The Stench of a Contested Convention

Posted on April 11, 2016 by Robert Ringer Comments (65)


For months now, the hottest political topic by far has been the phenomenon of a “contested convention” in the Republican Party. Most people are baffled, because their instinctual sense of fairness tells them that whoever gets the most votes — whether it’s for queen of the high school prom, captain of the football team, or politics — is the winner. Period.

In other words, they don’t think in terms of caveats, special rules, or manipulation of the vote totals. To the average guy, a win is a win. People don’t have time to learn the intricacies of the complicated game of delegate maneuvering.

I’d be willing to bet that before this whole brouhaha began, most people had no idea that someone other than the candidate with the most votes could be handpicked by a small number of party insiders.

The boys in the back room are now coming out into the open and talking in belligerent tones as they explain to the public how the system is designed to work and why this primary season is no different than any other. They tell us that the party leaders have always had the power to change the rules at any time, including at the nominating convention, so it’s no big deal. Business as usual, as they like to say in Washington.

Their explanations are supposed to comfort us, but, without realizing it, when they make it clear that delegates who have been won by Candidate X can be nabbed by Candidate Y at the convention … that someone who dropped out of the race long ago could still be chosen as the nominee … or that someone who didn’t even bother to run at all could be selected as the party’s nominee, it only succeeds in revving up voter anger.

The deep-seated cause of their anger is that when insiders talk like this, they’re so arrogant that they don’t even realize they are actually admitting that the entire system is corrupt — as in, rotten to the core.

They openly admit, for example, that they invented Rule 40 (the “Ron Paul rule”) in 2012, the purpose of which was to keep Ron Paul from having any say-so at the convention. This year, of course, they will have to change Rule 40 because it would shut out John Kasich, not to mention other establishment guys who have already dropped out of the race or didn’t even bother to run.

The bottom line is that the system is rigged to allow a handful of good old boys to keep out boat rockers like Ron Paul, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump and sneak in the John McCains, Marco Rubios, and Mitt Romneys via the back door — even if millions of Republican voters resoundingly reject the latter types.

In other words, the problem is the system itself — a system that makes the votes of millions of people all but irrelevant by simply changing the rules of the game at any time. Government by the people means government by the people — no equivocations, no exceptions, no caveats, no “buts.”

Now that this contested-convention sewage is out in the open for all to see, I believe that the only solution is for the Republican Party to be completely dismantled and replaced by a party that respects two things unequivocally: the Constitution and the will of the majority. Majority rule is still tyranny, to be sure, but minority rule is tyranny times a hundred.

I am deeply concerned that if Republicans and independents don’t take bold steps this year to form a third party, they may never again have the opportunity to do so. Literally, this might be a case of now or never.

I didn’t even bother to mention the Democratic Party, because it’s a whole different animal. In simple terms, it is now a Marxist-driven party that openly lies, steals, cheats, and deceives Americans 365 days a year — and has the arrogance and self-assuredness to taunt them while doing so. The only hope to crush them out of existence is the emergence of a new and very angry third party.

In other words, forming a third party could be a twofer, killing off both wings of the Demopublican Party in one election. I say, bring it on.

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

65 responses to “The Stench of a Contested Convention”

  1. Gary Stone says:

    Ah, the old law of unintended consequences. Perhaps it will bite the demonrats and the dead elephants equally.

    Care to lead the new party, Robert?

  2. FIGMO says:

    If Trump goes to the convention with a clear majority and they steal the nomination from him, I plan to leave the republican party for good, write his name on the general election ballot, never vote for any republican for any office again. I will no longer accept the hold your nose and vote for the lesser evil BS in order to keep a left wing loonie from getting elected. I will vote for whomever is running against the republican and seek a third party to join and support. The republican party has become like that village in Viet Nam. We must destroy it to save it.

    • samarami says:

      Abstain from beans, my friend.


      • Jim Hallett says:

        You are right, Sam, as any support of those who coerce and steal (not to mention, KILL, others) is evil. I voted NO in 2012, as I wanted to make it clear I had not just forgotten to vote, but rather that I found NO ONE worthy to vote for. I had voted for Ron Paul in 2008, but the Establishment managed to keep him off the ballot in my state in 2012 and Mittman and Ovomit were not worthy choices for ANYTHING! I wanted Trump to stay in this primary season, so he could torch the whole damn system, and finally stand up to the lies of the most evil Hildabeast! However, he is surely not the answer to those of us who value freedom.

  3. Scott theczech says:

    Constitution yes, democracy – no! Ours was intended to be a representative government. The rights of the minority must always be respected and protected. Therefore the primary and caucus process should reflect the will of the people and their delegates (which should be elected by the people as well). The delegates should be bound by the will of the people and should not be for sale or lease by power brokers.

  4. Allan L. Vandall says:

    Trump and Cruz should take control of their big EGOs, (Edging God Out,) and form a unified team soon.

    This team could then learn to become truly unbeatable.

    They both will then win the presidency; first the elder Mr. Trump, and then Mr. Cruz, locking up this crucial American job for the next 12 to 16 years!

    Wake up America to the directly honest truth of this perspective!

    Allan L. Vandall

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      Allan, you're right on the money. I have talked about this before. Cruz is very smart, but his ego is getting in the way of his clinching the presidency for himself – eight years from now, that is. If he were willing to subordinate his ego and make a deal with Trump wherein he would be DT's VP, they would automatically win not only the nomination but the general in Nov. Cruz would be VP at age 45 and president of the United States at the tender young age of 53. Not all that bad.

      If Cruz doesn't do this, I guess you could call him a brilliant idiot – or just a plain old enigma. It's amazing what ego will do to people's judgments.

      • JOSEPH says:

        GREAT GREAT IDEA. The best idea I've heard thus far in regards to this primary.

      • Louis Baesel says:

        As some one who knocked on doors for Goldwater,I suppport Trump-Cruz ticket. ,by the way. 'Winning thru Intimadation' should be a ' must read' for all young salespersons,,,,

  5. Jurgy says:

    You are exactly right Robert … the system is rigged, which is why I will continue to contend that her thighness has already been deemed our next president …

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      And Hillary Clinton is definitely bad news for almost everyone, what does she really offer to anyone? She promoted the trade deals with China that turned China into a super trading world force. The free trade is not fair trade since China doesn't have the same free speech, labor, environmental and other requirements that 1st world countries have.

  6. Marte says:

    This is both disgusting and scary as hell. Between these jackasses and voter fraud, does America have a chance?

  7. Allen says:

    There already IS a Viable 3rd Party, that respect the US Constitution and all the individual freedom that goes with it.

    That party is the Libertarian Party.

    The Libertarian Party is on the ballot in every single state, and it is the Only non demo-publican party to do so. Want change? Want honesty? Want freedom?

    Vote Libertarian.

  8. Dorn Brenton says:

    Clearly, a vibrant and exciting third party already exists. The Libertarian Party has worked hard to earn ballot access in all 50 States. Gary Johnson, two time Governor of New Mexico is running for the Libertarian nomination for President and is garnering 11% of the people in nationwide polls against Hillary and Trump. This is the year, this is the election, where your vote can truly make a difference.

    Instead of voting for one of the two parties that have proven their determination to screw you over and over again, vote Libertarian this time. If a Libertarian wins and you don't like what happens, you can always go back to the predictable outcome of a D or R….more taxes and less liberty.

    This fall, vote for freedom. Vote Libertarian.

  9. SteveR says:

    Trump was certainly a real possibility until he became a lunatic. He has since driven off so many voters that he will have a hard time winning. None of the other candidates show much promise of leadership. My concern is if Trump doesn't get the nomination, he will run under a third party ticket and guarantee a Demoncratic win. Ross Perot did the same thing in 1992 and put Bill Clinton in the white house. Hopefully, trump won't put Hellary there.
    Upon reflection, Trump seems to be very much like Perot. He could have easily won if he hadn't kept shooting off his mouth and alienating people.

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      I agree that DT could have easily won if he hadn't gone nuts. But I don't agree that his running third party would guarantee the Dems the WH. I think millions of Democrats and Independents would come on board. Keeping Trump sane would be the big challenge.

      • Nasdaq7 says:

        Google The 210 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List

      • JOSEPH says:

        I think Trump would win if he formed his own party but like you said keeping himself sane in the process is the question. But, I do believe he'd the win the primary and presidency if he formed his won party.

  10. Reality Seeker says:

    I agree, mostly, with RJR. The only part I tend to respectfully disagree with is when he states the following: "I am deeply concerned that if Republicans and independents don’t take bold steps this year to form a third party, they may never again have the opportunity to do so. Literally, this might be a case of now or never."

    I tend to disagree that this is the last chance for a third party. This could very well be the opening salvo in what turns out to be a war between the "great unwashed" and "the boys in the back room". Did you see what Drudge was headlining in the past 24hr? Check out this headline: "Voters Burn Registration Cards".

    Did you notice how the good ol' country boy in the video was piss off at the back room boys who shut him out of the "democratic" process? Yes. This is just the beginning. And Trump is the rider, not the horse. The unwashed masses are becoming restless, and they are the horse. This is what happens in all "republics" throughout history. Republics turn into oligarchies. Eventually it becomes a mortal struggle between outsiders and insiders. I can't tell you how long or how vicious the struggle. But I can tell you that, historically, empires tend to end badly when you have such opposing views as that are currently found inside the American Empire. On one side you have a strange mixture of communists, socialists, wacky environmentalists, brain washed liberal college kids and too many extremists to list, e.g, Moslem zealots, la Raza, Black Panthers and a host of other militant groups. On the other side you have a mixture of Christian zealots, some Zionists, KKK types, various militias and so on and so forth and most of all the fascist neocons supported by a dumb-down, football worshiping electorate.

    This is going to end well. I think we might be finally entering a period of political and socioeconomic upheaval. And I'm kinda glad that I started to build new positions in both gold and silver last fall. Because during times of stress, commodity money tends to be both a good investment and insurance. And it's looking more and more everyday like there's some real trouble ahead.

  11. John says:

    I was going to bring up the Libertarian Party, but got beat to the punch. So I'll just say this.

    The Libertarian Party has a tremendous perceptual problem. The have been portrayed by conservatives, liberals, and the media as (depending on your party viewpoint) either immoral, soft-on-crime, advocates of drug use… or capitalistic, right-wing, gun-toting racists.

    I guess that's what being a supporter of individual freedom and liberty gets you labeled these days.

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      The only way the LP can ever change people's perception of it is to get a number of VERY big donors behind it. When I gave the keynote address at the 1979 LP Presidential Nominating Convention, David Koch was the VP nominee. I thought the Koch Bros. would stick with it, but they gave up on the LP long ago. That was pretty much the end of the dream.

  12. Avery Horton says:

    Ross Perot and Trump have at least one thing in common that would allow them to make a run of a third-party ticket – A BOAT LOAD OF MONEY!

    Something is "wrong" when people spend millions, if not billions, of dollars to run for offices that offer salaries of less that half a million dollars. What company would spend millions of dollars on advertising if their expected return was less than a million? Should be easy to see that something is rotten to the core.

    Robert, I don't think the system is the problem, as much as, the people at the controls. For example, the immigration systems is not the problem. We don't need immigration reform, we need immigration enforcement. In this case, don't hate the game, hate the players.

    • samarami says:

      "…Something is "wrong" when people spend millions, if not billions, of dollars to run for offices that offer salaries of less that half a million dollars…"

      Unbelievable! One human being sees what millions simply cannot see. So those millions jibber, and they jabber (textually), and they whine, and they moan, and they take up tens of billions of column inches of text with their prognostications and their pontifications; when the obvious solution is, as I commented above, for each and every human being to simply abstain from beans:

      The solution is so obvious.


      • ◄Dave► says:

        Excellent references, Sam. Thanks. ◄Dave►

      • ◄Dave► says:

        I just finished the AnarchyDraft.pdf file (35 pages) referenced above by Sam. It is profound, thought provoking, and effectively slays most arguments that governments are a necessity. I highly recommend it to all thinkers. Read it and then do… Look Around! ◄Dave►

  13. Time and Experience, as always, will tell the story. And, here's another trite saying: Fear the worst and hope for the best. Though hope without action is, obviously, a dead end. What a scary time we are in!

  14. Ken S says:

    I tend to disagree. In my opinion this is exactly what you get in a democratic political system. If anyone is to blame it is the American people in total.

  15. Paul Anthony says:

    Since members of both parties spend most of their time blaming the other party when things inevitably go wrong, I propose the creation of a new party to be called…THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY.

    This new party can take all the blame, forcing the other two to stop finger-pointing and actually accomplish something.

    Of course, it won't help. But it was fun imagining it.

  16. James says:

    Awesome post and totally agree! I want to see Trump BURN his GOP pledge and do so on Live TV. It's so obvious they are going to screw him over. There's zero point in Trump staying with the GOP. Get started now with a brand new party and it will likely attract voters from all other parties as well as his current base.

    But… it does need a new, cool, catchy name :)

  17. ◄Dave► says:

    From the beginning, my mission for Trump was to eviscerate the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly, by disassembling the tenuous coalition of special interest groups, comprising its GOP wing. It has been fun to watch the process, and from my perspective, he has already rather effectively accomplished this mission. There is so much rancor between the competing factions, no matter what happens from here forward, there is no way in hell that the outcome of the GOP convention, could possibly be an enthusiastic grass roots, united behind the eventual nominee. That should spell disaster for the GOP wing in the General election, and rather dim hope for their future.

    An unanticipated pleasure, has been to watch Sanders doing the same thing to the Collectivist wing. Like Trump, Sanders populist campaign will be stopped by the Democrat Party elites; and like Trump’s, his now enthusiastic supporters will be so pissed, that they will likely boycott the sham General election. The only thing left to motivate bitterly disenfranchised supporters, of either Trump or Sanders, is the old ‘Lessor of Two Evils’ ruse. Why even bother to choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, unless somehow one becomes convinced that the other one is unacceptably frightening to the future. The demagogues are pretty effective at this; but it has been rather pleasant to see all the new Primary voters, turning out in enthusiastic support for a candidate. In the General, most are voting against the worst one, while the ‘none of the above’ citizens register their displeasure by just staying home.

    I still like your suggestion of the ultimate unity ticket, to destroy both wings in a single election, in a bloodless coup. It looks like Trump and Sanders will both be denied the nomination, by the arcane convention processes, rules, and procedures. I would bet good money that if they joined forces and melded their anti-establishment supporters, they could easily win a plurality, if not a majority, of the General election votes against the two Incumbrepublocrat candidates.

    I for one, would register and vote for them in a heartbeat, just to help destroy the so-called two-party system. It wouldn’t matter a whit to me which one was at the top of the ticket, as long as Trump had the portfolio for trade negotiations, immigration, and border control. I would probably even send them a $27 contribution or two, just to help the cause and keep them independent of the oligarchs.

    BTW: If the LP had a lick of sense, and permitted themselves to be pragmatic for a change, they would offer their nomination to Trump and Sanders this year. Once these characters put them on the media-controlled stage for a change, then they could get back to their insufferable dogmatic purity debates for subsequent elections, as recognized viable alternatives to the collectivists. Imagine where they could be now, if they had offered Perot their infrastructure. As it is, most sheeple still have no idea what a libertarian is, and little prospect of ever learning. ◄Dave►

  18. Nasdaq7 says:

    Rule 40 sounds outrageous. What use is a system of rules if the rules keep changing every election?

  19. Lana says:

    Political correctness and greed are making a mess of this election. If being offended by something someone says is the worst that happens to you in this life, consider yourself lucky. Stop playing the blame game. If we want to restore this country to a nation of integrity, we have to get this man elected and see to it the rules get changed. If someone isn't doing their job, they would be fired (and not paid beyond their employ which is another issue). Did we all forget that politicians work for us…….how did this get so turned around? Pardon my naïve outlook, but the more I read here, the more hopeless it looks. A nation without hope is lost. I don't want to live in a lost nation.

