Share This Article with a Friend!

Presidential Horse Race 2016: Carly Fiorina is much more than BOGOF for Republican voters

Are you in denial?

The air had barely cleared following Ted Cruz’s somewhat surprising announcement that Carly Fiorina was to be his running mate on Wednesday and already some folks were saying the move was made purely out of desperation, panic, fear or some other emotion that always goes along with recognizing you’re beaten and will Cruz and Carlydo anything to try and save yourself from going over the edge.

W. James Antle III of the Washington Examiner writes, “[T]he party seems split between denial and acceptance when it comes to coping with front-runner Donald Trump.

“The most prominent sign of denial: the day after his sixth straight loss to Trump in a popular election, Ted Cruz named Carly Fiorina as his running mate.”

For the record, Antle says the signs of “acceptance” among Republicans had to do with the generally positive reaction to Trump’s foreign policy speech that he delivered in Washington, also on Wednesday. In other words, Antle’s arguing a lot of Republicans are beginning the process of “accepting” Trump will be the nominee and henceforth making efforts to patch the enormous fissures that have developed in the party since he came onto the scene.

Personally, I don’t equate Cruz’s naming of Fiorina to be “denial” at all.

Either you believe in the process or you don’t. Either you believe in your candidate or you don’t.

The process says you must win the votes of 1237 delegates to the Republican National Convention in July to receive the Republican Party’s nomination for president. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are still seriously competing for those delegate votes. Neither has locked them up in sufficient numbers and while one candidate is significantly ahead, there’s a fair to good chance neither will do so before the convention convenes.

It’s not being in “denial” to keep fighting for your candidate until that day arrives. Therefore, it is not outlandish to stick with the belief you can still win, especially when there are a number of factors in your favor in the overall “game”.

Donald Trump and some elements of the media will continue with the narrative that the election is being “stolen” by those who are choosing to let the process play out instead of automatically “accepting” Trump’s inevitability and handing over the nomination to the New York reality TV star.

Yes, it is certainly true Trump has won millions more votes than Ted Cruz. But he still hasn’t won a majority (i.e, 50 percent plus 1) of the votes from Republicans. If that were the situation, he would have a much stronger argument in his favor.

And yes, as Trump often points out, there were a lot of candidates in the early states to divide the vote, so the “majority” factor isn’t necessarily the only one. But by the time Nevada held its caucuses (the fourth state to vote), the race was essentially down to four candidates.

Trump kept on winning after Nevada, but he didn’t break the 50 percent mark until his home state of New York on April 19. Then, as we saw on Tuesday, he shattered the barrier in all five states. So yes, he’s gotten above 50 percent six times in a row. But they were all reliable blue states, too.

The fact remains Trump is still deeply unpopular with certain elements of the Republican Party. Ted Cruz is too (such as with establishment fools like John Boehner, who called him “Lucifer in the flesh”), but there isn’t anyone in politics today that evokes such strong emotions – negative and positive – as Donald Trump.

The addition of Fiorina to Cruz’s ticket, if anything, is the opposite of denial. It’s an expression of hope on behalf of the Cruz campaign that her talents will supplement his to present a complete package of principles to voters. It isn’t BOGOF (“buy one get one free” for those of you without marketing degrees), Fiorina adds real value.

Carly will also help Cruz with perhaps his biggest political flaw – the media and establishment-created notion he’s self-interested, ambitious-to-a-fault and unlikable.

Fiorina’s singing to Cruz’s daughters during the announcement rally may have gone viral on the internet, but there’s little doubt her affection for Cruz and his family is real. She’ll help him look more “human,” which is an ongoing concern for the campaign.

So whether some folks see Cruz’s adding Fiorina to the mix as “denial” or a lack of “acceptance” of Trump’s inevitability, it doesn’t change the fact Republicans and conservatives are going to have to come to grips with one of them being the Republican nominee. That nominee’s charge is to defeat Hillary. Period. Defeating Hillary will “make America great again” on its own.

This should be the marching cry: #NeverHillary 2016.

Bruce “Call me Cait” Jenner uses women’s restroom in Trump Tower, news media goes nuts

The world’s most famous crossdressing celebrity accepted the invitation of the world’s most famous billionaire reality TV star presidential candidate to use a bathroom in one of his buildings and it’s making headline news.

