Who are you voting for in the Texas primary?

Mr. Deez said:
So you won't vote for Bush out of spite. Ok.
Click to expand...
So you didn't vote for Trump in 2016 out of spite. OK.

See how easy this is, again? Since the Republican Establishment doesn't support all GOP nominees, I'm following the same plan, and will only vote "My Principals" from now on. No more dutifully voting for any GOP nominee.

After H, W, and Jeb!, I'll never vote for anyone in the Bush family. Done with them, once and for all. Fool me twice, and I was done with them after W. Jeb! was the icing on the comic cake. Certainly not going to vote for his son - in the runoff, or general.

Notice how riled up the GOP establishment types get from this - just following the same logic and history as they do, when it's not one of their types who wins the nomination. Oh the fury and fire that comes out of their mouths when their establishment nominee doesn't get full support.

Gloom and doom and "N Pelosi / C Shummer / etc. thank you!". Or "You'll be sorry when they pass ...". But they never follow that same logic, and support Trump or similar non-authorized nominees.

In truth, the GOP establishment doesn't really care what polices the Democrats pass when they have power. The more rubbish they pass in fact, the easier it is to win the next election cycle and get themselves back into power - when they'll sudden come up with 28 reasons why they can't possible do anything they ran on. See from Bonner in 2011 to the coward Paul Ryan in 2017.
 
Last edited:
Horn6721 said:
That is the dilemma. Send a message while some whacked lib wins?
Click to expand...
It apparently doesn't matter to the GOP establishment - for when a non-authorized canidate wins, they pull support and actively work against the nominee.

The unfortunate truth is that the GOP establishment hates its voting base. It hates the polices it has to run on, about abortion and guns and prayer and not cutting off sexual organs of 9 year olds, of which they don't care the slightest about at all.

It hates the fact that as the Democrat party has gone from working class and lower class, to lower class and upper class, now the GOP establishment has to represent the working class, of which they are neither from, nor do they like.

Behind closed doors in DC they lament with Democrats about what they have to do to win elections via getting votes from their base, and how much they'd prefer to run as Democrats.

But they're from places where Democrats don't win, like Texas, or from families with such a long history in the GOP, like the Bush turds, than no Democrat would ever vote for them. Or the slot for a Democrat politician is already filled so they have to pretend to be Republican's and hope to win an election here or there.

So they muddle along, pretending to care about their base and pretending to be fighting for what they ran on, when neither is true. And the results show it.

Since the 2000 presidential election to now, 21 some years, the GOP has controlled the House for 14 years (67%), the Senate for 11 years (52%), and the White House for 12 years (57%). And that doesn't even count the previous 6 years of GOP control of the House and Senate in the 90's.

And yet the country is further left than it ever has been. Ever wonder why? Why does a country that votes Republican far more often than Democrat somehow, magically, end up further and further left? The voters are Republican. The elected leaders are Republican. Ye the actual results are the opposite.

Why, it's as if the elected Republicans don't actually do anything to prevent the country from becoming leftist. And worse, most don't care.

So don't try to shame or threaten me with dozens of bad things that will happen if George Bush the XIII or whatever his name is doesn't win the general election. That used to work. No longer.
 
Duck Dodgers said:
So you didn't vote for Trump in 2016 out of spite. OK
Click to expand...

Not true. There were policy reasons in '16, and there was a policy reason why I voted for him in '20. However, you're basically admitting that you'd not vote for George P because some Republicans didn't vote for Trump. But that's fine. People vote based on dumb reasons all the time.
 
Watching Republicans argue over sectarian issues and who is a real Republican is like reviewing the debates between bolsheviks and Mensheviks and then the bolshies versus the trotskyites a nd the whole bunch of commies versus various shades of anarchists

time for a nap

hope you guys get it worked out
 
It is may understanding that Texas is still under an executive emergency order due to COVID. Is this true? If so, why aren't Republicans calling for it to end?
 
Mr. Deez said:
Not true. There were policy reasons in '16, and there was a policy reason why I voted for him in '20. However, you're basically admitting that you'd not vote for George P because some Republicans didn't vote for Trump. But that's fine. People vote based on dumb reasons all the time.
Click to expand...

