Republican Primary Nomination poll

[Old Gobbler]

If an when some more republican candidates drop out , we plan on running another poll to see where people's preferences lay -- Shannon

[southern_leo]

If an when some more republican candidates drop out , we plan on running another poll to see where people's preferences lay -- Shannon

Hopefully this will happen after south carolina. I'm hoping Jeb leaves and Carson. After this they will have to be at 20% in the polls to get delegates according to one interview I watched, and obviously they aren't there. Kasich also needs to go. I understand it a historic election unlike prior elections, but still at some point you gotta throw in the towel. It's primarily a three man race already. Jeb is only hanging on because of his last name, Carson (as much as I like the guy) is dillusional, and Kasich is a Rino who's acting like something he's not. I really think if the SC results show Trump, Cruz, Rubio as top three, the people need to pressure the others to leave. Kasich said in the last primary if he didn't do well he was quiting, then all of a sudden he places second and believes he's the next Potus although polls show that as a fluke from a middle of the Isle state which explains why they like him. Anyone who follows politics should remember when this all kicked off and Kasich declared candidacy he preached "bring both parties together" same stuff all the last republican candidates preached and failed with. Then when Trump and Cruz took off all of a sudden Kasich is some great conservative (with a pretty liberal record). I'm always weary of any candidate from a swing state. If they are popular in a swing state then both sides Generally find them acceptable. This is our time conservatives. Everyone go vote!

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[davisd9]

Trump is calling for boycott on Apple. I guess the privacy of American citizens is not overly important to him.


Sent from the Strut Zone

[southern_leo]

Trump is calling for boycott on Apple. I guess the privacy of American citizens is not overly important to him.


Sent from the Strut Zone

I'm actually with Trump on this. I knew a year or two ago when Apple openingly said they would not help any investigations that it would end up in a court. Now Apple thinks they can disregard court orders? Who are they? This is being done with a court order not a random unauthorized intrution. This will also have unintended consequences. Consider if a group that was transporting children for a sex trade and they know if they use iphones then the feds will never get their information. Honestly it scares me more that it's that secure. Law enforcement should be able to gain access if a court order exist. This is already done for androids, and even your house if a search warrant is issued. I think Apple is in the wrong considering that Farooks phone could contain information that could save lives. Consider if it stopped another attack that could kill one of your loved ones. Honestly if they refuse to abide by a court order they should be punished severly. If other companies can't refuse to cooperate with investigations why can they? Why would they want too? Then they act like it's a moral stance but the facts suggest otherwise. It's purely a marketing move and all about money and disregarding America's safety. I for one will not be supporting Apple.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[davisd9]

Trump is calling for boycott on Apple. I guess the privacy of American citizens is not overly important to him.


Sent from the Strut Zone

I'm actually with Trump on this. I knew a year or two ago when Apple openingly said they would not help any investigations that it would end up in a court. Now Apple thinks they can disregard court orders? Who are they? This is being done with a court order not a random unauthorized intrution. This will also have unintended consequences. Consider if a group that was transporting children for a sex trade and they know if they use iphones then the feds will never get their information. Honestly it scares me more that it's that secure. Law enforcement should be able to gain access if a court order exist. This is already done for androids, and even your house if a search warrant is issued. I think Apple is in the wrong considering that Farooks phone could contain information that could save lives. Consider if it stopped another attack that could kill one of your loved ones. Honestly if they refuse to abide by a court order they should be punished severly. If other companies can't refuse to cooperate with investigations why can they? Why would they want too? Then they act like it's a moral stance but the facts suggest otherwise. It's purely a marketing move and all about money and disregarding America's safety. I for one will not be supporting Apple.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Apple has completely agreed to work with the FBI. The FBI wants a back door opened on IOS so they can search phones. They do not need to do this as all the information they need can be retrieved without that. This opens the door for the government to look into the privacy of American citizens. This is a violation to American privacy rights. Once this "back door" is open it will never be closed. This is just like the Patriot Act after 9/11, there may be good intentions but it steps on American citizen privacy rights.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin


Sent from the Strut Zone

[southern_leo]

Trump is calling for boycott on Apple. I guess the privacy of American citizens is not overly important to him.