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      Lincoln said: "better give your path to a dog, than be bitten by him in contesting for the right, not even killing the dog, will cure the bite”
      Smart people knows political correctness is totally overblown, some of it is good, much of it is merely an attempt to avoid facing the realities of making really really tough decisions upon really tough problems. But Trump had to win the delegate race too while he was running to win the election. He went too far in my view insulting McCain and his followers. The same with Romney and his supporters. Yes he felt better, if he looked into the future, he might have seen this delegate battle developing. Ted Cruz he can attack because he is running. But McCain and Romney has support and it will matter in a contested convention and he could have won that support. So Trump in my view had to set limits on his attacks, I mean just be smart and wait for after the election is won. He can still win it, but he will have to strip away financial support from Hillary, follow the advice RJR has given about Melania and family, improve his public image, get enough people in his campaign team, let everyone in the team contribute new ideas and choose the best of those ideas, zoom in on the needs and desires of voters, constantly monitor, read and study the newspapers that inform him about important information and ideas past, present and future and do far more. Action!: Nothing Happens Until Something Moves. But will he plan ahead and listen to reason that wants him to win? I'm not sure, he is too impulsive for unique ideas and risk taking.

      And if he loses, it will be a big blow for all international countries that have hoped that the terrorism, mass uncontrolled immigration, the unfair trade practices, attacks on business and internet freedom and the international debt and financial issues and US military balance issues are not addressed.

  20. Richard says:

    Go Third part. DT president, Ted Cruz VP. To sweeten the pot, The VP should be the Secretary of State, overseeing the foreign affairs for the President.

  21. Mark says:

    George Washington warned us about political parties. My proposal is to eliminate party designations on the voting ballot and hence the elimination of straight party voting. Without the party label voters will at least be more cognizant of the individuals they vote for rather than follow a simple minded party vote. Yes its unrealistic to think this will happen while the two major parties are in power because both benefit from the arrangement. All the more reason for the change.

    • Allen Hamm says:

      I couldn't agree more. It's the individual and his/her message that counts, not some political dogma.

    • ◄Dave► says:

      You are right – it will never happen. The Kabuki dance of the 'us against them' paradgym, is how the oligarchs keep the sheeple distracted and at each others' throats, instead of their own. ◄Dave►

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      Almost all Americans would favor such a setup, but the power holders in both major parties would kill to prevent it from happening. Literally.

      • Nasdaq7 says:

        I've read that the delegates can vote even before the first ballot to change the rules:

        Google How GOP Could Still Steal Nomination From Trump Even If He Wins 1,237 Delegates

        "The delegates could vote to change the convention rules even BEFORE the first round of balloting takes place. That’s right, in the days leading up to the convention, the RNC Rules Committee could recommend rules changes to the Convention Rules Committee. That committee could tweak the recommendations but they they would ultimately have to send the new rules to the floor of the convention for a vote by the delegates. If the delegates vote to change the rules so as to ‘unbind’ themselves, then they could vote for whoever they wanted even in that first round.

        “The delegates ultimately have the final say in the rules that will govern the convention. That may mean that they opt to unbind themselves, but a majority of them would have to agree to that,” Josh Putnam, an expert in this matter, and lecturer at the University of Georgia told"

  22. Egad!! says:

    The Republican Party made it clear in 2012 that no one will be the nominee unless that person can be controlled by them. Witness the mess they made of the nomination process to keep Paul from getting the nomination. This time it's no different, but something new has been added. If the GOP vote is split between Trump and Cruz and the followers of the losing side decide to withhold their vote that means that Hellary will be the next President and IMHO she is totally unfit to hold ANY ELECTIVE OFFICE. What Obama did to America she will finish and the it will result either in a new civil war or super depression or just possibly both.

  23. Nasdaq7 says:

    If you talk to people from highly multicultural countries like Canada and South Africa, you will see that they will tell you that in order to solve the problems of a highly multicultural and globally diverse society, you need to be as inclusive as possible, as united as possible. The more exclusive solutions you seek, the more problems present themselves further down the road. So the fact that Democrats are creating a long term winning strategy by being as inclusive, as unified and unifying as possible, unity and inclusiveness is of absolute important as well as foreign alliances. International alliances can be very beneficial where everyone contributes equally their fair share towards the goals of the alliance.

    • John says:

      Define "fair".

      Fair is a meaningless term. I can guarantee that socialists have a different definition of "fair" than capitalists.

      Even if it were possible to agree on a definition, it would still be meaningless as it is not just life that is unfair… the universe (reality) is unfair. No rules, no laws, no regulations, no religion, no system of ethics. no philosophy, no attempts to change/alter human nature / culture / nations to make them "fair" will succeed long term as the Law of Unintended Consequences rules over all. It is why political promises are so much hot air.

      Look at ObamaCare. Every liberal I know blames Republicans for everything bad about it. Which, if true, makes Obama look even worse. He had to know in advance he wasn't going to get what he promised… which makes him a liar. If he didn't know, then he's stupid. (Personally, I don't believe he's stupid.) Again, every lib I know simply won't (or can't) see this. They won't make a judgement call about the man. and the thing is this… all the bad stuff that's blamed on the Republicans, that was foreseeable so they weren't unintended consequences. The unintended stuff is what nobody foresaw, more of which is yet to happened, and what the now-benighted-with-affordable-healthcare citizen is going to be dealing with the rest of their lives. Thru their wallets.

      No matter what is done, eventually one person's "fairness" will become (if it isn't from the start) another's oppression.

  24. Nasdaq7 says:

    In my opinion if Trump had positioned his party to just the center right of issues, he would have won tremendous support in the US and internationally. It's all he had to do, now Britain even wants to ban him from visiting. Now he will have to work extremely hard to mend divisions inside the Republican Party and Democratic Party.

  25. Nasdaq7 says:

    Trump could have easily won, but he doesn't know how to win people.
    He needs to read the book How to win friends and influence people by Dale Carnegie.

  26. Bill Amadeo says:

    The voice of the People has been silenced by both Political Parties. The "Establishment" wants to keep the status quo because its a closed society and they split up the pie no matter who wins and understands that they have to take care of the boys and girls in the club. God forbid some friggin outsider gets in and rocks the boat. Thats why establishment GOPers would rather have Hillary instead of Trump, with her the trough stays full. The best thing that could happen to America is that both Trump and Bernie run as independents against Cruz and Clinton and the voters decide who the next President will be. Aside benefit is that the 2 established parties might be rendered obsolete and the establishment will have to run for the hills

  27. Gary Waltrip says:

    If a viable third party is formed, I will switch my registration in a heart beat. The two-party system has failed. Also, I am voting for Trump because I see him as a wrecking ball for the Demopublican establishment. I wish he had more tact and protected himself better from attack; but nevertheless, I am voting for him, win or lose.

  28. Reality Seeker says:

    "The Stench"

    There's a lot of stench in the these days. I've been gently trying to tell people for years that the entire country stinks to High Heaven. I smell the "stench" of the "Company". Yes, that's right, your beloved America reeks of empire and everything rotten associated with empire. Take the "Panama Papers" for example, that's a CIA operation if I ever saw one. You don't have to be Alex Jones to recognize Big Brother's finger prints. The problem is that you can't tell the dumb-ass amerikans anything, because they're too brainwashed by propaganda and/or sidetracked by entertainment.

    Surprisingly enough, CNBC is running the following story; it's the most truthful story they've run in years. How could this happen? Guys like Birkenfeld normally can only get the word out through Alex Jones…

    "Bradley Birkenfeld is the most significant financial whistleblower of all time, so you might think he'd be cheering on the disclosures in the new Panama Papers leaks. But today, Birkenfeld is raising questions about the source of the information that is shaking political regimes around the world."

    The above story brings be back full circle to the STENCH of this election. I smell Company Men all over the place…..

  29. John Davise says:

    Mr Ringer,
    I have read most of your books and I realize that you are an extraordinarily realistic and intelligent thinker. You and Trump are the only men of historic stature that I admire for clear thinking and guts> Count me in as a disciple and follower of you.
    Please continue leading by your words, thoughts and literary masterpieces.

  30. Sheila says:

    Sen. Cruz would be even nuttier than DT to run as VP. DT has gone off the deep end. Funny how in the beginning I supported DT. I would never support or vote for the clown, come what may in November. I tired of hearing about him being an outsider and a billionaire businessman. So what? He's crazy. Now I'm all in for Sen. Cruz for P not VP. But as for the convention, it has to be a majority – 1237 votes – and not a plurality. There were no primaries in 1860 but I'm pretty sure votes were changed at the Convention back then and that's how Lincoln won. And I'm also pretty sure states make their own rules as to the votes. Since when are we a democracy, aren't we a republic? Must have missed that history lesson…

    • Reality Seeker says:

      "……[ bla, bla bla,……there were no primaries in 1860 but I'm pretty sure votes were changed at the Convention"

      You moron. You sound like that dimwitted Glenn beck. Well, let me tell you something: I'm not "pretty sure". I'm absolutely sure women didn't get to vote for "honest" (lol) Abe. How about we go back to that? You women can sit down and shut up! How about that! No women. No blacks. Nobody but the insiders like Abe and company. How about we let the "Party" pick the president? We could sill call ourselves a "republic". Right? No voting machines. No primaries. No caucuses.

      This is the kinda dimwitted shit I have to put up with — Glenn Beck's crap. Now I know how Ayn Rand felt— listening to the dimwits —and what probably drove her a little crazy….

      I'm absolutely sure that the 'Founders" made sure their "republic" was ruled by laws that insured everything was run by them. The Founders usurped the King and his insiders only to become insiders of a different sort….. Yes. Let's be honest. And when an outsider named Andrew Jackson came along, and, remember, he won both the popular vote and the delegate count, but he still lost to the corrupt son of a founder. An Adams became president with the help of other insiders like Henry Clay. Jackson went on to win the presidency on his second attempt.

      On President Jackson's deathbed he said his only regret was he didn't shoot Henry Clay…….

      Yeah, I'm pretty sure things were viciously corrupt back then, too, but it doesn't mean I support a Whigs style democracy. I've been saying for years that the GOP can go straight to hell…… where it belongs.

      Say hi to the Whigs for me….. and to Glenn Beck and Ted Cruz. Cruz has ruined himself. It's a shame, too, because I really liked his voting record. I always knew he was a phony, but I never knew he was a Whig…..

      • ◄Dave► says:

        Agreed. Let's go find Galt's Gulch and bail from the insanity. 😉 ◄Dave►

      • Sheila says:

        After reading your reply, I'll say this: I'd rather be a moron than a sick sorry sack like you. Hope you know a good psychiatrist. Your language and name-calling is indicative of high intelligence, Mensa I'm sure.

  31. Nasdaq7 says:

    An interesting video speech the past 24 hours by Donald Trump about just this topic:

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      or Google

      Donald Trump, Losing Ground, Tries to blame the System New York Times

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      Another interesting video collection:

      • Sheila says:

        Interesting video. Thank you for posting. The problem is Trump is only gracious when he wins. If he were gracious and contrite once in awhile, I would have voted for him. I supported him when he first ran. Then he began with his attacks on women's appearances, the disabled, other GOP candidates and many other groups. It's unjustified, undignified and does not demonstrate the integrity we need for President.

        • Nasdaq7 says:

          I loved Reagan's speeches:

          there's actually hundreds of them on the Internet.

          I love presidents to inspire both men and women, not to make promises such as reducing the debt by $19trn, realistically trying and committing to problems.

          I'm neutral on choosing any side. Like RJR he remains neutral. I'm neutral. I check the videos of all presidential candidates, there's very interesting polls on all candidates. I would post them my coverage of Trump has been a little overblown.

        • Nasdaq7 says:

          But I will say this: there's a story about a country that had the practice of having prisoners executed by firing squad. The general that was tasked to perform this task always gave the prisoners two options: either die blindfolded by firing squad or walk through an unknown door with untold horrors from which no one has escaped or returned. And time and time again the prisoners chose to die blindfolded by firing squad.

          So one day his secretary asked the general what's behind the door and the general replied: "freedom".

          So with Trump he might be or he might not be that unknown and uncertain door to freedom.

Leave a Reply