It’s a very special midweek episode of HWX, with Brian Ward of Fraters Libertas and Paul Happe of the Nihilist in Golf Pants reconvening to discuss the critical issues of our time. Topics addressed include:

* Barack Obama’s controversial NCAA women’s basketball tournament bracket picks

* A fond look back on Marco Rubio’s now suspended Presidential campaign (with help from Carly Simon)

* The Trump attack ads on Rubio and their potential effect on his future prospects in Florida (including a new attack ad debuting and targeting some of your favorite Ricochet personalities)

* The status of the Hillary campaign and some of her recent advertisements (including a first draft of a rejected ad never before heard in public)

* The #NeverTrump movement among conservatives – high principle or a temper tantrum?

* The enticing potential of an open GOP convention. If a majority of delegates can’t agree on any of the remaining candidates, who to choose? And a question for the Ricochet membership, if we could dispense with the dirty business of democratic selection, and you could choose ANYONE in the country to be the Republican nominee, who would it be?

HWX is brought to you by the fine folks at Harry’s Shave. Go to Harrys.com now and Harry’s will give you $5 off if you type in my code HWX with your first purchase.

All member feedback welcome in the comments section. Hope you enjoy.

 

Podcast listeners: Now become a Ricochet member for only $2.50 month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

Members have made 11 comments.

  1. Profile photo of Hank Rhody Member

    You know who I’d like to see come out the nominee from the convention?

    Clarence Thomas.

    Let him campaign like he argues on the court. Say nothing, give a cogent opinion by writing every so often, and let the rest of the right go on the attack. When the press attacks him say “Weren’t you the guy who called him an Uncle Tom in 2006? Aren’t you just racist?”

    Sure, we’d have to make up two picks on the Supreme court, but who would you trust more?

    • #1
    • March 17, 2016 at 4:04 am
    • LikeLike
  2. Profile photo of Grendel Member

    Still longing for Perry-Fiorina.

    • #2
    • March 17, 2016 at 6:24 am
    • LikeLike
  3. Profile photo of Brian Ward Contributor
    Brian Ward Post author

    As I mentioned on the podcast, Newt Gingrich is an intriguing choice. Kind of a proto-Trump. He focuses on popular but under served issues/desires of the average citizen. He knows how to fight, the political opposition and the media. He knows how to win. Plus, as a bonus, he’s an expert in the legislative process, both de jure and defecto.

    He’s 73 and well past his political freshness date. But who else is there? Open to other ideas. There has to be someone, right?

    (Cue dry wind sound and tumbleweed rolling by)

    • #3
    • March 17, 2016 at 7:31 am
    • LikeLike
  4. Profile photo of angelasg Member

    I couldn’t agree more that Hillary Clinton is clearly worse than Trump. It’s better to pick the unknown over the known “evil”. And pushing people to a third party or to stay home will have a negative impact on the down-ballot races from the conservative point of view.

    • #4
    • March 17, 2016 at 12:07 pm
    • LikeLike
  5. Profile photo of Penfold Member

    Does Pawlenty have some free time on his hands? Or is that gig with the Financial Services Roundtable keeping him busy?

    • #5
    • March 17, 2016 at 12:20 pm
    • LikeLike
  6. Profile photo of Chris Gregerson Member

    If I could pick anyone for president, I think I’d be leaning for Senator Ben Sasse (R) of Nebraska. Every time I hear him interviewed he seems to have logical solutions for the political and economic problems of our nation. He’s a strong supporter of the Constitution and I’m thinking that he’s govern that way.

    • #6
    • March 17, 2016 at 12:49 pm
    • LikeLike
  7. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    Its interesting to note that such an event is how Garfield got the nomination. He went to the convention with the intent as a sitting congressmen to get the nod for a Senate run. Turns out by the end they were making him President.

    If he were allowed to I would go with Mark Steyn but he isn’t allowed to as a fellow Canadian.

    Hmm. Lets maybe go with David Patreus. Cause we could use a General at the helm for a bit.

    • #7
    • March 18, 2016 at 9:25 am
    • LikeLike
  8. Profile photo of Keith Keystone Member

    Sorry guys, but I am #nevertrump. There are many reasons, but mostly because he is anti free-trade, which is the cornerstone of his campaign.

    If you want to see how huge tariffs affect an economy, look at Europe. The 19% tariffs have not created jobs. They aren’t making iPhones in Sweden. Instead it simply forces EU customers to pay more for electronics, textiles, etc. and lowers everyone’s standard of living.

    But you are suggesting that I am supposed to fall in line even though Trump’s ideas are mostly garbage. Sorry. Not happening. I’m committed to ideas over party. And if the party embraces garbage, I’m out.

    The good (bad?) news is that I live in MN. So the pressure is off. My vote doesn’t count. We know who’ll win this state.

    Oh, and if I could choose anyone it would be Nikki Haley. That choice would neutralize Hillary’s only selling point and would give us an intelligent, conservative candidate (who supports free trade!).

    • #8
    • March 18, 2016 at 5:28 pm
    • LikeLike
  9. Profile photo of bagodonuts Member

    Listing Hillary’s failings and pointing out that Trump hasn’t done these things ignores the fact that he wasn’t in politics and wasn’t in a position to do these things (although he gladly gave to Hillary while she did them). But both he and Hillary have addressed their followers, and only one openly advocated political violence. Only one has mocked the handicapped openly. (Avoiding that is not “political correctness,” it’s common human decency, something Trump utterly lacks.) Only one has been openly coarse and obscene in talking about the opposite sex. Only one is completely, willfully, and unapologetically unacquainted with the very basics of foreign policy.

    It’s fine to tell us that Trump is the lesser of two evils (I don’t buy it). But to assert that those who disagree are “taking their ball and going home” — I would hope you guys are better than that. (And asserting the need to do support Trump, for unity’s sake, while painting your fellow conservatives as immature, should strike you as incongruous.)

    You pose for us President Hillary as “Obama’s 3rd term.” If I grant that possibility, will you grant me the possibility that President Trump does something that no previous demagogue in the US has ever been able to do: legitimize violence and intimidation as political tools?

    • #9
    • March 19, 2016 at 11:17 am
    • LikeLike
  10. Profile photo of Skarv Thatcher

    Since Hinderaker left HWX has mostly (it was challenged for a while by Tracked and Targeted) been the podcast that most effectively portray Republicans as troglodytes.

    • #10
    • March 19, 2016 at 6:27 pm
    • LikeLike
  11. Profile photo of Reldim Inactive

    #NeverTrump – here’s why. Clinton is a criminal. Maybe she gets indicted, maybe not. She will almost certainly behave in a way to attain a second “first” – first husband and wife to both be impeached. But at least conservatism and the Republican Party will not have to own her faults and her mistakes.

    But Trump will be a disaster, not just for the country but for the Republican Party as a vehicle for conservatism. The media will never let the GOP get out from under Trump, ever. We conservatives could defeat a President Trump in the 2020 primaries in a landslide with the true second coming of Reagan, and we’d still be the party of the KKK, the nativists, and the vulgarians for a generation. We will have “saved the country” from 4 years of Hillary but condemned it to a generation of far worse (as the Democratic Party is poised to move ever farther to the Sanders wing where the young voters are). Trump will make the GOP about as useless a national force as the Whigs were in 1852 – a dying party that had lost its soul.

    Hate to say it, but this is the chance for Conservatives to prove their electoral power – much as they have done in NY State. NY has “fusion ballots” allowing multiple parties to nominate the same person. It is a recipe for letting ideological groups prove their power, and the Conservative Party has done that – Republicans in NY are reticent to cross the line lest they lose the Conservatives endorsement – and without that ballot line, they are sure to lose. Maybe it’s time for the conservative movement nationally to take its business elsewhere and prove to the rest of the Republican Party just how necessary they are to the electoral success of Republicans. Conservatives have long been told to “suck it up” when an establishment squish gets the nomination, and I, like most, have done so. Let’s be honest, for all the differences, John McCain and Mitt Romney are generally starting from the same philosophical base point as most conservatives. I wish I knew what Trump’s philosophical base was, but from what I know so far, it is far to the left of even the “RINO Squishes” we’ve been “forced” to accept in the past. This is perhaps the perfect opportunity for the conservative movement to show just what happens when the party capitulates to an authoritarian-minded lifelong liberal who “converted” to “conservatism” about 12 minutes ago. I’m one who’s taking that opportunity.

    If that makes me “pro-Hillary” – bring it on. She may be only slightly less evil, but she’s the lesser of two evils.

    • #11
    • March 22, 2016 at 5:53 pm
    • LikeLike