Sent from the Strut Zone

I'm actually with Trump on this. I knew a year or two ago when Apple openingly said they would not help any investigations that it would end up in a court. Now Apple thinks they can disregard court orders? Who are they? This is being done with a court order not a random unauthorized intrution. This will also have unintended consequences. Consider if a group that was transporting children for a sex trade and they know if they use iphones then the feds will never get their information. Honestly it scares me more that it's that secure. Law enforcement should be able to gain access if a court order exist. This is already done for androids, and even your house if a search warrant is issued. I think Apple is in the wrong considering that Farooks phone could contain information that could save lives. Consider if it stopped another attack that could kill one of your loved ones. Honestly if they refuse to abide by a court order they should be punished severly. If other companies can't refuse to cooperate with investigations why can they? Why would they want too? Then they act like it's a moral stance but the facts suggest otherwise. It's purely a marketing move and all about money and disregarding America's safety. I for one will not be supporting Apple.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Apple has completely agreed to work with the FBI. The FBI wants a back door opened on IOS so they can search phones. They do not need to do this as all the information they need can be retrieved without that. This opens the door for the government to look into the privacy of American citizens. This is a violation to American privacy rights. Once this "back door" is open it will never be closed. This is just like the Patriot Act after 9/11, there may be good intentions but it steps on American citizen privacy rights.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin


Sent from the Strut Zone

But it's not Apples place to determine what they will and won't do once ordered by the courts. And I have watched the media releases from Apple and have yet to see any where they agreed to cooperate at all. I agree that the back door should be made. It's not any of Apples business and could create a security risk if you involve civilian staff from Apple everytime your conducting an investigation if that was the case. It doesn't just open a flood gate like everyone acts. Law enforcement would still be required to obtain a search warrant which would be a court order based on probable cause. One easy way to recognize this is not about security is Apple is historically extreme left wing, since when do you really think they decided the 4th amendment mattered?
    As far as your quote, do not misuse a good quote from a good man. Obviously if a court order is in place Americans are not surrendering freedom for security. If this allowed law enforcement to proceed without a warrant then you may have standing. But search warrants have been around for a long time and are 100% legal and constitutional. It's not about surrendering any freedom. If you don't want your stuff searched don't do illegal stuff like shoot up Co workers in San Bernardino. I'm still very confused how and why any American can be against this.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[southern_leo]

Let's get back to presidential discussions as this thread is deviating off course a little. GO CRUZ!

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Marc]

Anybody but Hellery!

Better than Bernie...

The GOP needs to wake up...  Trump is too much of a jerk to accomplish anything (as he pizzes everyone off, even in his own party).  His ego will interfere with his ability to accomplish anything in the Whitehouse...

I liked Carson, but it appears he is heavily medicated or something...

I do not think the country is quite ready for another Bush as president.

We need someone that appeals to the majority of the country...  Conservative fiscally while a bit more socially liberal...  And get someone who does not involve religion in politics...  Religion often scares many of the "middle" away from the GOP.

[southern_leo]

Where you Bush fans going now?

Post SC results Trump wins, Rubio and Cruz basically tie. Bush quits. I look for Kasich and Carson to follow soon. But where are you Bush supporters going now since he made it official?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Eric Gregg]

This election has been crazy for sure. Never thought that Trump would have actually done this well.
I believe that why he is doing well is that he is saying what everyone has been feeling for almost 8 years, however, I believe that is his strategy. I believe that he is capitalizing off of fear and anger, and that people are not thinking clearly.
The problem is that you do not have a strong second Rep. candidate to actually stand against Trump. Cruz at times looks like a goober, Rubio has a problem with immigration, and Bush just bailed.
So, what I see is Trump and Hillary fighting it out, and Hillary beating Trump.
I honestly hope Trump wasn't in this just for publicity or to help the Clintons ensure victory because Hillary could not win unless they split the Republican vote, and that is what has happened.
I believe that some of the good ones like Rick Perry and Rand Paul would have done better if Trump never entered the fray. We cannot get this election wrong, and I believe that we already have.
Hope I am wrong

[southern_leo]

This election has been crazy for sure. Never thought that Trump would have actually done this well.
I believe that why he is doing well is that he is saying what everyone has been feeling for almost 8 years, however, I believe that is his strategy. I believe that he is capitalizing off of fear and anger, and that people are not thinking clearly.
The problem is that you do not have a strong second Rep. candidate to actually stand against Trump. Cruz at times looks like a goober, Rubio has a problem with immigration, and Bush just bailed.
So, what I see is Trump and Hillary fighting it out, and Hillary beating Trump.
I honestly hope Trump wasn't in this just for publicity or to help the Clintons ensure victory because Hillary could not win unless they split the Republican vote, and that is what has happened.
I believe that some of the good ones like Rick Perry and Rand Paul would have done better if Trump never entered the fray. We cannot get this election wrong, and I believe that we already have.
Hope I am wrong

I agree Hillary vs Trump in a head to head debate is scary. I'm a Cruz guy but really wish Huckabee could have gained traction, I always liked him.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[VaTuRkStOmPeR]

"Upstate New York, I'm like the most popular person that has ever lived, virtually."
-Donald Trump during his interview with CNN after winning South Carolina

It's humiliating that this man is considered for the highest office of government. What a travesty American politics has become.

