Our forefathers provided a blueprint based on their vision at the time. But they could have no idea of what we are now facing. As I said earlier, this enemy isn't playing by the rules. The gloves are off. We have to defend ourselves and win this thing at all costs and if we have to temporarily sacrifice some freedoms to do so, then so be it. Just like the airport procedures after 911. Things change. Inconveniences in the name of safety. Our brave servicemen and women are willing to risk their lives defending this country. Surely the rest of us can temporarily make some small sacrifices.
The issues I have with giving up pieces of our rights under the Constitution are two-fold--
--The Government, once it takes a power, will not cede it back should the situation change or the threat diminish. More likely, they will tend to take more if they can get it. We have a Government dominated by Politicians, which is not what the forefathers wanted; they wanted one populated with citizens who went back home after some time in office. Put a "D" or an "R" in front of them, very few that we elect want anything less than more power. They've made seniority important to "what our district gets". so we are afraid to vote our guy or gal out. Power has migrated to Washington, DC in ways that were not intended.
--The TSA screening system, for example, allows us to be searched when there is no cause for search. We are treated as a suspect. You may say "well you don't have to get searched if you don't fly"...but how far do you want to extend that out? Trips to McDonald's? The grocery store? Why would you search people hours before they actually board the plane instead of immediately before boarding? Why are the agents not trained as Israel trains theirs--to ask questions and observe reactions? How many holes are there in the system that allow access to aircraft without searches, etc? All of the same things could be done less intrusively with bomb-sniffing dogs, a couple of screening questions by agents as we wait to check-in, etc.
We have the capability to gather intelligence in a myriad of ways but we let people decimate our "human intelligence" capabilities. That is where the focus should be--deploying assets to infiltrate everywhere and check everything WITHOUT trampling on our rights.
Think of a right that is important to YOU...then think of what the government could do to it. Heck, they've already perverted "Freedom of Religion" to "Freedom from Religion"--it was meant to stop a state sponsored religion, not to stop public prayers and every instance of religion. Now a coach can't hold a voluntary prayer with his team after a game. Ridiculous. How much more power do you want to give the government?
Jindal is gone; how soon will more leave the Republican race for the nomination?
"No one else in the GOP field even gets more than 5%- Jeb Bush reaches that mark followed by Carly Fiorina and Mike Huckabee at 4%, Chris Christie and John Kasich at 3%, Rand Paul at 2%, Lindsey Graham and George Pataki at 1%, and Jim Gilmore, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Santorum all at less than 1%."
I don't see a candidate with <1% surviving much longer. I think Gilmore and Santorum will be incredibly lucky to even make to the caucuses in Iowa. Of the two, Santorum may be the better bet to survive since he did win the event last time around. I also can't see Paul, Graham, or Kasich surviving much longer than that. Above that, I think everyone stays in a little bit longer hoping to pick up lost support from the inexperienced candidates at the top or the ex-candidates at the bottom.
In 2012, Santorum rented a house in Iowa and spent nearly all his time there. He went door to door and diner to diner and met these folks and that is why he had a strong showing despite not registering all that much in the polls prior to the caucuses. He is looking for that same lightning in a bottle again, so I doubt he will go anywhere until after Iowa.
One thing that really surprises me, is I hear repub operatives saying it will come down to Rubio and Cruz. They say Trump and Carson will fade and Cruz will pick up their support (I think they under-estimate Trump's staying power yet again). And with the three 'establishment' candidates, Bush, Christie and Kasich having been rejected, that the establishment will now rally around Rubio. I don't get how Rubio is now an establishment candidate? He was a tea-party guy who ran AGAINST the establishment candidate in the Florida senate race and won. He won his Senate seat based on the strength of the Tea-party sweep in 2010. Now all of the sudden he is establishment? I don't get that.
Fox News: Republican nomination. Trump 28, Carson 18, Rubio 14, Cruz 15
ABC/Wash Post: Repub nomination. Trump 32, Carson 22, Rubio 11, Cruz 8
The first 3 individual states even more stunning.
CBS News: Iowa caucus. Trump 30, Cruz 21, Carson 19, Rubio 11
CBS News: New Hampshire. Trump 32, Rubio 13, Cruz 10, Carson 10
CSB News: South Carolina. Trump 35, Carson 19, Rubio16, Cruz 13
As I have mentioned before, I don't like to put too much weight in any single or even a couple polls. I like to use the Real Clear Politics Average, which is an average of a number recent polls.
Real Clear Averages. Nationally: Trump 27.5, Carson 19.8, Rubio 12.5, Cruz 11.3
Real Clear Averages. Iowa: Trump 25.7, Carson 21, Cruz 15.3, Rubio 13.3
Real Clear Averages. New Hamp. Trump 26.6, Rubio 12, Cruz 10, Carson 9.8
Perhaps the most stunning thing of all....Jeb Bush failed to reach double digits in ANY poll conducted, down about 4-5% in every single case.
Trump entered the race in July. They said he would be gone by labor day. Then they said, when the debates started and people got serious, he would fade. Later, I heard the republican establishment say, Trump would crash and burn by Thanksgiving. Folks we are 2 months from the voting starting. Can the republican establishment stop Trump?
It just shows how disconnected both the GOP establishment and many media members are from the pulse of many in the general public.
Can the republican establishment stop Trump?
They're trying to figure out if they can live with him.
Frankly, anyone who said they knew Trump was going to win the nomination would be basing their bet on instinct. Because what other track record is there to use?
Which is fine. It's sometimes works for the long shot horses too.
Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump would not rule out making a run for president as an independent despite signing a pledge over the summer saying he would support the eventual GOP nominee instead of running a third-party bid.
“I’m going to have to see what happens. I will see what happens. I have to be treated fairly,” Trump said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” when asked about a new guerrilla effort by operatives within the Republican Party to derail Trump’s candidacy. “When I did this, I said I have to be treated fairly. If I’m treated fairly, I’m fine. All I want to do is [have] a level playing field."
Mama Mia, Hillary wil be the next president. Micky Mouse candidates from the GOP, majority of the country are poor, they'll never vote republican. if republicans don't reinvent themselves this party is finished, nobody wants to vote for them.
Mickey Mouse would beat Hillary.
I'm not supporting Trump, and Hillary may well win...but she is far from a great candidate. Too many people don't like her.