BREAKING: Kristol Eyes Conservative Lawyer David French for Independent Presidential Run

[Norm Lenhart]

Exactly. Why vote for someone who's not in the ballot on all 50? (not my own POV, just saying)

Although I heard that the most vulnerable Trump state is Utah, and if this guy gets in there, Hillary probably won't pull Utah.

If the EV is close, then pull Utah from Trump's column might be enough to throw it into the House, something that hasn't happened since the "Corrupt Bargain" election in 1820.

Crazy.

Even crazier is if the Senate goes Dem and votes for a Dem VP. Yes it could happen.

Or if the HoR cannot decide we could get interim President Joe Biden.

At least with Slow Joe, we'd be in the same place as now. A puppet president run by the behind the scenes crowd. Which, ugly as it is, is still a batter option than Hillary's marxist crap or Trumps multipolar whatever it is he does.

[Timber Rattler]

Problem is that nobody outside of the National Review world has ever heard of David French.   

[markomalley]

Doesn't need to be on ballot of all 50 states. 270 electoral votes will put you in office or the house will if no one has the 270.

What state(s) does he have a chance of a snowball in h3!! of winning?

Optimistically, I can see him getting 10-15% of the vote at best in any state,  even Texas.

That adds up to a possibility of ZERO electoral college votes.

How many votes would he bleed off from Clinton / how many votes would he bleed off from Trump?

The only thing that this would do is assure Clinton just enough of an edge to win. That should be patently obvious to anybody. But I guess Kristol's thought would be that it is better to have Her Thighness in the White House than the Orange Jesus.

[Poser]

This is tilting at windmills. The most that could happen is to get enough votes in one of the big swing states to shift the election to Clinton. Personally, I'd rather have Trump than Clinton. Ted Cruz lost to Donald Trump. In this case, the lesser of two evils is far superior. Four or five SCOTUS justices are critical to the future of the US.

[Jazzhead]

If this can keep Trump from the White House, I'm all for it.   Whatever it takes.   

[Oceander]

This is tilting at windmills. The most that could happen is to get enough votes in one of the big swing states to shift the election to Clinton. Personally, I'd rather have Trump than Clinton. Ted Cruz lost to Donald Trump. In this case, the lesser of two evils is far superior. Four or five SCOTUS justices are critical to the future of the US.

That is a matter of disagreement. I lived in NYC for 13 years.  I know Trump and I know his type and as far as I'm concerned there is no lesser evil here.  Trump will be just as liberal as Clinton and his nominees to the Supreme Court will be indistinguishable from hers.

[Just_Victor]

For all those Trump supporters who don't care about who Trump is or what he believes, but simply want to stick it to the GOP....



...here's a real opportunity to do exactly that.

[mlizzy]

I'm cautiously optimistic. VERY cautious. But unless he's some abortion backer or wants gays to have special rights, something blatantly evil, then he'll probably become my default vote...

@Norm Lenhart

http://www.lifenews.com/2016/05/31/prominent-pro-life-attorney-david-french-recruited-as-conservative-alternative-to-donald-trump/

"As I’ve argued before, there’s no other issue in American politics of equal moral weight as abortion, and there’s no other issue in American politics where the partisan divide is so stark.  From the environment, to war, to the economy, to entitlements, the differences (while important) are often differences in degree and tactics, not fundamental goals.  Both parties want to protect the environment, both parties prefer peace to war, both parties seek a strong and growing economy, both parties want to accomplish the aims of the Medicare and Social Security programs, and both parties engage in robust intra-party debate on those points.  Yet one party wants to preserve the “right” to pay another person to kill an innocent child for any reason or no reason at all.  The other party wants to preserve that child’s right to life.  The difference is stark." -David French

 

[Right_in_Virginia]

If this can keep Trump from the White House, I'm all for it.   Whatever it takes.

Are you on Hillary's payroll yet?  If not, I think she owes you back pay .... you should demand it. 

