I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[SEC_Chick]

It should surprise no one that I quite liked Cruz's speech. It was the only part I watched last night. Of course Trump leaked to friendly delegations that an endorsement would not be coming, and the jeering was planned, not spontaneous.

The establishment hates Cruz far more than Trump, mainly because Cruz actually wants people to be committed to the principles that the party supposedly stands for. There is far more money to be made in the consultant class with Trump. That's why you have the official RNC spokesman, Sean Spicer (of Twilight Sparkle defense fame) go out and call Cruz an asshole. And lie that he did not give the remarks that had been submitted and approved (until people show you what he said matched the advance copy you gave to journalists, idiot).

Branch Trumpidians are incensed at the failure to endorse, but if a man says, "Vote your conscience and uphold the Constitution" and you take that to mean "Don't vote Trump", perhaps the problem isn't really Cruz.

I would not be surprised if there is some booing tonight during Trump's speech. Or some walkouts. But some anti-Trump delegates have been stripped of their credentials, because, you know, unity.

Cruz's maneuver only works if Trump loses big. If he wins, traditional Republicanism is dead. If he loses by a narrow margin, the same smarmy grifters remain in charge of the RNC. But if the GOP faces total annihilation at the hands of Trump, it is really the only scenario in which conservatives will have a role in rebuilding.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I'd applaud Cruz if he weren't as big an asshole as Trump.

To be fair, it is an important reminder that this is just one battle in the larger war for the title of Asshole of the Century. This war will rage on for years.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

It should surprise no one that I quite liked Cruz's speech. It was the only part I watched last night. Of course Trump leaked to friendly delegations that an endorsement would not be coming, and the jeering was planned, not spontaneous.

The establishment hates Cruz far more than Trump, mainly because Cruz actually wants people to be committed to the principles that the party supposedly stands for. There is far more money to be made in the consultant class with Trump. That's why you have the official RNC spokesman, Sean Spicer (of Twilight Sparkle defense fame) go out and call Cruz an asshole. And lie that he did not give the remarks that had been submitted and approved (until people show you what he said matched the advance copy you gave to journalists, idiot).

Branch Trumpidians are incensed at the failure to endorse, but if a man says, "Vote your conscience and uphold the Constitution" and you take that to mean "Don't vote Trump", perhaps the problem isn't really Cruz.

I would not be surprised if there is some booing tonight during Trump's speech. Or some walkouts. But some anti-Trump delegates have been stripped of their credentials, because, you know, unity.

Cruz's maneuver only works if Trump loses big. If he wins, traditional Republicanism is dead. If he loses by a narrow margin, the same smarmy grifters remain in charge of the RNC. But if the GOP faces total annihilation at the hands of Trump, it is really the only scenario in which conservatives will have a role in rebuilding.

I think you are completely delusional about Cruz. While most of your analysis makes perfect sense, you do not factor in to your calculations the fact that Cruz is a galactic, pompous, raging, smarmy, self-righteous, egomaniacal asshole who no one in the world (let alone the Republican Party), besides you, likes. He will always be seen as a disloyal (to the party) prick that is completely out for self. If he thinks last night's "gamble" helps him win the nomination in 2020, he's a few bullets short of a full clip.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Evangelicals, who sat out 2012. Hence, Pence.

Is there any reason to think that evangelicals sat out in 2008 or 2012?

And the under the radar bigoted vote.

Those who couldn't be bothered to vote against Obama?

Huge 2. That's the strategic bet among party elites. The question is, will the people running the GOP ground games at the state levels also leave Trump out to dry? I think a lot of the infantry loves the guy.

I think it's more of a hope than a bet for the elites, because what are they putting down? The infantry certainly loves what he says. Can other candidates find the same magic?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

To be fair, it is an important reminder that this is just one battle in the larger war for the title of Asshole of the Century. This war will rage on for years.

Yeah, but he's the current dungeonmaster.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

The establishment hates Cruz

Because nearly everyone who has met him hates him.

mainly because Cruz actually wants people to be committed to the principles that the party supposedly stands for.

The establishment hates Cruz because he actively tries to make them look bad by posing harder for the things the party tells the rubes it stands for but doesn't really.

Whether that's because Cruz really believes those things (making him a moron) or because Cruz only cares about the advancement of Cruz (bingo!) is the question.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

Because nearly everyone who has met him hates him.



The establishment hates Cruz because he actively tries to make them look bad by posing harder for the things the party tells the rubes it stands for but doesn't really.

Whether that's because Cruz really believes those things (making him a moron) or because Cruz only cares about the advancement of Cruz (bingo!) is the question.

Some of the reasons everyone hates Cruz aren't related to policy but process. His willingness to shut the government down, for example, despite the disaster shut downs have been for Republicans in the past, and to hold progress on any issue or appointment hostage, and his constant use of trantrums to stall the process to try to get his way.

He has been unique ineffective in all of this - what does he have to show? But it seems to build his popularity nonetheless, at the expense of making it impossible for anyone else to get anything done.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Some of the reasons everyone hates Cruz aren't related to policy but process. His willingness to shut the government down, for example, despite the disaster shut downs have been for Republicans in the past, and to hold progress on any issue or appointment hostage, and his constant use of trantrums to stall the process to try to get his way.

Right. His behavior suggests he either doesn't understand these things, or doesn't care, because he can personally benefit regardless. As SEC has demonstrated.

He has been unique ineffective in all of this - what does he have to show?

He was among the last three remaining presidential candidates, got to speak the convention and thinks he'll be a 2020 contender. It's hard to see him as caring about anything else.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

He was among the last three remaining presidential candidates, got to speak the convention and thinks he'll be a 2020 contender. It's hard to see him as caring about anything else.

right, I should have been clearer and said what has he contributed to governing through this, not what has he personally gotten out of it.

politicians benefiting personally from obstructionism is massively awful. See Justice Garland.

[SEC_Chick]

So #DNCleaks happened just in time to make the DNC convention exciting! When faced with evidence that Wasserman Schultz did exactly as Bernie folks always suspected, she doesn't apologize and just doubles down for support for Hillary. Now Bernie folks are planning on opposing Tim Kaine's nomination and disrupting the convention. I may just watch some of it yet. But since I probably won't, I am counting on y'all to post updates for the Democrat challenged like me.

I am also curious to see what Assange is sitting on regarding Hillary that will supposedly ensure Hillary's arrest. Any thoughts? My guess is something regarding the selling of influence through the Clinton Foundation. Probably not enough for an indictment, but bad.

[SEC_Chick]

I have to imagine some sad panda Bernie Bros when their candidate doesn't have a Vote Your Conscience moment and endorses Hillary later this week.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

So #DNCleaks happened just in time to make the DNC convention exciting! When faced with evidence that Wasserman Schultz did exactly as Bernie folks always suspected, she doesn't apologize and just doubles down for support for Hillary. Now Bernie folks are planning on opposing Tim Kaine's nomination and disrupting the convention. I may just watch some of it yet. But since I probably won't, I am counting on y'all to post updates for the Democrat challenged like me.

I am also curious to see what Assange is sitting on regarding Hillary that will supposedly ensure Hillary's arrest. Any thoughts? My guess is something regarding the selling of influence through the Clinton Foundation. Probably not enough for an indictment, but bad.

I personally have nothing against doing a roll call for Kaine, it will look kind of pitiful for the BernieBros since he'll take virtually all of Hillary's supporters and a chunk of Bernie's as well. But why not do a roll call? It's not that disruptive, you don't have to do it with the pomp of the Presidential, just run ballots around the floor while someone is speaking, collect them, and count during the next speech.

What I can't figure out is why Wasserman isn't already gone but being allowed to gavel in and out. I'd just get her out of the picture altogether. Unfortunately, I think this will dissolve into personalities instead of policy, because I think we could make some policy changes at the DNC - like I think turning the keys over to the Presidential once they are the presumptive nominee is a mistake, and the DNC ought to continue to operate in coordination but not in control. It would take some of the job pressure off people whose position is going to get revisited when the nominee becomes clear, for instance.

The Hillary arrest button jumped the shark back in the 90s. Fonzie didn't even have gray hair then.

[SEC_Chick]

Am I the only one amused by the fact that Hillary's campaign is blaming Russians for the hacking of the DNC, but the idea of them hacking her email servers is unpossible!?

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

So #DNCleaks happened just in time to make the DNC convention exciting! When faced with evidence that Wasserman Schultz did exactly as Bernie folks always suspected, she doesn't apologize and just doubles down for support for Hillary. Now Bernie folks are planning on opposing Tim Kaine's nomination and disrupting the convention. I may just watch some of it yet. But since I probably won't, I am counting on y'all to post updates for the Democrat challenged like me.

I am also curious to see what Assange is sitting on regarding Hillary that will supposedly ensure Hillary's arrest. Any thoughts? My guess is something regarding the selling of influence through the Clinton Foundation. Probably not enough for an indictment, but bad.

I think that it's entirely possible to be the following, all at the same time:

1. Pissed at the lack of neutrality by DWS. (And even more pissed at the lack of neutrality by the staff -- like those who suggested calling Bernie an atheist in Kentucky or wherever.)

2. Outraged/annoyed/amused by the press being curried/bullied and allowing itself to be curried/bullied. (Pre-publication review of stories? Shame on you, Politico.)

3. Shocked, shocked! at gambling going on in this casino. See also watching sausage getting made.

4. Certain that a leak of RNC emails would reveal at least as much nonsense -- and maybe more on the lack of neutrality.

5. Troubled by the fact that foreign powers seem to be behind the leak, concerned that the leak has a purpose of interfering with the election, yet acknowledging that the stuff that was leaked is Not Good and maybe should have been brought to light. (See also the Sony leak, sorta, and some but not all or even most of Snowden's leak.)

I started to mention Private Manning's leak here, but don't think that there is any info that she leaked it with either the assistance of a foreign power or was protected by one (obviously not, since she's in a domestic version of Gitmo).

6. Titillated by what's been leaked and curious about what Julian thinks he has on HRC.

7. Depressed as hell about the fact that no one seems to care that the hack (even if not done by the Russians) is a crime. And also depressed that (as one infosec commentator put it) all servers worth hacking have probably already been hacked.

8. Wanting to shout constantly at the TV "don't any of you idiots walk down the hall to talk? Or use the phone?"

9. Annoyed that this overshadowed Mike Piazza's introduction into the Hall of Fame (yes, fine -- Junior's, too).

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

I think that it's entirely possible to be the following, all at the same time:

4. Certain that a leak of RNC emails would reveal at least as much nonsense -- and maybe more on the lack of neutrality.

The DNC at least tries to put on a face of impartiality. I don't think the RNC needs a leak, it's right there in the open. Like how the NRSC won't give any $ for the CO senate candidate, just because he beat their GOPe guys at the state convention. He's even enthusiastically onboard the Trump train, but Cruz endorsed him, so he's on their hit list.

Heck, since his speech last Friday, all Trump has done is badmouth other Rs, and even says he's raising $ to primary challenge Cruz and Kasich, because, clearly, that's what his priority is.

Trump has multiple high-level people in his campaign with ties to Putin and other Russian oligarchs. It is highly concerning to me that a foreign nation may be influencing our campaign, but I guess it is only bad when Democrats don't specifically request it?

See http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/...984-elections/