In a recent article titled ‘Ranking The Candidates – My Take‘, the author (who goes by the handle Utah) writes:
“Trump is an authoritarian corporatist. He promises some government cuts out of one side of his mouth and out of the other side, he promises the most classy, phenomenal, tremendous, efficient well-oiled China beating Leviathan ever, not smaller government. Trump has self-identified as a “common sense conservative” which I interpret as he will be abetted by the usual progressive Republicans in the Congress, he will continue to grow government in a “compassionate conservative” process. The GOP Congress will pretend to resist but will knuckle under just as they have to Obama. His progressive tendencies are evident in how he believes government is a means to an end. GOP loses control of Congress under a President Trump.”
To begin with, Trump is not a corporatist. His campaign has gained traction, in part, because he refuses to take contributions from corporations or special interest groups who buy and sell politicians in order to get legislation favorable to them passed through Congress. A corporatist is basically a crony capitalist, and while Trump has played that game for many years from the business side of the coin, he has routinely spoken out against it as a politician. He’s explained that there is a sincere difference between a real estate developer finding himself in a situation where he has to legally bribe political candidates – which is an absolute necessity if you ever want to get anything built in a large city – and accepting such bribes as a candidate who has the means to self-fund his campaign.
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of politicians in this country are corporatists, especially the party leaders, which is why they HATE Trump and his supporters. The Trumpian movement represents a direct threat to the corporatism which has run rampant in America for as long as I can remember. It is this imbedded corporatist philosophy that has lead directly to massive trade imbalances between the U.S. and practically every other major nation of Earth, as well as the continued influx of millions of illegal aliens for the sake of cheap labor.
Trump’s campaign has been built primarily on the promise that he will end these insidious schemes once and for all, so to even suggest that he is somehow the biggest corporatist in the race is simply ridiculous on its face. As for him being authoritarian, please explain to me how any GOP candidate who embraces the 2nd Amendment is in any way more authoritarian than any Democrat has been for the past 50 years? Is Trump more government-friendly than – say – Ted Cruz? Yes, but that doesn’t make him a full-blown statist like Barack, Hillary, Bernie, or virtually any leftist politician one could name.
He also hasn’t promised to create a federal “Leviathan” in order to beat China in trade or accomplish any of his other stated goals. The fact is that he has called for reducing regulation and taxes on businesses in order to draw resources and jobs back into America from around the world. He also believes in cutting waste, fraud and abuse within the existing federal Leviathan. That’s right, dear Utah, the current government in Washington, DC is already so monstrously huge, corrupt and intrusive that people have been rallying in increasing numbers against it since George W. Bush was president, and many of them are supporting The Donald today. In my estimation, the majority of Trump backers (and I’ve talked to hundreds of them since last summer) are disaffected, disenfranchised, disillusioned, working-class people who are sick to death of watching American jobs move to India and Mexico. In fact, I’ve yet to converse with even one Trumpian who thinks the government shouldn’t be cut down to size, or wants to impose more laws and regulations on their fellow citizens.
Utah goes on to state that Mr. Trump self identifies as a “common sense conservative”. Personally, I have watched dozens of Trump speeches over the past several months, not to mention at least 7 debates, and I have never heard him even utter the phrase before. But assuming he has done so in some forum I haven’t seen, I think it’s a stretch to assume he defines those words in the exact same way that most Washington insiders do. Utah also asserts that Trump will likely embrace the “compassionate conservative” process that grows government, yet he doesn’t explain why he believes such a thing. Yes, Donald Trump talks about making deals with politicians, but that doesn’t necessarily mean doing the same sort of idiotic things that people like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have done over and over again. Trump’s whole shtick is that he makes GOOD deals, not stupid ones. He expresses the importance of WINNING, not giving away the store just so he can get along with his enemies or garner positive write-ups in the mainstream press.
Look, there are a lot of good reasons not to favor Trump in this presidential race, chief among them being that Ted Cruz is still in the hunt, and is a far better candidate than anyone else running. That having been said, it is more than a little nuts to rate The Donald ABOVE Hillary Felon Clinton on a list that ranks the current candidates from most (or pro) government to least (or anti) government. Clinton is basically Obama in a pantsuit, and if Utah honestly thinks that Donald Trump would be even half as destructive to liberty, justice and our economy as the Wicked Witch of Benghazi, I’m afraid he’s lost his grip on reality.
