Several Republican Candidates Support Drafting Women

I’m finding myself leaning more towards Cruz, even if he sometimes comes across as having the personality of a schoolmarm.

Trump’s campaign is a living example of his book “The Art of the Deal.”

One poll says that of the non-Trump-supporting repub primary voters, no one has Trump as their second or third choice. So as more candidates drop out, support will coallesce to the last man standing against Trump. So as long as direct Trump support stays under 50%, his last remaining opponent in the primary will have the majority of support.

The other analysis, I get from Scott Adams, who says that Trump is a master persuader/hypnotist, using psychological Jedi mind tricks, a la Tony Robbins. That analysis says that as the other candidates drop out, Trump will convince their supporters to come to him, even though those voters don’t yet acknowlege that possibility.

If Trump does make it to the general election, he’ll get elected, as 20% of the democrat base already support him. And democrats are more susceptible to Jedi mind tricks than republicans are.

Adams suspects Christie is already in cahoots with Trump, based on Christie’s Trump-like moves/attack on Rubio. If that’s true, Christie could be Trump’s VP pick. Trump’s attack on Cruz showed it won’t be Cruz.

God selected David, man (and woman) chooses the best manipulator.

If Trump is nominated, then Bloomberg will jump in as an independent, a real billionaire winner to contrast with the fraud who plays one on TV.

You guys do realize – I hope – that all the Presidential candidates are bad? – And that none of them will (elected or not) even be trying to do ‘the one thing needful’? – Which means that all of them will actively be making things worse, albeit in slightly different ways and at different speeds.

(Given which, any good that comes from any of them will be unintentional, accidental and happen by invisible, unknown and unpredictable means.)

And that mass election voting is meaningless (and if it wasn’t you wouldn’t be allowed to vote), and even if it wasn’t meaningless then voting is a truly terrible way to make decisions?

And that the last election was *very obviously* fixed to a significant and decisive extent, with no comeback, so all future elections will presumably be the same and more?

Okay – you *do* realize that? – fine.

I just wanted to check you weren’t getting manipulated into being carried-away by the unfolding circus of horrors…

I am not very impressed with any of the candidates, though Ben Carson seems like both a genuinely nice guy with a powerful biography and a sincere believer. He is intelligent, too. Not much chance of winning, of course. As for the rest, it is a question of the lesser of weasels. The option of leaving the presidency vacant for four years is not available.

Watching Trump is like watching an unstoppable clown car.

*The option of leaving the presidency vacant for four years is not available.*

Fix your political system with this one simple trick!

I wondered in ’04 if electing John Kerry president would be a close equivalent to leaving the office vacant, and therefore a better option than continuing with George W. Bush.

BC, if you’re saying that Republicans and Decomrats are the right and left rail of the same track, leading to the same destination, then I agree.

I’ve long said that Republicans give Democrats exactly what they want, about 20 to 25 years after they start asking for it.

The show is much like a Hegelian Dialectic: thesis, antithesis, synthesis. The unseen powers create a problem for which the thing they really wanted to do all along is the solution. Obamacare is an example; it was designed to fail so that single-payer (govt run) would be demanded as a fix. Health care and health insurance was so over-regulated for the past 35 years that it was degraded to make it look like it needed “fixing”. The good fix would have been to reduce regulation; ACA/Obamacare was merely the final nail in the coffin to kill off the old system, so that a new one would be demanded.

Your Satan/God analysis is spot on. I don’t know if that framework can go primetime. A better short term strategy may be to say “follow the money.”

We did have a positive abnormality when Reagan was elected, though he and his administration wasn’t perfect. (We got some permanent anti-gun laws, civil forfeiture, one or two stealth liberals on the Supreme Court, some ominous statist/anti-freedom SC rulings, and deregulation of the S&Ls.)

We could hope for another such abnormality, at least in terms of the economy and national defense.

Or, as one nabob remarked, “if you had to choose between a dog biscuit or dog poop for dinner, which would you choose?”

—

Leo, who is Carson’s team of advisors and would-be staff? He has no track record, and no admin experience. Do we know the people who influenced him, or who he will select as staff, appointees, and advisors?

All you had to know about Obama was his connection to Saul Alinsky through Ayers, Dorn, and Frank Marshall Davis. Valerie Jerret’s parents were also connected to Alinsky and were card-carrying communists. Frank Marshall Davis, Obama’s Hawaiian mentor, was formerly of that Chicago group of communists, and got him hooked up with Ayers/Dorn and the Jarrets. Obama’s grandparents were card carrying communists at one point. All of Obama’s circle were essentially “red-diaper babies.”

—

Trump is a performer, an actor, a professional persuader (deal maker), a psychological manipulator, definitely a narcissist, possibly a psychopath, so we don’t know if his statements of what he’ll do in political office are sincere. He has no political record of voting for legislative bills, or track record of political administration by which to judge him, only former verbiage, which was all over the place.

“The show is much like a Hegelian Dialectic: thesis, antithesis, synthesis. The unseen powers create a problem for which the thing they really wanted to do all along is the solution.”

Should have been: The show is much like a Hegelian Dialectic: thesis, antithesis, synthesis/solution. People with power or control create a problem for which the thing they really wanted to do all along is the apparent solution, but the populace would not have gone along with that thing unless there was an apparent need for it.

@Bookslinger,

I have no idea who Carson’s advisors might be. His executive experience is in a top-flight hospital, not in government. I haven’t examined what a Carson presidency might actually be like because he has the proverbial snowball’s chance. But he is very bright, did pull himself up by his bootstraps with his mother’s help, and doesn’t use vulgarities at his rallies. That last one is a low bar, I know, but important this year. He is the sort of guy I would be comfortable with as my next door neighbor or as my physician.

@G
Now if we could only keep the Congress and Supreme Court out of session at the same time. As Will Rogers put it, the difference between death and taxes is that death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets.

I believe Christ is King. Ultimately all true authority come from God (akin to how the prophet is selected). Even today’s hypocritical candidates still give lip-service to the idea!

“Multicultural” (or nihilist) Democracy is a complete fraud. The only systems of that type that can work are based entirely based on shared and truly believed-in religious values, with the hope or belief that the selection is ultimately guided by the Holy Spirit and not of man alone.

The president of the the US represents all its citizens, both the wise and the unwise; and some degree of compromise is unavoidable, which means that no matter how well your preferred candidate matches your views, they’re going to end up doing some things that will upset you. Still, the better they match your views the less they’ll upset you. (Hopefully.)

But returning to the topic of the post, if women are allowed in combat, and if society really is pretending that there is no difference between women and men, then it’s hard to see what logic could keep women out of the draft. The camel’s nose is in the tent, and the undesirable consequence naturally follows the conditions we, as a nation, have allowed to occur.

Oh, I could certainly support the female draft as a bit of dark political trolling. But I refuse to be treacly about it.

Today, I saw a news story about a woman who was tired of getting immodest pictures from men on dating sites. She decided to give them a taste of their own medicine and see how well they would like it if she did that to them. And she was honestly surprised when when the men… didn’t have a problem with this.

The War of the Sexes has always been limited by too much fraternizing with the enemy. Hard to believe we are overcoming that limit.

Feminists aren’t the only women who would have to register with Selective Service. I don’t want normal women who would choose not to comply with registration to suffer the civic disabilities that non-registering men do. We are not at war with women around here.