‘Some of You Will Be Angry at Me’: Mark Levin Makes 2016 Endorsement
Conservative talk show host Mark Levin endorsed Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) for president Wednesday on his recently-launched television program.
“I’ve decided I’m going to let you know who I support for president of the United States by the end of this discussion and why,” Levin said at the outset of a 47-minute video. “Some of you will be angry at me. Some of you will think I’m the greatest thing since sliced bread. Think as you will, but at least listen to what I have to say.”
After discussing the founding of the U.S., Levin said his “purpose here tonight is not to trash any candidate.”
“My purpose here tonight is to tell you why I support Ted Cruz for president of the United States,” he said. “I support Ted Cruz for president of the United States because I believe everything I’ve just discussed with you.”
“He appreciates, he embraces, he understands, and he has fought for throughout his life too. That is the Constitution, the republic, individual sovereignty, the separation of powers, the Bill of Rights, family, faith, a secure border, our national security,” Levin said. (Read more from “‘Some of You Will Be Angry at Me’: Mark Levin Makes 2016 Endorsement” HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.
So now the Trump-a-teers will trash Levin. He’ll be called a sellout, not really conservative, a RINO, an establishment hack, yada yada…
But what he really is, is a very thoughtful and analytical Constitutionalist.
As he laid out in his well explained endorsement, Cruz is the ONLY candidate that has demonstrated the ability and the WILL to return the country to the Constitution.
So I guess he joins Glen Beck, Michelle Malkin, George Will, Brent Bozell, Pam Gellar, Rick Perry, Greg Abbott, David Limbaugh, Rush Limbaugh (Cruz is the only choice for conservatives), James Dobson, Tony Perkins, Thomas Sowell, Carly Fiorina, etc., as a RINO sellout, huh?
Trump folks need to put the Kool-Aid down for a while and look at reality. You are being CONNED. Trump is NOT conservative. Trump does NOT care about you. Trump does NOT love the real America and the Constitution. Trump loves Trump, period.
Mike, I think a lot of all these people and agree that Cruz is truly conservative and totally supportive of the Constitution. I would therefore see him as a great choice for AG or even the Supreme Court. But the one quality I find most important is his lack of management skills. As his constituent, I asked for his assistance in getting corrupt government officials off my back in my business. In his run for the Senate he talked of supporting small businesses and ending abuse from government so I contributed multiple times to his campaign and voted for him. But after multiple calls and letters, he/his office did nothing so I finally gave up. Then out of nowhere I got an email thanking me for allowing him to “solve” my problem … and asking me to send money for his Presidential run. In spite of the dirty tricks used by his staff, I truly believe TC to be an honest guy. But he hasn’t a clue what his people are doing or not doing. He has no people management skills. There are only two people in the running with successful management skills: Trump and Kasich. After two terms under a guy with no management skills, I’m looking for someone who has run an organization with success. Cruz and Rubio haven’t and time will prove both to be bright, articulate guys but without executive skills.
And Trump’s history proves him to be a big government progressive that wants whatever is best for him at the time. Talk is cheap.
Trump is FAR from perfect, no argument there, and I know he’s to the left of me. But when the media and elites in both Parties attack anyone who threatens those in power in DC, who the hell wants to run? And Trump isn’t “owned” by anyone. To me, it’s amazing we can get quality people like this to even CONSIDER running, let alone use the energy and capital to do it. Virtually everyone on the original list of Republicans would do a better job than BO, but we eliminated all the successful executives but one! And when you look at the Democrat side you see a guy who’s never accomplished squat and a gal whose decisions got Americans killed and now has the FBI in her business. It’s pathetic but the best qualified folks want nothing to do with the job and to be honest, I wouldn’t either.
Bill, with respect, we all tend to work really hard to justify our own actions. If you are determined to support Trump, you will find a way to justify that.
I can’t do it. I simply cannot ignore the reality of his past positions and his present words. I can’t pretend he is something that he is obviously not.
There are great big red flags all over Trump. When you check them out, the red flags are well justified. My kids’ future is too important to entrust it to a con man.
We don’t have to pretend. Trump is an American who is going to rock the boat and screw things up for a great many in the donor class. He is not guaranteed to make things better for us, but the usual suspects, including Cruz, are guaranteed to go on making things worse.
.
