Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Meet the 2016 Republican Nominee
American Thinker ^ | 4/16/2014 | Daren Jonescu

Posted on 04/09/2014 2:31:00 AM PDT by markomalley

How does the Republican Party establishment choose its presidential candidate?  Typically, constitutionalists accuse their establishment rivals of being moderate, risk-averse, stubborn old fools who lack faith in conservative principles.  This is a soothing interpretation, as it begins from the hypothesis that the contest between conservatives and the GOP elite is a family feud. 

But there is another hypothesis -- less soothing, but, at least from an outsider's bird's-eye view, more reconcilable with the facts.  This hypothesis is that America has reached a stage of progressive soft despotism in which the only important family feud in national politics is between the fundamentally allied factions of the Washington establishment itself. 

(snip)

So here he is, the 2016 GOP nominee:

He supports a "path to citizenship" for illegal immigrants. This drops anchor for the progressive captains of the ship of state, eventually inflating the electorate with millions of people lacking education or cultural heritage related to individualism and property rights, while deflating manufacturing costs with low-skill, low-literacy workers.

His position on manmade climate change is "evolving," drifting and shifting somewhere along the continuum from "climate change may be real" (Jeb Bush, 2011) to "when you have over 90 percent of the world’s scientists who have studied this stating that climate change is occurring and that humans play a contributing role it’s time to defer to the experts" (Chris Christie, 2011). 

(snip)

Whatever you do, don't assume that any candidate who espouses a few items on the Republican side of your Venn diagram is satisfactory.  That section then becomes the ruling class's shiny distraction.  Keep your eye on the intersection of the circles, where the two mildly competitive factions of the progressive elite follow their bliss together -- at their nation's expense.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2016election
The scary part is that this is exactly what happens when the GOPe selects a candidate for us proles.

The part he missed is that they contract with some nice, shiny talking heads to convince us that the selected progressive candidate is truly a hard core conservative...

1 posted on 04/09/2014 2:31:00 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

When the Establishment so strongly supports Jeb Bush, I honestly wonder if they want to lose on purpose. Either that or they are completely disconnected from reality.

Surely they know that the name Bush, rightly or wrongly, brings a knee-jerk NO reaction from a huge swathe of Americans.


2 posted on 04/09/2014 2:53:09 AM PDT by Corporate Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
yeah..very scary; I think, I've seen this before another extremely weakened
GOP/er in '16. (like Juan McPain, "Car salesman" Romney & NEBBRs)
no difference between them, no RWR/CC

3 posted on 04/09/2014 2:55:22 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun..0'Caligula / 0'Reid / 0'Pelosi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corporate Democrat

Yep, the article is a good analysis and Jeb fits the description.

And, right, they don’t care about winning, just like they don’t care about repealing 0bamacare. I suspect contributions are higher than when a Tea Party candidate runs, either way.


4 posted on 04/09/2014 3:06:43 AM PDT by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
A great read by Daren Jonescu. One thing is for sure, the system is no longer fixable at the ballot box. Something more will be required.
5 posted on 04/09/2014 3:12:30 AM PDT by iontheball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This is to concede that the country is lost for good and all.

It does not have to be that way.

Germany in 1930 was at a very crucial crossroads. Not totally surrendered to the growing call for despotic government, but with few opportunities to call for alternatives, an otherwise relatively civilized, intelligent people crumbled to their baser instincts, and paved the way for a mesmerizing personality to ascend to power, with what was a minority representation. Once in power, this minority became the voice and image of all Germans, because it was “the law of the land”.

A practice of law that was to become much at odds with the established jurisprudence, with frequent “reinterpretations” and ever more tyrannical applications, where a minority opinion of any kind was turned into the “enemies of the state”, and the holders of those opinions, or even a minority that lacked sufficient clout to raise strong objections, were hustled off, made into “nonentities”, and held in custody.

It can’t happen here? Well, it has, and it can again, this time with much more high-tech means to enforce its application. Even in the absence of a sound and responsible judiciary, it is possible to overwhelm the systems of even the most oppressive of regimes, and confound their objectives.

Confront the fact that during your lifetime, you are going to lose everything. And with nothing left to lose, a kind of glorious freedom arises, a transcendence in which everything you do to struggle against this onerous despotism seems blessed with a special immunity, a touch of something almost divine, where your steps and actions are sure and the outcome appears to be ordained. And maybe, just maybe, it is. If only your will does not fail.

Pray as if it all depended on the power of the Almighty. And keep up the fight as if it all depended on you.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.


6 posted on 04/09/2014 3:14:25 AM PDT by alloysteel (Selective and willful ignorance spells doom, to both victim and perpetrator - mostly the perp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Rand Paul's immigration speech
...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.

Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.

Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.

If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...

This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform
Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...
[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
7 posted on 04/09/2014 3:14:46 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance
...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.
[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]

8 posted on 04/09/2014 3:14:56 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Rand Paul On Shutdown: “Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea”
RCP | November 18th, 2013 | Fox News Special Report
Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3093108/posts

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Senator, when Obamacare was at issue, a month ago, when it came to a continuing resolution to funding the government you supported a filibuster of other Senators, who demanded that you had to have a change or the abolition of Obamacare as a condition for funding the government. In retrospect do you think that was a good strategy? But even more importantly —looking ahead, the deadlines are coming up, the resolution’s going to run out, we’re going to hit the debt ceiling soon — would you be prepared to use same tactic as we approach the new deadlines? SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): Well, I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it’s a conundrum. Here’s the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can’t give the president a blank check. We just can’t keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can’t vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don’t we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.


9 posted on 04/09/2014 3:15:09 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Corporate Democrat

To Republican Party establishment Jeb Bush would make the perfect step ford POTUS.


10 posted on 04/09/2014 3:22:25 AM PDT by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I read an article lauding Jeb Bush in the WSJ today, based mainly on contrasting him to the phantom “Tea Party” that they have created in their minds. The author claimed that the “Tea Party” was just the attempt of a vanishing demographic sector (elderly rural whites, I guess) to bring back their dominance and the world as they knew it. Bush represents the future, according to the author.

Then he proceeded to laud Bush for his love of government programs (such as Common Core and Obamacare), something that evidently seemed to the author to be “the future.”

It occurred to me then that one of the reasons for the GOP failure to seek or present conservative candidates is that the establishment wing of the GOP has created an image of the conservative wing that is a complete parody - and has begun to believe it.

I’m sure there are “Tea Party” types out there who do see themselves as bringing back a vanished time that never really existed, but that’s not the essence of the movement. If I could sum it up as one thing, I’d say conservatives simply want to defend the private sphere, which was always the foundation of US civic life.

The private sphere can be defended by limiting the amount of money and power in the hands of the federal government (or any level of government) - and by restoring people’s control over things like their healthcare, the education of their children, etc. And that’s what it’s all about, not some phantom attempt by elderly, cranky crypto-white supremacists to bring back a world that never existed. But the GOP-e parody vision of conservatives is the one that has become the dominant and defining vision.

The thing I don’t like about Bush - who was a good Florida governor but who seemed to have a somewhat different approach at that time - is not any individual statement, but that his whole philosophy now revolves around more big government, the bigger and more intrusive the better, government everywhere, government when you get up in the morning and when you go to bed at night, government when you brush your teeth or eat your lunch, government solving your problems, government living in your head, government telling you what to think, government in every aspect of life. That, to me, is the problem with not only Bush, but with the entire Democratic Party and GOP-e.


11 posted on 04/09/2014 3:37:37 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

Well done! You should write the New GOP platform.


12 posted on 04/09/2014 3:54:29 AM PDT by epluribus_2 (he had the best mom - ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Corporate Democrat

Another Bush /Clinton election will make us a laughing stock around the world.
350 million Americans and our “democracy” picks members of the same 2 families again. Shades of Patrician Rome.


