Primary Concern

It took me until this year to figure out that the Presidential primaries in the United States are an absolute joke.  I knew very little about superdelegates, contested conventions, and a whole host of other obscure rules before 2016.  Now, this stuff is in the news every single day, because the Democrats and Republicans may both be heading to contested conventions for the nominations.

For the Democrats, you have Hillary Clinton leading Bernie Sanders by a slim margin among voters, and thus in regular delegates.  But, in part because Hillary Clinton is a corrupt career politician in everyone's pocket, she is destroying Bernie in the superdelegates.  Of course, superdelegates do not officially support a candidate until the convention, so if neither gets enough regular delegates outright, there will be a contested convention.  And if Bernie continues to win states and ends up winning the popular vote, it is very likely that many of the superdelegates will support him at the convention.  But they don't have to.  Actually, the whole reason superdelegates exist is so the party's elite can better control who the nominee is, just in case it's relatively close and the voters choose someone they don't like.  Some Democracy.

At least the Republicans don't have superdelegates, but don't worry, in a close enough election where no candidate gets the magic number of delegates, the party elite can still control who the nominee is at the convention.  And while Donald Trump may still win outright, he may not, and then we can end up with a whole lot of fun at the convention in Cleveland.  Ted Cruz and John Kasich will both try to wrestle the nomination away from Trump should a contested convention take place.  The funny thing about that is that it is almost impossible for Cruz to win the 1,237 delegates needed to secure the nomination ahead of the convention, and it IS impossible for Kasich, yet he's still hanging around anyway.  He knows the rules.  At a contested convention, Democracy be damned.

The funny thing here is, I am rooting against the will of the people in the Republican primary right now.  Let me take this moment to officially endorse John Kasich, the one person out of the five remaining candidates for President who actually has a shot at uniting this politically-divided nation.  I am not a fan of Trump or Cruz for a whole host of reasons, though I would vote for either over Hillary, but a great thing about Kasich is that he would almost certainly garner enough support from Independents, Republicans, and even some Democrats that he would handily win the presidency should he be nominated.  Trump and Cruz are almost certain to lose in a general election, barring the unlikely event of a Hillary Clinton indictment (I imagine enough of the right people are paid off to stop that from happening).  This is reason enough for Republicans to root for a Kasich nomination, but the man also speaks with common sense and conviction, and he has proven that he can govern and bring people together rather than tear them apart.

All of this being said, the primaries are an enormous scam.  If we truly want the people to decide the nominee, the rules should be changed to allow that.  Otherwise, why the fuck are we even voting in primaries?  Oh, WAIT, not all of us are.  In my particular state, Connecticut (yes, the one with possibly the worst Governor in the nation), I CAN'T vote in the primaries.  Why?  Well, like some other states, Connecticut voters who are registered as Independents can't vote in the primaries.  And I have, thus far, refused to change my affiliation to either the Democratic or the Republican party.  By exercising that freedom, I have disenfranchised myself during the primaries.  So, with all the rules varying by state and the strange delegate rules, it seems there exists the option to just do away with the broken primary voting altogether and let the party elite pick their nominees, and then the people can vote in the general election.  This, I believe, could also be the downfall of the two-party system, and I am perfectly fine with that.  Democracy in the primary process seems to make more sense though, but the rules have to be cleaned up and standardized.  We should do away with the electoral college too, but that's another topic...

I'm not even sure any of these things are even the most absurd thing about the primaries.  Did you know that Jeb Bush spent like $60 million on his campaign?  It was clearly doomed from the beginning.  I knew that, and just about everyone else knew that.  There is no way there was going to be another Bush in the White House at this point in history.  He never had a shot at the nomination, no matter how much money was poured into his campaign from wealthy donors and SuperPACs.  Add up all of the totals of all the losing campaigns when we finally have our nominees, and I am sure the number will be staggering.  Hundreds of millions.  Probably well over a billion dollars!  For what?  How many things could this money have been better spent on?  Feeding, sheltering, and clothing the poor?  Helping the sick?  I mean, just about anything else would have been a better use of that money, except for counterproductive things like donating to the ACLU.