Edward L. Daley
Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who briefly led the Republican presidential race before his campaign began an extended public implosion, told his supporters in a statement Wednesday afternoon that he does not see a “path forward” and will not attend Thursday’s debate in Detroit.
Carson, however, did not formally suspend his campaign. Instead, he said in the statement that he has decided to make a speech about his political future on Friday at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland, just outside Washington.
“I do not see a political path forward in light of last evening’s Super Tuesday primary results,” the statement said. “However, this grassroots movement on behalf of ‘We the People’ will continue. Along with millions of patriots who have supported my campaign for President, I remain committed to Saving America for Future Generations.”
The announcement will serve as an acknowledgment that Carson’s candidacy is all but over following a disappointing showing in the 11 states that held contests on Tuesday.
The decision follows months of candidate stumbles, staff infighting and strategy shifts derailing what had once appeared to be an unstoppable journey to conservative superstardom. It also marks the coming departure of the only high profile African American candidate in the 2016 presidential race.
Carson, 64, burst onto the political scene in early 2013 when, addressing the typically nonpartisan National Prayer Breakfast, he spoke about the dangers of political correctness, put forward the idea of a flat tax and criticized President Obama’s health-care law. What stood out was that he did so right beside a steely-faced Obama.
That week, the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial titled “Ben Carson for President.” By August of that year, there was a “National Draft Ben Carson for President Committee.” Before he launched his presidential bid last May, the group had raised close to $16 million, gotten a half-million signatures encouraging Carson to run and had 30,000 active volunteers across the country, according to organizers.
The media whirlwind was hardly his first brush with fame. Before he took the conservative world by storm, Carson was famous for an up-from-his-bootstraps life story, from impoverished childhood to a high-profile neurosurgery career. He was, at 33, the youngest major division director in Johns Hopkins Hospital history, and he was the first pediatric neurosurgeon to successfully separate twins conjoined at the head. He wrote a best-selling book, “Gifted Hands,” about his life, which later became a television movie.
The same bluntness that catapulted him into contention in a year that favored plain-spoken insurgents and outsider candidates earned him criticism as well. He found himself in political hot water for calling the Affordable Care Act the “worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery,” saying that the United States now is “very much like Nazi Germany” and predicting that allowing same-sex marriage could lead to legalized bestiality.
Even his political team admitted from the start that perhaps he needed to work on his messaging. “If I could create the Webster’s dictionary of words Dr. Carson could use in the campaign, there would be some words I’d leave out,” his former campaign chairman, Terry Giles, told The Washington Post before Carson officially jumped into the race in May. Later, when Donald Trump grabbed headlines, the usually mild-mannered Carson was urged to dial it up and take the mogul on more aggressively.
Carson resisted that advice as well. Until the end, he sought to offer himself to Republicans as a calm and steady hand, untouched by Washington.
“Many people told me that this business is corrupt, that it’s evil, that it’s how it’ll always be,” Carson said in a phone interview Monday. “But I don’t believe that we have to accept that. We should rail against that, fight against it, and get something that’s decent and inspirational.”
His performance may have played a role in his political undoing. Even as his “politically incorrect” style played well in places with staunchly conservative bases, his apparent unfamiliarity with many policy fundamentals, particularly on national security issues, made some voters wary.
His support dropped precipitously in the weeks after two high-profile terrorist attacks, bringing him from second place just behind Trump to fourth or fifth place in most national polls.
“Unfortunately, Paris happened. San Bernardino happened,” he told The Post earlier this year. “Somehow the narrative has been projected that if you’re soft-spoken and mild-mannered, there is no way you can deal with terrorism, with national security, that you’re not a strong person.”
It wasn’t just Carson’s often unfiltered and unseasoned approach that cost him; his advisers’ did as well, as internal feuds played out publicly, and candidate and campaign deficits were spotlighted in unusually detailed media admissions by some staffers and advisers.
Disagreements within the campaign’s highest ranks broke out into the open on numerous occasions, highlighting a persistent and sharp division between Armstrong Williams – Carson’s longtime business manager, who was not formally part of the campaign – and Barry Bennett, the Republican operative who led it.
