Trump infuriates far too many classic GOP voters.

Those he loses must be replaced by winning over Democrat voters.

However, the vast bulk of the Democrat faction is even more infuriated with Donald than Conservatives.

He’s dragging a brutal level of negatives — hard core haters — that are never going to be flipped.

&&&&&&

Lest we forget, many states are Democrat fiefs.

Hawaii
California
Oregon
New England
The old Northwest

Trump would need every state that Romney pulled and then pick up Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, ….

Trump’s New York style — of bombast — is sure to prove wearing in the old south.

His weakness there is already apparent to the HRC and Cruz camps.

Cruz’s ‘heartland’ is teaming with illegals. No wonder his pitch is selling… to natives, and legals.

NEXT

The Mexican faction HATES Trump. They are certain to pull every lever against him. Yet they ARE a major minority across the South.

&&&

I don’t have policy issues with Donald. He could not possibly be as wacky as Barry — and as corrupt as Hillary.

Electability is a deal breaker for me.

Trump is certain to be dead meat in November.

The GOPe is all fine with defeat. Holding onto Congress — and the slop trough — is its primary concern.

So it’s no wonder that they’re backing anybody but Cruz.

Ted is garlic — and they’re vampires.

Last night’s ‘debate’ was a set-up to favor ‘open torrent’ Rubio.

It’s what a father does to boost his daughter — and vice versa.

The current smear campaign is to make Ted Cruz look as squishy as Rubio, Bush, and others.

My condensed argument for deposing Saddam is:

It was an operation necessary to sustain the UN Security Council — itself — lest its resolutions become as flap-jawed as the League of Nations WRT Ethiopia and Manchuria.

A gummy UNSC would mean that the CORE purpose of the UN to preserve the peace planet wide would end.

World wide warring would soon ensue.

Barry Soetoro has achieved the same effect as not deposing Saddam — and enforcing the mandate of the UNSC.

He has un-friended NATO, Israel, Japan, KSA, Qaddaffy, Assad, ….

We are early in to WWIV — and with his Iranian fiasco — it could break out into an Atomic WWIV.

It’s actually pretty amazing how the planet is revisiting the escalation tempo// dynamic seen in the 1930s… With Barry aping Stanley Baldwin.

By the time Chamberlain stepped into the Big Chair matters had already gotten entirely out of hand.

While usually dated 9-1-1939 — War in Europe really got started with Munich.

For not withstanding his rhetoric, Chamberlain budgeted every cutting edge military technology at a wartime tempo.

The production war had already begun.

&&&&&&

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/red-ponzi-ticking/

This piece by David Stockman is critical reading — and very sobering.

Beijing has set the tables for a horrific civil war — that is most unlikely to stay within its own borders.

Hear, hear!

Preach it brother.

That caused support to evaporate overnight.

Just found a link on Hot Air for you:

&&&&

Check out this link — one page —

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ted-cruz-poison-bill-amendments-killed/2015/12/18/id/706450/

The ‘open door’ amendments that Ted Cruz launched were all poison pills.

I’ve seen his work repeatedly distorted by opponents.

One of his amendments would’ve dramatically increased the permitted H1b numbers.

Of course, at the same time it would nix a quickie route to voting status for illegals — for all time.

Wrapping sugar around poison pills is COMMON in Washington.

It’s also common for opponents to use the sugar as propaganda material — omitting that the true thrust of the amendment was to kill the original bill all together.

Pitching a half-truth being by far the best form of lying.

Labeling an observation as ‘resignation’ does not make it so Eric.

Let’s say you could set “the record straight on the Iraq intervention to re-lay the foundation and re-set the frame at the premise level” in that rationally and factually you absolutely destroyed the Left’s mischaracterization of the Iraq intervention.

Incidentally, I know we’ve already done that.

The result would be exactly what it is today. That is because the acceptance by half the American public of that mischaracterization is predicated upon their having long ago accepted the Left’s definition of mankind as soulless.

In 1952, Whittaker Chambers articulated the Communist vision as “the vision of man’s mind displacing God as the creative intelligence of the world. It is the vision of man’s liberated mind, by the sole force of its rational intelligence, redirecting man’s destiny.”

The West long ago accepted that vision and that is why the public has accepted the Left’s mischaracterization of the Iraq intervention and will continue to resist any and all ‘corrections’.

‘Reframing the narrative’ Eric, requires much deeper correction than a legal argument.

“Political ideas that have dominated the public mind for decades cannot be refuted through rational arguments. They must run their course in life and cannot collapse otherwise than in great catastrophe…” Ludwig von Mises

What you fail to appreciate Eric is that, “You can’t reason (reframe) people out of positions, they haven’t reasoned themselves into…” Benjamin Franklin paraphrased

The basic answer to your question starts was the legal character of the Iraq intervention established in 1990-1991: the enforcement of the UNSCR 660-series resolutions, which included the ceasefire mandates and post-Saddam mandates.

Foundational legal documents for the 2003-2011 peace operations in post-Saddam Iraq are linked here.

Actually, it’s as a former activist whose team succeeded with a cause that was deemed quixotic that I grasp the frame re-setting competitive value and feasibility of setting the record straight on the Iraq intervention.

What’s past is prologue and the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist is always malleable. Remember, the actual truth is merely another narrative that must be competed for like any other.

It’s also as a former activist where I came to understand with much frustration your kind of mindset. If it had been left up to the conservatives, and but for anti-left liberals, we would have lost to the leftists out of the gate.

There’s a reason the Left took extraordinary care to mischaracterize the Iraq intervention: it set the cornerstone premise to lay the foundation for everything else in this episode of their long march.

That the Left successfully asserted a demonstrably false narrative in overt contradiction of a decade-plus record, the controlling law and policy, and determinative facts shouldn’t have happened in the first place. The progress made by the Trump-front, Left-mimicking alt-Right insurgency shouldn’t be happening now.

Why are they happening?

Exhibit A. Your resignation “that ship has sailed” regarding a pivotal active underlying premise in the political discourse reflects why mainstream conservatives are approaching dangerously close to obsolescence in the American political landscape. It’s not due to the quality of ideas. It’s due to the endemic sub-par competitive mindset and method.

Setting the record straight on the Iraq intervention to re-lay the foundation and re-set the frame at the premise level amounts to basic training in the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist.

If the Right can’t even manage to set the record straight on the Iraq intervention armed with a straightforward set of law and policy and facts versus a demonstrably false narrative, then there is dim hope that conservatives will be able to rise to compete effectively elsewhere in the only social cultural/political game there is.

The basic disarmament standard for Iraq was set by UNSCR 687, but I usually refer to UNSCR 1441 to attribute the quote in order to implicitly cover the “enhanced inspection regime” mandated by UNSCR 1441.