If your kids’ futures are too important to entrust to a con man, that rules out all the other candidates. They’re proven liars, at best. Trump might be real. He’s the only one who hasn’t proven he’s deliberately, consciously anti-American.
.
More of the same is going to produce more of the same, and Cruz is definitely going to be more of the same.
You willfully choose to ignore who Trump has very publicly been for the last 40 years.
Then you willfully choose to ignore Ted Cruz’ record in the Senate and as TX Attorney General.
You make up your own “facts” and reality.
I don’t live in Pretendville. I pay attention to what people actually do, not just what they say they will do.
From the Goldberg File:
Trump said it doesn’t matter what the media writes about you “as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.”
– Trump boasted that his ordeal of avoiding the clap while sleeping around so much amounted to his own “personal Vietnam.”
– He said that John McCain’s ordeal avoiding dying at the hands of his torturers wasn’t heroic.
– As for everyone else’s Vietnam, Trump got out of that by claiming to have a medical condition that instantly healed when hostilities ended.
– He bragged — in print! — about bedding married women and has admitted to cheating on at least two of his wives.
– He boasted that he “whines until I win.”
– He’s condemned Charles Krauthammer, George Will, with far, far more vitriol than he condemns Vladimir Putin, the butchers of Tiananmen, and David Duke.
-The man is so lacking in moral clarity that he dismissed Vladimir Putin’s murdering of journalists by saying, “I think our country does plenty of killing also.”
– This is a man who expresses a passionate desire to change the First Amendment so he can punish journalists who don’t kowtow to him.
– This is a man who praised the mass murder at Tiananmen and criticized Gorbachev for not being as tough-minded.
– This is a man who says he “reads the Bible more than anybody” but can’t — after months of opportunities — speak intelligently about it for 30 seconds.
– This is a man who, by any objective measure, lies nearly as much as Bill Clinton but with a tenth of the skill.
– He lacks the patriotic seriousness to do minimal homework, even when his ignorance has been pointed out time and again. Hugh Hewitt asked Trump about the nuclear triad in August. Several months later, when the question came up again Trump was, if anything, more ignorant.)
– This is a man whose business dealings have been shot through with shady practices, mob ties, and fraudulent claims (also known as “lies”).
– This is a man with a totally thumbless grasp of what the Constitution is about or what conservatism is (“Conservatism means,” according to Trump, “to conserve our money”).
– This is a man who boasted for months that he will torture our enemies and indiscriminately murder their children as a matter of policy.
– This is a man who says that the last Republican president deliberately lied us into war and plays coy about whether 9/11 was an inside job.
And not one establishment Senator backs Cruz, a bonafide “outsider”. Bear that in mind as well.
I do and to me, the fact that Cruz is an “outsider” is a huge plus … I just wish he had some basic management skills. If he did, he’d be the perfect candidate. Having said that, I clearly understand the support TC is getting and I was part of it until I actually dealt with his office.
Cruz is no dummy. He'[s a quick study and will surround himself with able administrators. I don’t see his “lack” of “people-management” skills a problem at all.His fearless pursuit of foundational principles, his analytical and problem-solving skills are his strengths. Many presidents before him managed very little before assuming the presidency and some acquitted themselves very nicely. Cruz will as well.
All of that is true. Unfortunately, Tundra Ted is an internationalist immigrant who is going to continue the flood of immigrants, legal, illegal and mohammedan. His able administrators will be instructed to do more business as usual, only harder and faster. No thanks.
Jim, you are right, Cruz is no dummy. I’d go so far as to say he’s very bright and has a gift when it comes to understanding and applying the meanings of our Constitution, quite likely up there with Scalia. But high level leadership and management ability are “soft” skills that also require an aptitude or gift. I think you’d agree, Ronald Reagan was not our brightest President but if you didn’t see him as an inspirational leader with incredible people skills, you weren’t paying attention. I’ll be blunt here. I provided evidence to Ted Cruz’s office to lock up government officials for violating their own laws. We’re talking about the very stuff he talked about in his campaign to be elected to the Senate. I actually provided him the name of a DOJ chief prosecutor who wanted to prosecute them but after months of letters, emails and telephone conversations with two of his Texas offices and the one in DC, I couldn’t get Ted onboard because he had not a clue what was going on. I DO believe he would have helped me but he had no idea one of his constituents had this problem. By the way, I was a HUGE supporter of Scalia but I wouldn’t vote for him as President either.
