GOP plan would make Texas major player in 2016

[TexasTowelie]

Texas would vault to a plum place in choosing the next Republican presidential nominee under new rules that will be acted upon by the Republican National Committee in the new year, adding an intriguing twist to a contest that might feature both U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and Gov. Rick Perry.

As a result, for the first time in more than three decades, Texas would command attention in the GOP primaries befitting its size, drawing candidates’ time and advertising dollars.

A special rules subcommittee of the Republican National Committee has drawn up a plan for compressing the 2016 primary schedule, moving up the date of the national convention while limiting and better controlling primary debates. In combination with the Texas Legislature some years ago setting the state’s primary for the first Tuesday in March, the changes would secure Texas a spot as the big prize on March 1, 2016, which would be the first multiprimary day on the 2016 calendar.

“It really looks like Texas has a real chance to be a major player in the 2016 selection of the nominee,” Texas Republican Chairman Steve Munisteri, one of 17 members of the subcommittee, said in an interview last week.

More at http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/gop-plan-would-make-texas-major-player-in-2016/ncRjz/ (subscription required).

Cross-posted in Texas Group.

[Gothmog]

1. Letting the Texas GOP have a say in the GOP selection process is a great idea

The Texas GOP want to reinstate laws making homosexuality a crime. The GOP candidates for Lt. Governor are each competing to see who likes creationism more (the first to claim that the earth if flat may win the nomination). Letting Texas republicans have a say in the GOP selection process.

BTW, the reasons why Texas did not have say in 2012 was due to the stupidity of Greg Abbott and his contest of the redistricting issues.

[BobUp]

2. Are We Kidding?

Not to attack you personally, but did you actually write this post?

Since non subscribers can't read the article, was this post of yours a copy and paste job or did you write it?

I mean you're lumping Cruz and Perry into the same bowl here, neither are conservatives, Cruz wanted help from Uncle Sam for the fertilizer plant blast, and Perry took Uncle Sam's stimulus money to help balance the state's budget. Both of these people railed against Uncle Sam's help for a natural disaster and using Gov't. funds for the state, I'm pointing out the hypocrisy here.

And being that Cruz is a teabagger, Perry only when the wind blows a certain direction, does anyone in their right mind (no pun intended here) really believe that the RNC or GOP would embrace those two idiots? I believe the only kind of attention these two would draw is a hell of a lot of eye rolls. Isn't the GOP trying to run away from the teabaggers?

I'd like to have some of whatever Chairman Steve Munisteri is smoking, because it must be some pretty good sheet to imagine all that. Steve should either quit the peyote, lay off the sauce, or wake up and smell the coffee, or tea.

[TexasTowelie]

3. I did not write the article.

If you click on the link, you'll get the first paragraph and a portion of the second paragraph. The article was written by Austin American-Statesman staff.

[BobUp]

4. Odd

I find it odd that more people haven't posted comments about this thread.

Your post pointing out the article exemplifies by the author's comments just how far out of touch the GOP really is. We already know the GOP members are pretty much at war with the teabaggers who infiltrated their party. Boehner the house speaker voiced his opinions of displeasure with his members about a week ago when democrats and republicans finally got together to hammer out a budget. And now all of a sudden the GOP is ready to embrace the people who opposed everything the GOP tried to do? Now that's what I call not being on the same page.

I'm curious about how other DU members feel about that piece?

[TBF]

5. And I'm curious as to your affiliation -

anyone who declares that Rick Perry is not a conservative is being quite disingenuous in my book.

Yes, Texas will go blue. The demographics are there and I am sure it will happen. I am not overly confident we can elect Wendy and push it blue so quickly - the demographics show it really isn't realistic until at least 2020 - but I sure as hell will try. Hillary has a lot of support amongst labor here in Houston so there's a chance if we can get folks registered. And of course the GOP knows this and is passing all the funky voter registration laws they can to thwart our attempts.

[BobUp]

6. A Flaming Democrat

My answer is above.

Perry being a conservative is a joke IMO. He pretty much flip flopped on accepting stimulus dollars from Uncle Sam. I feel the same way about Cruz too. Again, IMO, both are hypocrites. I figure once voters realize what big mistakes they've made in putting these people into office, they're not going to reelect the same people again. Perry is pretty much a liar just as most republicans are.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/17/297556/report-texas-ranks-dead-last-in-total-job-creation-accounting-for-labor-force-growth/#

It's playing out here in my state of Wisconsin, with broken campaign pledges and alleged corruption by Walker. I would be quite surprised to see Walker reelected, I can't believe voters might be that confident in someone who has abused the system. I'm not being disingenuous at all, just being honest about the way people perceive crooked politicians.

Wisconsin had budget problems, and Walker claims to have balanced the state's budget, but has largely balanced the budget on the backs of the poor and working class. We're still awaiting for him to fulfill a campaign pledge of creating 250,000 jobs in his first term, meanwhile, my state went from being 32nd. to 44th. in job creation.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/23/scott-walker-investigated-in-secret-wisconsin-probe.html

[TBF]

7. Actually I am from Wisconsin as well -

but it's been a long time since I lived there. When I was growing up in the 70s there was still manufacturing and all of our dads belonged to unions. It's a much different feel there now. Walker is a disaster.

[BobUp]

8. Nice Response And Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays!

Thanks for the kind response.

My dad was a union sheet metal worker when we lived in Chicago in the 50's and 60's. Things were much better, and different back then too. Back then, employers seemed to care about their workers, offered up paid vacations, paid sick leave, retirement benefits, my how times have changed, for the worse.

Who 40 or 50 years ago would've thought that hardly any of this would be around in this day and time. Some corporations and companies have even dipped into worker retirement funds for their own benefit and misused the funds, Hostess is a good example. Even some municipal workers have seen their pensions dwindle because their employers either invested money improperly or just misappropriated retirement funds to keeping city, village heads above water. Borrowing from peter to pay paul I guess.

Walker's done basically that, balancing the state's budget on the backs of middle class and poor. Stripped education funding, stripped Badgercare, stripped SNAP benefits, stripped Medicare, state union worker rights, yeah, he's a real jewel alright.

Texas is headed down the wrong path right now, offering up tax cuts, and neglecting infrastructure.
http://www.texaspolicy.com/center/economic-freedom/blog/great-texas-budget-debate-2013

What's funny is that these so called conservatives who offer up tax cuts, while neglecting either it's people in need, or something else they feel is unimportant. You can't cut taxes and get anything done or keep up with spending. Bush 43 proved this with waging two wars and cutting taxes, the money for the wars need to come from somewhere. He actually ran up the debt America has and it's been a tough road for Obama to try to rein in the high debt. What Bush 43 did will have lasting effects on America for at least 10 years from the day he left office.

The so called conservatives say they're conservatives, but in my lifetime of voting for 40+ years, I have yet to see true conservatism from the R party. At least Reagan and his advisers were smart enough to recognize the need to raise tax revenues. Another case of robbing peter to pay paul.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ronald-reagan-myth-doesnt-square-with-reality/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_my_lips:_no_new_taxes

When you run anything, be it a household, a business or a government, you don't cut taxes or revenue knowing full well that you're going to need that money to keep things running smoothly. It's not rocket science, anyone who balances a checkbook knows how to budget, and recognizes when their budget has enough money to make it or not.
Borrowing from this to pay that is not the answer.