I'll be over here hoping against all odds that John Kasich gets the Republican nomination.  And that Hillary goes to prison.  That has a nice ring to it, like a great title for a children's book.  Hillary Goes to Prison.  Yeah, I like that a lot.  But not nearly as much as I like the thought of President Kasich being sworn in.  It would be wonderful to see that page in a history book one day.

The Quest to Claim my Second Amendment Right

I live in Connecticut, which is a blue state.  We have several rather violent cities, with Hartford, Bridgeport, and New Haven all perennially finding their way into the FBI's Top 10 worst.  I feel pretty safe where I live, but you never really know.  There was a home invasion in Cheshire many years ago, and of course the unspeakable tragedy in Newtown a few years ago.  I've been to both of those towns.  They feel extremely safe.  But you know the old saying.  It's better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.  And there are those in the government, both state and federal, who are attempting to chip away at our second amendment rights.  Heck, after what happened in Newtown, Connecticut passed a series of entirely useless laws.  I now can't buy guns that have a certain type of handle, and I can't have magazines that hold more than ten rounds or something like that.  I'm not particularly fond of guns, but, especially with my brother being a certified NRA instructor, I figured it was time to get my pistol permit.  This is my story.  [Dun, Dun]

I took the gun safety course in the Fall with my brother and cousins.  I actually believe that this course should be required for anyone who wants to purchase a firearm (as should a background check!).  I really knew very little about firearms before taking it, and now I know enough so that I can use one and do so safely.  This is of paramount importance.  Anyway, we went through the course, took the test, went to the range, and then ate some tacos.  It was the first time I had ever shot a gun in my life.  I actually had a few solid groupings.  I shot a Glock and a Ruger.  I liked the Glock better.  With some practice, I could probably be a pretty good shot.  After it was all over, I got my certificate and had what I needed to apply for a pistol permit.

December 16: My local Police Department does fingerprinting on Wednesdays from 3-7 PM.  However, the records department there is only open from 8 AM to 3:45 PM.  That left me a pretty narrow window to get my fingerprinting done and bring it a few steps over to the records department in the same day.  But being close to the end of the year and having a lot of errands to run anyway, I took some time off from work and showed up there at exactly 3 PM.  There were a bunch of people in line.  There had been recent mass shootings and more liberals talking about how guns are the problem and we need to make laws so that they will be harder for people to get.  You know, because criminals and terrorists obey laws.  Anyway, the line moved quickly enough and wasn't quite out the door.  The guy had some trouble getting good prints, but eventually the computer device he was using said they were good.  He handed me the prints and I signed some paperwork and gave him $25.  I walked over to the records department, minutes before they were going to close and handed these things to them along with some other paperwork I had to fill out and three more checks.  There was a $70 check, a $50 check, and then one for $14.75.  I don't even remember what went where.  Probably town, state, and background check or something.  So I'm up to $159.75 just like that.  I have a good job, so no complaints.

Christmas Vacation: At some point during my two-week vacation, I got a voicemail from the police department saying that my fingerprints were unreadable and needed to be redone.  Apparently the computer device they were using had failed us.  But of course my prints were unreadable!  I rock climb once or twice a week (indoors during the cold months).  My fingers are a damn mess.  I called them back when I got back from vacation.  At least they weren't going to charge me to do it again.  But this time when I went the line was even longer.  It was after work this time.  The woman who took my prints said that there were 18 people there for prints that day before me, and 17 were getting them done in order to get their pistol permit.  The line had been steady throughout her time there, a far cry from days when she used to get one or two people.  I'm willing to bet that more people have gotten their pistol permits (and bought guns for the first time) during the Obama administration than any other two terms in the history of our nation.  I brought the prints to the records office on the way to work the next morning.

January went by.  February went by.  Now it was March.  I called the police department and asked when I could expect my permit.  They said everything was good on their end, and the background check came back fine, so they had to see what was holding things up with the state.  They told me to call back the following week.  I did.  Someone who needed a copy of my prints apparently hadn't gotten it.  They took care of it and said I should have my permit in a week.  Sure enough, they called me a week later and said I could come pick it up.  So I picked it up on my way to work on Saint Patrick's Day.