All the more reason to support Cruz.
Exactly. But super conservative Mike Lee endorsed him.
Cruz has been fighting the establishment GOP and democrats since he got to congress. Trump is a con artist and a blowhard.
Choose Cruz- 2016
Cruz is a jerk who can’t get along with his fellow internationalists. He’s literally in bed with a CFR member who was part of the team who drafted the blueprint for the North American Union. Trump has been described as a threat to the North American Union. Cruz? He’s no threat to the internationalists.
There you go, lying again.
Heidi Cruz is NOT a member of the CFR.
They’ve also attacked, black-balled Cruz as well. Why?Because Cruz won’t take their status quo, big gov’t sh**. He’s been a demonstratively fearless defender of Conservative, foundational principles. He is the real mccoy. No questions about where he stands on issues or on how exactly he’ll drain the DC swamp.
And yet, over 50 internationalist billionaires have congregated to agree on a strategy to stop Trump. I guess they’ll get around to stopping their boy from Calgary next?
I guess people want “empty vessels” that have done nothing, thus never failed or succeeded, and cannot be criticized. Obama had little to nothing in the way of successes outside of hiring a terrorist to write his faked “memoirs.” The book did well and he was a nobody in the Illinois senate, with nothing but a series of abstentions to account for his time. He didn’t succeed as a lawyer, despite taking the place in law school of someone more qualified but the wrong color, He didn’t succeed because he never tried for more than a minute and found out that it was hard, and you had to work hard, long hours, and win cases and produce. So, he went into electoral politics as a “Kenyan born author” (his words) with a unique background. He was given a perch at the U of Ill not as a professor, not as an assistant prof, not as an adjunct prof, but as a lecturer where he taught Alinsky. And when he community organized? Did that community emerge a bastion of economic success, with low crime, great schools and beautifully renovated neighborhoods? No. Still the same slum.
“… Trump’s history proves him to be a big government progressive …”
.
Just like Cruz. Just like Bush, and Rubio, and Hillary, and 0bammy, and all the rest of them. Except that Trump is at least promising to put America first. He is at least promising to close our borders. He may be lying, but we know all those others are lying. Do you see the difference? Trump might come through. No other candidate will do any of that, guaranteed. Trump might. That’s a huge difference.
.
If it turns out that Trump does none of what he promised, we will still have elected someone who is a nationalist. We will have proven that a candidate can get elected just by promising to put America and Americans ahead of mohammedan and Central American invaders. If Trump turns out to be a liar, as we know the other candidates are, in 2018 and 2020 we will have a number of good nationalist candidates, running to do what Trump promised. If Trump is telling the truth, we win sooner. If he’s lying, we win later. There is no way for Americans to lose by electing Trump.
.
Trump is going to be very bad for the internationalists. That’s why over 50 donor-class internationalist billionaires got together recently to try to get rid of Trump. That’s an unbeatable endorsement for him.
Of them all, CRUZ has been a dyed-in-the-wool Conservative who nearly single-handedly taken on the Establishment and other big government types. He has demonstrated/proven his bonafides as a true Conservative. Trump has been all over the map and has relied upon slogans.
Jim, see my reply above on why I don’t see “dyed-in-the-wool Conservative” and “big government progressive” as two different things. We need a new word for people who oppose big government and internationalism and are pro-constitution. Maybe patriot? Whatever word we settle on, it won’t describe Cruz, who is an internationalist, big government progressive, dyed-in-the-wool Conservative (whatever conservative means).
And four times Trump had to file bankruptcy for his businesses. He claims it is a common “business” tactic but it does not show that he is the excellent businessman he claims to be.
I would suggest all trump supporters watch “The Trump Tapes Vol 1” and “You’ve Been Trumped”.
Your statement I is silly.
Please try to use complete, coherent sentences.
Mike, I think that one is a lost cause.
Is this silly too?
Trump brags that in doing business he gives a lot of money to politicians in order to get things he wants done.
That is called Pay to play. Will he be on the receiving end as a politician? In my mind it is corruption no matter what side you are on the paying or receiving.
Okay, yes you are so correct. Corruption is happening in the current administration, right?
Corruption is around the world and in the USA too, pretty much everywhere. On corruption you and I agree.