As Carson fell from top-tier status, he publicly blamed campaign aides for his drop in the polls – calling some of them overpaid and ineffective – and vowed a staff shake-up in an interview arranged by Williams without Bennett’s knowledge. Carson backtracked hours later, but within days, several of his most experienced campaign hands, including Bennett, had resigned.
A new campaign chairman was named: retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert F. Dees – previously a Carson policy adviser who, like the candidate himself, had never before been involved in a political campaign.
The departure of a string of senior aides didn’t end the behind-the-scenes drama. Within weeks, reporters were sent a list of the only staffers they were to contact for campaign comment and for candidate interview requests – a list that pointedly did not include Williams.
The Carson campaign war chest, which had been flush with cash after solid fundraising quarters earlier in the race, began shrinking dramatically amid questions about how the money was being spent. Carson made further sweeping changes last month, cutting staff salaries and shrinking his traveling entourage.
“We had to get a much better check on the finances. I was appalled when I did a deep dive and saw what was going on. We saw that and stopped it,” Carson said in the Monday interview.
The mild-mannered candidate soon lashed out at individuals he accused of sabotaging his presidential bid, including rival Ted Cruz of Texas, whose campaign falsely circulated the idea that Carson was going to quit the race on the night of the Iowa caucuses.
He followed up a distant fourth-place showing in Iowa with last-place showings in New Hampshire and in South Carolina, a state he had once said would be a special focus. He polled poorly again in the 11 GOP primaries and caucuses Tuesday night.
When asked Monday whether he would ever reenter politics if he left the race, Carson chuckled at the prospect.
“I’m certainly not looking for something to do,” he said, adding that his plan after leaving medicine in 2013 was to retire to Palm Beach, Fla., with his wife.
“I’m not going to disappear,” he said. “But yes, if I didn’t think the country needed what we’re doing, I’d be there.”
A judge in Cook County Circuit Court will hear testimony Friday in a lawsuit filed by an Illinois voter that alleges Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz should not be allowed to run for president, CNN and ABC are reporting.
Lawrence Joyce, an Illinois voter who has objected to Cruz’s placement on the Illinois primary ballot next month, will have his case heard in the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago. Joyce’s previous objection, made to the state’s Board of Elections, was dismissed on February 1.
Joyce challenges Cruz’s right to be president in the wake of questions put forth by GOP rival Donald Trump about being born in Canada, according to CNN.
Cruz maintains he is a natural-born citizen since his mother is American-born.
“My case presents the perfect opportunity for Donald Trump himself to step forward and bring the matter to court personally,” Joyce told WBBM radio.
Joyce, of Poplar Grove, Ill., said he’s concerned about what could happen if Cruz is the Republican nominee, saying the Democrats could file a challenge in the fall, ABC’s channel 7 in Chicago reported.
“At that point, all of his fundraising would dry up. And his support in the polls would drop dramatically. He may be forced at that point to resign the nomination,” Joyce said.
Joyce said he has not spoken to the Trump campaign and that he supports Republican contender Ben Carson.
The Trump and Cruz campaigns could not immediately be reached.
An attorney for the Ted Cruz campaign asked a Cook County judge Friday to dismiss an Illinois man’s lawsuit challenging the Texas senator’s eligibility to run for president, citing that the Republican hopeful wasn’t properly served with the complaint.
Lawrence Joyce, an Illinois voter and Ben Carson supporter, brought his complaint earlier this month to the Illinois State Board of Elections, which dismissed it.
Now, he is appealing the case with the Cook County Circuit Court in Chicago, asking it to rule Cruz ineligible to run in next month’s GOP primary in Illinois. Joyce challenges whether the senator from Texas meets the criteria to serve as president because he was born in Canada.
Sharee Langenstein, an attorney for Cruz, said in court Friday it is “very, very clear” the Cook County court doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear the case because state law stipulates the candidate be served with the complaint. Joyce, a pharmacist and attorney from Poplar Grove, Ill., failed to serve Cruz, whose home address is listed in his petition to be placed on the state’s ballot, Langenstein said.
The issue of whether Cruz is a “natural-born” citizen has been raised by others, including rival GOP presidential contender Donald Trump, who has threatened to file a lawsuit on the issue. Cruz maintains he meets the criteria because his mother is American-born.
