Why Sanders could be our next president

by Dr. Ed Berry, also NewsWithViews

Don’t get me wrong. I am a hat-wearing supporter of Donald Trump. Trump is doing great in the polls. As I write this, it looks like Trump will win in Iowa, New Hampshire, and go on to win the nomination.

Dick Morris warned about the following scenario.

There are anti-Trump votes out there. They are presently split between Rubio, Bush, Kasich, and Christy. These moderate voters are frustrated that none of their four candidates pulls more votes than second-place Cruz. That, of course is because these moderate four are splitting the moderate votes.

If one of the moderate four breaks away in New Hampshire, then the anti-Trump voters will pile on that candidate. Cruz will be out of the race. That would change the present two-way race between Trump versus Cruz, to Trump versus the moderate candidate.

But what if no moderate candidate dominates in New Hampshire?

Then anti-Trump voters may see Cruz as the only possible way to defeat Trump. If these moderate anti-Trump votes go to Cruz and add to the present conservative Cruz supporters, then Cruz could be Republican nominee. The Democrats will file an eligibility lawsuit against Cruz. The critical independent voters who back Trump will not vote. And the Democrat will win the presidency.

Unfortunately, many far-right conservatives, former Ron Paul supporters who would not vote for Romney, now back Cruz. They are the core problem in this election. They are idealistic about Cruz. They could care less if Cruz is ineligible as they hypocritically claim to support our constitution. They are the ones who booed Trump in the last debate when Trump mentioned that Cruz should get a declaratory judgment to prove his eligibility, or risk taking down the Republican Party.

A strange thing about politics is how a strong pull by the far right can elect a leftwing candidate.

The far right tea party did this in Montana in 2012 when they emotionally voted Libertarian because Republican candidates “were not good enough for them.” Their irrational Libertarian votes elected Democrat Steve Bullock as governor, Jon Tester for US Senator, and many Democrats to statewide offices. All these Democrat wins were by fewer votes than the votes for the Libertarian candidates.

Although many of these tea party voters are evangelical, they do not accept or understand the Biblical advice, “By their works we shall know them.” These Montana tea party voters will not accept that they are responsible for the works of Senator Tester and President Obama.

Furthermore, they don’t care. Today, these tea party folks claim Donald Trump does not follow the constitution. So they rally around Ted Cruz. They are not concerned that Cruz may be ineligible according to our constitution. If they were smart, they would realize Donald Trump is their only hope to get what they really want for America.

What about the Cruz and Rubio eligibility issue?

If moderates converge on Cruz, the eligibility issue will not matter in the Republican nomination. The Republican insider elites will happily nominate Cruz or Rubio and suffer the consequences, rather than to nominate Donald Trump. They will risk losing to Sanders rather than let Donald Trump take over the Republican Party.

Yes, the Democrats will sue if Republicans nominate either Cruz or Rubio. Then Sanders may be our next president. Hillary, as we now know, will likely be in jail. Sanders will be a stronger Democratic, or I should say socialist, candidate than Hillary because he does not have Benghazi hanging over his head.

A few readers of my article “Cruz and Rubio are eligible to be president,” read the tapes in their brains before they read what I wrote. They assumed without evidence that I personally believed they were technically eligible. These readers considered my behavior a mortal sin according to their tea party religion. Some actually chastised me in their emails and comments.

Actually, I did not discuss my personal opinion. I made it clear that, as a physicist, I do not play lawyer. I do not attempt to judge which side might win if the eligibility issue ever receives a proper review in a court of law. Frankly, it’s a waste of my time to play lawyer and judge because my legal opinion is irrelevant to a court of law.

What I wrote was I believe those who argue the eligible side would “prevail” in a court of law.

There is a difference between a prediction and a desire. In 2008, I desired McCain to beat Obama. I voted for McCain. At the same time, I predicted Obama would win. Similarity, I desire that Cruz and Rubio be proven ineligible but I predict that will not happen.

My main point, as you can see emphasized in the 85 plus comments on my article, is that by law Cruz and Rubio are eligible until proven ineligible in a court of law. Since no one has yet proven them ineligible, they are legally eligible.

I encourage you who make legal arguments that Cruz and Rubio are ineligible, to act rather than talk. Internet debates about law are useless. If you who have good arguments want to be useful, get your arguments into a court of law.

We know some people have done this. Unfortunately, only the Texas lawsuit has made the news. It will take a court longer to make a decision than it will to elect the next president. Once the votes are cast, the nomination will be concluded. We need another strategy.

Donald Trump showed his wisdom in how he handled the eligibility issue with Cruz.

Trump did not claim that Cruz is ineligible. That would have started a legal debate that Trump could not win in the court of public opinion. That would have cost him votes. Trump kept his eye on the goal: votes. Trump realized the court of public opinion is greater than a court of law that could take two years to make a decision.

Trump reversed the burden of proof. The burden of proof in a court of law is upon those who attempt to prove Cruz or Rubio guilty. This burden of proof makes it more difficult to win. Trump told Cruz he should get a declaratory judgment to prove he is eligible. That puts the burden of proof on Cruz.

How did Cruz respond? He laughed it off!

Cruz will not get a declaratory judgment. That is proof in the court of public opinion that he does not care and he is a fraud. He wants to be the first president of the North American Union. He wants to be a puppet for his money providers. He wants to bring dominionism to America.

Cruz laughed it off!

That Cruz laughed off the possibility that he “might be ineligible” is the issue that Trump supporters must push now. Forget trying to resolve the legal technicalities on internet debates.