13 posted on 04/09/2014 3:59:14 AM PDT by Kozak ("It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal" Henry Kissinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel; iontheball
Just because you are pessimistic doesn't make you right. Conservatives have not yet begun to fight. Americans are not European peasants with a centuries old history of conformity to royalty. We are better educated, better armed, and far more liberty minded.

It might come to a fight...but not now, not when we have overwhelming numbers on our side.

14 posted on 04/09/2014 5:39:46 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Good article.

The author describes our national political situation very well.

Might events falsify my hypothesis?

IMO, sadly, a major war or national disaster is the only thing that MIGHT reverse our march to tyranny. Such a circumstance MIGHT actually hasten the end of democracy & what little freedom we have left. God forbid that BHO or HRC ever has the powers FDR had during WWII.

I believe we are beyond the point of returning to honor & freedom by political means. Corruption rules the political process.

The civil war that some are predicting will really be a political insurrection, pitting conservatives against the government & the 50%+ of the people that support it - a replay of the Civil War with likely the same outcome: the government wins & the losers are severely punished. “Reconstruction” will see the end of any semblance of a republic.

15 posted on 04/09/2014 5:55:20 AM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak
Another Bush /Clinton election will make us a laughing stock around the world. 350 million Americans and our “democracy” picks members of the same 2 families again. Shades of Patrician Rome.

Indeed, and neither of these is Cincinnatus or Caesar....

16 posted on 04/09/2014 6:16:42 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

They can’t stop a massive Tea Party write-in campaign.

They foist Jeb or Christie on us, we write in Ted Cruz.


17 posted on 04/09/2014 11:38:55 AM PDT by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Da
The civil war that some are predicting will really be a political insurrection, pitting conservatives against the government & the 50%+ of the people that support it - a replay of the Civil War with likely the same outcome: the government wins & the losers are severely punished.

What kind of arithmetic supports the above synopsis?

18 posted on 04/09/2014 11:49:16 AM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: livius

WSJ has wanted open borders since the 80’s


19 posted on 04/09/2014 11:55:22 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NFHale

I’m a died in the wool Ted Cruz supporter. He is right on every issue I can think of.

Who will I settle for? That’s a tough question, because I want to win:

Definitely:
Sen Jess Sessions
Gov Sarah Palin

Probably:
Rick Perry
Rand Paul
Mike Lee

If my arm is twisted behind my back:

Scott
Martinez

If a gun held to my head:

Kasich

I’ll write in Cruz if:

Bush
Romney
Christie


20 posted on 04/09/2014 11:55:29 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Well if we dont split our votes over trivial crap, like in 2012, then this wont be an issue.

Hopefully we will be focused on whom can articulate the conservative message more than whose kids have the whitest teeth or who can recite a bible verse the best.


21 posted on 04/09/2014 11:59:13 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I hear you and I like your list.

A Governor for pres and a Senator for VP would be a nice experience... especially folks who actually WORKED for a living before politics.


22 posted on 04/09/2014 12:35:16 PM PDT by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I’m not that concerned about that issue, because our borders really aren’t that open - unless you count the airports, through which most of our initially legal immigrants arrive. I’m concerned about the huge numbers of African and Middle Eastern Muslims Obama has LEGALLY admitted to this country, actually taking away from the Latin American quota and thereby making more Latin Americans illegal. The 40% of visa-overstayers he mentioned are in their majority Africans, Middle Easterners, Russians and Chinese, partly because Latin Americans simply can’t even get visas, even if they wanted to overstay them. I read somewhere (can’t cite it, sorry) that the Chinese are the largest number of these.

However, my point was that Jeb Bush, like all the other GOP-e potential candidates, doesn’t just fail on one issue, but on his whole outlook, which is “the more government the better.”

If I had to say that there was one common viewpoint or theme in the GOP-e candidates, it would be love for government and the desire to extend and expand government. That’s the true dream of every “progressive.”


23 posted on 04/09/2014 4:40:50 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

24 posted on 04/09/2014 11:39:17 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Cruz and/or Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson