In Pennsylvania tomorrow, GOP voters will be confronted with a choice of John Kasich, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and Ben Carson. They also will be asked to vote for delegates to the GOP convention in Cleveland. The ballot doesn’t spell out which candidate each delegate has committed to vote for at the convention. Some will remain uncommitted and others might be persuaded to switch, making PA delegates very popular between now and the GOP convention.
Political website PoliticsPA published a list of delegates who are pledged to Donald Trump. For those #nevertrump PA readers, this could be a handy help going into tomorrow.
Review the list.
Trump has 41 delegates in 15 districts committed to him.
According Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, Donald Neuhaus has pledged for Trump in the 14th District. He also has a handy list. One wonders where he got it.
Here is something more official from the Trump campaign.
Everybody makes mistakes. I certainly don’t expect presidential candidates to be flawless in their public statements. They speak constantly and answer questions on a broad spectrum of topics. They will misspeak.
On the other hand, a consistent record of incorrect claims implies either lack of care for truth or an unacceptable ignorance when it comes to important issues. Motives are hard to discern but fact checking can get us closer to the truth.
The folks at Politifact compiled a report card for the GOP candidates which I summarize here. John Kasich leads the way with over half of his claims (53%) being rated as true or mostly true. Cruz is a distant second with 22% being rated as true or mostly true. Trump is far behind with only 8% of his claims rated as mostly true or true. See the images below for the full report.
If Trump gets the nomination, the GOP will reject the candidate who is the most factual, best liked, and most likely to beat Hillary in favor of the one who is the least factual, least liked, and least likely to defeat Hillary in November.
Today Baylor University historian Thomas Kidd opines on the plight of Republicans as the November election approaches. After reviewing the options on the GOP side (Trump, Cruz, Kasich), Kidd comes down about where I do: Kasich is (for him reluctantly, for me enthusiastically) the best choice. However, he echoes the worry of many Kasich supporters that a contested convention might not go to the Ohio governor.
Faced with a Cruz-Clinton match up, Kidd also shares my conviction on Cruz.
Sorry, folks. If it is Cruz vs. Clinton, I’m afraid that I’ll have to vote for a third party candidate, or not vote for president. In a way, it doesn’t matter what I do – Cruz would win Texas, for sure, with or without my vote. And I “get it” if many of my evangelical friends do support Cruz, and don’t share my alarm about the Barton-Beck connection. But for me, those traveling companions make Cruz a non-option.
Kidd didn’t mention Cruz’s father Rafael. Recently, Rafael Cruz told a Grove City College audience that the USA was the only nation on earth founded on the Word of God. Cruz has also said that the Constitution was divinely inspired.
Cruz and his supporters like to say that Cruz is a constitutional conservative. Given what Cruz’s advisors say about the Constitution (e.g., Barton says that the Constitution contains Bible verses quote verbatim), I have to ask what does it mean to be a constitutional conservative in the Cruzian sense. Given his advisors, I am not inspired to think he has a view which supports true freedom of conscience for all.
On the matter of religious liberty, Kidd has some reservations about Kasich. The answers I have heard from Kasich lead me to believe he has a balanced and reasonable view. Kasich has urged various groups to work together and has said that legislation may be needed to protect religious liberty. However, he is also sensitive to minority groups who understandably fear a loss of their rights in public accommodations.
Rafael Cruz came to Grove City College earlier this evening for a Q&A hosted by the college Republican club. He represented the Cruz campaign but I should hasten to add that the event was not a campaign rally and the college is not endorsing Cruz or any candidate.
Political Science professor Paul Kengor moderated the event and most of the initial hour centered around Rafael Cruz’s background in Cuba and then his assimilation to life in America. I tweeted some of the things Cruz said which can be viewed here: #rcruzgcc.
At one point, Cruz came close to sounding the seven mountains dominionism themes and said America was founded on the Word of God.
After the event, I had a moment with Rev. Cruz and asked him if his son believes the seven mountain dominionism teaching that Christians should take dominion over the mountain of government. He said that you have to be careful with the terms because people don’t understand. He said people, especially in the media, think you mean theocracy. He said it doesn’t mean a theocracy. He added that Christians should be salt and light in the government and use their influence to be salt and light.
The time was short so I was unable to follow up but I still believe Ted Cruz needs to clarify what taking dominion as president would look like.
Two of Ted Cruz’s national security advisors, Jerry Boykin and Frank Gaffney were discussing President Obama’s handling of the military. Right Wing Watch pointed out an amazing exchange between the two. In particular one that stood out to me was the characterization of white privilege as “nonsense.”
Go to RWW to listen to the exchange. After complaining about the training offered in the military, Gaffney and Boykin ridiculed “white privilege” as a proper subject of training.
“Diversity, sensitivity, and white privilege,” Gaffney said derisively.
“Yeah, that’s right,” Boykin said, “on white privilege and nonsense like that. That’s where they spend their training time.”
Now I don’t know what other subjects are covered in military training. I suspect many more than these. However, it is shocking to hear advisors to a presidential candidate ridicule sensitivity training that includes the subject of white privilege. Does Ted Cruz agree with his advisors here?
Is this the kind of military climate Cruz wants to create?
In my opinion, both Boykin and Gaffney should be relieved of advising duty, and if Cruz doesn’t deal with this now and he becomes the nominee, Hillary Clinton will deal with it in November.