Nolan D. McCaskill of Politico reports, “Donald Trump said Caitlyn Jenner could use any bathroom in Trump Tower. So she did.

“’Oh my God, a trans woman in New York,’ Jenner says in a Facebook video published Wednesday. ‘I gotta take a pee. Anyway, oh my God, Trump International Hotel. I love this.’…

“’Thank you, Donald,’ she says as she leaves the restroom. ‘I really appreciate it, and by the way, Ted, nobody got molested.’”

Yeah, yeah, yeah, very funny, Bruce. This issue is much bigger than just a human being with a male private part and female attire and makeup and a video crew relieving himself in a ladies’ restroom stall.

This is akin to thrusting your fingers Three Stooges-style in the eyes of everyone who thinks it’s a joke that Trump and others in the politically correct universe believe it’s okay for grown men to use the same facilities as women and young girls.

It isn’t about “Cait” filming a video in Trump’s domain. It’s about making sure perverts and sex offenders don’t have ready access to potential victims just because they “identify” as a female human at some point in time and a nitwit company policy allows them to follow girls into a public restroom.

If this is the case, every convicted sex offender just needs to dress up in drag and petition Obama and Hillary to use the ladies’ lavatory at the state prison.

If there’s no difference between the genders – or gender identifiers – why segregate at all? Should a male prisoner who says he’s really a woman be “forced” to live in a men’s penitentiary?

The potentially harmful logical extensions of ditching such simple policies as maintaining gender separate restroom facilities are virtually limitless. If society is going to base common sense practices on what everyone “feels” they are on any particular day, how can we possibly maintain order?

Or in the alternative, should a crossdresser have to obtain a special stamp on his/her driver’s license to certify that this person officially identifies as a woman most of the time? Can’t you just picture state legislators debating the terms of a bill that will identify who “qualifies” as a transgender person? “Wore a dress for sixty straight days. Used a commonly accepted opposite sex name for ninety days…”

Sure, “Cait” and Donald, laugh it up. But the longer you allow this fallacy to go on, the more people are just going to start ignoring the law in the first place…or boycotting businesses (like Target) that play down to such stupidity.

Is this a preview of what’s to come if Trump wins the nomination? Are other “transgender” people going to push the limits of normalcy to see how far he will bend?

It’s not a good situation, that’s for sure.

Yet another sign the establishment sees the devil in Ted Cruz

A few months ago I wrote on the fact the New York Times’ David Brooks had said Ted Cruz was using “dark and satanic tones” in his campaign to scare people into supporting him.

I said at the time that clearly the establishment was “seeing the devil” in the Texas senator, a trend that is continuing even today.

This time, however, it’s former Speaker John Boehner making the anti-Christ references in connection to Cruz.

Al Weaver of the Washington Examiner reports, “Former House Speaker John Boehner ripped into Sen. Ted Cruz at an event at Stanford University Wednesday night, by referring to him as ‘lucifer in the flesh,’ and saying he ‘never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.’”

One only wonders what Boehner would have to say about some of the conservatives in his former House caucus, the ones who had to fight him tooth and nail to stall the Ohioan’s attempts to deliver every aspect of Obama’s agenda.

Boehner is an idiot and conservatives are glad to be rid of him. But unfortunately, Boehner’s attitude continues to poison many in the Republican Party who don’t like Trump but still can’t get themselves to work with Cruz, because he’s the “devil” who defied them.

If there was ever a true endorsement of Cruz’s anti-establishment credentials, Boehner just provided it.

Cruz’s reaction to Boehner’s tirade was a tad more civilized. As reported by Nolan D. McCaskill of Politico, Cruz said on Thursday, “John Boehner had some interesting comments last night. He actually didn’t abbreviate what he said. He allowed his inner Trump to come out.”

Cruz went on to note he’s never personally worked with Boehner and they haven’t exchanged more than about 50 words total, so he wasn’t sure what Boehner was talking about in reference to “working with” Ted.

Cruz also highlighted Boehner’s long-standing friendship with Trump, which the former Speaker said consisted of being golfing partners and “texting buddies” with the Republican frontrunner.

