Rush: Why Those 12 Republican Senators Really Voted Against Trump

[mystery-ak]

Why Those 12 Republican Senators Really Voted Against Trump

Mar 18, 2019




RUSH: I keep seeing that these 12 Republicans that voted against the president’s declaration of a national emergency are somehow concerned about the Constitution.

They’re somehow concerned that if they vote for this and authorize this, that some left-wing Democrat president down the road will use this and we won’t like it at all. That’s not… These people are not worried about the Constitution, these Republicans. They’re open-borders people! They always have been open-borders people. That’s the dividing line here. All of this talk from Romney and these guys about (impression), “Well, I’m very worried about the constitutional implications. If we sign onto this, we’re just signaling to the next Democrat to go ahead and declare an emergency to implement the Green New Deal. We wouldn’t want that. We can’t sit…”

That’s not why they’re doing this at all. They are for open borders, and they want everybody… This open-borders movement… Especially now, after just the past 12 months, how can anybody in this country who cares get even close to supporting open borders? How can anybody not see what is happening here? That’s the scary thing to me. The evidence is right in front of our face of what illegal immigration is doing, has done, and continues to threaten to do. And yet all of these Republicans claim not to see it, claim to think that that’s somehow racism or bigotry.

To have borders, to enforce border law/immigration law on people of color is bigotry? If we’ve gotten to that point, then we may as well get rid of all law, because you gonna be able to characterize all law as bigoted or racist if you want. I also think these 12 Republicans, in addition to being for open borders, are still part of the Never Trump movement. They despise Trump, and they just can’t bring themselves to support anything Trump does that might work and succeed, ’cause that would totally confound their efforts to get rid of him from now through 2020.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/03/18/why-those-12-republican-senators-really-voted-against-trump/

[ABX]

Rush, here is a hint- if Mike Lee and Rand Paul vote against something, don't lump them in with the left but look at the Constitutional reasoning. Neither of them vote on whims or based on popularity, but on what is right Constitutionally.

Quit telling everyone why you think they did something- both have made very clear cases for their votes.

The others Rush's comments may apply to, but not those two.

[Idiot]

Rush, here is a hint- if Mike Lee and Rand Paul vote against something, don't lump them in with the left but look at the Constitutional reasoning. Neither of them vote on whims or based on popularity, but on what is right Constitutionally.

Quit telling everyone why you think they did something- both have made very clear cases for their votes.

The others Rush's comments may apply to, but not those two.

Oh pleaseeeeeeeee.  Rand Paul HATES Trump!

[ABX]

Oh pleaseeeeeeeee.  Rand Paul HATES Trump!

He isn't one to act on emotion. He wrote a very long detailed analysis on the Constitutional reasoning behind his vote, long before many of these others announced what they were doing.

[TomSea]

Rand Paul campaigned with Trump in Montana. Look it up. 2018.

These guys have disagreements, maybe fundamental differences, it doesn't mean they totally hate and have nothing to do with each other.

Rubio may still be an influential voice on Venezuela, yet he voted for this too.

[Jazzhead]

Rush is doing his best to divide the GOP, and sic the Trump nativist base on those Senators who don't believe the NEA provides the President with a way to stiff-arm Congress on appropriations it had approved just weeks before.   

This is all a process to be followed in order to get the issue, ultimately, before the SCOTUS.  But Rush's goal is to destroy these "traitors" to Trump, notwithstanding that some are solid conservatives.   

The Party needs someone with the courage to challenge this man for the nomination.   

[TomSea]

Rand Paul blasts Saudi Arabia at rally with Trump Jr.
By Alexander Bolton - 10/27/18 08:34 PM EDT

MISSOULA, Mont. — Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) slammed Saudi Arabia as a sponsor of terrorism at a Montana rally with Donald Trump Jr. Saturday, another sign of pressure from Congress that President Trump needs to get tougher with the longtime U.S. ally.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/413498-rand-paul-blasts-saudi-arabia-at-rally-with-trump-jr

Okay, I was wrong, this is with Trump Jr. Well, You just hear on the radio and you might not get all details correct. Still, not bad.  So, I misstated but wasn't far off all the same.

Rand Paul is principled, he's very constitutional, very libertarian, very independent.

He knows TX, he grew up some there, so, I guess he just thinks this is an unconstitutional power grab. Rush needs to up his game. Just because they disagree with the Prez. does not mean, now these guys have nothing to do with each other.

