Recruiting forum off topic thread (merged)

[Skullbone]

Ted broke the record on Frank Luntz's machine last night. Twice. Two perfect 100s. Never been done. The previous record was a 98. Also achieved by Ted Cruz.

 

[VolsnCards5]

Ted broke the record on Frank Luntz's machine last night. Twice. Two perfect 100s. Never been done. The previous record was a 98. Also achieved by Ted Cruz.

To bad the machine doesn't cast votes

 

[volssam]

Ted broke the record on Frank Luntz's machine last night. Twice. Two perfect 100s. Never been done. The previous record was a 98. Also achieved by Ted Cruz.

Cruz is awesome. He knows the constitution inside and out and would defend it and truly hold to it. I don't think any other candidate can legitimately claim that.

It's sad because with this cycle and the political climate ( the anti-establishment wave, and coming off two terms of unpopular policies and actions, and going against a very very weak candidate in hilary Clinton), we would have a very good shot at getting a true and strong conservative in the White House. And I fear we are gonna totally waste it in nominating Trump.

And I think Trump will either lose to hilary, or if he does get in will be an awful president (I think he will grow government and grow the imperial power of the presidential office, and I think he is a liberal pretending to be a semi-conservative).

I am sad.

 

[Skullbone]

To bad the machine doesn't cast votes

Indeed. But, people do. The machine measures the responses of people. Ted Cruz is beating Donald in most states on actual election day voting where people have had time to take a second look. Donald's majorities are often largely gained from early voting. Regardless, relevant or not to votes the high scores on the famous Luntz machine is impressive. And Frank Luntz is no Ted Cruz fan.

 

[Dust10]

Cruz is awesome. He knows the constitution inside and out and would defend it and truly hold to it. I don't think any other candidate can legitimately claim that.

It's sad because with this cycle and the political climate ( the anti-establishment wave, and coming off two terms of unpopular policies and actions, and going against a very very weak candidate in hilary Clinton), we would have a very good shot at getting a true and strong conservative in the White House. And I fear we are gonna totally waste it in nominating Trump.

And I think Trump will either lose to hilary, or if he does get in will be an awful president (I think he will grow government and grow the imperial power of the presidential office, and I think he is a liberal pretending to be a semi-conservative).

I am sad.

Hate to break it to you, but Cruz would lose against Hillary as well. When you nominate a candidate with an extreme ideology, your chances of pulling moderates is nullified. There aren't enough extreme conservatives in this country to carry Cruz. They can't even carry him to the nomination.

 

[Skullbone]

Cruz is awesome. He knows the constitution inside and out and would defend it and truly hold to it. I don't think any other candidate can legitimately claim that.

It's sad because with this cycle and the political climate ( the anti-establishment wave, and coming off two terms of unpopular policies and actions, and going against a very very weak candidate in hilary Clinton), we would have a very good shot at getting a true and strong conservative in the White House. And I fear we are gonna totally waste it in nominating Trump.

And I think Trump will either lose to hilary, or if he does get in will be an awful president (I think he will grow government and grow the imperial power of the presidential office, and I think he is a liberal pretending to be a semi-conservative).

I am sad.

I agree with you 100%. It does look grim at the moment, but let not your heart be troubled. Donald has the perceived momentum from winning states, but the delegate count is still in play. To quote Churchill, "never give in..." And if it indeed comes to that, yes, we as a nation may have squandered the opportunity to right the ship, but like those before us who have endured through difficult times so shall we. When Donald Trump is long gone we will still be here.(hopefully)

If you're looking for some hope as far as the primary goes, here's an in depth look at how Cruz still has a path to victory even if Trump should do well in Ohio and Florida. : https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/03/cruzs-path-to-victory-the-math-and-science

 

[Skullbone]

Hate to break it to you, but Cruz would lose against Hillary as well. When you nominate a candidate with an extreme ideology, your chances of pulling moderates is nullified. There aren't enough extreme conservatives in this country to carry Cruz. They can't even carry him to the nomination.

Firstly, Hillary Clinton is a candidate with an extreme ideology herself. It's well documented. Secondly, this is the mentality that caused the GOP to give us moderate, rino republicans "who can win independents" in basically every election. That's why we had to have Romney. That's why we had to have McCain. That's why we had to have Dole. Ford, etc. It's a proven losing strategy. Repeatedly.


Here's some data that supports Ted Cruz beating Hillary.:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton

Here's data that supports Donald losing to Hillary:
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Here's data supporting Cruz beats Donald in a true one on one matchup:

Access Denied

*The link above works even though it says access denied.

 

[volssam]

Hate to break it to you, but Cruz would lose against Hillary as well. When you nominate a candidate with an extreme ideology, your chances of pulling moderates is nullified. There aren't enough extreme conservatives in this country to carry Cruz. They can't even carry him to the nomination.

I keep getting told this. But I disagree.

But I will say part of the stigma is people keep saying he is "extreme"

Why is he extreme?

Abortion? It is close to a 50-50 issue in America. And actually I believe the people against it are now in the majority.

Gay marriage? His view may be in the minority now in America. But the Supreme Court has already decided that. So what can he even do about it? He wants to protect the religious freedom of those who are being forced to participate in gay marriage or pay the penalty. I don't see that as extreme. Why can't the LGBT lobby be satisfied with the marriage rights given to them by the Supreme Court and leave Christians who don't want to participate in it out of it? Why isn't that a compromise they can make?

Taxes/entitlements? He wants to slash government, and try to make it closer to what the founding fathers intended, rather than this bloated, hand-out coddling bureaucracy it has become. I could see that being called extreme by some. But brilliant by others (including myself. Haha)

Healthcare? He wants to get rid of Obamacare. Majority of Americans want it gone too. Not extreme.

Immigration? It's a hot button issue this cycle. He wants the laws to be upheld and us to be a sovereign nation that protects its borders. Not an extreme stance IMO.

Someone who wants to hold to the constitution, which whoever is elected will vow to do btw, should not be considered extreme.

 

[Dust10]

QUOTE=Dust10;12473510]Hate to break it to you, but Cruz would lose against Hillary as well. When you nominate a candidate with an extreme ideology, your chances of pulling moderates is nullified. There aren't enough extreme conservatives in this country to carry Cruz. They can't even carry him to the nomination.

This is the mentality that caused the GOP to give us moderate, rino republicans "who can win independents" in basically every election. That's why we had to have Romney. That's why we had to have McCain. That's why we had to have Dole. Ford, etc. It's a proven losing strategy. Repeatedly.


Here's some data that supports Ted Cruz beating Hillary.:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton

Here's data that supports Donald losing to Hillary:
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Here's data supporting Cruz beats Donald in a true one on one matchup:

Access Denied

*The link above works even though it says access denied.[/QUOTE]

If I had expounded on my point, I would have said Rubio or Kasich would have the best chance against Hillary. Your website clearly bears that out.

I have never once said which way I lean, by the way, and I won't ever.

 

[volssam]

Btw dust10...I don't deny it will be a battle for a conservative to win states who are pretty split like Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, etc....

It will be a battle but A) I think Cruz could talk his way into winning those arguments. And B) as I stated earlier this is a perfect cycle to get it done, especially with hilary likely being the democratic nominee. She is an awful candidate. And also part of the establishment machine that people are pushing against strongly this cycle.

 

[Dust10]

I keep getting told this. But I disagree.

But I will say part of the stigma is people keep saying he is "extreme"

Why is he extreme?

Abortion? It is close to a 50-50 issue in America. And actually I believe the people against it are now in the majority.

Gay marriage? His view may be in the minority now in America. But the Supreme Court has already decided that. So what can he even do about it? He wants to protect the religious freedom of those who are being forced to participate in gay marriage or pay the penalty. I don't see that as extreme. Why can't the LGBT lobby be satisfied with the marriage rights given to them by the Supreme Court and leave Christians who don't want to participate in it out of it? Why isn't that a compromise they can make?

Taxes/entitlements? He wants to slash government, and try to make it closer to what the founding fathers intended, rather than this bloated, hand-out coddling bureaucracy it has become. I could see that being called extreme by some. But brilliant by others (including myself. Haha)

Healthcare? He wants to get rid of Obamacare. Majority of Americans want it gone too. Not extreme.

Immigration? It's a hot button issue this cycle. He wants the laws to be upheld and us to be a sovereign nation that protects its borders. Not an extreme stance IMO.

Someone who wants to hold to the constitution, which whoever is elected will vow to do btw, should not be considered extreme.

I'm not going to argue any sort of politics with anyone on here. The only thing I will say is if your own colleagues in the Senate consider you extreme, you're extreme.

 

[volssam]

I'm not going to argue any sort of politics with anyone on here. The only thing I will say is if your own colleagues in the Senate consider you extreme, you're extreme.

Haha. I don't want to really argue either. I have other things I need to do today. Haha. But having the establishment call you extreme, especially those in congress whose approval rating is abysmal, is considered a wonderful endorsement in my mind

 

[Vol464]

I'm not going to argue any sort of politics with anyone on here. The only thing I will say is if your own colleagues in the Senate consider you extreme, you're extreme.

Actually, most of them pretend to be conservative to get elected, then go to Washington and play the game instead of doing what they said they would.

 

[Dust10]

Haha. I don't want to really argue either. I have other things I need to do today. Haha. But having the establishment call you extreme, especially those in congress whose approval rating is abysmal, is considered a wonderful endorsement in my mind

Haha I probably wouldn't mind arguing about this stuff, but its pretty much a no no in my job, which is in this field.

Funny how everyone hates Congress, but incumbents almost always win, and are often unopposed. Everyone hates Congress, but want to blame the rest of the Country instead of looking directly at who represents them.

 

[Skullbone]

This is the mentality that caused the GOP to give us moderate, rino republicans "who can win independents" in basically every election. That's why we had to have Romney. That's why we had to have McCain. That's why we had to have Dole. Ford, etc. It's a proven losing strategy. Repeatedly.


Here's some data that supports Ted Cruz beating Hillary.:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton


Here's data that supports Donald losing to Hillary:
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Here's data supporting Cruz beats Donald in a true one on one matchup:

Access Denied

*The link above works even though it says access denied.

If I had expounded on my point, I would have said Rubio or Kasich would have the best chance against Hillary. Your website clearly bears that out.

I have never once said which way I lean, by the way, and I won't ever.[/QUOTE]




Rubio and Kasich are irrelevant. They literally cannot win. It's Trump or Cruz. Of those two, Cruz is your best bet. That's a fact. Then there's the whole thing about Ted actually being a true representative of Constitutional conservatism which carries much more weight for me.

 

[Dust10]

If I had expounded on my point, I would have said Rubio or Kasich would have the best chance against Hillary. Your website clearly bears that out.

I have never once said which way I lean, by the way, and I won't ever.




Rubio and Kasich are irrelevant. They literally cannot win. It's Trump or Cruz. Of those two, Cruz is your best bet. That's a fact. Then there's the whole thing about Ted actually being a true representative of Constitutional conservatism which carries much more weight for me.

Maybe you're right. Maybe Rubio and Kasich will drop out after this Tuesday and we can see if Cruz can catch Trump.

Trump only needs 54% of the remaining delegates, and that number will go way down after he dominates this Tuesday.

I'd say everyone should start mentally preparing themselves for a Trump v. Hillary GE.

Btw, this messed up quoting is annoying me. Hopefully I just fixed it.

 

[Skullbone]

Haha I probably wouldn't mind arguing about this stuff, but its pretty much a no no in my job, which is in this field.

Funny how everyone hates Congress, but incumbents almost always win, and are often unopposed. Everyone hates Congress, but want to blame the rest of the Country instead of looking directly at who represents them.

Incumbents often win because they get a stranglehold on the power structure. Plus people often don't keep up with what their reps and Senators are actually doing behind the scenes. All they know is come election time their reps all talk like rock ribbed conservatives. Later after they get elected they do just the opposite, but in secret. They'll figure out how to make sure a non-conservative bill gets the votes it needs behind closed doors and then come outside and cast a symbolic vote knowing they had just privately asked 100 others to vote otherwise to insure it passed while insulating themselves from judgment. For example, John Cornyn of Texas. Mitch McConnel of Kentucky or even recently voted out Eric Cantor of Virginia. Our own Bob Corker ceded the Senate's treaty powers regarding Iran as if he were doing us a favor for crying out loud. And guess what, most people think it was a swell anti-Obama move even though it gave him Senate's blessing to do a deal on his own when all they really had to do is vote on it as a treaty whether Obama called it one or not. In five years he'll be the most rock ribbed conservative you've ever heard, but for now he'll be Mitch McConnel's right hand man in TN.

 

[volssam]

Haha I probably wouldn't mind arguing about this stuff, but its pretty much a no no in my job, which is in this field.

Funny how everyone hates Congress, but incumbents almost always win, and are often unopposed. Everyone hates Congress, but want to blame the rest of the Country instead of looking directly at who represents them.

Definitely agree there. That always surprises me too.

I will say I'm pretty sure I didn't vote for corker or Haslam back in 2014. I didn't vote for any opposition either. But I at least didn't vote for them and didn't give my approval to them. Corker has especially been infuriating to me. He's way too establishment for me. Alexander is bad too. I wish true conservatives would run against them next time they're up for re-election.

 

[volssam]

Dust10. If I remember correctly, you're up in IL, right?

You think Cruz has a chance Tuesday? Last poll I heard he was down 10 to trump. But Cruz has been way outperforming his polling in some states. I'm hoping IL will be the same.

 

[Dust10]

Dust10. If I remember correctly, you're up in IL, right?

You think Cruz has a chance Tuesday? Last poll I heard he was down 10 to trump. But Cruz has been way outperforming his polling in some states. I'm hoping IL will be the same.

Yes, I'm in Illinois. You have a battle of collar county Republicans who will vote for Trump (and also got a Republican businessman elected Governor) against southern conservatives who support Cruz. There are simply more people in the collar counties, Trump will win Illinois.

And Hillary is going to crush Sanders.

 

[Vols4us]

If I had expounded on my point, I would have said Rubio or Kasich would have the best chance against Hillary. Your website clearly bears that out.

I have never once said which way I lean, by the way, and I won't ever.

Rubio and Kasich are irrelevant. They literally cannot win. It's Trump or Cruz. Of those two, Cruz is your best bet. That's a fact. Then there's the whole thing about Ted actually being a true representative of Constitutional conservatism which carries much more weight for me.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Which is why I want Cruz. Christians generally believe that nothing happens outside of God's will in this world. Leaders and nations rise and fall. All part of his plan that leads to the results in the back of the book. It's hard for many to accept that when the country you are a citizen of moves away from God there are serious consequences even when many devout Christians reside in it.

 

[JRVFL]

This is the mentality that caused the GOP to give us moderate, rino republicans "who can win independents" in basically every election. That's why we had to have Romney. That's why we had to have McCain. That's why we had to have Dole. Ford, etc. It's a proven losing strategy. Repeatedly.


Here's some data that supports Ted Cruz beating Hillary.:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton

Here's data that supports Donald losing to Hillary:
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Here's data supporting Cruz beats Donald in a true one on one matchup:

Access Denied

*The link above works even though it says access denied.

Your mistake is in looking at national polls, which are essentially worthless, as opposed to battleground state polls.

 

[Vols4us]

Thanks for your thoughtful response, sir. It is refreshing to see someone post without anger and snarkiness, especially when the subject is something people get so emotionally invested in.

As I said I am not to be an ultimate judge of anyone's soul or heart, and I am very grateful I don't have to be. And so I can't speak to why Carson would make this decision. It is very disappointing to me personally, but could God use him, and Trump for that matter, to carry out His Will? Absolutely. Could His Will also be the destruction of America? Also true.

And with the fact the God is in control, after seeing some posts on Facebook earlier this morning, I prayed to God that He would give me peace in the knowledge that He is in control. It's hard for me. But I am trying to keep that in the front of my mind. And I have told my wife already that I need to stay off Facebook today.

In your question of would I join with Trump, I don't believe I would. I would say there is no way, but I often have trouble speaking in absolutes, unless it speaks to the issue in the Bible. I think my taking a stance to join Trump would/could cause harm to the cause of Christ and His Church. Hence, my declaration multiple times that I will never vote for trump (yes, that is an absolute, I know. Haha ). Anyways that's my opinion on it. And I know people have differing ones on it.

May you be blessed and find peace with all of this, Sam. Much respect, brother.

Our freedom of choice leads to the consequences of our decisions. I just ask the Lord daily to clean up the messes I make even when I am seeking to do his will.

 

[Dust10]

Your mistake is in looking at national polls, which are essentially worthless, as opposed to battleground state polls.

That top part wasn't written by me.

The part you just deleted, was by me, haha.

 

[Vols4us]

Maybe you're right. Maybe Rubio and Kasich will drop out after this Tuesday and we can see if Cruz can catch Trump.

Trump only needs 54% of the remaining delegates, and that number will go way down after he dominates this Tuesday.

I'd say everyone should start mentally preparing themselves for a Trump v. Hillary GE.

Btw, this messed up quoting is annoying me. Hopefully I just fixed it.

I just had the same problem with a Skullbone post

EDIT - and now yours.