I know people keep saying that we've only had 3 states vote and so there is plenty of time for the race to turn around for Rubio, who has yet to win a single state, especially now that he is getting establishment support. I really don't think so, the math is just very daunting. You just have to realize that by the end of March 15th, 59.9% of the delegates will have been allocated. Is there any scenario here where Rubio does well and gets large amounts of delegates when there will be four major candidates competing, Trump, Cruz, Rubio and Kasich (who says he is in the race at least until after the OH primary on March 15)?
Let's assume that Rubio runs the table after March 15th, taking every single state, including Trump's home state of NY and other northeastern liberal states where Trump should do well like NJ and CT (note, that in the latest MA poll, Trump is winning by 34 points, with 50% of the vote). Well, that's still 40% of the delegates, he also needs to get 245 more delegates before the end of March 15th in order to get to the magic 1,237 delegate number. Even getting to 245 (about 16.5% of the total) will be extremely tough. Most states are deep red states where Trump and Cruz should finish 1 or 2. Other states, like Massachusetts are very liberal and would likely go heavily towards Trump. Heck at this point it's not even clear Rubio is going to carry Florida on the 15th. While 245 delegates out of 1,480 doesn't sound like a lot, you have to understand that so far he has 10 out of 103, so less than 10% of the total allocated.
Regardless on whether than 245 is doable, we have to understand that there is zero chance of him running the table at the end. If you just eliminate NY, NJ and CT, which I believe are core Trump states, that takes 174 delegates off the table and makes him now get 419 by the end of March 15th or 28% of the total up to that point. I really don't see how he could possibly get that much in a 4 way race with lots of Trump and Cruz friendly states in the mix. Plus, winning with 419 still requires him to win in places like PA and WV (105 delegates total), which are heavily blue-collar and very Trump oriented. It also requires him to win Cruz friendly states like SD, MT and NE (92 total).
Note that Nate Silver estimates that Rubio will need to have 632 delegates through March 15th with is 43% of the total while in a 4 way race where states are apportioned proportionally. Again, I just don't see any realistic way that this could happen.
Monday, February 22, 2016
Sunday, February 21, 2016
Why I might prefer Trump to Rubio
No, I didn't have a brain tumor for breakfast, it's just last night's loss in South Carolina had me thinking, if Ted Cruz doesn't do well on Super Tuesday, I might have to make a choice. For if Cruz isn't able to get a heap of delegates and state wins in the SEC primary, what exactly will be his path to victory? He has focused his campaign on social issues and immigration which I've said time and time again is a mistake. People care about the economy, people care about jobs and he should have focused on those issues. Instead, Trump did and many of the people Cruz was targeting went to Trump instead. Cruz can still turn it around but, in the case that he doesn't, I'm going to have to make a choice between two candidates I really hate, Trump and Rubio. And despite all the bad things I have said about Trump, I might actually prefer him to Rubio.
Now I know, Rubio's voting record is only a little less conservative than Ted Cruz's so how does it make sense that I choose someone like Trump over someone who is technically more conservative than Jesse Helms? Because I don't trust Rubio's record. I think many of his votes he just went along with the conservative crowd because he needed to have a conservative record for the election and he didn't particularly care about the issue. When you look at the issues he does care about, foreign policy/national security, and immigration, there is a lot I really don't like.
On national security, he has thrown in with John McCain and Lindsey Graham, with no civil liberty that isn't worth stomping on and no dictator that is not worth overthrowing. He was in favor of overthrowing Qaddafi, when we had zero national interest for doing so, and he is currently for putting boots on the ground in Syria, again, where we have zero national interest. His foreign policy adventurism will be expensive and is something we can't afford. Try balancing the budget when you are throwing money at the military AND are sending troops everywhere.
On immigration, he obviously threw in with the Democrats in trying to legalize millions of illegal aliens while only paying lip service to border security. His list of wrongdoing here is pretty extensive so if you want a complete rundown, check out what the conservative legend Phyllis Schlafly has to say about it (seriously there just is so much, from broken promises to defeating amendments that would have not allowed legal status for gang members). And obviously, we all know, if Rubio is President the wall will NEVER EVER be built and the invasion along our southern border will continue.
I have this feeling that in many ways a Rubio administration will be a lot like a third term for George W. We will see a lot of military adventurism, spending controls will go out the window and none of the changes that need to be made, will be made.
And this is why I think I might prefer Trump. Now, I'm not kidding myself, in many ways he is a Democrat, but I think he will shake things up for the better in certain key areas. First, he believes in a wall along our southern border, which is something we desperately need. Second, he will try to get jobs back into this country by dialing back some of the free trade agreements that have completely gutted our manufacturing base. We don't make anything anymore. Instead of having lots of skilled labor, we have lots of burger flippers and customer service reps. Our country and our economy are dying. Third, he is a businessman who is used to seeing profits (I know he had four bankrupt companies but he has been more profitable than unprofitable) and so the fact that we keep running up yuge deficits will be a problem for him. Fourth, as he said in last night's SC victory speech, he will be appointing businesspeople for government posts instead of just "political hacks". That is something we desperately need as it is the only way we will get real change. Finally, he is very clearly not a military adventurist. Now I don't want to get into an argument of if he opposed the Iraq war or not, it's clear he didn't until after but I don't think it would have been his decision to go in if he were President back then. It's one thing to support something that your President has decided on, it's another to come up with the idea in the first place.
And if you haven't noticed, Trump is the one reassembling the Reagan coalition. He has conservatives, moderates, independents and democrats backing him. Even the Teamsters are considering a general election endorsement of him (the last time they did endorse a Republican for President was Reagan). Rubio doesn't have a chance of doing that as he just doesn't have a connection with the white working class.
2016 is a very important election and may be one of the last chances we have to elect someone who can actually make a difference. Rubio, he won't be making a difference. It will be just the same old disappointing Republican administration. With Trump, he will shake things up and at least in a few areas, it will be for the better.
Now I know, Rubio's voting record is only a little less conservative than Ted Cruz's so how does it make sense that I choose someone like Trump over someone who is technically more conservative than Jesse Helms? Because I don't trust Rubio's record. I think many of his votes he just went along with the conservative crowd because he needed to have a conservative record for the election and he didn't particularly care about the issue. When you look at the issues he does care about, foreign policy/national security, and immigration, there is a lot I really don't like.
On national security, he has thrown in with John McCain and Lindsey Graham, with no civil liberty that isn't worth stomping on and no dictator that is not worth overthrowing. He was in favor of overthrowing Qaddafi, when we had zero national interest for doing so, and he is currently for putting boots on the ground in Syria, again, where we have zero national interest. His foreign policy adventurism will be expensive and is something we can't afford. Try balancing the budget when you are throwing money at the military AND are sending troops everywhere.
On immigration, he obviously threw in with the Democrats in trying to legalize millions of illegal aliens while only paying lip service to border security. His list of wrongdoing here is pretty extensive so if you want a complete rundown, check out what the conservative legend Phyllis Schlafly has to say about it (seriously there just is so much, from broken promises to defeating amendments that would have not allowed legal status for gang members). And obviously, we all know, if Rubio is President the wall will NEVER EVER be built and the invasion along our southern border will continue.
I have this feeling that in many ways a Rubio administration will be a lot like a third term for George W. We will see a lot of military adventurism, spending controls will go out the window and none of the changes that need to be made, will be made.
And this is why I think I might prefer Trump. Now, I'm not kidding myself, in many ways he is a Democrat, but I think he will shake things up for the better in certain key areas. First, he believes in a wall along our southern border, which is something we desperately need. Second, he will try to get jobs back into this country by dialing back some of the free trade agreements that have completely gutted our manufacturing base. We don't make anything anymore. Instead of having lots of skilled labor, we have lots of burger flippers and customer service reps. Our country and our economy are dying. Third, he is a businessman who is used to seeing profits (I know he had four bankrupt companies but he has been more profitable than unprofitable) and so the fact that we keep running up yuge deficits will be a problem for him. Fourth, as he said in last night's SC victory speech, he will be appointing businesspeople for government posts instead of just "political hacks". That is something we desperately need as it is the only way we will get real change. Finally, he is very clearly not a military adventurist. Now I don't want to get into an argument of if he opposed the Iraq war or not, it's clear he didn't until after but I don't think it would have been his decision to go in if he were President back then. It's one thing to support something that your President has decided on, it's another to come up with the idea in the first place.
And if you haven't noticed, Trump is the one reassembling the Reagan coalition. He has conservatives, moderates, independents and democrats backing him. Even the Teamsters are considering a general election endorsement of him (the last time they did endorse a Republican for President was Reagan). Rubio doesn't have a chance of doing that as he just doesn't have a connection with the white working class.
2016 is a very important election and may be one of the last chances we have to elect someone who can actually make a difference. Rubio, he won't be making a difference. It will be just the same old disappointing Republican administration. With Trump, he will shake things up and at least in a few areas, it will be for the better.
Friday, February 19, 2016
Ted Cruz's Speech at the Conservative Review Conference
Here is Ted Cruz's speech at the Conservative Review Conference, aka the conservative conference that Rubio skipped out on (Mark Levin was pissed and said he was probably at a meeting of La Raza):
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Ted Cruz knocked it out of the park last night at the CNN Town Hall
Ted Cruz did a great job last night at the CNN Town Hall. He came across as knowledgeable, serious, honest, funny and loving (seriously, how can anyone who sings to his wife on the phone be a bad guy?). This is exactly what he needed and I think he changed quite a few minds.
Part I:
Part II:
Part I:
Part II:
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)