Judge Maureen Ward Kirby set a March 1 court date to hear arguments on the motion to dismiss. Joyce, who works the midnight shift at a hospital pharmacy, told the judge he wasn’t available for arguments before then because of work commitments. The Illinois primary is March 15 and early voting has already begun.
Despite the close timing, Joyce said it is worth letting his complaint play out.
“The nomination doesn’t take place until July,” Joyce said. “So if a determination is made after the primary that Ted Cruz is not eligible to be president then certainly it would be incumbent upon the Republican National Committee not allow the name of Ted Cruz to be entered at the convention in July.”
Voters in Texas and New York also have filed legal challenges on whether Cruz meets the citizenship qualifications. The Indiana Board of Election is scheduled to hear a complaint Friday from a Republican voter challenging whether Cruz and fellow GOP presidential hopeful Marco Rubio meet the “natural-born” requirement. Rubio, whose parents immigrated from Cuba, was born in Florida.
Cruz has dismissed the efforts as “political mischief.”
He defended his citizenship and right to run at a CNN candidates’ forum Wednesday, saying he was born in Canada to a U.S. citizen, making him an automatic U.S citizen. His mother was born in Wilmington, Del., Cruz said.
“I never breathed a breath of air on this planet when I was not a U.S. citizen,” he said. “It was the act of being born that made me a U.S. citizen.”
Washington, DC (February 18, 2016) – CRTV is announcing the launch of LevinTV, hosted by one of the nation’s most compelling, passionate and thoughtful Conservative voices, Mark Levin. Having just signed a contract extension to continue his nation wide radio broadcast to millions of listeners for another nine years, the six-time New York Times best-selling author is further expanding his media network, to reach an even larger audience through a dynamic, cutting edge, digital based television platform. LevinTV will be America’s new televised Town Hall meeting and is the next step in the evolution of digital conservative media.
LevinTV will be produced five days a week in a state-of-the-art studio built exclusively for the Show. It will be broadcast in HD, featuring one of the most technologically advanced television sets ever created. Mark Levin will bring his unique perspective of pro-American and patriotic values to his new TV show that champions liberty and true conservatism.
LevinTV is a commercial-free explosion of Mark Levin’s engaging personality, unique intellect and passionate commentary about history, economics, philosophy and the latest political and current events. The show will also feature exclusive, long-form interviews with compelling guests from all walks of life.
“I have the greatest audience in the world and I give them my best every night,” said Mark Levin. “I am thrilled we are expanding our Town Hall meeting place for patriots, by taking TV broadcasting to a new level on multiple platforms where I will speak directly to my audience – uncensored, without middlemen, and commercial free.” Levin added, “I make no excuses for my patriotism, I am proud of it, and LevinTV will reflect it. It’s about time there is a place on television where people can go and have their principles, beliefs, and values reinforced rather than attacked.”
How to Watch
LevinTV launches on March 7, 2016. His inaugural episode, along with hours of preview material, can be accessed on any digital or mobile device. Levin’s loyal audience and new fans alike can subscribe for an entire year for $59 (just $4.92 a month) saving $10 off the regular price of $69 a year by subscribing on or before March 7. Monthly subscription fees are $7.99. By keeping subscription prices low, LevinTV will be accessible to a large and growing audience.
For more information, visit www.LevinTV.com.
On Thursday, Westwood One announced that conservative radio giant Mark Levin’s talk show has been renewed through 2025, essentially a lifetime contract. The network stated: Levin, one of the most important, popular, and trusted voices in radio, is always at the top of the political conversation. Indeed, his name has been invoked by candidates throughout the presidential primary process during the debates and at campaign rallies.”
Levin’s fearlessness in standing for conservative principles has been demonstrated consistently over the years. As Sean Hannity said of Levin, “He has not moved. He has not changed. He believes the principles that were applied back when worked then, and if applied now to today’s problems would be just as effective.”
Some of the over 300 stations on which Levin appears include WABC-AM/New York; KRLA-AM/Los Angeles; WLS-AM/Chicago; KSFO-AM/San Francisco; WBAP-AM/Dallas; KTRH-AM/Houston; WMAL-AM/Washington, DC; WJR-AM/Detroit; and WNTP-AM/Philadelphia.