Constitutionally, I could see the Paul/Lee/Rubio and so on way....

This issue is very typical of the kind of issue a Constitutional Libertarian would not be for.

With Trump Jr. @mrpotatohead

Still, if son was with Rand Paul, that doesn't look like Rand Paul hates Trump.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The Party needs someone with the courage to challenge this man for the nomination.   

Why @Jazzhead   Are the democrat socialists not winning fast enough for your liking?

[DCPatriot]

Why @Jazzhead   Are the democrat socialists not winning fast enough for your liking?

 

[Jazzhead]

Why @Jazzhead   Are the democrat socialists not winning fast enough for your liking?

You know my position.   The Dems are increasingly radicalized,  and the conditions are ripe for a democratic socialist president.   Not because the electorate wants socialism, but because the election is being framed as a referendum on Trump and his chaos.   

I understand your confidence that Trump will be re-elected, but I think your confidence is misplaced.   I am advocating a risk-averse strategy,  predicated on nipping the Dems' socialism in the bud.   The Dems want and need Trump to be re-nominated.   

[ABX]

You know my position.   The Dems are increasingly radicalized,  and the conditions are ripe for a democratic socialist president.   Not because the electorate wants socialism, but because the election is being framed as a referendum on Trump and his chaos.   

I understand your confidence that Trump will be re-elected, but I think your confidence is misplaced.   I am advocating a risk-averse strategy,  predicated on nipping the Dems' socialism in the bud.   The Dems want and need Trump to be re-nominated.   

Plus, what's wrong with more choice. The voters should have as many options. If Trump supporters believe he has done an amazing job, he should cheer for a primary challenge because it would be his opportunity to showcase and sell what he accomplished.

A primary means more cameras, that are somewhat friendly (versus skipping just to the general which will all be on the attack).

[Right_in_Virginia]

You know my position.   

Your constant use of the "nativist base" when referring to supporters of the President tells me all I need to know about your position @Jazzhead  In spite of your clever words, the real you always bleeds through:  You think like a democrat socialist -- on all issues.  I truly believe nothing would make you happier than total control of the government in their hands.

Defeating *you* is going to be the cherry on the parfait.

[TomSea]

As said in the other thread, despite how Trump's temperament might be perceived by others...what he actually does appears to be viewed positively by the Republican Constituency, but maybe Jazz can show up at the nomination and be a one man parade for a competing candidate.



 

They say many Dems are resigned to Trump being reelected...I know, I will do what is in my power to see him reelected....

As the old adage goes, "It's the economy".

[Jazzhead]

Your constant use of the "nativist base" when referring to supporters of the President tells me all I need to know about your position @Jazzhead  In spite of your clever words, the real you always bleeds through:  You think like a democrat socialist -- on all issues.  I truly believe nothing would make you happier than total control of the government in their hands.

Defeating *you* is going to be the cherry on the parfait.

I am an old school Republican who, like Reagan, sees us as a shining city and a beacon to those seeking to come here for a better life.  I support immigration as fundamentally in character with the best of America, and necessary for sustained economic growth.    I support Trump's policies that have lowered taxes, cut regulation and helped create this booming economy that is finally adding both jobs and wage gains.    When Obama was President, the illegals went home - can you figure out why?   

You're right,  I refuse to concede the GOP to Trump's nativist, white nationalist base.   But you are not my enemy, @Right_in_Virginia,  the looming specter of socialism is.   If Trump is our nominee,  the baggage he carries will sink our hopes of defeating a radicalized Democratic party.   

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I am an old school Republican who, like Reagan, sees us as a shining city and a beacon to those seeking to come here for a better life.  I support immigration as fundamentally in character with the best of America, and necessary for sustained economic growth.    I support Trump's policies that have lowered taxes, cut regulation and helped create this booming economy that is finally adding both jobs and wage gains.    When Obama was President, the illegals went home - can you figure out why?   

You're right,  I refuse to concede the GOP to Trump's nativist, white nationalist base.   But you are not my enemy, @Right_in_Virginia,  the looming specter of socialism is.   If Trump is our nominee,  the baggage he carries will sink our hopes of defeating a radicalized Democratic party.

When did this happen?  I must have missed the part about the massive wave of humanity going South.

[Jazzhead]

When did this happen?  I must have missed the part about the massive wave of humanity going South.