Folks who haven't gone through this process here before don't know this, but what the town gives you is a temporary permit that's good for 60 days.  If you want a permanent one, you have to bring that to the state DPS along with a $70 check (Hooray, another money grab by the government, bringing that number to $229.75 now!), your license, and a passport or birth certificate.  Crap, who carries their passport on them to work?  I guess I had to do it another day, and Friday was the day I went out to lunch with the guys at work, so the final step took place just this week...

Monday was too busy.  Tuesday was going well, so I figured I could head there during lunch.  The DPS in Middletown isn't much more than 10 minutes from where I work.  There's a sign in the lot that you can't bring any weapons inside the building.  I don't have a... oh... yeah this is considered a weapon here, not a tool.  I leave my pocketknife in the car.  That wouldn't have gone far anyway.  It's airport security when you get in the building.
"Empty your pockets into the bin, take off your belt, walk through here.  Nope, you still have something metal."
"Oh.  Yup, steel-toed shoes..."
Here let me pet you with this wand.
OK.

The line is longer than I thought it would be.  There are 15 people in front of me.  At least.  One of them is this redneck guy who talks about a time he came and the line was out the door.  The door is very far away.  A lady in front of me is talking about how she took the day off to come here.  I'm last in line.  A guy with a mustache comes up behind me and looks at the line.
"Not today I guess."
He walks away.  Eventually, there are a lot more people forming a line behind me than there are in front of me.

There's another form to fill out.  They were nice enough to leave a small platform with some pens in the line next to the forms.  Lots of repetitive forms.  Oh well.  It will pass the time.  After that's done, I check some things on my phone.  I send a few texts, look at some things on ebay, swipe through some pictures on Tinder...  Hmmm... I usually take a half hour lunch, except on Fridays, but it's Tuesday.  Actually, I usually work through lunch.  And now it's almost 1 already, and I left work at noon.  I text my buddy at work who sits next to me and tell him if anyone is looking for me to tell them where I am.  Eventually I get to the window.  Two people are running the whole operation.  One is complaining that she's having computer problems.  They seem pleasant though.  They take my paperwork, take my photograph, and hand me my pistol permit.  Finally, a little more than three months later!  And the picture even came out alright.  It's a shame I'll have to get a new one in five years when I renew it (yes, they'll charge $70 for that too, probably more by then).

I get back to work by 1:30.  An hour and half lunch and I hadn't eaten.  I'm kind of hungry.  I warm up some chicken in the microwave and work while I eat.  No one was looking for me while I was gone.  My phone rings.  My boss had a question.  I realize that I'm blessed to have a job where I don't have to punch a clock and can come and go as needed.  I've earned trust, and they trust me because I do more than what's required of me, and while I don't get paid for overtime, there aren't very many weeks where I only work 40 hours.  I don't have to worry about getting fired for taking an hour and a half lunch break to get a pistol permit.  Some people do.  Some people can't do that, or they have to take a day off in order to do that.  And they can't afford the $230 to the government to claim this right (plus the cost of the safety course and the range fees--oh, yeah, and the gun).

Sometimes legal gun owners commit crimes, but I can't imagine someone going through these things, standing in the lines, paying the fees, filling out the paperwork, who plans to get a permit to buy a gun with which to commit crimes.  I imagine most of the time, those folks just obtain guns illegally, and, because the government isn't involved, it's cheaper and it happens more quickly.  Now I have to decide on a gun...  The one I choose costs $480.  My brother tells me it's a great deal.  I write out that check.  It's currently out of stock but coming in soon, and also, I have to special order it with a magazine that holds less rounds because it normally comes with a 15-round capacity magazine which is now, for no reason based in reality, illegal for me to have here in the great state of Connecticut.  Oh well.  Other than when I go to the range, I don't think I'll carry very often anyway.  But then, it's always better to have it and not need it, especially when a portion of society and the government don't want me to have it.  My quest to claim my Second Amendment right is nearly complete!