Elections are in process. Trump is an excellent candidate. He needs our help to overcome the threat by Cruz. The best way to get Cruz on eligibility is to shout loudly that, as a lawyer, Cruz will not accept the fact that the eligibility issue is “unsettled.”

The voting public will care that Cruz’s eligibility is “unsettled.” They will care that Cruz refuses to do anything about it. They will not care about your detailed legal arguments where you attempt to prove Cruz is ineligible.

The public will not understand legal mumbo jumbo. But the public will understand that Cruz “threatens” America when his eligibility is “unsettled.”

As a candidate, Trump can lose by being too negative. He must be positive as much as possible. It’s up to us to do his negative dirty work.

Let’s review what Trump said in the debate:

“The fact is, there is a big overhang. There’s a big question mark on your head. And you can’t do that to the party. You really can’t. You can’t do that to the party. You have to have certainty. Even if it was a one percent chance, and it’s far greater than one percent…. I mean, you have great constitutional lawyers that say you can’t run. If there was a–and you know I’m not bringing a suit. I promise. But the Democrats are going to bring a lawsuit, and you have to have certainty. You can’t have a question. I can agree with you or not, but you can’t have a question over your head.”

Cruz responded:

“Well, listen, I’ve spent my entire life defending the Constitution before the US Supreme Court. And I’ll tell you, I’m not going to be taking legal advice from Donald Trump. The chances of any litigation proceeding and succeeding on this are zero. And Mr. Trump is very focused on Larry Tribe. Let me tell you who Larry Tribe is.”

Cruz evaded the question. Cruz is smart. He knows what he is doing. But his reply avoids the question. Larry Tribe is irrelevant. There are good lawyers on both sides. That makes the issue unsettled. Cruz did not prove the issue is settled. He did not prove his candidacy is not a threat to the Republican Party

We need to turn Cruz’s strength into weakness. Cruz is a smooth talking lawyer but he has never DONE anything. He has never BUILT anything. Lacking that experience, Cruz cannot lead America to greatness. Cruz is too slick, too practiced, too insincere, and too artificial. He’s a good puppet for his puppet masters. His puppet masters loaned Cruz money and you better bet there are lots of strings attached. Cruz can’t win.

Why do the bankers and hedge-fund boys back Cruz? Because he will keep their taxes low. Trump will raise their taxes. ​Personally, I trust our economy and defense to a candidate who owns big hotels and a Boeing 757 before I trust a guy who takes secret loans from puppet masters.

Yes, Cruz understands our carbon dioxide emissions do not cause global warming. But Trump is just as wise as Cruz on climate change. It turns out climate is not a key political issue in 2016 so it has not entered the debate. Trump will stop Obama’s climate rally. He will stop Obama’s EPA from destroying our economy.

Jerry Falwell, Jr., endorsed Trump. Phyllis Schlafly said “Trump is the last hope for America.” Sarah Palin endorsed Trump and is campaigning for Trump in Iowa. The Iowa governor told Iowans, “Cruz must be defeated.” John Wayne’s daughter endorsed Trump. John Wayne was born in Iowa.

Trump is on a roll. 

Donald Trump has the best tax plan to restore America’s economy. He has the best immigration plan to stop the destruction of America. He has the best defense plan to make America strong. He has the best Second Amendment plan to assure America’s freedom. He has the best veterans plan to assure we properly care for our veterans. He has the best trade plan to bring jobs back to America.

No candidate brings as much potential value to America as Donald Trump.

Polls show the voting public still approves Obama by 47 to 50 percent. The only way a Republican can win is to bring in new voters. No candidate but Trump brings in new voters. That is why only Trump can beat Sanders or Hillary.

Perhaps most important, Donald Trump will bring back control of America to the American people. In my opinion, we lost control of America when they shot John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Today, we see how the Washington Republican elite tries to defeat the Republican’s leading candidate. No candidate but Donald Trump has the chance to beat the Republican elite and give America back to our people.

I do not understand how those who claim to be “freedom fighters” or “patriots” do not support Donald Trump.

I do not understand how those who have waited in vain for a “man on a white horse” to save America do not support Donald Trump.

I do not understand how those who correctly praised Dinesh D’Souza’s and Gerald Molen’s “America” do not support Donald Trump. Donald Trump is the only candidate who will truly build up America.

We must begin to build up America again. We must make America great again. To do that, we must support Donald Trump for president.

3 thoughts on “Why Sanders could be our next president”

  1. "In my opinion, we lost control of America when they shot John Fitzgerald Kennedy."

    Your article on "Why Sanders could be our next president" is about as correct as one can get, except for the above comment.

    I believe control of America was lost during the Constitutional Convention of 1789. Historical events and the life of Patrick Henry is very revealing on that score. But the Constitutional Convention of 1789 didn't completely destroy America. It took another tyrant president to finish off the Constitution.

    To clinch the deal ole dishonest Abe was elected president in 1860.

    Abe is Obama's mentor. If one knows the real truth about dishonest Abe, it's not hard to see both think and act alike, especially in the number and content of their executive orders.

  2. Dr. Ed; You keep on blaming the Tea Party. Who is the Tea Party, in my opion the Tea party represents the private sector. Government employees sector ( 55% of Americas workforce ) have unions and elected officials to support them. The private sector has no one to protect us, (the only real tax payers), except for the Tea Party , the Tea Party gave us a voice. The voters I worry about are the females and the evangelicals, after all they would not vote for Romney.

    1. Dear Fred, As I wrote, I specifically refer to the tea party folks who vote Libertarian rather than Republican. I have no problem with the tea party folks who support the winners of Republican primary elections in the final elections.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.