[Mod1]

Two threads on same subject merged.

[Jazzhead]

Are you on Hillary's payroll yet?  If not, I think she owes you back pay .... you should demand it.

I have been consistent all along,  RIV -  whatever it takes to make sure Trump isn't the next President.   Of course I'd prefer he be denied the GOP nomination.  I fought for that, and supported the one candidate the polls all said could defeat Clinton.  So don't accuse me of being on Hillary's payroll -  if you'd listened to me,  Clinton would be well on the way to being consigned to the dustbin.   

But if the fools are in charge, and Trump is nominated,  I'm not changing my tune.  Trump is too dangerous to be President.   Clinton's awful,  but Trump is worse.   As I've said many a time, this is not about policy differences - I've always supported the GOP nominee,  whether I had issues with our candidate or not.     What you Trumpsters fail to do,  with your threats, intimidation and snide remarks,  is address the elephant in the room -  Trump's terrible, vindictive,  megalomaniacal temperament.         

[ABX]

For all those Trump supporters who don't care about who Trump is or what he believes, but simply want to stick it to the GOP....



...here's a real opportunity to do exactly that.

It will be a real test for freeper types who are so rabid about the destruction of the so-called 'GOPe' as their first priority. Even those who'se main goal is to destroy Clinton. Now that have a choice that is not the 'e' nor had any involvement in Clinton. (such as funding her rise to power).

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Problem is that nobody outside of the National Review world has ever heard of David French.   

I agree.  French likely wouldn't change the election one iota.  The only people who will vote for him are those conservatives who weren't going to vote for Trump or Hillary anyway.

[libertybele]

I agree.  French likely wouldn't change the election one iota.  The only people who will vote for him are those conservatives who weren't going to vote for Trump or Hillary anyway.

Disagree.  First and foremost he is a conservative; he could very well be the answer for many voters. Trump attacking him or Clinton attacking him will give him recognition.  Secondly, IMHO you are underestimating the amount of people who won't vote Trump or Clinton.  Those people could very well deny Trump or Clinton the majority - then it is up to the House to decide who the president is.

[libertybele]

I have been consistent all along,  RIV -  whatever it takes to make sure Trump isn't the next President.   Of course I'd prefer he be denied the GOP nomination.  I fought for that, and supported the one candidate the polls all said could defeat Clinton.  So don't accuse me of being on Hillary's payroll -  if you'd listened to me,  Clinton would be well on the way to being consigned to the dustbin.   

But if the fools are in charge, and Trump is nominated,  I'm not changing my tune.  Trump is too dangerous to be President.   Clinton's awful,  but Trump is worse.   As I've said many a time, this is not about policy differences - I've always supported the GOP nominee,  whether I had issued with our candidate or not.     What you Trumpsters fail to do,  with your threats, intimidation and snide remarks,  is address the elephant in the room -  Trump's terrible, vindictive,  megalomaniacal temperament.         

There is no comparison between Kasich and Trump.  Kasich was not my favorite, but I am confident that at least he would have appointed moderate justices rather than the liberals Trump and Clinton will place.  Kasich at least didn't act like a total lunatic and had knowledge and experience about issues rather than making remarks about issues with absolutely no substance to back him up.

[verga]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I&#39;ve seen more vetting of David French in the last 10 minutes than I&#39;ve seen of Donald Trump in 10 months.</p>— Kyle Foley (@HypelineKyle)

May 31, 2016

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The demoncrats are saving all the "good" stuff for the general election. Thy were smart enough not to waste anything until he was the nominee. They have given him the most intense proctological exam since Palin. every dissatisfied Trump university student, every disgruntled ex employee, every deal questionable or otherwise. Every compromising picture,any mistress they can get to parade around. You thought these off the cuff remarks were blown up, you ain't seen nothin yet. Anyone that has had a negative thought about the man will be held up as an example. The media built him up now they will vilify and crucify him. The butt reaming Romney and McCain got will seem like kisses from a virgin.