Scalias of Justice

The death of The Honorable Antonin Scalia has left a vacant Supreme Court seat.  Regardless of what Republicans may say, Barack Obama is going to nominate someone to fill that seat.  Any President would and probably should.  But, regardless of what Democrats say, the Senate is not obligated to confirm a nominee or even let it go to a vote.  The dishonorable Elizabeth Warren has pointed out that Americans voted for Obama again in 2012, so he should choose Scalia's successor, rather than the next President.  However, she failed to mention the massive mid-term losses for Democrats in 2014, where America chose Republican majorities in both the House and Senate.  Thus, they have a right to not confirm any of Obama's nominees.  And if the shoe were on the other foot?


Well, it has been...  In fact, Joe Biden led the Democrats in successfully blocking Ronald Reagan's nominee, Robert Bork, from confirmation.  Barack Obama tried to filibuster to block Samuel Alito in 2006.  Chuck Schumer preemptively encouraged blocking any George W. Bush nominee, when there wasn't even an opening on the Supreme Court (nor did one occur between Schumer's statements and the end of Bush's term).  Of course, all of them now believe that the current Democratic President should be the one to choose Scalia's successor.  That's because they are all Democrats.  If the President was Republican, they would believe the opposite, just like the Republicans would believe the opposite of what they are saying now if the President was Republican.


Like it or not, both parties play these games.  And if you want to compare who has played them dirtier historically, it's the Democrats by a mile.  And they are now going to have to deal with the probable scenario of Obama nominating someone who will not be confirmed or even be voted on while he is in office, at least not prior to the election.  Too bad.  And let's face it, America would look a lot different right now if Bork had been confirmed for the spot on the court that ultimately went to Anthony Kennedy.  The Democrats have appointed (and had confirmed) more consistently liberal justices, compared to the Republicans having appointed (and had confirmed) more moderate-to-conservative, rather than conservative justices.  The Republicans really have no choice but to block an Obama nominee, unless it's somehow someone who has a proven record of not being liberal.


Of course, if the Democrats take the White House again in November, this all becomes a moot point.  And the Republican Party is kind of a mess right now, so that is certainly a possibility, even with Hillary Clinton as the person in America who is least qualified to be President.  But here's hoping that our second amendment rights are not taken away and we find a way to stop so many lives from being ended before they start...  It'd sure be nice if Presidents from both parties nominated intelligent moderates though.  Can someone find a nominee who is pro-life, pro gay marriage, pro gun, and pro pot?  That would be a real accomplishment.

Please Excuse Me, I have to go to the John...

If you're feeling the Bern, maybe you should go to the John.

That pretty much sums up the New Hampshire primaries today.

To borrow a word from Donald Trump's ridiculous lexicon, Bernie Sanders schlonged Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire.  I use that word because my disdain for Hillary grows each day, and her latest strategy is calling everyone who isn't voting for her sexist.  ...Bernie's voters are sexist, the Republicans are sexist, everyone who doesn't like Hillary is sexist. Madeleine Albright spoke on her behalf and said that women who don't vote for Hillary have a special place in hell.  To be fair, Madeleine Albright is probably familiar with hell.  But really, this is all very despicable, because if you don't vote for Hillary, it doesn't mean that your sexist.  It means that you have a brain.

The only woman Hillary really cares about is herself.  She doesn't care about women who serve in the military or women who say they were victimized by her husband.  At one point, she even went so far as to defend against allegations that she is not "a progressive" by playing the "I'm a woman running for President, so of course I am" card.  Yeah, that holds a lot of water.  By that definition, Carly Fiorina is a progressive.  I mean, at least Carly Fiorina cares about women and unborn babies.  Heck, Ben Carson must be super progressive, seeing as he is running for President and is the son of two black parents.  Hillary is a felon who needs to go away, both from this race and to prison.  Bernie destroyed her in New Hampshire, and rightfully so.  A Democratic Socialist is far more worthy of the nomination than a hateful felon, regardless of whether or not she has a penis.

