The 2012 Republican candidate for POTUS:
|
| MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
| ...
| In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
| liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
| he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
| election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
| candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
| ...
<https://www.newsweek.com/mitt-romney-faces-backlash-maga-1846910>

--bks

On 26 Nov 2023 13:26:40 -0000, bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:

>The 2012 Republican candidate for POTUS:
> |
> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
> | ...
> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
> | ...
><https://www.newsweek.com/mitt-romney-faces-backlash-maga-1846910>
>
> --bks

Mitt Romney is a Republican. Donald Trump is a RINO.

Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority

Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/

Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!

Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!

Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!

Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>

bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote in news:ujvh2g$sh8$1
@panix3.panix.com:

> The 2012 Republican candidate for POTUS:
> |
> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
> | ...
> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
> | ...
> <https://www.newsweek.com/mitt-romney-faces-backlash-maga-1846910>
>
> --bks
>

Reagan and Goldwater would have the
same opinion of the Trump Cult takeover
of the GOP.

>> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
>> | ...
>> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
>> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
>> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
>> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
>> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.

|
| Liz Cheney [R-MT]: "In my view, fundamentally there's a
| choice to be made-
|
| You can't be both for Donald Trump and for the
| Constitution. You have to choose."
|
| [27-second video at URL]
|
<https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1731330318106247404>

--bks

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 16:23:39 -0000 (UTC)
bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:

> >> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
> >> | ...
> >> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
> >> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
> >> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
> >> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
> >> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
>
> |
> | Liz Cheney [R-MT]: "In my view, fundamentally there's a
> | choice to be made-
> |
> | You can't be both for Donald Trump and for the
> | Constitution. You have to choose."
> |
> | [27-second video at URL]
> |
> <https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1731330318106247404>
>
> --bks

Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
Constitution requires it.

Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United States
shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of
government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on
application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the
legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug cartels
and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot control our
borders we cannot defend our national sovereignty…..it's that simple.

On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:

{snip}

> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
> Constitution requires it.
>
> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United States
> shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of
> government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on
> application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the
> legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
>
> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug cartels
> and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot control our
> borders we cannot defend our national sovereignty…..it's that simple.

Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not close to
being settled law.

As such, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Texas' argument
that the buoys should remain in place while the case is being litigated
because they prevent an on-going invasion. The court instead held that
the determination we have an invasion requires full briefing and
argument and should not be assumed at this stage of the litigation.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>
> {snip}
>
> > Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
> > Constitution requires it.
> >
> > Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
> > States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
> > form of government, and shall protect each of them against
> > invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
> > executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
> > domestic violence.
> >
> > This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
> > against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
> > cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
> > control our borders we cannot defend our national
> > sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>
> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not close
> to being settled law.

Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.

Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
settle all this unsettled law.

>
> As such, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Texas' argument
> that the buoys should remain in place while the case is being
> litigated because they prevent an on-going invasion. The court
> instead held that the determination we have an invasion requires full
> briefing and argument and should not be assumed at this stage of the
> litigation.
>

There is no doubt Texas is being invaded. People are entering Texas
from a foreign country. They are not wanted in Texas.

The court ordered the buoys removed because two of the three judges
said they were blocking a navigable water way. Which is bullshit.
The water in not knee deep.

I don't know why but both you and Biden want this continuous flow of
illegal immigrants to continue.

Biden has also ordered the Border Patrol to cut barbed wire to let
people enter the country.

On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>
>> {snip}
>>
>>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
>>> Constitution requires it.
>>>
>>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
>>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
>>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
>>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
>>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
>>> domestic violence.
>>>
>>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
>>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
>>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
>>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>>
>> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not close
>> to being settled law.
>
> Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.

Correct.

> Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
> settle all this unsettled law.

Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.

>> As such, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Texas' argument
>> that the buoys should remain in place while the case is being
>> litigated because they prevent an on-going invasion. The court
>> instead held that the determination we have an invasion requires full
>> briefing and argument and should not be assumed at this stage of the
>> litigation.
>
> There is no doubt Texas is being invaded. People are entering Texas
> from a foreign country. They are not wanted in Texas.

As the court recognized, there is considerable doubt. See for example
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/18/immigration-is-not-invasion/

> The court ordered the buoys removed because two of the three judges
> said they were blocking a navigable water way. Which is bullshit.
> The water in not knee deep.
>
> I don't know why but both you and Biden want this continuous flow of
> illegal immigrants to continue.
>
> Biden has also ordered the Border Patrol to cut barbed wire to let
> people enter the country.

I do not want the flow. We need to 1) establish processes to much more
quickly resolve these cases, and 2) increase the number of people we
legally let in.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 09:45:48 -0800
Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
> > Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
> >>
> >> {snip}
> >>
> >>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.
> >>> The Constitution requires it.
> >>>
> >>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
> >>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
> >>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
> >>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
> >>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
> >>> domestic violence.
> >>>
> >>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
> >>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
> >>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
> >>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
> >>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
> >>
> >> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not
> >> close to being settled law.
> >
> > Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.
> >
>
> Correct.
>
> > Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
> > settle all this unsettled law.
>
> Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court can.

On 12/3/2023 10:06 AM, Johnny wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 09:45:48 -0800
> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
>>> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>>>
>>>> {snip}
>>>>
>>>>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.
>>>>> The Constitution requires it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
>>>>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
>>>>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
>>>>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
>>>>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
>>>>> domestic violence.
>>>>>
>>>>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>>>>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
>>>>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
>>>>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
>>>>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>>>>
>>>> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not
>>>> close to being settled law.
>>>
>>> Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.
>>>
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>>> Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
>>> settle all this unsettled law.
>>
>> Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.
>
> The Supreme Court can.

They have yet to weigh in and hence it is not settled law.

On 12/3/2023 8:57 AM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>
> {snip}
>
>> Texas is being invaded daily.  Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.  The
>> Constitution requires it.
>>
>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United States
>> shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of
>> government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on
>> application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the
>> legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
>>
>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug cartels
>> and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration.  If we cannot control our
>> borders we cannot defend our national sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>
> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not close to being
> settled law.

It's not a question of law. Article 4 Section 4 clearly and unequivocally is
talking about an organized military invasion by a hostile foreign power with the
intent of seizing territory and overthrowing the government. That's not happening.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 10:21:06 -0800
Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On 12/3/2023 10:06 AM, Johnny wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 09:45:48 -0800
> > Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
> >>> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> {snip}
> >>>>
> >>>>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.
> >>>>> The Constitution requires it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
> >>>>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
> >>>>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
> >>>>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
> >>>>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
> >>>>> domestic violence.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
> >>>>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
> >>>>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
> >>>>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
> >>>>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
> >>>>
> >>>> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not
> >>>> close to being settled law.
> >>>
> >>> Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled
> >>> law.
> >>
> >> Correct.
> >>
> >>> Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else
> >>> and settle all this unsettled law.
> >>
> >> Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.
> >
> > The Supreme Court can.
>
> They have yet to weigh in and hence it is not settled law.
>

There will never be settled law.

On 12/3/2023 11:57 AM, Johnny wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 10:21:06 -0800
> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2023 10:06 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 09:45:48 -0800
>>> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
>>>>> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.
>>>>>>> The Constitution requires it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
>>>>>>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
>>>>>>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
>>>>>>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
>>>>>>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
>>>>>>> domestic violence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>>>>>>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
>>>>>>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
>>>>>>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
>>>>>>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not
>>>>>> close to being settled law.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled
>>>>> law.
>>>>
>>>> Correct.
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else
>>>>> and settle all this unsettled law.
>>>>
>>>> Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.
>>>
>>> The Supreme Court can.
>>
>> They have yet to weigh in and hence it is not settled law.
>>
>
> There will never be settled law.

Settled law is where SCOTUS has weighed in. Sure, SCOTUS can reverse
itself later on, but it's settled in the sense that all other courts
must abide by what SCOTUS said in the meantime.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 10:48:38 -0600, Johnny <johnny@invalid.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 16:23:39 -0000 (UTC)
>bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>
>> >> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
>> >> | ...
>> >> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
>> >> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
>> >> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
>> >> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
>> >> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
>>
>> |
>> | Liz Cheney [R-MT]: "In my view, fundamentally there's a
>> | choice to be made-
>> |
>> | You can't be both for Donald Trump and for the
>> | Constitution. You have to choose."
>> |
>> | [27-second video at URL]
>> |
>> <https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1731330318106247404>
>>
>> --bks
>
>Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
>Constitution requires it.
>

So Texas has given up on that independence thing?

Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority

Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/

Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!

Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!

Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!

Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 11:18:41 -0600, Johnny <johnny@invalid.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
>Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>>
>> {snip}
>>
>> > Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
>> > Constitution requires it.
>> >
>> > Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
>> > States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
>> > form of government, and shall protect each of them against
>> > invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
>> > executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
>> > domestic violence.
>> >
>> > This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>> > against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
>> > cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
>> > control our borders we cannot defend our national
>> > sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>>
>> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not close
>> to being settled law.
>
>Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.
>
>Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
>settle all this unsettled law.

The House? All by itself? No Senate? No Executive? No Courts? Just the House all by
itself?

Have you ever READ the Constitution? Not the Russian translation but in the original
English.

>>
>> As such, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Texas' argument
>> that the buoys should remain in place while the case is being
>> litigated because they prevent an on-going invasion. The court
>> instead held that the determination we have an invasion requires full
>> briefing and argument and should not be assumed at this stage of the
>> litigation.
>>
>
>There is no doubt Texas is being invaded. People are entering Texas
>from a foreign country. They are not wanted in Texas.

They're very much wanted in Texas. Business wants them for cheap labor. Florida wants
them for the same reason. Georgia and California too.

>The court ordered the buoys removed because two of the three judges
>said they were blocking a navigable water way. Which is bullshit.
>The water in not knee deep.

If it was, it wouldn't be navigable, would it?

>I don't know why but both you and Biden want this continuous flow of
>illegal immigrants to continue.

Republican businesses are screaming for cheap labor.

>Biden has also ordered the Border Patrol to cut barbed wire to let
>people enter the country.

*shrug* Republican businesses are screaming for cheap labor.

When unemployment is low, illegal immigration is high. The only way to stop it is by
making the jobs go away. Clearly barriers don't work. We have to make them not want to
come here.

OR

We could realize that anybody with the gumption to walk two thousand miles through jungle,
swamp and desert to come here for some shit job like emptying bedpans, harvesting crops or
washing dishes, is probably a hard worker our economy needs.

Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority

Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/

Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!

Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!

Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!

Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 12:06:55 -0600, Johnny <johnny@invalid.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 09:45:48 -0800
>Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2023 9:18 AM, Johnny wrote:
>> > On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 08:57:59 -0800
>> > Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 12/3/2023 8:48 AM, Johnny wrote:
>> >>
>> >> {snip}
>> >>
>> >>> Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas.
>> >>> The Constitution requires it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United
>> >>> States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
>> >>> form of government, and shall protect each of them against
>> >>> invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the
>> >>> executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against
>> >>> domestic violence.
>> >>>
>> >>> This was to guarantee that each state of the union was protected
>> >>> against invasion by foreign nations, revolutionary forces, drug
>> >>> cartels and uncontrolled (illegal) immigration. If we cannot
>> >>> control our borders we cannot defend our national
>> >>> sovereignty…..it's that simple.
>> >>
>> >> Whether uncontrolled illegal immigration is an invasion is not
>> >> close to being settled law.
>> >
>> > Not settled law? According to you there is a lot of unsettled law.
>> >
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>> > Maybe The House of Representatives needs to drop everything else and
>> > settle all this unsettled law.
>>
>> Congress cannot change the meaning of the Constitution.
>
>The Supreme Court can.

Then file a suit and appeal to the SCOTUS. Let us know how they rule.

How cleverly you snipped the rest of his post.

We need more courts to process the illegals coming in. We have catch and release
precisely because Republicans are holding up funds needed to process these cases. They do
this because they and the US Chamber of Commerce know that these people are a valuable
source of cheap labor while they're waiting for their hearings.

Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority

Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/

Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!

Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!

Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!

Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>

Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
news:cftqmid9ftb7a759samps83l2080a4q7tg@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 10:48:38 -0600, Johnny <johnny@invalid.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 16:23:39 -0000 (UTC)
>>bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>>
>>> >> | MAGA Furious Over Mitt Romney Saying He'd Vote for Democrats
>>> >> | ...
>>> >> | In the interview, Romney was asked by O'Donnell who he
>>> >> | liked in the Republican field, in which he responded that
>>> >> | he would support any one of the Republicans amid the 2024
>>> >> | election, adding that he would also vote for Democratic
>>> >> | candidates as it would be an "upgrade" from Trump.
>>>
>>> |
>>> | Liz Cheney [R-MT]: "In my view, fundamentally there's a
>>> | choice to be made-
>>> |
>>> | You can't be both for Donald Trump and for the
>>> | Constitution. You have to choose."
>>> |
>>> | [27-second video at URL]
>>> |
>>> <https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1731330318106247404>
>>>
>>> --bks
>>
>>Texas is being invaded daily. Why doesn't Biden protect Texas. The
>>Constitution requires it.
>>
>
> So Texas has given up on that independence thing?

