Featured Rick Perry Endorses Cancer for President; Would Serve as Cancer's VP

Sounds like a pretty good guy. The people have made their choice for the GOP candidate, and he is backing his party's candidate.

 

As someone who lives in Texas, Rick Perry was not a great governor. Moreover, I expected all the dirt about him to come out during the Presidential campaigns, but he sank his own candidacy twice with his inability to formulate coherent thoughts and express himself without a script. While that's not essential to being a good President, it is a major benefit.

Moreover, he has served as a Governor in Texas where the Lieutenant Governor actually has most of the power and runs the state's government. (That's a holdover from the days of Reconstruction where the state constitution was written in such a way where the federal appointees selected by the Radical Republicans did not have much power - mostly figureheads, while the real work was done by someone without the title.) While he was formerly Lieutenant Governor under George W. Bush, he was in that office slightly less than two years. As such, his record of Governor of Texas is much less impressive than it seems - like all Texas Governors.

This is exactly what this is about. Perry wants to be President and knows that if Trump manages to get elected, Trump will eventually be impeached and removed from office. He wants to be the guy in the wings.

 

He's applying for the Vice President's position.

 

Sounds like a good plan for him, and he might bring some calming balance to Trumps unstable actions.

Just like Christie, Rubio, Carson, Carly did with Cruz. They are positioning themselves to keep in the game, that is what politicians do unfortunately, it is all a game to them. Or in Trumps case where he isn't a real politician, it really is just a big game to him, and he is probably shocked that he is where he is now, but would never admit it.

The other problem is Texas. Anyone from there has fried their brain in the heat, and that needs to be taken into consideration, too.

 

How ever he got there, and exactly who voted for him as long as it was legal under the State rules doesn't matter. He is the last one standing.

Just to be clear Trump was not on my list of candidates I wouldn't have minded seeing take the nomination when the whole fiasco started.

 

Uh, no.

There are a lot of foolish people in Texas who vote Republican because they think the Republican Party owns their vote (just like it was before Reagan, when Texas was solidly Democratic), but that might change.

However, Perry offers no political advantage to Trump since there are so many knee-jerk Republicans here, Trump will win the 38 electoral votes.

 

I wonder if all these Republican politicians who suddenly jumped on the Trump Train realize that if he loses, especially if he loses by a wide margin, every Democrat seeking a Republican-held office will be campaigning against the Trump Political Brand. His supporters will have his stigma to overcome if they seek reelection.

 

Are these the folks living in the rural areas, or the sin infested cities like Houston, Austin, etc where you would expect to find the demoncrat voters. Maybe they should just vote to secede, then they can be free of both parties. I keep hearing that it is supposed to be an option, and just think of how many illegals will make it across the border alive if Texas is guarding the border. Don't Mess With Texas Cool

 

Yup, that sounds like something a Texan would say Biggrin Everything is Bigger in Texas, especially egos. Thumbsup WinkWinkWink

 

You just revealed your ignorance of the Texas political landscape. Houston is HARD right-wing. Austin is HARD left-wing. Rural areas are a mix, but in East Texas skew right wing.

Only people ignorant of history and/or politicians trying to drum up support talk about secession. The Civil War rather definitively answered that question. It was primarily about secession long before it became concerned with slavery.

By and large, Texans have a much more nuanced view of immigration issues because we actually have the longest border with Mexico of any of the other United States. Moreover, the state is majority Hispanic/Latino for historical and sociological reasons - non-Hispanic "white" folks are actually an ethnic minority here. There are a wide variety of opinions about how to handle the immigration problem and they tend to be far more nuanced and insightful than the mind-numbing stuff that comes from other parts of the country where they have no clue what they are talking about. Having said that, you may bring up Rick Perry's immigration rhetoric... Remember that his pubic statements are designed to ingratiate him to the rest of the nation because of his political ambitions for the Presidency.

 

That's not actually what I was thinking of. I never took Lehmberg seriously. That was clearly a personal vendetta aided by political opportunists.

 

Houston HARD right wing, then how is it they have that homosexual Mayor voted into office? Austin just wants to Keep Austin Weird, and is full of liberal fanatics, who are as batty as the bats coming from their bridge.

At the rate this country is falling apart, any State that wanted to separate themselves from the Federal government, and their taking away the Constitutional rights of the people, and the States, they should be allowed to leave. What does something that happened 150+ years ago have to do with today. History tells us that old Honest Abe tossed out the Constitution during the Civil War. Now in 2016 it has just been tossed out, and it will probably be illegal to mention it within a few years. There is no more United States of America, only the united state of Washington DC

Sounds like a bunch of liberal mumbo jumbo. If other parts of the country don't have a clue what they are talking about, why do you want to be associated with them? I have no problem with Hispanics being here, I do have a problem with them being here ILLEGALLY. If they come across the border illegally they are criminals, and those who allow it, and then deny they are criminals, are a threat to our country, and criminals, too.

 

I suspected you were going to mention her. Again, you don't understand Houston. There is Houston (the actual city) and the Greater Houston area. The Greater Houston area is HARD right wing. Houston (city limits) is right wing with a very large student and GLBT population. Then you also have the right wing folks who are fiscal conservatives more than social conservatives.

Its a complicated situation, but the greater Houston area is HARD right, but there are inroads in certain places for more leftward people like the mayor.

Austin is the Democratic stronghold of Texas. The Beaumont/Orange/Port Arthur area used to also be a Democratic stronghold because of the unionization of heavy industry there, but it is now a Tea Party wonderland since the demise of the power of the unions.

That was the Confederate line, however policy and precedent are made by the winners of the war.

Seriously? You're griping about the Constitution not being upheld (written well over 200 years ago) and then suggest that something that occurred 150 years ago doesn't matter?

Please be consistent.

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it is "liberal" or "mumbo jumbo." You are not the standard by which reality is measured.

I sure hope so since a lot of them were here before this nation was formed.

If someone comes across the border illegally, they are lawbreakers. But the problem is not that simplistic. Many people who cross the border illegally are crossing because of significant threats to their well-being in Mexico, Central America, and even South America. These threats include threats to their lives and the ability to provide for themselves and the needs of their families. Moreover, because the US does not have a sane guest worker program, those who come up from Central America and Mexico to harvest crops do not have many options IF they are going to serve the US economy. The harvesting of fruits and vegetables would become astronomically expensive to do without that hand labor. Moreover, the border used to be much more fluid and the economy has established itself in a way -- that is not easy to change -- where things will not get done without these foreign workers. Whole segments of the economy will have to change, and the US will have to cede much more of its food production overseas (increasing costs and lowering food safety), if we are going to truly make a dent in the traffic of illegals.

There's a lot more to that, but I'm pretty sure you are going to reject it out of hand so I don't see the point.

The problem is not as simple as rounding up everyone and kicking them out. It's not as simple as building a wall -- a wall that is actually quite unfeasible without cutting off large amounts of American territory and spending an enormous quantity of money every year. Anyone who tells you differently is lying or doesn't understand the issues.

There are no easy answers to the immigration issues we face.