Levin said, “I could not be more pleased to extend my radio partnership with Cumulus/Westwood One. For the next nine years – an unprecedented long-term relationship in the broadcasting industry – I am committed to continuing to bring the best possible program, both substantive and entertaining, to my millions of beloved and loyal listeners each and every day.”
Bart Tessler, Westwood One EVP, News & Talk, enthused, “We couldn’t be more pleased to announce this lifetime agreement with Mark. To know that we’ll be working together for so many years is a Mark Levin Show primary victory and a big win for affiliates, advertisers, and listeners. Mark’s tenure will now exceed that of a two-term president and that means continued excellence on the air on a nightly basis.”
Levin’s glittery resume includes his work as an attorney before he soared to acting as a top adviser and administrator to several members of President Ronald Reagan’s cabinet. He rose to the position of Chief of Staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese. Levin serves as the president of the prestigious Landmark Legal Foundation, a non-profit legal advocacy group based in Leesburg, VA.
Levin’s prolific writing career has seen him writing numerous New York Times best-selling books, including: “Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America”; “Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto”; “Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America”; “The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic”; and “Plunder and Deceit: Big Government’s Exploitation of Young People and the Future.”
Honored by the American Conservative Union, Hillsdale College, The Fund for American Studies, The Media Research Center, and Citizens United/Breitbart. Levin received his B. A. degree, with numerous honors, from Temple University, and his J.D. degree from Temple University School of Law.
I have said it before, there is a lot to like about Rubio, and this is one of those things
As good as Rubio was on that question, and as correct as he was last night on Obama’s actions being deliberate, he looked very bad when he kept repeating that line verbatim. Christie thrashed him. I wonder if that one exchange will damage Rubio with voters.
I also think Rubio missed an opportunity last night to address his “Gang of 8” fiasco. When asked if he fought for that bill, Rubio made the point, several times, that the bill had no, and has no hope of passing. He pointed out, correctly, that the American people will not allow such a bill to pass now. He should have taken the opportunity to say that the bill would have been a disaster, and that ever supporting it is his greatest regret.
If Rubio is to ever get past that Gang of 8 stunt, he must repudiate what he did, and vow that “as president, I will never sign a bill that grants blanket amnesty.
Rand Paul, the libertarian-minded freshman senator who was once viewed as a formidable presidential contender, is suspending his White House bid.
Paul discussed the matter with staff Wednesday morning and sent out a statement confirming the decision to drop out of the Republican presidential primary.
“It’s been an incredible honor to run a principled campaign for the White House,” Paul said in the statement. “Today, I will end where I began, ready and willing to fight for the cause of Liberty.”
Paul, a Kentucky Republican, is expected to instead place his focus squarely on his Senate reelection bid, where he faces a wealthy Democrat, Lexington Mayor Jim Gray, who has the money to partially finance his campaign.
Paul finished a disappointing fifth place in Monday’s Iowa caucuses, registering just 4.5% of the vote despite placing a heavy emphasis on the state’s college towns to bring out younger voters inspired by his libertarian-minded message. He promised that night to continue his campaign.
Paul will not make an endorsement in the GOP presidential race before next week’s New Hampshire primary, his spokesman Sergio Gor told CNN.
But sources close to Paul said a morning-after review made clear to Paul that there was not a viable path to winning the Republican nomination and that fund-raising was becoming extremely difficult.
Indeed, as the New Hampshire primary approaches, where his father Ron Paul won 23% of the vote in 2012, polls have found the younger Paul struggling to gain traction.
Paul’s calls for a less aggressive foreign policy, which his critics have dubbed as “isolationist,” failed to connect with GOP voters at a time of growing national security fears. Moreover, Paul had a hard time reestablishing his father’s libertarian coalition because he had sought to broaden his appeal to more establishment-minded Republicans, hurting his credibility with some in his core base of supporters.
Dropping out this early is a disappointment for Paul. He had engineered a major change in Kentucky’s primary system to allow him to run for two offices at the same time, a move aimed at circumventing a prohibition in state law prohibiting candidates from doing so. The state party agreed to change its traditional paper ballot primary to a caucus system in early March, in order to let him avoid the restriction that he couldn’t appear on the ballot twice.