Texas wants independence AND federal loot.

Abbott seeks federal help after Texas tornadoes
January 26, 2016
http://tinyurl.com/zq87q8o

GOP Texas governor asks for federal
assistance to help with COVID-19
01/02/22
https://tinyurl.com/5x4bbk8n

Texas Governor Abbott Requests Federal Zika Funds
Aug 22 2016
http://tinyurl.com/jd3av4r

Ted Cruz Demands Federal Money For Texas Floods
May, 27th, 2015
http://tinyurl.com/oc7hume

Perry requested billions in federal aid as governor
Nov. 9, 2011
http://tinyurl.com/hulzkwr

|
| Alyssa Farah Griffin Says Former Boss Trump Is
| 'Historically Dangerous'
| ...
<https://themessenger.com/entertainment/alyssa-farah-griffin-donald-trump-historically-dangerous>

--bks

The 2012 GOP candidate for President of the United States:
| ...
| "If I endorse someone, it'll be the kiss of death," Romney
| quipped. "Should I endorse the person I like least right
| now?"
| ...
<https://themessenger.com/politics/mitt-romney-says-joe-manchin-is-the-joe-id-like-to-vote-for-in-2024>

--bks

|
| Ann Coulter Slams Anti-Abortion Movement After Texas
| Decision
|
| The conservative pundit is backing Kate Cox after the Texas
| Supreme Court ruled against her petition to get an abortion
| in the state this month.
| ...
<https://www.thedailybeast.com/ann-coulter-slams-pro-life-movement-after-texas-anti-abortion-decision>

--bks

> | Ann Coulter Slams Anti-Abortion Movement After Texas
> | Decision

|
| Chris Christie is stepping up his rhetoric attacking GOP
| presidential front-runner and rival former President Trump,
| releasing a new ad declaring Trump will "burn America to
| the ground."
| ...
<https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4380102-christie-says-trump-will-burn-america-to-the-ground/>

--bks

On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:11:27 -0000 (UTC), bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:

>> | Ann Coulter Slams Anti-Abortion Movement After Texas
>> | Decision
>
> |
> | Chris Christie is stepping up his rhetoric attacking GOP
> | presidential front-runner and rival former President Trump,
> | releasing a new ad declaring Trump will "burn America to
> | the ground."

Only if we give him the chance.

> | ...
><https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4380102-christie-says-trump-will-burn-america-to-the-ground/>
>
> --bks

Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority

Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/

Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!

Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!

Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!

Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>

|
| Just under half of likely Iowa GOP caucusgoers who support
| former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley indicated that they
| would make a crossover to the Democratic party, saying that
| they would rather vote for President Biden over former
| President Trump.
| ...
<https://thehill.com/elections/4408071-almost-half-of-haley-supporters-say-they-would-vote-for-biden-over-trump-iowa-poll/>

--bks

On 1/14/2024 12:45 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
> |
> | Just under half of likely Iowa GOP caucusgoers who support
> | former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley indicated that they
> | would make a crossover to the Democratic party, saying that
> | they would rather vote for President Biden over former
> | President Trump.

Not very meaningful. Iowa is as shithole red as they get, and Haley is polling
at 17.3% If that's close to accurate, that means approximately 8% of Iowa
Republiscums/QAnon will vote for Biden over Trump. Trump won Iowa in 2020 with
53.09% of the vote, vs 44.89% for Biden (the rest was scattered among seven
others). Trump could lose those 8% of Republiscums/QAnon and still win the state
handily.

Lou Bricano <lb@cap.con> wrote:
>On 1/14/2024 12:45 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
>> |
>> | Just under half of likely Iowa GOP caucusgoers who support
>> | former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley indicated that they
>> | would make a crossover to the Democratic party, saying that
>> | they would rather vote for President Biden over former
>> | President Trump.
>
>Not very meaningful. Iowa is as shithole red as they get, and Haley is polling
>at 17.3% If that's close to accurate, that means approximately 8% of Iowa
>Republiscums/QAnon will vote for Biden over Trump. Trump won Iowa in 2020 with
>53.09% of the vote, vs 44.89% for Biden (the rest was scattered among seven
>others). Trump could lose those 8% of Republiscums/QAnon and still win
>the state
>handily.

Not why I posted it (see Subject line) but it might be true of
Haley support in all states. The number of Republicans who
endorse Biden over Trump will be astonishing.

--bks