Apparently the policy reason in 16 was that you were fine with the Democrat party having a 5 vote majority on the Supreme Court, and would have in two sessions turned the country irrevocably leftist. That was an extinction level event for conservative politics in the US, and still didn't matter to the GOP establishment.

You're like the lifeboat survivor who voted for everyone to drink saltwater, and now opine as to if the boat should sail east or west. Sorry Junior, time to go back to the corner and keep counting aspirin while the rest of decide where this boat is going.

After 2016, the contract of always voting for the GOP nominee is expired, as it was broken by the GOP. The base reliably voted for any turd the establishment drug over the convention finish line like the Bush turds, McShitStain, or Mittens. Then when a non-establishment pick wins the nomination, they abandon ship.

From now on, every Republican nominee need to stand on their own merits, not just being the party pick. Not my rules, those are the establishment's, though it doesn't stop them from turning red with rage when you say you won't rubber stamp any loser they push onto election day.

George Bush the XIII is a political coward who would, like his entire family, quit at the first sign of pushback from the Democrat/media complex. His granddad quit in office, his uncle quit in office. His dad was the designated Tomato Can for 2016, running so that he could throw the election and allow their buddies, the Clinton, to get back into the White House.

He did a crap job as Land Commission, with a weak, half-baked plan for the Alamo that basically sold it off to corporate sponsorship. Why in the world would I vote for such a turd? It's not like he's going to change the power of the Supreme Court - which I guess isn't enough reason to vote for someone either.
 
huisache said:
Watching Republicans argue over sectarian issues and who is a real Republican is like reviewing the debates between bolsheviks and Mensheviks and then the bolshies versus the trotskyites a nd the whole bunch of commies versus various shades of anarchists

time for a nap

hope you guys get it worked out
Click to expand...
Yeah, old people need to sleep a lot.

As above, merely reliably voting for any GOP nominee, putting them into power for a majority of the 21st Century while the USA gets further and further leftist each year, isn't a viable strategy for a party.

Certainly not for a party that actually wants to achieve and implement it's stated polices - leading to the question as to if they actually want to.
 
Duck, you talk about being against established Republicans but you defend Gov. Abbott. Why so? He is establishment and is holding back conservative agenda points despite any successes you may claim.

I would be curious to know what or who to read to understand your position better.
 
Duck Dodgers said:
A technique often used in engineering problems is to use what's called Risk Weighted Analysis. It's where, instead of deciding all at once what to do, you look at various aspects of the problem, assign probabilities to different scenarios, and then see what the overall risk weighted outcomes are.

For Texas governor, the knock on Abbott seems to be that he did too much lockdown stuff in the early days of the Wuhan virus, and that various other candidates claim they would have done it differently. But you only have their promise, after the fact, that they would have resisted all the Wuhan panic and kept everything open and running at 100%.

Being generous to them, it's a 50% - 50% chance they would. Lots of elected officials claim one thing, get into office, then act completely different.

So, using this, electing someone besides Abbott gives you a 50% chance of them being better.

But - there's also a general election to deal with. Abbott in the general election would have about a 90-95% chance of winning, against the most likely opponent of Beta Male. Abbots won the governors race twice before, last time by 13%. He can't at this point be typecast as a "meanie who hates!!!', which is the Democrat - Media's favorite line about Republicans. His wife is Hispanic so he gets good support from that group for a Republican.

Now Beta Male failed in his last race for statewide office, in 2018. He had huge funding, was constantly pumped up by the media as a fresh young leader, and was running against a very conservative Cruz, who could be typecast as a meanie, and thus didn't get a lot of support from the afternoon wino book club crowd. And all this is a good year for Democrats nationwide. He still lost by 3%.

Abbott vs. Beta Male in 22, with Slow Joe the drooling President having about a 30% approval rate, won't be close. Unless something unusual happens like some hitherto unknow scandal popping up about Abbott, expect another 60/40 blow out like in 14 against the Abortion Barbie Wendy Davis.