If Trump is such an “outsider,” why has he been playing all these “insider” games all these years, including big contributions to PACs supporting Boehner, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?

Maybe Boehner was intoxicated when making such comments the other night. We all know he has a fondness for Merlot. If that’s the case, judging by the tone deafness of the Republican establishment as a whole to the concerns of the grassroots, they must be tipsy all the time.

Are we ready for 25 percent of the electorate to sit out November’s election?

Finally this week, everyone knows the American electorate is about as angry with the political leaders as they’ve ever been, but who could have foreseen that nearly one-in-four likely voters say they won’t vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton if they end up the major party candidates this year.

Rebecca Savransky of The Hill reports, “Nearly a quarter of voters say they would stay home or vote for a third-party candidate in a general election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national survey.

“The poll finds Trump and Clinton tied with 38 percent each among likely voters.”

16 percent indicated they would vote third party, 6 percent said they wouldn’t vote and another 2 percent weren’t sure what they’d do if it came down to the two respective party frontrunners.

I don’t believe the numbers will be this high on Election Day in November. Historically speaking, most people realize they’re stuck with choosing between the Democrat and the Republican candidates.

We can only hope there will be a real choice to make this year between party standard bearers who will make a difference. We’ve certainly had enough of the two presidential candidates essentially representing big government and even bigger government the past several election cycles.

Time will tell.


On a personal note, I would like to pass along Happy 80th Birthday wishes to my dad, Charles Rendall.

Dad’s (and mom’s too) influence and example continue to inspire me in all aspects of everyday life and I can honestly say I wouldn’t be where I am today without his consistent and patient guidance.

Coming from a New Deal Democrat blue collar family, Dad was the first to graduate from college, recognized early on that big government only gets in the way of individuals bettering themselves and went on to a long career as a civil engineer.

I won’t add his long list of accomplishments here, but needless to say, his example went far beyond his office and our home.

Dad continues to give me good advice in politics and life. May we all be so fortunate!

Thanks, dad. Hope you have a great birthday and looking forward to sharing some good wine with you and mom again soon.

Share this

Making Enemies Together

Cruz and Fiorina have both shown over and over that they don't much care for "conventional wisdom", but prefer battle-hardened experience and the wisdom of the ages in their fight to do the right thing.

In spite of a huge amount of liberal influence surrounding her in California, as Carly found her political voice, it became clearer and more conservative. She understands history and economics, and has very good grounding in world affairs.

Cruz grew up revering the Constitution and conservative principles, surviving a journey to the center of the Rovian beast (the "W" campaign), where W's conservatism was watered down, but Ted's wasn't.

Both have been willing to lead from the front and take arrows in the back in order to advance their causes.

If we want our enemies to fear and respect us, what better than having the ultra-liberal Alan Dershowitz express respect and admiration for the steadfastness of principle and well-grounded arguments of Cruz - the smartest student he ever had? Or even, Van Jones warning people that Fiorina's mind is so sharp it should be registered as a weapon!

Is not the enmity of the "Orange Bo[h]ner" and the chinless wonder of Kentucky a badge of honor to be (ahem) trump-eted far and wide? Are not the desperate emissions of David the Pecker and the thuggish hints of Stoned Roger, signs of fear in TrumpWorld?

Do we just want flashy deals and a flexible approach to Democrats, or do we want the best debaters of the 2016 season tag-teaming it to present a principled case for truly limited government?

I know which I'd choose - people, please choose wisely!

Making enemies together

I would say that these flashy deals will leave any patriotic American citizen just a little bit queasy, wishing for a do over.
trump will have to deal with the likes of harry reid and nancy pelosi, not to mention mcconnell and others of like mindedness from the other side who are more than willing to compromise believing they are stopping the progressives from achieving their goals. To compromise is to lose, once you lose you will continue to lose.
Senator Cruz has shown his steadfastness to stand up to the aristocratic political elite on both sides of the isle and refuse to make the kind of deals that I believe trump will make to fool the people into believing he was the correct choice.
trump will soon understand that to compromise is the first step to failure since the other side has gotten what they wanted (a bite at the apple) and begin the next stage of their next compromise insuring they get the whole apple not just the first bite.