On the Republican side, Donald Trump solidly won in New Hampshire.  As unfortunate as it is, this was in line with the polls, and it came on the heels of probably Trump's best debate performance yet.  Maybe taking a debate off helped him rest up and prepare for the next one.  He actually sounded like he knew what he was talking about for some portion of the night.  But I still think that the lower-tier candidates need to drop out and Republicans need to eventually rally around someone who can beat Donald Trump.  A Trump nomination could be disastrous for the Republican party.

Where did John Kasich come from?  I had no idea who this dude was prior to the first debate.  He started off very underwhelming, but has gained momentum in each debate, and I think he did the best out of anyone in the most recent debate.  Accordingly, Kasich has shocked many people by landing in second place in New Hampshire.  This is great news for Republicans, because Kasich now appears to be a very electable common sense conservative.  And one who isn't crazy and seems like a pleasant person to be around too!  This is amazing.  What a rare breed.  He's still polling quite low nationally, and is a long shot to get the nomination, but at this point, I honestly think he is probably the best option for the Republicans.  He has one person to thank for that...

Domo Arigato, Marco Ruboto!  Like Cruz's poor performance in the Trumpless debate, which followed his best debate performance, so went Marco Rubio in the most recent debate.  I actually think he did pretty well in the second half of the debate, but his terrible beginning overshadows that.  He pretty much repeated the same "25-second memorized speech" like four times within a few minutes, and Chris Christie (rightfully) called him out on it!  I do still like Rubio, but he has got to avoid absurd things like that.  That's even worse than awkwardly sipping water.  Yes Marco, we get it.  Obama is intentionally changing the country to make it like the rest of the world.  He knows exactly what he's doing.  Got it.  You don't need to repeat it four times in virtually the same way.

All the votes aren't tallied yet, but third through fifth are pretty close between Cruz, Bush, and Rubio, but it's time for Bush to get out of the race.  He's blowing through ridiculous amounts of money and isn't getting many votes or favorable poll numbers anywhere.  Christie, Fiorina, and Carson should drop out too, after rounding out sixth through eighth in New Hampshire.  They're done, and that pains me, because I really have a deep respect and admiration for Carson.  Jim Gilmore is a joke at this point, for some reason still not having formally declared that he's out of the race despite getting virtually no votes in Iowa or New Hampshire and polling under one percent basically everywhere.

Here's hoping that we'll at least be down to the final four before the next primaries: Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Trump.  ...Although personally, I could do without Cruz and Trump as well.

[The picture here is from a rock climbing trip in New Hampshire this past summer.]

Iowa Fracas

Well, the first voting has come and gone in Iowa, and certainly not without controversy.  For the Democrats, we have a virtual tie between a mean-spirited felon (who apparently replies "fuck off" when a secret service agent says good morning to her) and a kindhearted socialist (who wants to make everything free for everyone who's not rich, except that free has a giant asterisk next to it).  And coming in with less than one percent of the vote was Martin O'Malley who promptly did what he should have done long ago and dropped out of the race.  So we're officially down to two on that side.  That's nice.  It's a lot less to keep track of, which is good when your party has to deal with confusing things such as superdelegates and coin tosses that determine delegates in certain situations.  So much for Democracy in the Democratic party.  Hillary narrowly beat out Bernie in Iowa, and Bernie is already calling for more of the voting information to be released since it was so absurdly close.

And then we have the Republicans.  Ah, the Republicans.  There were twelve of them on the ballot in Iowa, which makes me wonder what it would be like if the twelve of them sat down at a table like the disciples and ate dinner with Jesus.  Which one would he hand a dipped piece of bread to?  Anyway, out of the twelve candidates, six of them got less than two percent of the vote.  Save for Kasich, who is holding out for a strong showing in New Hampshire, the other five should drop out, but only Mike Huckabee has so far.  Bush couldn't even muster three percent, but he seems ready to go on wasting millions of dollars on a failed campaign.  Heck, his brother wasted a lot more money than that.  Rand Paul got almost five percent to finish in fifth.  Carson finished in fourth with just over nine percent after someone from Ted Cruz's campaign said that Ben was dropping out of the race (though he probably would have finished fourth anyway).  Rubio was third with Trump nudging him out for second and Ted Cruz taking home first place with a whopping 27.6 percent of the vote. 