But for West/Huffines/Prather, it's much less. Again, call it 50/50. 2022 will be a good year for the GOP, but any of those candidates are going to have a much harder race than Abbott would. Plenty of opportunity for unknown scandals, real or media created, to pop up. And, it wouldn't be surprising for the establishment wing of the GOP to do their usual thing when their candidate doesn't win the primary, and take their ball and go home crying, and not support the GOP nominee.

So, you have a 50% chance that West/Huffines/Prather wins the general election, and then a 50% chance that they would do better than Abbott. That's a 25% chance overall.

And, you now have a 50% chance that instead of them, or the decent but not great Abbott is governor, you have Beta Male as governor, and the endless celebratory stories of "Texas turns Blue!!!". If that communist was governor now, you'd still have the state as locked down as he could possibly have it.

Here's what a vote for West/Huffines/Prather means:

25% chance you'll have a more conservative governor that Abbott
25% chance you'll have the same type of governor as Abbott
50% chance you'll have a communist swine as governor. And don't count on the Texas Legislature as a backstop - in the event of a Beta Male win as governor, the momentum of him winning could bring in more Democrats into the Legislature. The Texas Senate is 18-13 R, so a swap of 3 seats, and it's a Democrat run Senate.

Any of West/Huffines/Prather are going to have a hard race in the general election - and if you vote for them in the primary, are you going to do your part to help them in the general? Donate to their campaigns, make phone calls, knock on doors, hold signs at intersections - the hard work of getting someone elected, not marking a ballot and then doing nothing else. Going with West/Huffines/Prather is a bold move for the general election, and if you are not prepared to put in the work to keep Beta Male out of the office, then don't vote for them.

Abbott doesn't do much for me, and I certainly would not vote for him in a presidential primary. If Milk Carton Cornyn finally disappears in 2026 and doesn't run for re-election, I'd look for about any other viable candidate for that seat. But he's been an OK governor, and is such a slam dunk for the governor's race in 22 I'm voting for him, hoping he doesn't have a runoff to deal with, and will enjoy the easy win against Beta Male, while I donate and volunteer for other races.
Click to expand...

I go into detail in this post about why I voted for Abbott, compared to the others, in this election cycle.

Abbott was pretty worthless during the Wuhan panic, hence his 2/3rd primary result, but he signed all the conservative polices the Legislature passed this session, and was good on the voting bill, calling the Democrats back time after time when they ran off to DC.

I listed what the Legislature passed this session above - gun bills, abortion, voting, and lots of others.

What conservative agenda aspects do you feel Abbott is preventing?

Look, I realize that Rome wasn't built in a day, and things take time to work on and pass. What I don't abide by is chumps like the Bush family, who care far more about what the media thinks of them than their own voters, and who have a bad habit of quitting in office when the media's mean on them.

There's a dividing line in my voting policy now between say weak, wimpy GOP's like Abbott or Cornyn, both of whom I voted for last times, and just worthless, stab-ya in the back types like the entire Bush family, or say Mittens or McCain, both of whom I also (unforutanly) voted for.
 
Duck Dodgers said:
Apparently the policy reason in 16 was that you were fine with the Democrat party having a 5 vote majority on the Supreme Court, and would have in two sessions turned the country irrevocably leftist. That was an extinction level event for conservative politics in the US, and still didn't matter to the GOP establishment.

You're like the lifeboat survivor who voted for everyone to drink saltwater, and now opine as to if the boat should sail east or west. Sorry Junior, time to go back to the corner and keep counting aspirin while the rest of decide where this boat is going.

After 2016, the contract of always voting for the GOP nominee is expired, as it was broken by the GOP. The base reliably voted for any turd the establishment drug over the convention finish line like the Bush turds, McShitStain, or Mittens. Then when a non-establishment pick wins the nomination, they abandon ship.

From now on, every Republican nominee need to stand on their own merits, not just being the party pick. Not my rules, those are the establishment's, though it doesn't stop them from turning red with rage when you say you won't rubber stamp any loser they push onto election day.

George Bush the XIII is a political coward who would, like his entire family, quit at the first sign of pushback from the Democrat/media complex. His granddad quit in office, his uncle quit in office. His dad was the designated Tomato Can for 2016, running so that he could throw the election and allow their buddies, the Clinton, to get back into the White House.

He did a crap job as Land Commission, with a weak, half-baked plan for the Alamo that basically sold it off to corporate sponsorship. Why in the world would I vote for such a turd? It's not like he's going to change the power of the Supreme Court - which I guess isn't enough reason to vote for someone either.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're a cartoon character. Lol.
 
Abbott behaves the way he does because he wants to run for president and in order to win outside of Texas he will have to have a few sane people voting for him

I am personally sorry to see Huffines and Gohmert kicked to the curb but I love a geek show and there will be others

If you rough riding real republicans want to get real and get honest with the voting public you need to only vote for your real republicans who will pledge to get rid of social security and medicare and obamacare and public schools and other vestiges of communism/socialism/liberalism (what is the difference? None!!!) that we have been saddled with against the will of the people for decades.

Real Republicans rise up!!! You have nothing to lose but your chains and a world to gain!!
 
Mr. Deez said:
Dude, you're a cartoon character. Lol.
Click to expand...
Any alleged conservative who didn't vote for Trump in 16, with control of the Supreme Court up for grabs, can't be taken seriously from that point on. Why would we?

If you're voting preference had carried the day, there would be a 6-3 Supreme Court leftist majority, which would have been the end for the conservative movement's polices, as the left would have just ruled the country by 6-3 decree. And I'm supposed to be the dumb voter?

Don't know what policy differences you claim you had against Trump then, don't care. That was an all hands on deck point for the conservatives movement - which a good portion of the establishment wing failed.
 
Duck Dodgers said:
Any alleged conservative who didn't vote for Trump in 16, with control of the Supreme Court up for grabs, can't be taken seriously from that point on. Why would we?

If you're voting preference had carried the day, there would be a 6-3 Supreme Court leftist majority, which would have been the end for the conservative movement's polices, as the left would have just ruled the country by 6-3 decree. And I'm supposed to be the dumb voter?

Don't know what policy differences you claim you had against Trump then, don't care. That was an all hands on deck point for the conservatives movement - which a good portion of the establishment wing failed.
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be a 6-3 majority of if Trump had lost. There would have been a 5-4 for awhile, and it would probably be 5-4 the other way now. And my voting preference wasn't for Hillary Clinton.
 
Was 4-4 at the 2016 election.

Hillary wins scenario:

No Gorsuch, some leftist. 5-4 leftist, plus the Roberts who's usually pretty worthless on anything important.

Maybe Kennedy doesn't retire, maybe he does, who knows? Can't count on him sticking it out - while he's not dead now, would he have gutted it out till 2020?

Ginsburg died 2020. Assuming a Republican Senate, would they have held that seat up till after the election? Most likely, but only matters if then Clinton loses.

Impossible to predict what a Clinton win in 16 would have meant for 20. All other things being the same, the Wuhan panic would have, via media kiss-assistry a la Cuomo, made her more popular than she was, not less. Would have been the favorite to win again in 20. Then Kennedy throws in the towel, if he hadn't before.

Only way it's back to 5-4 R is if 1. Kennedy doesn't retire in 18 2. Clinton loses in 20 and Ginsberg is replaced in 21 by a Republican nominee.

Thankfully none of that happened, via those of us who voted for Trump.
 
Oh and I forgot, Ginsburg's plan was to hang it up under Clinton, which is why she didn't retire under King Barry. So in the Clinton wins scenario, she retires at some point 2017-2020. Even with a Republican senate in 2017 and 2018, after the 2016 election, she would have been replaced with a Democrat - not even Mitch could have kept that seat open for 4 years, with his argument about waiting till after the 16 election to fill that seat being done and dusted.

So yeah, 5-4 at a minimum Democrat lead SC, and 6-3 if Kennedy does the same thing as he did and retire by now.

Would have been the end of many things the GOP has allegedly run on for the past 40 years, and put the Warren Court's re-writing of America to shame.