Still, as he now focuses on his Senate race, he remains the heavy favorite in a state that has grown increasingly red.
“The Democrat Party in Kentucky has been very wounded by President Obama,” Paul told CNN Sunday when asked if he were concerned about Gray’s candidacy.
Paul’s campaign account tweeted a reminiscent video Wednesday morning, thanking his supporters and featuring highlights from the senator’s presidential bid.
It has now been confirmed – The photograph of Ted Cruz campaign shaming letters is legit (see below). The letters are officially from the Ted Cruz campaign.
Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler confirmed to IJ Review that the mailer was theirs in a phone call Friday evening, saying that the targeting had been “very narrow, but the caucuses are important and we want people who haven’t voted before to vote.” (link)
The personalized letters target individual Iowa voters and identifies them as having failed to vote in prior elections. They are admonished and then encouraged to vote this year. In addition the letters identify the neighbors of the voter, and provides their voting history.
The text reads:
“You are receiving this election notice because of low expected voter turnout in your area. Your individual voting history as well as your neighbors’ are public record. Their scores are published below, and many of them will see your score as well. CAUCUS ON MONDAY TO IMPROVE YOUR SCORE and please encourage your neighbors to caucus as well. A follow-up notice may be issued following Monday’s caucuses”.
In an effort to shame the recipient, the notice also informs the targeted voter their neighbors have also been notified of the recipients poor voting record.
How the Cruz Team would think a public shaming campaign is a good idea is just staggeringly unbelievable.
The campaign scheme was exposed via Twitter where “Tom Hinkeldy, a resident of Alta, Iowa, tweeted a photo (which was later deleted because it included his personal address) on Friday evening of a mailer Sen. Ted Cruz’s campaign sent addressed to his wife, Steffany” – link –
Word spread rapidly.
10:30 PM – 29 Jan 2016
The first name on the mailer list matches the name on the envelope at the top of the page. The envelope also has a returned address as “Paid for by Cruz for President”, the official campaign name of Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign (not a super-pac):
Another Iowan, Braddock Massey, tweeted a photo of the mailer he received:
This has the very real potential to be a massive fail and seriously backfire against the Ted Cruz campaign. He might have just given Marco Rubio a considerable gift with the Iowa election only two days away.
From the candidate who prefers to keep his own records, well,… sealed.
UPDATE 5:00am: It looks like Howie might have found the trail, via a professor in Northern Iowa named Christopher Larimer. Describing a previous stunt like this in Alaska. As outlined in a 2014 PBS article:
[…] “Why would they think that shaming would make people comply?”
Because, well, it does. That’s according to Chris Larimer, associate professor of political science at the University of Northern Iowa. And he’s done the research to prove it.
“We found that when you make people aware of the norm of voting and that somebody else is going to observe whether or not you vote, people are more likely then to vote,” he said.
The letter from the so-called Alaska State Voter Project is nearly identical, word for word, to one that Larimer and other researchers tested in Michigan, right down to the typography and punctuation. In that 2006 research, Larimer and colleagues sent voters one of four different letters.
The softest message just urged people to do their civic duty and vote. The most aggressive letter matched the Alaska mailer. It included the addressee’s voting history as well as those of their neighbors, and contained something of a threat by promising a follow-up letter to show the results of the upcoming election.
Larimer says they got complaints, but the technique worked quite well. (read more)
That emboldened segment describes the current Cruz Campaign mailer 100%. Also, Chris Larimer is noted in this recent Texas Tribune article about the controversial debate:
[…] For Cruz, the No. 2 candidate in many polls, Trump’s snub could make him the center of action at the Iowa Events Center, a role that comes with both risks and rewards.
“If Trump’s not there, it affects the strategy other candidates take toward Cruz,” said Christopher Larimer, a political science professor at the University of Northern Iowa. “Do they treat Cruz like the frontrunner, or do they talk about Trump?”
At the same time, Larimer added, the debate could be a “lost opportunity” for Cruz to challenge Trump on his conservative credentials in what’s likely their last meeting before the caucuses. (read more)
Looks like another one of those ever brilliant political consultant types sold the Cruz campaign on a version of their already extensive “psychographic analytics“. Wouldn’t be surprised if billionaire Phd Robert Mercer, via Cambridge Analytica targeting – isn’t involved in the engineering of this too.
UPDATE: Chris Larimer distances himself from this fiasco via the Washington Post:
The blogosphere rumor is completely false. I do NOT work for the Cruz (or any) campaign and have absolutely nothing to do with mailings.
2:13 PM – 30 Jan 2016
[…] “As a researcher who has done randomized field experiments with get out the vote mailings,” Larimer wrote in an email, “what I can say is that mailings that call attention to an individual’s vote history as well as that of their neighbors’ have been shown to be effective in terms of significantly increasing voter turnout. We draw on norm compliance theory which suggests that publicizing behavior regarding a social norm increases the likelihood of norm compliance.”
That was if the ad was crafted in a smart way. “The Cruz mailing is more negative than anything we have done and has the potential to elicit a negative response or what psychologists call ‘reactance’ or ‘boomerang effect,’” warned Larimer. “The mailing also states that a ‘follow up notice’ will be sent following the caucuses on Monday. This is not possible as caucus turnout is private and maintained by the parties.” (link)
Hate to say I told y’all so, over and again, but……….. Trump is nothing but an egomaniac! Listen to him, LYING through his teeth about Cruz bashing the first responders of 9/11. What a sleaze! What an absolute, bottom-feeding sleaze!
Republican presidential contender Ted Cruz should be disqualified from the race because he isn’t a “natural-born citizen,” a fellow Texan claims in a “birther” challenge filed against the senator in a U.S. court.
The suit seeks a court definition of the term to clarify whether Cruz – who was born in Canada to an American mother – can or can’t serve if elected.
“This 229-year question has never been pled, presented to or finally decided by or resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court,” Houston attorney Newton B. Schwartz Sr. said in his 28-page complaint. “Only the U.S. Supreme Court can finally decide, determine judicially and settle this issue now.”
Claiming that “time is of the essence” because of the rapidly approaching Iowa caucuses and March 1 Super Tuesday primaries, Schwartz asked that the case be expedited for resolution by the nation’s highest court as soon as possible.
Republican front-runner Donald Trump pressed the issue during a televised candidate debate Thursday evening in South Carolina, saying he’s bringing up Cruz’s Canadian birthplace “because now he’s doing a little bit better” in the polls. Trump insisted that Cruz receive a judgment from the courts because it would be bad for Republicans to have the issue hanging over their presidential or vice-presidential nominee.
“There is a big overhang. A big question mark on your head,” Trump told Cruz. “You can’t do that to the party.”
Cruz chuckled when asked to respond to Trump’s taunts and swatted them away deftly. Trump, on the other end of the exchange, faced many boos from the crowd.
“There’s nothing to this birther issue,” Cruz said during the debate, noting that Trump said last fall that he was a natural-born citizen. “Since September, the Constitution hasn’t changed. But the poll numbers have. I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa. But the facts and the law are really clear. Under longstanding U.S. law, the child of a U.S. citizen abroad is a natural born citizen.”
Schwartz, 85, said in a phone interview he isn’t connected to any particular campaign, though he personally “probably” supports Bernie Sanders, the Vermont senator seeking the Democratic nomination.
“Honestly, I was watching C-SPAN one night when Donald Trump was talking about it and I couldn’t believe no one had thought to just file something with the court,” said Schwartz, a practicing trial attorney and self-described news junkie.
“It’s such a simple procedure – I’m amazed no one did it,” Schwartz said. “Senator Cruz should have filed it himself to avoid the question.”
Asked about the lawsuit, Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for the Cruz campaign, said: “I’d refer you to the debate exchange on the issue.”
Schwartz said he filed the paperwork himself with no one else advising him and he said he does not have an opinion for which way the court should rule.
“The country will be in chaos if he’s elected president or vice president and this goes to trial then,” Schwartz said. “I can see both sides of this argument.”
The attorney added that he’s got “nothing against” Cruz.
“If he gets cleared, he gets cleared,” Schwartz said. “Let’s just get this thing settled before the primaries and the convention and the election.”
The case is Schwartz v. Cruz, 4:16-cv-00106, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Houston).
The Constitution Of The United States – Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
Click HERE to purchase Mark. Levin’s book The Liberty Amendments: Restoring The American Republic.