Because illegals come here to work,  they respond as rational actors to the state of the U.S. economy.    When the Obama tanked the economy,   there was, for the first time in a while, more Mexicans returning home than coming here.   Now that the economy's been revived,  they are following the job opportunities.    I'm not defending illegals, but their resurgence is actually a healthy sign.   We are creating more jobs than there are willing Americans to fill them!   

[ABX]

When did this happen?  I must have missed the part about the massive wave of humanity going South.

The net number went down under Obama.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/us-illegal-immigrants-numbers-lowest-level-decade-barack-obama-study-donald-trump-undocumented-a7702976.html

But it wasn't due to enforcement. It was due to the dropping economy which caused many construction jobs to dry up.

IE, we weren't losing the hardened criminals but the actual day laborers and workers were not coming in as much.

[sneakypete]

Rush, here is a hint- if Mike Lee and Rand Paul vote against something, don't lump them in with the left but look at the Constitutional reasoning. Neither of them vote on whims or based on popularity, but on what is right Constitutionally.

Quit telling everyone why you think they did something- both have made very clear cases for their votes.

The others Rush's comments may apply to, but not those two.

@ABX

ABX,here is a hint. There is NOTHING preventing the Dims from doing this themselves to promote globalism/communism once they are back in the WH. NOTHING but THEMSELVES AND THEIR OWN SENSE OF HONOR.

What do YOU think they are going to do once they are in that position?

We need to build that damn wall NOW,while the American voters still outnumber the illegal alien voters.

As for Rand Paul and Mike Lee,they can both go piss up a rope.

[sneakypete]

He wrote a very long detailed analysis on the Constitutional reasoning behind his vote,

 

@ABX


That's a long road trip just to say "excuse".

[sneakypete]

Rush is doing his best to divide the GOP, and sic the Trump nativist base on those Senators who don't believe the NEA provides the President with a way to stiff-arm Congress on appropriations it had approved just weeks before.   

This is all a process to be followed in order to get the issue, ultimately, before the SCOTUS.  But Rush's goal is to destroy these "traitors" to Trump, notwithstanding that some are solid conservatives.   

The Party needs someone with the courage to challenge this man for the nomination.   

@Jazzhead

Yeah,if we can't trust globalists like you to steer us straight,who can we trust,right?

[Idiot]

I am an old school Republican who, like Reagan, sees us as a shining city and a beacon to those seeking to come here for a better life.  I support immigration as fundamentally in character with the best of America, and necessary for sustained economic growth.    I support Trump's policies that have lowered taxes, cut regulation and helped create this booming economy that is finally adding both jobs and wage gains.    When Obama was President, the illegals went home - can you figure out why?   

You're right,  I refuse to concede the GOP to Trump's nativist, white nationalist base.   But you are not my enemy, @Right_in_Virginia,  the looming specter of socialism is.   If Trump is our nominee,  the baggage he carries will sink our hopes of defeating a radicalized Democratic party.

[catfish1957]

BS? His points hit the nail on the head.

You need to change your sn to tater salad, cause you can't fix........

[skeeter]

California sits here like a great big canker sore as a testament to what happens when a region within the US becomes inundated with illegals, and if the truth be told, immigrants who do not share American values.

I do not trust the word of anyone who still justifies our crazy immigration policies with 'shining city' platitudes (a misappropriation of the term) and then claims to love this country as founded. Because those policies are helping change the country into the socialist sh*thole they claim to oppose.

[roamer_1]

Rush, here is a hint- if Mike Lee and Rand Paul vote against something, don't lump them in with the left but look at the Constitutional reasoning. Neither of them vote on whims or based on popularity, but on what is right Constitutionally.

Quit telling everyone why you think they did something- both have made very clear cases for their votes.

The others Rush's comments may apply to, but not those two.

That's right.

[catfish1957]

Rush, here is a hint- if Mike Lee and Rand Paul vote against something, don't lump them in with the left but look at the Constitutional reasoning. Neither of them vote on whims or based on popularity, but on what is right Constitutionally.

Quit telling everyone why you think they did something- both have made very clear cases for their votes.

The others Rush's comments may apply to, but not those two.

I used to be a huge Limbaugh fan until he became complicit in this Trump disaster.  He is probably more to blame than anyone else in this country for Trump.  For someone who claims to be the godfather of modern conservatism, he sure avoids the topic of Trump's conservative credentials.