[Swather]

[quote/]But it's not Apples place to determine what they will and won't do once ordered by the courts. And I have watched the media releases from Apple and have yet to see any where they agreed to cooperate at all. I agree that the back door should be made. It's not any of Apples business and could create a security risk if you involve civilian staff from Apple everytime your conducting an investigation if that was the case. It doesn't just open a flood gate like everyone acts. Law enforcement would still be required to obtain a search warrant which would be a court order based on probable cause. One easy way to recognize this is not about security is Apple is historically extreme left wing, since when do you really think they decided the 4th amendment mattered?
    As far as your quote, do not misuse a good quote from a good man. Obviously if a court order is in place Americans are not surrendering freedom for security. If this allowed law enforcement to proceed without a warrant then you may have standing. But search warrants have been around for a long time and are 100% legal and constitutional. It's not about surrendering any freedom. If you don't want your stuff searched don't do illegal stuff like shoot up Co workers in San Bernardino. I'm still very confused how and why any American can be against this. [/quote]

Apple has apparently cooperated in prior instances with prior Op Systems.  It's not easy for us, on the outside of the dispute, to understand why this instance is different from others.  Concern about the slippery slope and being held hostage by China appears to be weighing on the minds at Apple.  If they do it for the US, then it exists, and how do they refrain from giving it to China, which will use it as a matter of course and not as part of an official investigation that involves de jure criminal and terror acts and judicial process.

Apple says it does not exist and would have to be created from scratch.  It has an interest in appealing the lower court's decision to defend itself from becoming an involuntary servant and spending a lot of time and money doing the bidding of others.  Now, how time consuming and expensive it would be is hard for those of us on the outside to know.

[g8rvet]

a Republican candidate will need 270 electoral votes to become POTUS , and this is impossible with out winning FLORIDA as we speak its neck and neck in Florida on the polls with it showing Rubio having a slight lead out of all of the contestants over Hillary Clinton its 46% to 46% right now and whomever wins the primary better darn well be able to beat Hillary in Florida

Amen! I also read a poll and this was a while back, that showed Rubio was the winner by a large margin when Republican voters were asked "If your favored candidate dropped out, who would you support".  About the same time, he polled the best among independents vs Hilary or Bernstein.  This was several months ago mind you, but he was the only R that polled to beat those 2.  That factors in and I will watch for that poll in the future.

May I ask, not trying to derail, but I have read on here several times that Rubio is bad on immigration.  How exactly?  I freely admit that my attitudes on immigration tend to lean to the middle (I guess really left) of the most of my opinions like gun control and fiscal policies.  What holds some of you up on Rubio's policies?  Don't get me wrong, I would be ecstatic with a Cruz presidency, but right now I have Rubio with a slight edge were I to vote today.  My daughter loves Jeb, so I may be able to politic her vote too! 

[southern_leo]

a Republican candidate will need 270 electoral votes to become POTUS , and this is impossible with out winning FLORIDA as we speak its neck and neck in Florida on the polls with it showing Rubio having a slight lead out of all of the contestants over Hillary Clinton its 46% to 46% right now and whomever wins the primary better darn well be able to beat Hillary in Florida

Amen! I also read a poll and this was a while back, that showed Rubio was the winner by a large margin when Republican voters were asked "If your favored candidate dropped out, who would you support".  About the same time, he polled the best among independents vs Hilary or Bernstein.  This was several months ago mind you, but he was the only R that polled to beat those 2.  That factors in and I will watch for that poll in the future.

May I ask, not trying to derail, but I have read on here several times that Rubio is bad on immigration.  How exactly?  I freely admit that my attitudes on immigration tend to lean to the middle (I guess really left) of the most of my opinions like gun control and fiscal policies.  What holds some of you up on Rubio's policies?  Don't get me wrong, I would be ecstatic with a Cruz presidency, but right now I have Rubio with a slight edge were I to vote today.  My daughter loves Jeb, so I may be able to politic her vote too!

Rubio is weak on immigration. In the literal term, he has held positions for and against so he is very inconsistent which ever way you believe. Early on in his career he supported the DREAM act to give children of illegals in state tuition prices. Then in 06 he was largely supported by the illegal community as supporting their views. Then he runs for Senate as a tea party candidate and preaches strongly against illegals immigration. Then turned around and joined the gang of eight and voted for a path of citizenship for illegals. He was also blamed in I think 2006 for stalling legislation aimed at illegal enforcement that ultimately failed. Now he is back to being anti illegal. So he says what he needs to when he needs too. It should also throw up red flags to you that the establishment is now throwing their weight behind him....hint hint. I like Cruz because I think he is the best candidate. Strong conservative values with a consistent record to support that. I like Trump but I'm starting to believe he is all talk. I like the tough talk but we get that he can do that now we need to see substance, which he still hasn't shown. To me Cruz is the only viable option for a realistic conservative.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk