Monica Crowley predicts GOP establishment is on precipice of complete obliteration

[rangerrebew]

Monica Crowley predicts GOP establishment is on precipice of complete obliteration
February 24, 2016 | Frieda Powers | 1 Comment |
 

Fox News Contributor Monica Crowley revealed her thoughts on why the GOP establishment does not want Donald Trump or Ted Cruz to win the Republican nomination.

“They hate Ted Cruz,” Crowley said in an appearance on “Hannity” Tuesday. “But they fear Donald Trump. They want neither one to win the nomination because the truth is the establishment cannot control them.”

Crowley said the GOP establishment is in a “desperate mode” to try to stop the two candidates because if either Trump or Cruz becomes president, “the establishment is done, it’s over.” They would effectively lose power as “the control over everything will revert to the sitting president over whom the establishment has no control,” she added.
 

As for the establishment rallying behind one candidate in an effort to weaken another, Crowley believed any endorsement from the GOP at this point would hurt a candidate because the campaigns are “at a point of diminishing returns.”

“The more establishment support any one of these candidates gets” in the current election climate, said Crowley, “the more their numbers are driven down.”

See the comments via Fox News video below.
 
 

Response from social media poured in with tweets that seemed to confirm the anti-establishment sentiment among some voters.

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/02/24/monica-crowley-predicts-gop-establishment-is-on-precipice-of-complete-obliteration-309567#ixzz417VYZQ35

[sinkspur]

I never have been able to figure out what qualifies Crowley as a pundit.  Blonde who's kept her looks into her late 40s?  Former Nixon staffer?

In any case, this is one of the dumbest statements I've read today:  They would effectively lose power as “the control over everything will revert to the sitting president over whom the establishment has no control,” she added.

This establishment bullshit is really getting old, but does she really believe there are no controls over the President of the United States?

[Carling]

I never have been able to figure out what qualifies Crowley as a pundit.  Blonde who's kept her looks into her late 40s?  Former Nixon staffer?

In any case, this is one of the dumbest statements I've read today:  They would effectively lose power as “the control over everything will revert to the sitting president over whom the establishment has no control,” she added.

This establishment bullshit is really getting old, but does she really believe there are no controls over the President of the United States?

Why is it getting old?  Your GOPe/RNC candidates are getting their asses kicked by candidates they loathe.  Throwing hissy fits doesn't change the reality that your time is over in the GOP as it is today.   The point is the GOPe donor base is owed no favors by Trump/Cruz/Carson.  Rubio would just be a sweaty rubber stamp manipulated by people above him.  He owes everything he has in the race to the former Bush/GOPe donors, and will be beholden to the status quo.  Fortunately voters like me are finally tired of the GOPe's BS and lies and have moved on to other candidates. 


Some of you remind me of the people who clung to their HAM radios long after cell phones made them obsolete.

Marco Rubio is a HAM radio CEO in an era where no one under the age of 30 knows what that is.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I never have been able to figure out what qualifies Crowley as a pundit.  Blonde who's kept her looks into her late 40s?  Former Nixon staffer?

In any case, this is one of the dumbest statements I've read today:  They would effectively lose power as “the control over everything will revert to the sitting president over whom the establishment has no control,” she added.

This establishment bullshit is really getting old, but does she really believe there are no controls over the President of the United States?

The President becomes the establishment when he is elected.  When Dubya became the President he decided the course of action.  The establishment has never had control of the President.  It's the other way around.  If Trump becomes the President he will be the establishment and the decider.

There have been limited controls over Obama.  He gets away with whatever the people let him get away with.

[Wingnut]

Sink, her B-I-L is Alam Combs...so she has that going for her! ;)

[Carling]

The President becomes the establishment when he is elected.  When Dubya became the President he decided the course of action.  The establishment has never had control of the President.  It's the other way around.  If Trump becomes the President he will be the establishment and the decider.

There have been limited controls over Obama.  He gets away with whatever the people let him get away with.

Funny then how Dubya tried to ram amnesty down the American people's throats even with vehement opposition from the voters who put him in office.  Only an uprising that torched DC phone lines made the  GOPe go into self-preservation mode and not give the Chamber of Commerce and the Dems what they wanted.

I have to laugh at how the President sets the agenda.  Yes, they do, at the request of their donor base.

[HAPPY2BME]

I predicted this over ten years ago.

Life support is 99.9% depleted.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I have to laugh at how the President sets the agenda.  Yes, they do, at the request of their donor base.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/George_W__Bush_Immigration.htm

Latinos have come to the US to seek the same dreams that have inspired millions of others: they want a better life for their children. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River. Latinos enrich our country with faith in God, a strong ethic of work and community and responsibility. Immigration is not a problem to be solved; it is the sign of a successful nation. New Americans are not to be feared as strangers; they are to be welcomed as neighbors.

Source: Reforming the INS, in “Renewing America’s Purpose” , Feb 9, 2000

Dubya didn't ram anything down anyone's throat.  He spoke clearly before and after he was elected and re-elected.  Gloat if you must, but let us not rewrite history.  Until Trump, border patriots like Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo, and Chris Simcox have been, justifiably IMO, ridiculed and ignored as fringe candidates.  It remains to be seen if Trump's anti-illegal stance will playout in the general election or even the GOP nomination.

History says it will not.

[Carling]

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/George_W__Bush_Immigration.htm

Latinos have come to the US to seek the same dreams that have inspired millions of others: they want a better life for their children. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River. Latinos enrich our country with faith in God, a strong ethic of work and community and responsibility. Immigration is not a problem to be solved; it is the sign of a successful nation. New Americans are not to be feared as strangers; they are to be welcomed as neighbors.

Source: Reforming the INS, in “Renewing America’s Purpose” , Feb 9, 2000

Dubya didn't ram anything down anyone's throat.  He spoke clearly before and after he was elected and re-elected.  Gloat if you must, but let us not rewrite history.  Until Trump, border patriots like Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo, and Chris Simcox have been, justifiably IMO, ridiculed and ignored as fringe candidates.  It remains to be seen if Trump's anti-illegal stance will playout in the general election or even the GOP nomination.

History says it will not.

Will you point out where in that statement he mentions "illegal" immigrants and granting them "amnesty?"

kthx

[Fishrrman]

Once-Ler wrote above:
"Latinos have come to the US to seek the same dreams that have inspired millions of others: they want a better life for their children. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River."

But "illegality"  and lawbreaking certainly BEGIN there.
First law broken, often with more to follow.

G.W. should have known better.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Will you point out where in that statement he mentions "illegal" immigrants and granting them "amnesty?"

kthx

My friend, lies do not become us.  The phraseology of 2000 was very different than the phrases of today.  Amnesty was the unspoken word and meaning of Dubya's proclamations.  His actions and the actions of his father and Reagan reveal the true intent and mood of the populous.  Today nobody says Amnesty...they say path to citizenship or legal status.

Hatred of "outsiders", "invaders", "them" has, until recently, been recognized and rejected as disgusting bigotry by reasoned(establishment) politician.  Today Trump builds his army of brown shirts upon that sentiment.  I am sickened that the GOP front-runner has emboldened white supremacist thugs, and though I honestly believe you do not see it, I can't help but hold you partially responsible for the disastrous future that I see unfolding before my eyes.

You had a chance to voice your reservations, but chose to marvel at the gilded promises of a demagogue, and the dark, dark rage of his zealots.  My (perhaps mistaken) disappointment in you, surpasses your disappointment in me.  I guarantee it.

Still, I have been incapable of seeing the bigger picture this election.  I thought that Trump's venomous spite was obvious to all but the "poorly educated" that he loves.  I have always believed in the superior wisdom of the common man.  So I ask, my friend, even though I have written a stinging reply...do not give up on me.

I want to understand your opinion. I respect your voice.

Do you fear nothing about a Trump Presidency?

[Carling]

My friend, lies do not become us.  The phraseology of 2000 was very different than the phrases of today.  Amnesty was the unspoken word and meaning of Dubya's proclamations.  His actions and the actions of his father and Reagan reveal the true intent and mood of the populous.  Today nobody says Amnesty...they say path to citizenship or legal status.

Hatred of "outsiders", "invaders", "them" has, until recently, been recognized and rejected as disgusting bigotry by reasoned(establishment) politician.  Today Trump builds his army of brown shirts upon that sentiment.  I am sickened that the GOP front-runner has emboldened white supremacist thugs, and though I honestly believe you do not see it, I can't help but hold you partially responsible for the disastrous future that I see unfolding before my eyes.

You had a chance to voice your reservations, but chose to marvel at the gilded promises of a demagogue, and the dark, dark rage of his zealots.  My (perhaps mistaken) disappointment in you, surpasses your disappointment in me.  I guarantee it.

Still, I have been incapable of seeing the bigger picture this election.  I thought that Trump's venomous spite was obvious to all but the "poorly educated" that he loves.  I have always believed in the superior wisdom of the common man.  So I ask, my friend, even though I have written a stinging reply...do not give up on me.

I want to understand your opinion. I respect your voice.

Do you fear nothing about a Trump Presidency?

So I'm supposed to read meaning into words Dubya never said yesterday, yet disbelieve words Trump is saying at present?

That seems a bit subjective to me, and I will give Trump a chance over a Rubio or a Kasich.  Sorry, I've left the establishment.  There is no turning me back in primary season.  The difference is I won't take my ball and go home if Rubio and Kasich get the GOP nomination, and I will vote for the as I voted for their clones Romney and McCain.