Voting Guide for Tuesday (part 2)

cruzFor President. I know this one will gin up some discussion.  I WILL go out on a limb and say Kasich AND Rubio are both unacceptable. (It’s interesting that most of our elected Republicans are supporting one of those two.)

If the polling stands up, Trump will edge out Cruz here in North Carolina.  Thanks to changes by the geniuses at the state GOP and at the RNC, those two candidates will split the lion’s share of the state’s delegates.

But which name do you mark on the ballot? Well, as far as I go, I’ve been a Cruz fan since he joined the Senate.  His style reminded me so much of my former boss.  It was nice to cruzonce again have a strong conservative voice in the Senate to stand up and say NO. 

Then, Trump came on the scene.  His rhetoric on immigration – and the b@t$h!t-crazy reaction the left has had to him — has impressed me. Our porous borders are a huge problem for us economically, AND on criminal justice and national security bases. 

I’m going to recommend a vote for Ted Cruz on Tuesday. Cruz has walked the walk and talked the talk a little longer than Mr. Trump. I know, I know.  Politicians “grow in office.”  Even Jesse Helms and Ronald Reagan softened up as time went on.  I’m feeling a little more comfortable about what I’m “buying” with Cruz. 

If Cruz should falter and Trump should end up being the nominee, I’ll be a good soldier for Trump.  It’s hard to argue that he would not be a hell of a lot better than Hillary or Crazy Bernie. 

For US Senate.  It is sad that  state that once set the standard for burrtconservatism in the US Senate — Jesse Helms, Lauch Faircloth, John East — is now saddled with Thom Thilli$$ and Richard Burr.  Burr, like Thilli$$, hangs out with the anti-conservative Ripon Society.  Burr has weak conservatism ratings from Conservative Review and Heritage Action.  He ridiculed efforts to defund ObamaCare.  Right now, he is fighting to give the federal government more power to snoop on our smartphones. He endorsed that judge who threw out the marriage amendment to the state constitution and threw our congressional primaries into their current state of chaos.  And, apparently, he even boasted about his willingness to vote for Bernie Sanders over Ted Cruz.   Trick Dick is unacceptable. 

burrHe had been telling a lot of his friends in Winston about his willingness to retire.  But, apparently, Paul Shumaker’s cash flow was a little down, so Trick Dick is giving us an encore.

Burr has three primary challengers: Paul Wright, who has done little more than pay his filling fee;  Larry Holmquist, who appears to have done little more than hang out on this site and do a few TV interviews, and 2014’s Greg Brannon.

Brannon has his flaws.  He can come off like a constitutional law professor lecturing to you more than a candidate seeking your vote. I don’t know if the appeal of the gregbrannonol’ civil suit from 2014 has been settled positively in his favor.

Regardless, you have to remember that you are not voting for a best friend.  You are voting for someone who will — hopefully — vote the right way in DC.  It’s clear that Burr cannot be counted on for that. It’s also pretty clear that Brannon CAN BE. 

I’m recommending a vote for Greg Brannon on Tuesday.  He is the best of the three alternatives to Burr.  He has the experience, the knowledge, and the skill to effectively take on the Democrats in the general and vote the right way in The Hill’s upper chamber.

It’s an uphill fight for Brannon AND the other two.  But voting for Brannon will pull down Burr’s percentage and send him a message — if he survives the primary — that will hopefully guide him in the general and throughout the next six years. A winning percentage in the primary in the 50s for a two-term incumbent senator will speak loud and clear to the ruling class. 

15 thoughts on “Voting Guide for Tuesday (part 2)

  1. I don’t care for Burr but he has the name. as far as president here’s my line up. Trump he knows who to hire to advise him. Remember he isn’t to the point where he has ben briefed by the CIA or FBI so he’s still says what he thinks. My best guess would be Trump for president Kasich for VP only for the reason he knows how Washington works and could be a help. Crist for AG Carson for Surgeon Gen. Carly for sec. of treasure Cruz to the supreme court. Marco go fishing

    1. No conservitive in their right mind could support trump in 2011 much less in 2016

      Trump is totally un-trustable from one interview to the next. Never should he be leading this country

      Cruz is the best choice republicans have had in the last 28 years

  2. I am a Conservative, not a Republican. The party left me, not the other way around. Since Cruz is the only Conservative running he is my guy.

    Democrats in disguise: Bush, Christy.
    Weather Vane Republicans: Trump, Rubio, Kasich, Carson. Conservatives: Cruz, Fiorina (Suprise)

  3. Cruz is owned by Goldman Sachs.
    Goldman Sachs is owned by Hillary.

    The left fears Trump and hold protests so he cannot hold a rally. However, they are glad to let Cruz keep pushing Democrat ideas on immigration and trade.

  4. This is SOOOO important!

    “If Cruz should falter and Trump should end up being the nominee, I’ll be a good soldier for Trump. It’s hard to argue that he would not be a hell of a lot better than Hillary or Crazy Bernie.”

    I actually KNOW folks who would vote for Hills if Trump is our nominee. I’ll bet we all do. But as I tell anyone who will listen, Trump might only be 40% of what we need, but Hills can’t even be 5%. The responsible vote in THAT matchup is Trump. So I’m voting for Ted Cruz on Tuesday to try to avoid seeing Trump lose to Hills.

    1. Pretty much my take. If comes down to Trump v. Clinton, I’m not sure we’re not all screwed anyway, because I still fear that Trump is doing this to throw the race to her in the first place. There are races in NC where a putative Republican, actually a Democrat, is attempting to win the Republican primary to ensure a Dem wins in the fall, so it’s an effective tactic for Democrats in races they can’t conventionally win in November. So I’ll back Cruz now and pray I never have to vote Trump later.

  5. I cannot believe what I am seeing. I have been watching Ted (Edwardo Rafael Cruz) for a while and he has been voting with the libs on too many things. Especially trade. If he’ll sell out on Fast Track and TPP and waver on immigration now imagine what he’ll do when in office. I prefer a candidate that cannot be bought. And I’m really tired of him comparing himself to Ronald Reagan and claiming Donald Trump is inciting violence. This means he is the same ol hand wringing panderer.

    This is how Ronald Reagan handled protesters.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpg0UfpuUAs

    and when he was stormed on stage.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbDELK0s_8U&feature=youtu.be

    I’m voting for a man that knows how to stand up for this country. Donald Trump

  6. You really don’t know anything about my campaign, Brant, so please let me clear up a few misperceptions for you.

    Yes, I have done several TV interviews during the campaign (WRAL, WECT, WWAY, WXII, WGHP, Time Warner News, and Greenville/Pitt County Public TV) and I don’t apologize for that. Each of those interviews allowed me to introduce myself and my campaign to a large numbers of voters—why wouldn’t I want to do that?

    I’ve also done at least 15 live radio interviews during the campaign (WWNC, WGCR, WTRU, WBAG, WSPC, WTSB, WFNC, WAAV, WRHT, WTIB, and WTKF). These interviews allowed tens of thousands of voters to hear my voice and learn about my positions on major issues. What candidate doesn’t want that?

    These interviews required me to “think on my feet” as well as the courage to place myself in a position that involved an element of risk (being interviewed by potentially “adversarial” hosts) to get my message out to voters. My opponents, Mr. Burr and Mr. Brannon, have done little, if any, of this type of outreach on TV or radio. Instead, they’ve opted to hide behind “safe,” carefully-scripted 30-second TV/radio ads. A lot of risk there, right?

    (In addition to the TV and radio I’ve done, I’ve also met personally with probably at least 100 conservative and/or Republican groups all across the state.)

    I didn’t have a massive campaign budget or a small army of volunteers at my disposal during this campaign, so I had to adapt my strategy to the money and manpower that was available. All in all, I think I’ve done a good job given the resources I had to work with, and I remain very optimistic about the outcome on Tuesday.

    Given your anti-establishment preferences, I would think you’d appreciate a candidate who is resourceful and courageous enough to utilize the tools available to him, regardless of the risk involved.

    Larry Holmquist

    P.S. And as far as me “hanging out at this site,” isn’t that what you want everyone to do?!!

    1. Oops! My apologies to my friends at WEEB, in Brant’s backyard. Had two awesome interviews there as well!

      Larry Holmquist

Comments are closed.