But I guess Dude didn't like Trump's tax policy or his net neutrality plan or something, so totally OK to cede the rule of the country to 6 leftists in robes.
 
Last edited:
Kennedy almost surely would have stuck around, and we don't know when or if Ginsburg would have retired. Clinton very likely would have lost in 20 so long as Trump wasn't the nominee.
 
The GOP establishment acts as the enable of the radical Left. That is why I am against wishy washy Republicans like Abbott. Establishment Republicans have been calling real conservatives clowns, crazy, extremists, racist, too harsh, etc for 50 years.

On the subjects of war and economics they gave up more than 50 years ago.

Conservatism Has Conserved Nothing
 
Monahorns said:
The GOP establishment acts as the enable of the radical Left. That is why I am against wishy washy Republicans like Abbott. Establishment Republicans have been calling real conservatives clowns, crazy, extremists, racist, too harsh, etc for 50 years.

On the subjects of war and economics they gave up more than 50 years ago.

Conservatism Has Conserved Nothing
Click to expand...

They'll fight and demean Trump and his supporters. That's about all the fight they have in them.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Kennedy almost surely would have stuck around, and we don't know when or if Ginsburg would have retired. Clinton very likely would have lost in 20 so long as Trump wasn't the nominee.
Click to expand...
Ginsberg said several times she was waiting to have her replacement named by a woman President. 100 percent chance she would have retired early in Clinton’s first term.
The rest is just wish casting to avoid the reality that if the rest of the country voted the same way as you, we’d have a Democrat run Supreme Court, which would be the end of any conservative policies in America.

2016 was truly a all hands on deck moment for conservatism - which of course half the establishment GOP failed.
 
Garmel said:
They'll fight and demean Trump and his supporters. That's about all the fight they have in them.
Click to expand...
Once you realize that the GOP establishment cares only about winning power and keeping it, not in implementing anything they ran in (save for the two holy grails of cutting corporate tax rates and increasing H1 B visas), the rest of their actions are very easy to forecast.
 
The difference is whether someone considers themselves Republican, or conservative.

I’m a conservative as I believe in conservative polices. I vote Republican as they are the only party who even pretends to be have the same polices, and as the other party would like to send me off to a re-education camp.

Republicans are people who either work in politics in the Republican Party and make their living there, or who use that party to save themselves money via tax breaks and work visa handouts.

They espouse the goals of conservatives to get votes and win elections, at which point they feel their job is done until the next election. In general they dislike their voting base, and in private with Democrats, insult the people who vote for them.

It’s a strange state of affairs - but it’s what explains how the Republican Party has been in power the majority of the 21st century, yet the country is more leftist than it’s ever been.
 
Last edited:
Duck Dodgers said:
Ginsberg said several times she was waiting to have her replacement named by a woman President. 100 percent chance she would have retired early in Clinton’s first term.
Click to expand...

Not 100 percent chance. She also made comments that the Senate as it was composed wouldn't confirm someone with her "values." In other words Republicans controlled the Senate and wouldn't confirm someone like her. Republicans had the Senate after '16. There's a decent chance she would have held out until after '18, and that would have been too late.

Duck Dodgers said:
The rest is just wish casting to avoid the reality that if the rest of the country voted the same way as you, we’d have a Democrat run Supreme Court,
Click to expand...

If the rest of the country voted the same way I did, we'd have a libertarian Supreme Court.
 
Robert O'Rourke may be all hype and no substance, which means he's unlikely to actally improve anything, but if Greg Abbott doesn't at least pretend to start caring about the repeated power failures he may actually lose this one.
 
Statalyzer said:
Robert O'Rourke may be all hype and no substance, which means he's unlikely to actally improve anything, but if Greg Abbott doesn't at least pretend to start caring about the repeated power failures he may actually lose this one.
Click to expand...

His indifference is palpable. The sick thing is this; if he is protecting big money interests then he's doing it at our expense, our inconvenience and ultimately our demise as Liberals will take over this state and if so, it's game over in the Electoral College vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top