[WAC]

The probability of a previously unknown person splitting the conservative vote and insuring a win for the democrats is substantial.....

Already happened...........enter Trump to split the party on behalf of Hillary. .....if you note Trump is still very soft on Hillary compared to his onslaught of the Rep. Candidates......I can see him handing this over to Hillary down the road just as McCain did Obama.

[thatcher]

As sure as night follows day. Animals.

After news broke last night, twitter was filled with altRight scum showing images of his adopted African American daughter in a gas chamber with a smiling Trump outside the door.

[sitetest]

I'm cautiously optimistic. VERY cautious. But unless he's some abortion backer or wants gays to have special rights, something blatantly evil, then he'll probably become my default vote.

What will be interesting is if he is in fact a solid conservative, is watching Trump supporters justify tearing HIM down and STILL claim to be conservatives. Two conservatives in one campaign? Yup. Gonna be hard to stay hidden behind their already transparent fig leaf.

Maybe they'll come out of the closet and admit they are at best, moderates so actual conservatives wont have them as an anchor weighing us down going forward.

David French is a good guy.  I've followed him for years.  He's a mix of social conservative with a libertarian twinge, an economic  conservative,  a defense hawk, an Evangelical Christian,  and an all-around nice guy.

At one point, he took a somewhat libertarian view of homosexual marriage,  but eventually saw that this was folly.  His initial impulse was to walk away than pick a fight, but he eventually came to the view that it was a fight worth having.  Personally, he's very conservative.

[thatcher]

Also  -- French's wife co-wrote Christian themed books with -- ta da -- Sarah and Bristol Palin.  What is she going to say now about a rock solid conservative war vet that's challenging her candidate?

[Right_in_Virginia]

I have been consistent all along,  RIV -  whatever it takes to make sure Trump isn't the next President.   Of course I'd prefer he be denied the GOP nomination.  I fought for that, and supported the one candidate the polls all said could defeat Clinton.  So don't accuse me of being on Hillary's payroll -  if you'd listened to me,  Clinton would be well on the way to being consigned to the dustbin.   

@Jazzhead--you misunderstood me; or maybe I wasn't clear.  I'm not accusing you of being on Hillary's payroll---I'm simply pointing out that you should be.  After all, you're working almost as hard as she is to make sure Trump isn't victorious.  Albeit in a backhanded sort of way, I was complimenting your focus and effectiveness.   

[Poser]

If this can keep Trump from the White House, I'm all for it.   Whatever it takes.

So, basically, you are saying that you prefer Hillary Clinton to the GOP nominee. Why are you in the GOP briefing room? Wouldn't DU be more appropriate?

[MACVSOG68]

So, basically, you are saying that you prefer Hillary Clinton to the GOP nominee. Why are you in the GOP briefing room? Wouldn't DU be more appropriate?

We try to stay away from telling other members where they might be happier.  I don't agree with Jazzhead on this issue, but he has every right to say how he feels about Trump and Hillary.

[ABX]

So, basically, you are saying that you prefer Hillary Clinton to the GOP nominee. Why are you in the GOP briefing room? Wouldn't DU be more appropriate?

False dichotomy error. Being against Trump does not mean being for Hillary. That's the kind of argument the establishment keeps pushing on voters to accept worse and worse candidates, turning into an R versus D football game instead of choosing the best Commander In Chief out of ALL options.

[Jazzhead]

So, basically, you are saying that you prefer Hillary Clinton to the GOP nominee. Why are you in the GOP briefing room? Wouldn't DU be more appropriate?

I don't "prefer" Clinton.   I worked hard to support the one GOP candidate most likely, according to poll after poll, to defeat her.

Trump is existentially dangerous.  He's unfit for the Presidency, and I don't want him anywhere near the nuke codes.  That's the current reality, and it's not of my making.