On bankruptcy, yes it could become corrupt, but is not necessarily corrupt. It is actually completely legal. Now if the land was purchased, like many people purchase used cars and claim to the DMV that they paid less in order to save paying more in tax, then that is cheating. Yes cheating begins in early childhood. Cheating is also very common in the majority of people.
So in conclusion there are only perfectly imperfect people, in varying degrees.
Sad but true.
I am not a perfect person but I attempt to live my life by certain principles.
I was always taught to ask three questions before taking some action.
1. Is it legal?
2, Is it ethical?
3. Is it moral?
I was also taught and believe if it comes to asking those three questions the best path is to not take that action.
I believe many in politics and Trump from what I have learned about him, will skirt the edges of all three questions if they think it will benefit them.
Just what has Trump, in your thinking, skirted regarding the three questions? Legal is the primary secular law in your mind, or God’s Laws?
Also is ethical and moral pretty much the same or not?
From My Book “A Primer for Conservative Activism”: You are a perfect example of why our country is in serious trouble. Lazy thinking and ignorance (lack of knowledge) are what allow personality cults and disastrous politicians to be elected.
***
Legality in our society is determined by laws passed on a national, state, county, or local level. These can range from minor traffic regulations to capital murder. If you look at the history of law in this country dealing with serious crime, it almost always has the basis of law founded in moral teachings of religion. “Thou shalt not kill” is a perfect example. Murder is considered a serious crime in every culture for the very reason it is a universal truth that the unlawful taking of another human life is morally wrong.
The move by modern secularists has eroded this basic concept of what should be or should not be legal in our society. There are laws and court rulings that legalize certain acts that by the judgment of a vast majority of our society are morally and ethically wrong. Taking the life of an unborn child for the “convenience” of the parent or parents is legal but is considered morally wrong by a large percentage of our society. The use of imminent domain to strip ownership of property from an individual so that another private individual, corporation, or government can profit monetarily is ethically and morally wrong but is now legal according to the Supreme Court. Schools are allowed to legally interfere with the parents’ wishes to instill their own moral and ethical values in their children. Legislators are not called to account when they put the welfare of special interest groups above the people they were elected to represent. Even though present law allows them legally to do this, it is morally and ethically wrong.
The origin of ethics can be found in the Greek word ethikos, meaning “arising from habit.” So we can see that ethics is based on a history of actions found generally acceptable within a society, profession, or group. In this light, something that is ethical for one segment of civilization may not be ethical elsewhere or may vary even within the same society. Ethics then can be dependent on social, legal, religious, or political ideologies or changes of these ideologies within a society, profession, or other group of closely related individuals. Even with this ability to be modified, ethics usually change slowly, depending upon the gradual acceptance from most of the members of a society, profession, or group.
Ethics can be somewhat of a nebulous concept, so many professions have established written codes of ethics to guide their members in conduct that will reflect positively with other segments of society.
****
Morality is different from ethics. Morality is usually considered a more serious aspect of human behavior. Morality is more closely related to a real choice between good and evil, right and wrong on a very primitive level or long-term religious or societal concepts. It is closely related to what some persons refer to as universal truths. These truths are aspects of human behavior that are innate in the human psyche and cross societal, religious, and political boundaries. Even so, morality can change and has so historically. A classic historical example, comparing all civilizations in the past to the recent time frame of moral acceptance, is slavery. Up to very recently as compared to all of human history, slavery was acceptable. Now it is morally repugnant to almost every society on earth.
Trump constantly brags how he has BOUGHT and PAID for FAVORS from politicans.
Actually that is very silly. Pay to play is the way the system works right now. Trump gets bagged on for being a good business man and for being a bad one. You have done it right here. You are naïve to believe that the other candidates aren’t paying to play. As a matter of fact Trump is paying for his entire campaign out of pocket. He owes nobody. I’m going to tell you right now your candidate can’t say that and is playing to pay way more so than Trump is!
Bankruptcy is a way to re-organize a business….if you ever owned a business, you would know this. Mitt Romney did the same thing we he was “hurting the little people” and purchased failing businesses…they set up a plan to repay the lenders and save the business.
Is this ethical business practice?
***
From Wikipedia:
Trump Winery (formerly “Kluge Vineyard and Estate”) is a Virginia winery situated on Trump Vineyard Estates in Charlottesville, VA. The vineyard was purchased by American business mogul Donald Trump in April 2011[1] and was officially opened in October 2011.[2] President Eric Trump, Donald Trump’s son, oversees everything from winemaking and marketing to global distribution and sales.[3] Donald Trump no longer owns Trump Winery as he gave it to his son Eric.