Normally, I would be disconcerted about Cruz winning, but I was able to take some solace in the fact that he beat out Trump.  It was nice to see Trump lose.  But this brings us to the reality that Republicans must face.  Both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are NOT well-liked outside of the right, notably the far right.  While many conservatives want one of these top two finishers to represent their party in the general election, either one being nominated would increase the odds of the Democrats keeping the White House, meaning President Hillary Clinton or President Bernie Sanders.  That should be enough to send shudders down the spines of conservatives, yet they are still voting for the candidates who are either furthest to the far right or pretending to be.  The strategy ought to instead be to nominate someone who could actually garner Independent votes.  In my estimation, Marco Rubio fits that description best.  Paul, Kasich, and even Carson as a Washington outsider could do that to some extent.  With Trump, Bush, and Christie holding firm in my rankings at 8th, 7th, and 6th, I update my top 5 thusly:

5th (previously 2nd), Ted Cruz: After his brilliant showing two debates ago, Cruz has been a disaster.  His performance in the Trumpless debate was very poor by his master debater standards.  He started an unwarranted argument with the moderator, cracked a joke that was not funny, and was not as on point on the issues as he had been before.  Furthermore, it's becoming more and more difficult to see him as genuine, and there are plenty of folks wondering if he is using his Christianity to advance politically.  Whether he knew about it beforehand or not, his campaign people used several dirty tricks in Iowa, and the story about Cruz touting tithing but not actually doing so himself has gained traction.  This should not be a surprise from someone whose college roommate said he would rather vote for a random person in the phone book to be president instead of Cruz.  While it is possible that he can win the presidency if nominated, perhaps fueled by some quality debates, it does not give his party the best chance at victory.

4th (previously 4th), Rand Paul: I like Paul because he thinks.  He comes across as someone who believes he's smarter than you but isn't a complete jerk.  And he probably is smarter than you.  It's nice to see someone who actually thinks about the issues as well, and does not always just go along party lines.  He's debated well recently and offered some real solutions.  He could draw votes from moderates and independents in a general election.  And he appears to have a rabid fan base, at least in Iowa.  The only problem is that he's not getting many votes in the primaries and his poll numbers are quite low.  It's not likely that he will be the nominee.

3rd (previously 3rd), Ben Carson: Look, as an "Evangelical / Born Again" Christian, I recognize that Carson believes some weird stuff as a Seventh Day Adventist.  But I also recognize that a requirement to be President of the United States is not that the President believe the same things that I do, or that traditional Christians in America have believed.  Dr. Carson comes across as someone genuine, far more than Ted Cruz.  Carson appears to do a much better job showing his Christian love than Cruz.  As a political outsider (and an African-American), he will garner votes outside of the right in the general election, and he could potentially do a lot to unite a divided nation, but he's debated poorly lately and is fading fast in the polls.  He looks sleepy, but maybe he just needs a nap.

2nd (previously 5th), John Kasich: How did this guy make it up to second on my list?  I think it's almost by default.  That's how big of a mess the party is right now.  The Governor has debated well the last few times, he clearly has common sense, he has the ability to lead, and I could see him potentially doing well in a general election now.  I didn't see that as a real possibility before.  Of course, he got 1.9% of the vote in Iowa.  But there's hope.  He's virtually tied with Cruz for second place in the New Hampshire polls at least.  I just don't think the party would end up nominating someone as sensible as him right now.  The Republican Party is in disarray, but hey, the leading candidate for the Democrats should be thrown into prison, so whatever.

1st (previously 1st), Marco Rubio: He's done pretty well in the debates, people like him, and he doesn't seem crazy.  He doesn't always take the most conservative stance on every issue either, which is nice.  He is definitely electable in the general election and is the best chance the Republicans have to beat Clinton or Sanders.  As long as he can avoid awkwardly sipping water on television for a while, he just might have a shot at getting the nomination.

...Goodness, I hope so.  This thing is a mess.

Cruz Con Troll: Top Eight Update

My top eight Republican Candidates with brief notes (with ranking I gave them last time noted--I've narrowed this list down to eight, because Santorum, Huckabee, and Fiorina should have undoubtedly dropped out already).  It's useless to do this for Democrats at this point, as Bernie Sanders should clearly be their candidate, though Hillary Clinton, who should be in prison, will probably get the nomination.  Martin O'Malley does not have a chance to get the nomination, though he could end up on the ticket as a VP candidate.  Note: The graphic I've used is once again the 15-day polling average from 2016.republican-candidates.org.

8th (previously 5th), Donald Trump: It is baffling that Trump has remained so far ahead in the polls.  He would certainly do a better job than Hillary, but I would take any of the other Republican candidates over him.  Trump is a great businessman, he's very intelligent, he speaks his mind, and he doesn't need money from anyone, but the prospect of nominating him is terrifying.  He's already insulted Mexicans, women, Muslims, and I've lost track of who else...  Has he said anything to offend the gays or blacks yet?  If not, is Vegas taking odds on when that's going to happen?  Yes, we need to confront Islamic extremists and fight ISIS, but banning people of a certain religion from entering the country or tracking those who are already here is a really, really slippery slope.  If you thought Obama has been taking a dump on the Constitution, why would we want another President doing that, albeit differently?  Regardless, if Trump gets the nomination, not very many Democrats or Independents would vote for him, and there are millions of Republicans who wouldn't vote for him either.  He seems to have monopolized a very specific base, and this base will support him no matter what he says, but a large portion of the voters outside of this base wish Trump would disappear.

7th (previously 10th), Jeb Bush: His last name is still toxic, and he's still not a very good candidate, but even he can see the issues with a Trump nomination, and he's at least spoken about it and attempted to confront Trump on occasion during the debates.

6th (previously 3rd), Chris Christie: I still like him, but it's hard to see him winning in a general election.  And sometimes it works in his favor that he's more Liberal than the average Republican, but sometimes it works against him.  Christie should do the right thing and drop out.  He's young enough that he can try again in 4 or 8 years.

5th (previously 9th), John Kasich: His debate performances have improved, and it's nice to see someone with a solid amount common sense speaking on that stage.  However, like Christie, I'm not sure he could win a general election right now.

4th (previously 8th), Rand Paul: He got booted from the main debate stage because the FBN rules on which polls they look at, etc.  It is rather arbitrary, and he was rightfully not thrilled about it.  But I think he was a winner by not taking part in the debate, and I'm turning more and more into a Libertarian every day, a mold that the intelligent, strongly-opinionated Paul fits better than that of a Republican.  He may not be the best guy for the nomination, but he has a level of common sense and seems like he would be able to compete on a national level.

3rd (previously 1st), Ben Carson: It absolutely pains me to write this, because Ben Carson has been my personal favorite candidate since he entered the race, but he's starting to seem like the third best option for the nomination right now.  This is a shame, because I think he would do well as President, and that he could do a great deal to unite a very divided nation right now.  His poll numbers have plummeted not because of his ideas, but because he has shown that he is not a politician.  Perhaps the party's lurch further to the right (as the Democrats have lurched further to the left) and the current toxic climate has contributed to his decline as well.  He just comes off as too damn much of a nice and reasonable guy to be president.  He hasn't been able to take control of the debates, notably the most recent one where he was upstaged by several of the other candidates.  I still would like to see it turn around from him, but maybe a few years as a Senator (or VP, which it would be nice to see him considered for if he doesn't get the nomination) could serve him and America well should he choose to serve in that way.

2nd (previously 4th), Ted Cruz: It is my opinion that Cruz won the most recent debate.  He was dominating, he was polished, and he is quite obviously a master debater.  It should strike fear into the bleeding heart liberals that this man is still so young.  With the party as a whole going to the right, Cruz is in the catbird seat.  He's going at Trump, and if the candidates with no shot at the nomination would drop out already and all rally around someone else, it would probably either be Cruz or the new number one on this list...

1st (previously 2nd), Marco Rubio: Rubio has been very solid all around, trailing only Trump and Cruz in the polls right now.  Clearly not as conservative as Cruz, Rubio may have a disadvantage among Republican voters because of that, but it would play as an advantage in a general election.  He's also at the top spot because I could see Rubio, like Carson, as someone who could help to unite us and bring together those who vote red and those who vote blue.  Trump or Cruz could inadvertently (if you give them the benefit of the doubt here) continue what Obama began in dividing the nation.  Rubio seems like a genuinely good person who could become our next President.  It should be interesting to see how this all plays out this year...

Oregon Trail

How are we somehow turning what's going on in Oregon into a debate involving race?  What's going on in Oregon has nothing to do with race.  And no, sorry, they are not terrorists.  That doesn't mean that they're going about things the right way though.  In general, an armed takeover of a government building should really be a last resort.  But maybe they feel this is the last resort, and that's it's time to take a stand.  Yes, they're armed, but there has been zero violence so far.  Armed does not imply violent.

In case you're not familiar with what's going on, the nutshell version is that a father and son who are ranchers (the Hammonds) were arrested for Arson.  One of the annual fires that they started burned some grass on land owned by the federal government, and they also started a backfire that probably saved their home, among other things, from another fire.  If you're not familiar with these sorts of things, neither am I.  It's because we're not ranchers.  This is what ranchers have to deal with.  Anyway, for some asinine reason, the Hammonds were arrested for this, served time in prison, and were released.  Now, prosecutors have argued that the sentencing was too lenient, and they have headed back to prison for another five years each, essentially on terrorism charges.  So, a large group of folks, led by the Bundy family, have taken control of the headquarters of a Wildlife Reserve as an armed militia.  They have done this to protest the injustice of what has happened to the Hammonds, and the overreaching of the government.  That is what's going on.  The Hammonds should not be in prison.  Although I think there are better ways to protest that, but we'll get back to that in a minute.

First, let's discuss what this is not.  This is not something that has anything whatsoever to do with race or religion.  Why are so many people asking what would happen if the protesters were Black or Muslim?  It is a pointless hypothetical question meant to incite people.  My estimate is that it would pretty much go the same as it is going now.  No, the cops would not shoot them all.  No, they would not be and should not be labelled terrorists.  Let me ask a question to the folks asking these questions.  Do you know the race or religion of the folks in this militia?  Are you just assuming that all ranchers are white, you racist, you?  I would guess that this is NOT an all-white militia, let alone an all-white Christian militia, but I don't really know because I haven't polled them.  Neither have you.  And it doesn't matter either.  That's not the issue here.  The retort that Eric Holder was part of an armed protest in a government building is a proper response to this hypothetical question.  He's African American, and look what happened to him.  Not only did he not get shot or thrown in prison for life, but he became one of the most powerful people in the country (as well as one of the most inept at his job, but that's a totally different subject).

Additionally, this is not domestic terrorism.  These people don't want anyone shot.  There has been no violence.  There has been no terror.  They want the Hammonds released from prison and the government to keep their hands out of the everyday lives of ranchers to some extent.  Quite honestly, it's up for debate whether or not these people are even criminals.  The recent protesters in Baltimore and other cities are also not terrorists.  But those protests turned into riots, looting, arson, etc.  They were not always peaceful.  People were harmed.  There was violence.  Those people were clearly criminals.

Now that we have all of that out of the way, I personally don't think that a militia takeover was the best idea in this case.  I don't think that this has reached the point of a last resort yet.  I mean, really, if Ted freaking Cruz is telling you that you should stand down, you've probably taken things a bit too far.  Protests in Washington would make more sense, or perhaps even protesting the President wherever he goes.  He's issued a lot of executive actions recently.  Can't he issue one with regard to ranchers?  He's issued a lot of pardons.  Can't he pardon the Hammonds?  That would be a good way to get out of this whole mess.

TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUBJECT: The photo I put here is Mr. Bill.  Poor Mr. Bill has brought a knife to a gun fight.  OHH NOOO!  If you appreciate vintage SNL Mr. Bill humor, I'm starting a new blog that will mostly just have pictures of Mr. Bill with a line or two.  If you're not familiar with who Mr. Bill is, google it!  Here's the link to that blog: http://theadventuresofmrbill.blogspot.com/