Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Not Perfect. Not Complete. But Very, Very Good.
I’m not saying you should vote for him. And I can’t make you vote for him. But here’s why a lot of people will vote for him:
And I can’t say I mind.
Published in Elections, General, Religion & Philosophy
That wasn’t necessarily what I was referring to.
The fact that the Supreme Court has granted Cert on the Obama Executive Order re: deportations ought to put this whole issue in focus very nicely at an appropriate time.
What manner of Justices would President Trump put on the Court? Distinguished Jurists like Lawrence Tribe (whose legal acumen Trump lurrrves when it comes to natural born status) and Judge Judy, no doubt.
What manner of Justices would President Rubio nominate to the Court? Certainly not those.
Let’s ignore for a moment Hillary’s picks; Larry Tribe, Syd Blementhal and various other leftist legal luminaries.
The point has been made again and again: the idea that we are going to pack 12 million people off back to their home country is logistically absurd. The best we are likely to do is what you’ve said: improve E-Verify to enforce immigration law at the wellspring which draws illegals here, their place of employment. Build a physical barrier on the border. Conveniently, these are positions that Rubio already takes.
To Wit:
I’m satisfied with this.
Same, same.
I know, just making a brief point.
His rhetoric about e-verify, etc. is completely vacuous in absence a deportation penalty for those here illegally.
I think he is completely unserious about enforcing immigration law and papers over the issue in attempt to distract from the reality.
He supports corporate welfare for sugar producers on grounds of national security. With Republicans like that, who needs Democrats?
Rubio is extremely talented. He has some very bad positions on a lot of different issues, but he has the talent of Reagan to inspire people. However, he also has the policies of George W. Bush, which is a big negative to me.
I’m much more in the Ted Cruz/Rand Paul policy camp, but Ted Cruz just rubs me the wrong way, and Rand….well Rand is not a very good candidate and ISIS killed his bid.
I’m down to voting for who will pick justices that won’t doom conservatism and the country, and at the same time doesn’t remind me of Martin Prince from the Simpsons. That puts me in the Rubio camp.
I think this is a great summation of many people’s issue. There is little to no enthusiasm for anything close to a replay of G.W. Bush. Enthusiasm matters huge. Romney didn’t generate any and look where that got him.
I don’t believe your request was reasonable. I hope that feeling insulted hasn’t become the standard for moderator or editor interventions.
Well OK, then. It didn’t strike me as an unreasonable request. Within the bounds of reason and absolutely perfect are different things – holding others to unreasonably high standards of reasonableness is itself unreasonable.
We don’t actually know – however, we know infinitely more about how Rubio would govern than we do about Trump. Who knows how the dice will come out on any given day with that guy?
If you allow yourself to think that a) the President has essentially infinite power over the immigration system and b) no other meaningful responsibilities then you might be a Trump supporter.
I don’t view it that way. Immigration is certainly important, but it is not the only important issue and while we’re shouting about Rubio’s lack of purity (allegedly) on this issue the horses have bolted the barn on any number of other issues from Taxes to Regulation to the Supreme Court.
There’s a much bigger game going on here that is being ignored. In many respects, if we could fix these other issues, the immigration problem starts to look like a mole hill by comparison. Let’s not get the cart in front of the horse.
Good points as usual. I just think if we don’t solve national sovereignty with absolute certainty the right loses forever.
Apparently. being an jerk is acceptable within the CoC.
Calling someone a jerk is not.
Casey was not making arguments, he was, in his own admission making insults. Calling them “digs” does not change what they were. I was very tolerant, and I pointed out the issue, and the response was more insults, and derision that I was upset at the insults designed to upset me. When called on it by a Moderator, Casey mocked some more.
I have not asked for Casey’s point of view to be shut down, I have not asked for him to be punished. I asked for him, nicely, as in “Please stop” to stop insulting me. He refused and insulted more.
It is not calling for a safe space when you ask someone to stop insulting you. It is asking them to be polite. To continue to insult me is not polite. It is rude. It is the epitome of being rude. Trying to make someone angry to laugh at them is not the way to build a community.
Now, Guy, you are clearly for wanting insults to be thrown with abandon. The whole point of this site is to not go to that level.
Again, I find it funny that Casey, in posting how he supports Rubio on his Christian faith, uses that thread as a way to attack someone else in a most un-Christian manner.
You sound like you take your politics seriously. Should Casey be laughing at you?
Pandering would be promising ethanol subsidies in Iowa, welfare in Detroit, Defense contracts everywhere, and amnesty to Mexicans. Does being a devout Catholic win net votes?
How exactly?
I was just evaluating his comments to the audience in attendance. Seemed to me he went overboard to appeal to them. Again, I would have much more admired him had he just quoted our Founding Fathers (see earlier citations). They dealt with this subject infinitely better than MR did, IMO.
For the same reason nothing works in government – too many layers. The President can decide something but then every layer on down has to fall in line. If anyone in the chain feels less than enthusiastic they can put the kibosh on just by dragging their feet. The machine has a life of its own.
For a Prez to overcome that, he would have put forth a pretty heavy hand which would appear sudden, harsh, and tyrannical. I understand that he would just be doing what he’s already supposed to do but since nobody’s ever done it, it would seem pretty wild. And it would be politically all-consuming and limit action in other important areas.
This is also why I’m not so worried about President Trump. I don’t think the machine would allow him to screw up as much as he’d want to.
Yes.
So anyway, Bryan, you’ve been completely silent about the past inconsistent positions by Cruz on immigration. Why do you trust Cruz’s flip flops on immigration?
Bryan and Casey. I love both you guys. Whatever issues you are having are yours alone.
I trust him more than I trust “Gang of 8” Rubio. I thought this was about Rubio.
The fact that he isn’t in line with a majority of republican primary voters on intervention might have been ok without the rise of ISIS, but once it became a huge issue he was doomed.
He was also confusing in the summer on his position. Lately he has been very good for my tastes and clear, it just took too long to get there.
The last part of Rubio’s answer sounded too liberal to me.
In the context of an election campaign he should have differentiated between charity and redistribution. If you give your money to someone brandishing a baseball bat in proximity to your head, you’re not being charitable, you’re being mugged. Had he been teaching a Sunday school class, he would not have needed to explain the difference but, running for president, the explanation was needed.
Didn’t that atheist sound unusually polite to you? Having delivered his Dorothy Dixer, he just seemed to shut up and let Rubio deliver the profession of faith that audience wanted to hear.
To be fair, Rubio did assert his right to speak about his faith, as opposed to practising it furtively for fear of offending someone.
I still think he’s too pretty.
Eh. He sounded pretty normal to me.
Nice attempt at deflection.
You trust Cruz based on what? He has changed his position on the issue you care most about. He has never taken any real risk or tried to accomplish anything legislatively. Everything Cruz has done has been symbolic gesture and political theater. There is no more reason to believe that Cruz will stick to his positions on immigration than Rubio.
In fact, there is no reason to ever trust a politician to do what he says on the campaign trail at all. As Milton Friedman pointed out, the key to making a politician keep promises is to create the political environment where he has no choice but to keep his word. As I said before, a President Cruz or a President Rubio would need a congress that would pass the immigration policy you prefer. If congress passes a strong border security program I don’t believe either could or would oppose that. If the congress didn’t pass such legislation neither potential president could will it into being.
Congress is the lynchpin of this issue, not the president. But getting a president into office is absolutely essential. I doubt Cruz can make it into office.
What exactly is the “majority of republican primary voters [idea] of intervention”, if I may ask? We are intervening now and ISIS is withering away before our eyes. Drying up like a prune.
And where do folks expect to get monies for out-sized force application? Do we plan to provide SS and Medicare to baby boomers or not?
FYI – Kaus on Cruz.
Casey: Please drop the digs at Brian.
Brian: The staff has responded to at least one of the flags on Casey’s comments directed at you.
Nope, this is about how I don’t want to vote for Rubio. It is not about Cruz. You are the one changing the subject, not me.
What I am asking for, is for the President to enforce the laws on the books, which appears to be something that Rubio supporters do not want to happen, which, rather reinforces my dislike of the man.
Thanks.
You mean all atheists aren’t total jerks? ;)
Admittedly, I did find his “I represent millions of atheists and non-believers…” a bit much. No dude, you don’t.