspiracy theory ends.

trump-cant-be-boughtSo worried about the success of conservative candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul are these theorists, that they conclude with a picture showing Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul as FOR SALE.

Only Trump isn’t for sale?

The message is clear, only Donald Trump can defeat the evil RNC plot to anoint another Bush.

If this really was what the RNC was looking for, then they are much less intelligent than I give them credit for. But alas, this is the conspiracy theory causing Ted Cruz and Rand Paul supporters to get behind Donald Trump.

This is absolutely ridiculous.

Now, having demonstrated how ridiculous this conspiracy theory is, I am hoping that those conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists that have jumped ship will be able to reevaluate this campaign. Luckily it’s still early and no one has voted on the basis of a lie; and even more fortunately, it is such an awful theory that it is easily debunked and set aside.

It is also important to understand that I do not believe for a second that Trump’s people are behind this. While I am not a Donald Trump supporter, I do understand that there are plenty of folks who really like his politics, his success, and his campaign platform. These are the true Trump supporters and this article is not designed to sway a single one of those. This article is only meant to debunk a theory that has affected the thinking of some conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists.


Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

GOP Debates Haven’t Changed A Thing: It’s Still Jeb v. Cruz

Ted Cruz is the most polished and prepared Republican Candidate running for President in the GOP field. Despite being utterly ignored in the debates, his responses and temperament have been flawlessly executed. His campaign is carefully crafted, consistent, and relevant.  His record of fighting for Conservative and Constitutional values and policy is unrivaled amongst his candidate peers. He’s put together a brilliant team, is fund-raising well, has not had any gaffs, and has chosen not to participate in the vitriolic and mean-spirited back and forth we’ve been forced to stomach from the rest of the field. Yet, Republicans voters remain enamored with pomp, bombast, substance-less positioning and rhetoric, media narrative, and emotional appeal.

I recognize we have a great deal of pent up anger and frustration. I recognize we’re all excited by angry candidates like Trump and Fiorina. I recognize the appeal of a Bush campaign unimaginably well-financed. I also understand that these emotions and the gratification of having them mirrored and portrayed by the great actors running for President won’t last forever. Eventually even the media will be curious about what a Trump, Fiorina, Bush, Carson presidency would look like. They’ll start asking questions about policy. They’ll be annoyed by inconsistency, shallow rhetoric, and impractical folly. When that happens, Trump, Fiorina, and Carson will all slowly lose their appeal, and the debate will begin to center around just what kind of Republican Party are Republican voters looking for in the future.

gop-canidates-58ac30f7b098d564Jeb Bush has enough money on hand right now to fight until the bitter end. Rick Perry ran out of money and dropped out of the race. Scott Walker’s donors are desperate for new leadership at the top of his campaign. On October 15th, the fund-raising report deadline just one month away, we’ll get a much better idea regarding the health of these campaigns. While Kasich and Fiorina continue campaigning for Vice President, – Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, and Ted Cruz will battle it out to see who can raise the most small donor donations. Rand Paul and Scott Walker will need to seriously shake up their campaigns in order to compete come November. I don’t expect to see Jindal, Christie, Graham, Pataki, Gilmore, or Santorum still in the hunt by the end of 2015. Huckabee is still gaining ground with the Christian Right and he’s the only candidate campaigning on the Fair Tax. Like Walker, despite having low polling numbers, he has a strong ground game.

So what are we looking at? I still believe at the end of the day we’re looking at Ted Cruz versus Jeb Bush. We’re looking at the first choice of the Wall Street and K Street, inside the beltway, establishment crowd in Bush. We’re looking at the conservative, constitutional firebrand and face of the freedom movement in Ted Cruz. What kind of Republican Party do the Republican voters want? It’s hard to say. Jeb Bush appears to have some life in him after all and the GOP Establishment and Congressional Leadership slaughtered the TEA Party in the last round of primaries. However, they lost all support from their base in the process, something which should serve the Cruz campaign in the months to come.

Policy matters. Experience matters. Records matter. They always have. We forget that in every primary Republicans become enamored with new names and new faces, but their inexperience always rears its head, and the shiny new gadgets are tossed in the garage or in storage in favor of more reliable instruments.  These debates have been interesting, they’ve been entertaining, and they’ve been lucrative for FOX and CNN. Outside of that, they haven’t changed a thing.

Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

Loser Cantor to help Loser Bush Lose

So now we know which of the dozen or more RINO’s the RINO Blogs will be supporting. Pay for Play. Look for the checks to start drifting to the RINO Blogs that are for sale to the highest bidder.

(Hint: That ain’t Va Right!)

I thought Walker might be the Corporate Owned candidate that all the RINO’s got behind (the Koch Brothers and Americans for Prosperity expect massive repayment from Walker for helping him fight off the recall elections in Wisconsin. And if he is elected, they will get it.) but with disgraced loser Eric Cantor being appointed to Jeb Bush’s campaign to slither his way on the ballot in Virginia, smart money says that the RINO Blogs will begin cashing checks and writing stories favorable to (Oh God not another) Bush. And of course with the Bush/Cantor checks comes the mandatory posts against the other candidates. Expect Trump to receive the most venom from the RINO Class blogbots because he is currently mopping the floor with Bush and the rest of the field. And we can expect the nativist/racist insults to be liberally sprinkled within the digital ink stream because Corporate Owned Politicians are under mandates to bring in as many illegal aliens for profit and exploitation as they can. Many of these illegal aliens replace American workers and other illegals end up as sex slaves for the enjoyment of the Corporate Owned Politicians and their masters. Remember the Acorn undercover videos that pretended to bring in under age girls from South America, right? They didn’t make that up. These are one example of the exploited illegal aliens that the amnesty advocates are enabling.

But Cantor falls into familiar territory with the Bush campaign. The Jebitch has been tooling around calling Trump a Liberal. Seems that he has already been getting advice from Cantor. As I remember it, Cantor lost to a “Liberal” college professor in a stunning upset.

Oh, I’m sure it will work out this time. After all, nothing wrong with trying the same tactics over and over again expecting different results, right?

But for those who worry about Cantor rearing his ugly head again in Virginia, I don’t think you have to worry. We didn’t see him back when he was supposed to be working for us.

And for the Cantor Zombies – here’s a reminder of the contempt real Americans have for you blind followers of the Corporate Owned Politicians:

I’m and Eric Cantor Zombie!

Article written by: Tom White

What Everyone Seemed To Miss After The GOP Debate

It’s been 22 hours since the 9pm debate began Thursday night in Cleveland, Ohio. The last 20 hours have been filled with talk of winners and losers, moderator decorum, and howls from every conceivable angle. What have we learned?

In a shocking turn of events, those who loved The Donald at 9pm yesterday, still loved The Donald at 11pm. Their mission over the last 20 hours has been to slam the FOXNews moderators and praise Trumps’ courage at standing alone as the only candidate willing to jettison all hope of a Republican victory in 2016 with a 3rd party challenge.

More astonishingly, establishment Republicans still support the establishment candidates. Not one big government Republican came out after the debate and said, “You know, I’ve been for Jeb Bush for months, but after watching this debate, gosh, that Ted Cruz really is impressive!”

After Rand Paul went toe to toe with the raucous Chris Christie, none of the Rand Paul supporters said to themselves, “Damn it, that Christie is right! Screw the Fourth Amendment!”.

There are many wings to this Republican Party and each candidate is drawing upon their own base within the party. Rand Paul and Donald Trump actually had the easier job. Rand Paul had to inspire his libertarian-leaning Republican Base, convince them he was willing to fight, and that their donations would not be given in vane. Meanwhile, Donald Trump just had to be Donald Trump. Easy-Peesy.

Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Scott Walker, and Marco Rubio had the most difficult job. They are all fighting over the conservative Republican Base. This is a base comprised of Constitutionalists, grassroots activists, and Social Conservatives. These were the candidates that needed to have the biggest nights. They all did well. There were no knock out punches thrown. They introduced themselves, their identities, their political philosophies, and highlighted the central themes of their particular campaigns.

politifact-john-kasichjpg-6f115f6be0489742On the other side of the Republican divide we saw Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and John Kasich attempt to appeal to the establishment wing of the Republican Party. This was maybe the most interesting grouping to watch and evaluate. I can’t remember anything Jeb Bush said last night, to be perfectly frank; but Kasich, whom I absolutely loathe and would never vote for under any circumstance whatever, had a great debate. He was overly emotional and caring, which led many analysts to assume that he might have crossover appeal to moderate Democrats. Also, if Jeb Bush isn’t going to show up to these debates and John Kasich does, the Governor of Ohio has a real shot at earning the full throated support (and most importantly the money) of the billionaire class and their underlings.

It seems obvious to me that John Kasich and Carly Fiorina are in this campaign to win the Vice Presidential nomination for the Republican Party. After last night, however, Governor Kasich might just think he has a chance to win this thing. That’s the storyline everyone’s missed. Can Jeb Bush and his Goliath SuperPAC actually be dethroned by the Governor of Ohio?  It’s an interesting question and in the next debate, we’ll see how much of the hype Governor Kasich has bought into; because if he thinks his real competition is Jeb Bush, he’s going to have to start making the case for why the establishment Republicans ought to vote for him over Jeb. This is risky, because what he really wants is to be Jeb Bush’s VP… but maybe, just maybe, Jeb Bush might have to fill another position held by his illustrious father: Vice President of the United States. We’ll see.


Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker

Convention? Primary? Money, Money, Money!

I am new to Virginia Politics (going on two years), so you will have to excuse me for my intolerance of a great number of seemingly popular opinions with regard to elections in this state.

For those considering conventions as a solution to whatever problems you perceive in the Virginia electoral process, I would like to point out that Ed Gillespie won a decisive victory in Roanoke. The eminent Washington Insider, Ed Gillespie’s money won the day, and anyone who thinks that the collection of local Virginia TEA Party’s stands a chance against the Jeb Bush machine in a convention setting is simply delusional. I get it, I really do; your convention strategy.

You figure that if statewide polling looks like this: (Jeb Bush 33%, Marco Rubio 21%, Ted Cruz 18%, Rand Paul 15%, Donald Trump 5%, Mike Huckabee 4%, and Bobby Jindal 3% (and 1% somewhere else), that the Rubio 21% plus the Cruz 18% plus the Paul 15% equals 54% and the certainty of a Tea Party candidate victory.

O.K. I’ll buy that when you assure me that every single Rubio, Cruz, and Paul supporter will be delegates at that convention. It’s not going to happen. The candidates with the most money will get the most delegates. Jeb Bush could show up with 48% of the delegates. A few Huckabee supporters, a few Trump supporters, and boom, he’ll get 50%+ and that’s the ball game.

Now, there are those who support closed primaries, in order to keep Constitutionalists, Libertarians, and Infrastructure Democrats out of the primaries. Again, this is only a good idea if you want to nominate Jeb Bush.

Then there are those who object to the winner take all format. So if a Ted Cruz, a Marco Rubio, or a Rand Paul did defeat Jeb Bush, say 38% to %32, you will want Jeb Bush walking away with 32% of our delegates?

The only real option I see, is for there to be a winner take all open primary, and for the grassroots to get behind one candidate early on, defeat Jeb Bush, and give all of our delegates to the conservative of choice at the Nomination Convention. If we can’t do that, there is no trick that money can’t buy its’ way out of. Jeb Bush can buy a convention, just like Ed Gillespie did in Roanoke.

Now, if, out of ignorance, I’m missing something, please let me know. Convince me that there is a better option that money won’t inevitably work its way around. We know Wall Street, K Street, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Republican Party of Virginia are going to fall in line for the Jebster. As we’ve seen in the past, the only way to beat back money, to beat back the corporatists, is to get the grassroots, the constitutionalists, the libertarians, and the infrastructure Democrats behind a qualified conservative candidate and win on election day. If you support some other option, please, list examples of that strategy’s effectiveness in the past. I give you Dave Brat and Ed Gillespie.

Yes, 2008 and 2012 were awful for the grassroots, but don’t allow those failures to serve as the impetuous behind walking into the jaws of an establishment trap.


Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker