Wednesday, April 6, 2016

On Wisconsin

State motto: "If you MUST sin, Wisconsin!"
It's hard for Hope n' Change to find exactly the right words to describe the game-changing impact of the stunning and totally unexpected voting results from yesterday's Wisconsin primary.

Mostly because, at the time of this writing, we have no idea how the primaries turned out because millions of Wisconsinites are still at the polls casting their votes before returning home for a delicious dinner of artery-clogging cheese (although it being Taco Tuesday, they may be enjoying cheese con queso).

According to political pundits who, frankly, should just shut their pieholes already, Cruz will decisively beat Trump on the GOP side and cause The Donald's campaign to go into a yuuuge death spiral. Unless it's Trump who wins decisively, thereby clinching the Republican nomination and forcing Cruz to return to Canada where he'll wander aimlessly in the vast maple syrup-producing wilderness wearing beaver pelts and mumbling in Spanish.

On the Democrat side, the (ahem) experts are predicting a win for Bernie Sanders because Hillary can't rely on the state's nearly nonexistent black vote, especially after she declared that unborn black persons have no constitutional rights. Okay, she didn't single out the black unborn, but it was implied - right? Moreover, Wisconsin voters like the idea of a president Bernie Sanders because he'll need to buy unbelievable amounts of cheese for government handouts. On the other hand, maybe Hillary will win because of a deal she made with the devil involving her grandchild's soul (her own was traded away decades ago).

Whatever the election results turn out to be, one thing is certain: when we enter the voting booth in November to choose between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden, we'll wonder why the heck we even bothered with primaries.

And THAT'S what makes it American Cheese!


Joseph ET said...

Now the political pundits are all speculating what will happen at the contested convention. “Maybe they will find someone to just drop-in and be nominated.” For the first time I’m hearing about 150 uncommitted GOP delegates that can vote anyway they want much like the democrats have their super delegates. The party elites have their way of controlling the outcome to their liking.

I’m hoping that after this election, someone can find a way to change the laws or rules to make it possible to create a viable third party. It seems the current laws or rules are designed to make it almost impossible. Maybe a genuine conservative party, not a progressive lite as we have now.

It appears that this election will be the first one in many years that the California primary will make a difference. That will make it FUN TO VOTE AGAIN.

james daily said...

"why the heck we even bothered with primaries."
Ain't that the truth.

Emmentaler Limburger said...

Wait! Without primaries, how could we be enjoying this nationally-embarrassing and devilishly revealing circus going on around us?! Shoot - we're no better than our old nemesis USSR, ruled by a party - even if ours is ostensibly split in two...

Anonymous said...

This country is screwed.

Fred Ciampi said...

So, we all know by now that Cruz won the big W. In his acceptance speech all he talked about was Donald Trump. (Rhetorical question;) Why didn't he just tell all of us how he will make our country great again? And why oh why does he start each sentence nice and loud and end the last few words in a whisper? His message loses its impact when one cannot hear the last half or it. If he wins the presidency I hope he doesn't run his administration like that. "IT'S TIME FOR THIS COUNTRY TO GO FORTH and do what we must (whisper whisper whispre.......).

Judi King said...

Ted Cruz WAS interviewed by Megyn Kelly and he DID address the issues whenever she asked him, after she got done baiting him with Trump questions. He does have valid solutions if anyone chooses to listen.

Boligat said...

Why have primaries? Because we are stuck on stupid and the MSM needs something to bray about. Besides, well, have you seen those pics of Melania? Would we have seen them any other way without getting a mag in a plain brown paper wrapping in the mail?

But I digress.

I propose that each party have a national convention at which the party leaders trot out their candidate, then we have a national primary to pick two candidates, then we have a three month campaign and then the general election. The winners of the primary can court the parties of the losers for support in the general election.

I'm tired of the parties using my tax money for them to pick their candidates without giving me a say in the matter.

Geoff King said...

The circus act and freak show that is the Republican and Democrat primaries has caused the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, to recieve 11 percent of the popular vote in a recent poll. The first time a third party candidate has hit double-digits.
If the so-called two party system continues on it's present course, there is a chance that Johnson will have to be included in the Presidential Debates this fall. If that occurs, there is a slim chance that fed-up voters will not choose the "lesser of two evils", but will instead vote for option three.
I know I will.

CenTexTim said...

Geoff King +1

Judi King said...

Option 3 if Trump is Rep. candidate. I sincerely hope there will be a REAL conservative party someday.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Joseph ET- At the point a contest convention becomes an inevitability, I look forward to ignoring the rest of the primary process.

@James Daily- The primary process is fundamentally flawed, although I don't have an immediate plan for anything better. Trump's earliest victories came from simple math: a dozen other candidates were splitting the conservative vote. This is how we've ended up with candidates like John McCain in the past. It isn't working.

@Emmentaler Limburger- One of the things I most dislike about the aptly-named "circus" is that it captures every news cycle...leaving Obama a clear field to raise whatever hell he wants with little scrutiny. World events don't stop for American primaries - though you wouldn't know it from watching the news.

@Anonymous- I'm trying hard to find a good reason to disagree with you. Maybe it will occur to me sometime later...

@Fred Ciampi- Your observation made me laugh; in the past, I was an audio producer and directed voice talent (announcers) when reading scripts. It always drove me nuts when people would attack the beginning of a line strongly and then have the energy peter out - or disappear completely - by the end. One thing is for sure, if Cruz wins the presidency there will be plenty of excellent impersonations of his distinctive, nasal vocal delivery.

@Boligat- Melania is pleasing eye candy, but does anyone believe she'd be with Trump if he wasn't a billionaire? Still, if she's willing to appear nekkid on White House Christmas cards, it might help swing some votes.

Regarding the primaries, I hope this silly season will result in some possible changes being made to the process - though the powers that be will surely drag their heels.

@Geoff King (& CenTexTim & Judi King)- I'd happily vote Libertarian if I wasn't afraid of it opening the door for a Hillary presidency. I like the Libertarian mindset, but fear it can never get a significant following among voters because too few really want to rely on their own independence and responsibility.

Rod said...

Yes we need a lot of change (or is it undoing change?); and I'm thinking still two parties but eventually the Republican Party as we know it now won't be one of them. We know the Dems are here for a long time; after all, they're winning by crookedness, deceit, lies, dependency & current incumbency. By greed too, but that's shared with the other big party.

Meanwhile a third party that makes sense & can win will have my vote. As for Melania's character: she's ALSO shown a lot more class & composure than any of the leading candidates.

REM1875 said...

Yes I did enjoy the pictures of trump's wife but from a purely artist standpoint you understand.(although I am sure that I could enjoy more poly-ticks like that)
I am still fine with either of the top 2 republicans which ever one gets it.
The enemy is to the left of us.
We will all to unite to slay the hildabeast after the conventions.

Pour encourager les âutres said...

Send Drumpf back to Sanders and Clinton, from whence he cometh.

Trump is scum. Clinton is scum. Sanders is scum. What more does a voter need to know?

Hey, was reading this morning about one of Trump's stalwart backers, the National Policy Institute. Trump supporters. Skin heads. Just like Drumpf/Sanders/Clinton and their ilk.

John the Econ said...

I'm sorry, but a brief moment of clarity finally penetrated the hoopla last week and it became clear to me: No matter what happens over the next 6 months, it's going to be Hillary. At the end of the day, the reality remains that over 50% of the electorate is in some way collecting a government check every month, and Hillary is the one candidate that will be seen as most likely to keep those checks coming as they have for the last quarter century. Of the remaining four candidates, she's the only candidate that clearly implies that.

"One of the things I most dislike about the aptly-named "circus" is that it captures every news cycle...leaving Obama a clear field to raise whatever hell he wants with little scrutiny."

Speaking of, did you catch the silly things he said yesterday? While on his carbon-fueled fundraising junket he took time out to complain about "corporate tax inversions", which are now commonplace since the US has the highest corporate rates in the world because foreign taxes paid are not deductible like they are everywhere else.

The one comment that caught me was was his comments about how impractical Trump's suggestion that we tax the billions in remittances sent back to Mexico by illegal aliens to fund "the wall". Really? They have no problem demanding that calculate and remit sales taxes to nearly 5000 juristidctions, but Western Union couldn't deal with collecting a remittance tax to Mexico?

Last week, the White House censored a video of French president Hollande when he said "Islamic terrorism". They didn't censor the whole video, just the words "Islamic terrorism". A "technical glitch" they said.

So not only can the President or his minions not utter the words, they can't allow other world leaders to do so either. And as soon as they get control over the Internet, you won't be allowed to either.

Who would have expected this Trump supporter? Uber-lefty Susan Sarandon might find herself voting for Donald Trump if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee:

"The actress revealed on Monday that Trump might be a better choice than Clinton because "some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately."

“If he gets in, then things will really explode," she told MSNBC."

What Sarandon forgets is that in most "revolutions", useless intellectuals and artists such as herself are the first to go.

And finally: Paypal is pulling out of North Carolina over their "Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act".

Okay, fine. But how does PayPal square that stance with happily doing business in the dozens of countries where homosexuality itself isn't only illegal, but is frequently punishable by imprisonment, torture and/or death?

And once again, might I point out to the women out there how unless you're shopping for an abortion, you've been sold out by the alphabets who supposedly used to be concerned about "women's issues". 20 years ago, the Progressive mantra was that anything that could possibly make a woman feel "uncomfortable" (like an off-color joke) was immoral and should be made illegal and actionable. Today, they're arguing that any guy who doesn't "identify" as a hetrosexual male should feel free to pop into the women's showers. Feel "uncomfortable" yet?

Walter1694cir said...

This is all too CHEESY for me!

Romano Cambozola said...

If you like the Libertarian mindset, try attending a state Libertarian convention and pay attention to what crawls out of the woodwork: it ain't pretty. That experience cured me almost completely. Almost. I still think that there's a chance that a Libertarian could make a very good First Selectman or mayor or state legislator. Beyond that level they're just too dangerous.

Geoff King said...

As long as the majority of you have the mindset of "I'd happily vote Libertarian if I wasn't afraid of it opening the door for a Hillary presidency", this country of ours is doomed.
The "lesser of two evils" is still evil. Voting with that criteria simply destroys your grandchildren's chance at having a decent life, if not your own. That, to me, is extremely self- centered and is the very reason why our country is in the state it is in.
Go ahead and kick the can down the road, I am sure your offspring will be very proud of you for that.
Considering only around 17% of the American colonists supported the Revolution, it is a very good thing that our Founding Fathers did not decide to "kick the can down the road".
A nation of sheep will follow whatever sheepdog that offers them the easiest life, but they will still be controlled and the next sheepdog will control them even more.
I now hope that Hillary wins. Not because I believe she is the " lesser of two evils", but because I believe she could cause the turning point in our nation's history where true Americans will finally wake up and take their country back from the evil "lesser of two evils" empire that has taken it over.

GenEarly said...

Voting for or against Chamberpot Repubs or Marxist DemocRats seems entertaining all the while the Soopremes whittle away like the termites they are.....

If one part of the Feral Gubmint don't get you, another will. Welcome to the USSA, comrades.

Geoff King said...

I am going to vote for Michael Myers, because-at least-he's not Freddie Krueger.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Rod- I agree that the Dems aren't going to change, and we need a "second party" that isn't what the current Republican party is. As far as voicing support for a third party that can win, I think you've identified the key problem. No third party is likely to win in the current atmosphere.

@REM1875- I think Melania's pictures are a non-issue. It's not like she was a porn actress; she was a supermodel who did a tasteful (pretty much PG-13) nude shoot for a respected national magazine. And yes, the enemy is still Hillary - not Trump or Cruz.

@Pour encourager les âutres- I don't think Trump (or any candidate) can be blamed for who chooses to back him, unless he's actively solicited that vote.

@John the Econ- I mentioned earlier that the electorate doesn't have the stomach for Libertarian principles, and you clearly state why that is: way too many of them are getting a check they don't want to lose.

Obama's one-two punch of tax policies that send companies overseas while suggesting we couldn't keep American dollars from being wired to Mexico is a real head shaker. The man is an idiot and a liar.

I'll just "thumbs up" the rest of your comments to save some typing time (my hand is still annoying me).

@Walter1694cir- Gouda you to say so.

@Romano Cambozola- I once dropped by a Unitarian church to see if it might be a good fit for me. It wasn't. And perhaps the Libertarian movement might be the same way; best in small doses.

@Geoff King- The people who say "I'd happily vote Libertarian if I wasn't afraid of it opening the door for a Hillary presidency" are saying that they would vote for Trump (or Cruz), which I'd think you'd be in favor of. Right now, the "never Hillary" movement on the right needs to outweigh every other consideration.

If Hillary was to win, it wouldn't matter if she effed things up enough to cause America to wake up: with a few Supreme Court appointments, it wouldn't make a whit of difference if Americans were awake, angry, or anything else: our nation would be toast.

@GenEarly- The question of Supreme Court appointments is HUGE. Things are already fraying at the edges without Scalia on the bench. And while it's not what the founding fathers intended, the Supreme Court may well be THE most important branch of government now.

@Geoff King- For vice president, I can't decide between Leatherface or Jason...

Anonymous said...

This can't be true. Fox News had an EXPERT on today. He discussed the drubbing that Trump got and how pitifully he is going to lose in November.

And I was fine with that. Until they brought on the next expert who pointed out that Cruz was going to get his ass beat in New York for some reason, and it was a real fine effort on his part to keep his composure in the face of such humiliation.

Ok. I guess I could swallow that. Then they got me all riled up again with another half hour piece on how Bernie Sanders was going to make the world fair for everybody and it ain't gonna cost nuthin'. And how he beat Hillary Clinton's ass in 42 of the last seven primaries.

I'm burnt out on the whole damned circus. I don't care any more. I'll vote for the last Republican standing, whoever he is. As long as it ain't Hillary Clinton.

Popular Front said...

@Fred Ciampi - what you were saying about Cruz's speech delivery reminds me of a comedy sketch Down Here several elections ago. The premise was that the candidate could say any nonsense he liked as long as he included the words "...FOR AMERICA!"

"I'm going to start a war....FOR AMERICA!!" (canned wild applause)
"I'm going to raise taxes sky high....FOR AMERICA!!" (canned wild applause)
"I'm going to build a wall on the Mexican border*....FOR AMERICA!!" (canned wild applause) and so on. Quite funny at the time.

*He actually said that so Trump's idea is nothing new.

Anonymous said...

Are you sure you have nothing to do with this:

Pour encourager les âutres said...

Ah, Good Doctor, but the NPI is so Trump. That is the point. That is what Trump is all about. And he does not discourage it - remember the David Duke thing? Trump had no problem with that either. He may not have actively solicited but he also is aware of it and actively does not impugn it, as he should.

Same with PPP. And so on. We are the company that we keep.

Judi King said...

@ encourager: Yes, actions speak louder than words. This clown's actions show his true self which is NOT what I want for a president. I understand that a vote for a third party or a non vote will elect Hilliery and I've always opposed that, but I can't vote for Trump.

Linda Lee said...

I started off pretty excited about quite a few of the Republican candidates, then started to watch and research. Some dropped out before I dug very deeply, but it was amazing to me how an extremely false image - either good or bad - can be created for political candidates, and how easily Americans, who are supposedly savvy to media, will buy into it. My conclusion, after reading hundreds of articles and watching video of interviews going back to the 80's, is that finding the truth is like peeling an onion. I am now a former Cruz supporter. I will not vote for him under any circumstances. It's true that he is a liar. He is a vicious distorter and a total fraud. Donald Trump has faults but has been maligned unfairly, not just by his opponents, but by conservative media. It is extremely distressful to see the media and some conservative leaders either do such a sloppy job of follow up on statements, or actually join in on promoting a lie - that Ted Cruz is a constitutionalist, a conservative, and a 'good Christian' when he is not. Also to promote the idea that Donald Trump has no morals and doesn't really care about the country, just his ego, and many other slanders. Not true, and anyone with the time and willingness can still find out the details surrounding all Cruz promotion points or allegations against Trump. People are talking about 'next time' when there will be no next time unless we end up with someone who is actually FOR America, not for a North American Union - and that is Trump. Only Trump. Even now it may be too late to save our country. It looks like all the forces of hell are aligned against it, and have been quietly and steadily working to undermine us in every way. It is so obvious that the Republican elites are just as corrupt and unpatriotic and the Democrats, the media is extremely dishonest, and their main target is Trump - for good reason. He is the only one who is actually opposing their evil designs.

Anonymous said...

@Linda McWilliams So in what way is Cruz a liar in all your research? I could swear I have seen you post this same rant in prior blog posts. I guess Trump can fairly say he hasn't lied since he gives no details. He only back tracks, rescinds statements, or claims he was misquoted, but no details on his actual plans. Only "it'll be great".

Though I did find myself in the unenviable position of defending "The Donald" after his abortion/punish women statement. After all, before he back tracked all he really said was "I'll enforce the law." i.e. If Congress made abortion illegal, and a person got an abortion, then whatever penalty Congress wrote into the law would be enforced. I realize in this day and age it is crazy for a president to execute the law (weird executive branch, execute, strange how close those are....).

Pour encourager les âutres said...

@Judi King

Same here. If Trump is the Repub nominee, I am voting Libertarian (for the first time), maybe write-in Cruz, or not voting. I realize that this would seal the deal for Clinton if there are many like me, but the idiotic electorate need to get it good and hard, as Mencken said.

Trump is a crude thug, a bridge too far.

Linda Lee said...

Anonymous, I don't know if you really want to know the answer since you say I ranted. I don't feel that I am ranting but just trying to share some of what I have found in an abbreviated way. In case you seriously have a desire to know,
Cruz has lied about who and what he is, what he has done as a legislator, and his motives. He also regularly misrepresents what Trump says; he is a great spin master in that regard. I believe, with plenty of evidence, that he will not keep most of his promises, any more than the other Republicans we put into office. There may be more coming out on his hypocritical lifestyle as well, or maybe not until later, since he is the main tool at the moment in the concerted effort to discredit and stop Trump. You can find the same information I did if you are willing to search and spend a lot of time on it. I saved some of the links and articles that I read, but I don't have access to them now. I am out of the country until April 16th. I will send you what I have in my files if you email me after the 16th to remind me. (it should be all lower case). In the meantime, if you want to know Trumps positions and ideas, they are online and his books contain some political statements that were highly perceptive. As for Cruz, he has a slick excuse for every shady thing he's been involved in, but keep checking and you will find they don't hold up. Personally, I am really tired of being scammed by the political class, and that is why I spent so much time digging this time around. It is difficult to accept how far down the river we have already been sold, but for now I am holding on to the hope that there is still a chance to reverse the trend toward national self destruction. There is much I dislike about Cruz, but the most important is that he is deeply connected to the New World Order crowd who plan to erase our borders, usurp our sovereignty, and reduce us to third world status as soon as they can (within a decade) - actually they have already started. That is why they are hysterical over Trump saying we must actually and finally secure our border. Cruz calls the CFR a 'nest of vipers' or something like that. His campaign staff is full of those same people. He claimed to be an outsider, something he absolutely is not. He and his father adhere to Dominion Theology, and he has been 'anointed by God' as a 'king' - this theology involves the transfer of wealth from the 'wicked' (whoever is outside their camp) to the 'righteous' (Cruz, et al) - he's just another slimy religionist, greedy for money and power. As to his possible or probable infidelities, the reason it matters is because it is one more piece of evidence that the man is phony. I haven't followed up on that topic, and haven't been following the news much for about a week, but before I left for this trip it looked like he managed (with media help) to deflect it by accusing DT's campaign worker of 'manhandling' the reporter Michelle Fields. I have to stop - I'm on vacation and need a break.

Fred Ciampi said...

Linda McWilliams, very well written. You've done your homework. Enjoy your vacation.

Judi King said...

Ms. McWilliams, you are the epitome of a liar. If you look up the words.....Narcissistic, misogynistic, conceited, vulgar, amoral, unfaithful, phony, braggart, fraud, conman, failed businessman, and master manipulator, you will find Donald Trump (aka Drumpf). Not someone who belongs in OUR White House.

Anonymous said...

@Linda McWilliams Someone who rants, in my opinion, is not a bad thing. Rants to me just mean you are passionate about your position. (May not be other's opinion but there it is.) I just didn't see this post, or (I think) the earlier post have any details so I genuinely wanted to know. I do not like Trump but I want as much info on other candidates as possible.