Acquisition Controversy (screw something up so you can buy it cheap)
Trump bought the 1,300-acre vineyard and winery for a fraction of its original value. Patricia Kluge had owned the property and spent much of her $100-$200 million fortune over two decades developing it into a winery; as her finances dwindled, so did her chances of retaining the property. Bank of America owned the mortgage on the mansion itself and was foreclosing, but the surrounding property remained in a Kluge family trust. Trump, a longstanding friend of Patricia Kluge, bought the 200 acres surrounding the property directly from the Kluge family for less than $500,000; he then placed “No Trespassing” signs around the property and allowed the lawns to become overgrown. This warded off potential buyers and gave Trump the appearance of exclusive access to the property (although the bank’s property interest in the main house included right-of-way easements). This gave Trump the opportunity to buy the land from Bank of America for $3.6 million, a fraction of the nearly $16 million the bank had paid at the foreclosure auction to retain the property.
Ethical business? I don’t think so!
Sounds like he was smarter than Bank of America? I’d buy a distressed property from a bank if I knew what I was doing. He followed the law. Was it better for the Bank to foreclose and wait for someone else to take it off them at also a fraction of a cost? At least his friend got $500,000 rather than nothing. And, by the way. Are we now feeling sorry for Bank of America?
There is a vast difference between buying a distressed property and intentionally taking actions to make a portion of that property distressed, run down and unattractive to other buyers so you can purchase the rest at fire sale prices.
Trump is ethically challenged!!
Not really. Boo hoo to Bak of America?
There are many chapters. Some are a temporary in which one negotiates restructuring with one’s creditors. Here is a better description of Trump’s cases and a definition: “Trump’s four bankruptcies were Chapter 11 reorganizations which are designed to restructure businesses without shutting them down completely. The purpose is to ‘save’ the business, as opposed to other forms of bankruptcy which would liquidate the company…” Many successful airlines, for example, have used this chapter.
“… agree that Cruz is truly conservative …”
“Conservative” has gotten us to the place we are today. Conservatives have preserved and expanded every progressive program after it was put in place. If Cruz is conservative, it is only in the sense that he is going to try to conserve the status quo.
We desperately need someone who will try to overturn what the progressives have done, not someone who will try to conserve it.
Nels,
That makes no sense at all. Cruz has nearly single-handedly taken on the CINOs (Conservatives In Name Only) and, of course, the Progressives, the latter of which there are many on the Right as well.
Very pleased–and not at all surprised–that another unshakable Conservative, Sen. Lee of Idaho, came out today to strongly support Cruz.
I don’t know your Senator Lee. I do know that the political establishment, the donor-class and the punditry have all defined Bush, Boner, McStain, Murcowski, Ryan and the other progressive Republicans as “conservative.” If that’s conservative, I want no part of conservative.
.
As I said above, conservatives in office have conserved every liberal policy once it was enacted. Social Security, Medicare, female suffrage, homosexuals in the military – once the progressives had implemented them, your conservatives defended them and expanded them.
.
Remember “don’t ask, don’t tell”? That was a Clinton progressive policy that your conservatives were trying to conserve when 0bammy ended it. Remember the Medicare drug coverage expansion that Bush pushed through? That’s what conservative means: someone who defends liberals and their policy. No thanks.
.
So, Trump isn’t a conservative? Thank God! Maybe he’ll do something different than the conservatives who have helped the liberals bring us to this sorry mess.
Most of what he says makes no sense. Don’t lose sleep trying to make it so.
He not a natural born citizen….born in Canada to a Cuban non-citizen father and an American citizen mother….naturalized…yes…natural born…NO….Rubio is the same….born in the US to two non-citizen parents he would be called an anchor baby….both are naturalized NOT natural born….as as a Constitutional lawyer, Cruz knows this.
That argument is over, get on with your life and support Cruz if you value America liberty and freedom.
News flash: The birther train derailed about 2 months ago. Get a clue and a legitimate point.
Cruz can’t win Clinton. He cant win Trump!
Again with the incomplete sentences and thought. (just like Trump)
If you mean he can’t BEAT Clinton, then the polls don’t support your claim. Clinton beats Trump, but loses to Cruz.
I know, I know. You will reject those polls and accept the ones you like.
787, are you paying any attention? Trump’s negatives are gargantuan and he hasn’t won 50% of the vote in any GOP primary. Trump cannot win against the Shrillary.
Choose Cruz- 2016- the real outsider.
If Trump wins and Clinton does not get indicted, Clinton will destroy Trump in any debate. Listen to Trump speak. He talks at about the Fourth grade level, rarely completes a sentence, and cannot present any policy statement without repeating some thing over and over while avoiding the core question all together.
Trump obfuscates because he has no core principles.
No, no reason to trash someone because they support a Republican. I reserve my trashing for those who support Hillary. I’d be happy with either Pres. Trump or Pres. Cruz.
Interesting. So you’d be happy with a Progressive or a Conservative? A Statist or a Constitutionalist?
You’re pretty easy to please, huh?
I did not say that. Please TRY to understand. I campaign, contribute and vote for my first choice. There may in some cases be two candidates that I like equally. However I am only one person and one vote. A candidate is finally chosen by millions. In the general I have two choices. In THIS election I believe that the candidates will be Clinton and Trump. I prefer CRUZ but by preferring Cruz I don’t need to “hate” or disparage any other candidate. But come the general election I will NOT walk off the field as did many (4 million estimated) so-called Republicans to hand Obama a second term. Their over blown self described high ethics gave us 4 more destructive years of Obama. We would have been much better off with Romney. I will vote for Trump over Hillary. As my mother used to say, “Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.” I believe all our candidates are superior to Clinton or Bernie and we’re lucky to have so many good choices. And I don’t need to “hate” Kasich to like Rubio or Cruz or Trump, I can respect all but support my preference.
I don’t hate any of the republican candidates. I held my nose and voted for McCain. I held my nose and voted for Romney. I consider neither of them conservative, but they weren’t necessarily going to hurt the country and were far better than Obama.
Trump, on the other hand, will be a disaster as president. So would Hillary. I cannot, with a clear conscience, vote for (which indicates my support for) a person whom I believe will accelerate the destruction of the republic.
I support Cruz strongly, but I could vote for Rubio or Kasich if they were the nominee. I could have voted for Carson, Bush, Walker, Jindal, Christie, or any of the other republican options. Some of them I would have had to hold my nose again, but I would have voted for them.
I cannot vote for Trump. He is a phony and a fraud. He is a con man. He will not have my support, although I will vote. I pray that I don’t have to make that decision a reality, but I must be able to look at my children with a clear conscience.
Maybe so but as Pres. Reagan said, vote for the most conservative candidate who has a chance of winning. Can we agree that Trump is more conservative than Trump? Think gun rights, religious rights, think education, think Obamacare. We know that Hillary will continue every one of Obama’s policies and not rescind one of his unconstitutional or illegal or harmful EOs. So if the choice is Trump or Hillary, I’ll vote for Trump. By not voting you will have your exalted conscience (remember, we’re talking about politicians, not your minister) can be “clean” but you will do exactly what Hillary and the Dems are working feverishly to have you do: paint Trump as unacceptable so stay home. Instead we should paint Hillary as unacceptable, corrupt and a big phony and unacceptable to Democrats, especially to the youthful idiots who support Sanders, so hope they sit on THEIR hands. Don’t be one of them because you will be accepting the premise that sitting on your hands, walking off the field (whatever analogy you want) is somehow more exalted than making the better choice. In life we don’t usually have the best, but must settle for the better.
It is my humble observation as an amateurish psychologist that many who believe so strongly in their moral uprightness when choosing a political candidate are trying to compensate for other areas in their lives that they have little or no control. Perhaps they have compromised quite a bit on their choice of a spouse or friends. Anyway keep in mind that, paraphrasing Reagan, we don’t need to think of someone that we agree with 80% of the time as a 20% enemy.
ICruz is ineligible we have already had one foreign bred liar in chief in our White House, we do not ever want another. Rubio Cruz, Obama, Nikki Haley nor Bobby Jindal are eligible to sit in our White House as president. I have heard Levin say that he is but He is as wrong as can be. Cruz did not even have a US birth cirtificate until he got ready for a passport when he was in high school. We must protect our constitution and Levin nor no one else not even a judge can change this law without a constitutional amendment. The law stands! Read article II section 1 clause 5.
Your about 2 months late Larry. The birther horse died a few miles back. I’d suggest getting off. Have you noticed that nobody is talking about that any more? (except you and a few wing nut “experts” on these forums) That’s because it was nonsense to begin with and it still is.
Far more than just Levin have opined he is absolutely eligible. Article II doesn’t define NBC.. Get a clue.
When they described Levin, they miss-spelled cuckservative. Levin is backing more business as usual, to win the applause of his liberal friends. If Levin is a conservative, I’m not. I’m an American, and I’m going to vote for a candidate who will at least promise to put America and Americans ahead of the rest of the world. That leaves Cruz the internationalist out of the running. He won’t even lie about doing that.
Trump is the only candidate who can break up the minority voting blocks the Democrats depend on. If Trump gets 20+% of the black vote, and 30+% of the hispanic vote, no Democrat candidate can win, and Trump can do that. A big part of the reason is that the open borders policy has been destroying the middle class minorities, and they know it. They will vote for an America-first candidate, even if he’s Republican. They will never for a Republican internationalist over a Democrat internationalist.
Trump is the only candidate who might build a wall, the only candidate who might exclude jihadists, the only candidate who might try to protect American industries. He might be lying about some or all of that, but the other candidates won’t even lie about putting us first. With the other candidates, we are guaranteed more of the same.
Nels, all your mights are exactly that, just empty promises by a blowhard con artist. You want more of the status quo, support Trump because he can’t beat the Shrillary.
Choose Cruz- 2106
I’d rather have a might than a definitely not. Cruz is a definitely not on everything that matters. Trump is a maybe. Maybe always beats no.
You seem to prefer the certainty of failing in the approved fashion over a chance of winning.
Levin’s support for Cruz has been no secret for a long time now. And I agree with Levin’s analysis as to why he supports Cruz. We cannot risk blowing this election yet again. The future of this republic hangs in the balance, and Trump’s unfavorability rating is perilous. Support Cruz, a real constitutionalist, and let’s move on to victory in November. We have no other choice. Everything hangs in the balance.
Love Levin and I’m fine with Cruz but support Trump. Pollsters have been notoriously wrong. Trump will beat Hillary assuming she doesn’t have him ‘put away’. Remember too that all candidates have baggage. Ex. Cruz supported TPP before he changed. Trump sees the Islamist and border problem and intends to solve it. Cruz isn’t as strong on that.
GS, Trump cannot be counted on to follow up on any promises he has made unless they benefit him directly. Trump is a con artist and a left winger.
Choose Cruz- 2106
Another elist traitor
If you want a Shrillary presidency then keep supporting the blowhard con artist Trump. Trump cannot beat the Shrillary but Cruz can and we can’t afford another 4 years of the Marxist socialist agenda of another democrat.
Choose Cruz- 2106
Yes, Trump can beat Hillary. And I’m a Cruz supporter.
Yeah Trump has way more momentum than Cruz and when you hear stories of 30,000 Dems in Massachusetts switching parties to vote for Trump it kind of proves that Trump has way more crossover appeal than Cruz does. I think Trump has a better a chance of beating Hillary. Upholding the Constitution as well as Cruz would….not so sure!
Democrats crossing to vote for Trump may be evidence of sabotage of the Republican process, not of Trump’s appeal to supporters of a party not renowned for honest behavior!
PRP, it may be a little far fetched but there’s also the possibility that democrats are voting for Trump because they believe the Shrillary can beat Trump so they’re crossing over to vote for Trump to help insure Trump is the GOP nominee.
Choose Cruz- 2016
I think it’s more because Shillary and the Bern are just two absolutely horrible choices for POTUS. Having said that the powers that be want Shillary and it’s probably Shillary that we are going to get!
It’s always been Hillary and it was decided a long tine ago by the power brokers. Sanders is a side show to take the heat off of the lying corrupt Hillary. How else to explain Sanders winning more votes but getting less delegates in the primaries.
Not mad at you at all Mark….If Trump wins the nomination I will vote for Trump. If Cruz wins the nomination I will gladly vote for Cruz. Nobody else is acceptable in my book.
There is just as much evidence to believe Hillary is innocent as there is to believe Trump is a conservative.
Both of them claim it, but what we see and their histories say otherwise.
People need to quit being suckers. P T Barnum had it right.