Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
Ask around and you will hear only the most establishment person saying McSally can win her Senate seat in 2020. In a time of personality politics and in a time of high enthusiasm for President Trump's re-election and given McSally has not supported our president on some very important immigration policy, most of us think we will end up with two democrat Senators with McSally as the Republican candidate. Perish the thought. That would be the ultimate insult.
This man is not a candidate... at least, publicly. Yet. But read on and see what you think. Another Steve Gaynor, coming out of nowhere? Plenty of money if he choses to use it. He couldn't make the same mistake as Gaynor: spend $4.5million against his Republican opponent and very little to win in the General.
So here is a possible candidate to take on McSally in the primary. There is a survey to express your feelings about this man becoming a candidate.
I well understand that it is the legislature that controls the primary date; however, the GOP has controlled both houses and the governor's chair. This should never have happened and we will now likely loose control of the legislature.
The real issues are at a national level and the primary date is a killer for both senate and house primaries. As an example, if McCarthy enters the race, a hard-fought primary will ensue. At the end, the winner will have precious little time to raise the necessary funds and shift to a campaign against Kelly.
In the meantime, Kelly will amass a war chest with no primary challenger and effectively be campaigning for the seat while the two republicans are slugging it out.
Don't take this as an argument that McCarthy should not enter the race: I am no fan of McSally and believe the President made a mistake endorsing her; however, the reality is that an August primary is not conducive to a November general election victory. It was a GOP controlled legislature that did this and how have things turned out for the Arizona GOP in the house and senate at a federal level?
We feel your pain. We have long advocated for more time between Primary and General like most states. It all hinges on the legislature and we don't see any change no matter how much sense it makes to us here at AFA. Our legislature just doesn't work like most states and you can understand, like it or not, why our local lawmakers won't vote to move the primary, even though it might serve them well going into the general election. Our hope is that, if McCarthy gets in, he has the money before the primary to get the job done in the general. We didn't see much help for Gaynor after the primary but this is a much bigger race. The only good news we see is that it is only for two years and we vote again. BUT, we will have an incumbent then. If it's Kelly, he would have to do a really bad job and voters would have to be uncharacteristically informed to get unseated.
The RNC is no better at picking winners and loser then Congress. I hope he runs. I like his free market background. McSally is a loser and could easily be crushed in 2020. She ran for the senate because she probably would have lost in a re-election in CD2
It seems demanddaniel.com went live briefly yesterday. The website is said to be undergoing revisions before becoming an active site. Here is a report from our favorite source: azcentral.com
Photos included at the link.
I thought, but I might be wrong, that the legislature moved the primary up from the last Tuesday in August up three weeks earlier to the 1st week in August. Also, the final day to file to run for office from May 31st up three weeks to the 1st or second week in May. That should help. I ran my question by our county Ex Bd at our meeting and all them thought that legislation was passed too. If so, that is at least three more weeks between the Primary and the General we have to campaign against the Dems. I sure hope this is true that the legislation passed. Who can confirm?
You are correct, Shirley. Here is a link to the election calendar for 2019 (local elections) and 2020 (all elections).
What voters really want is a May or June Primary.
To avoid electing more RINOS I suggest candidates be vetted using the following questions.
Have you studied America’s Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights (organic Constitution)? yes no If yes, do you think you understand the spirit and intent of their authors? Yes no If yes, please proceed.
The Declaration of Independence is our Nation's birth certificate and our Constitution’s cornerstone. For lawful government to exist, it must comply with the principles and policies set forth in these documents and the Bill of Rights when interpreted in the spirit and intent of America’s founders. agree disagree
Through the Constitution, the States created the federal government as their AGENT. As principals to the Constitution and under the Law of Agency, our States possess the ultimate authority and responsibility for the proper interpretation and implementation of the Constitution. agree disagree
Art. IV, Sec. 4 of the Constitution requires that each State have a Republican form of government and be protected from invasion. agree disagree
Treaties, a purview of the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, cannot lawfully create law as Art. 1 Sec.1 of our Constitution vested all legislative powers in the Congress. Since the House has no authority over Treaties, any pretense to use them to create or modify our laws is an unlawful act. agree disagree
The Constitution's 10th Amendment stating "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution .. are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people" provides incontestable evidence that the only lawful powers of the Federal Government are those specified in the Constitution. agree disagree
No elected or appointed official has - nor has had - any lawful authority to alter the intent of our Nation’s founding fathers as set forth in our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. To be lawful, every Executive Order, Supreme Court decision, Presidential Decision Directive, Constitutional Amendment, Proclamation, or other writing must be in the interest of advancing the cause of life, liberty, and the happiness of the American people. agree disagree
The U. S. Supreme Court was correct in saying:
States are free to exercise the doctrines of “interposition” and “nullification” and reject Federal legislation with which they disagree. (see South Carolinas 1832 Ordinance of Nullification) agree disagree
The 11/22/1994 Republican governor allegation saying "Federal action has exceeded the clear bounds of its jurisdiction under the Constitution and thus violated rights guaranteed the people" is true; amply supported by evidence; adequately defines America’s problem and means those responsible for the action and its perpetuation are guilty of crimes falling under Title 18 of the U. S. Criminal code. agree disagree
Our states are, in law, the principals to the Constitution; that our problem stems from state legislatures failing to enforce the provisions of the Constitution; that it is through them that a state may act in its highest sovereign capacity in dealing with the unconstitutional “Federal action” and it will be state action that restores our Constitution and satisfies our goal, if it is ever to be restored. agree disagree
On August 30, 1973, a United Press International news release said: “A special Senate subcommittee, after a painstaking computer search of the statue books, concluded the United States since 1933 has been operating under emergency rule, conferring near-authoritarian powers on its presidents.” The “special subcommittee” alluded to was the Senate Special Committee on the termination of the National Emergency. It reportedly “discovered 470 major provisions of Federal law giving presidents ‘an enormous--seemingly expanding and never-ending---range of emergency powers” and said “This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes… For 40 years (now over 75) freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of emergency.” Will you support action to terminate the emergency and to reinstate our organic constitution as the supreme law of the land? Yes no
ART. 1, SEC 8:5 of our Constitution gave CONGRESS the power “to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin…” Congress abrogated this responsibility by transferring it to a deceitfully named, privately owned bank known as the Federal Reserve System (FED) in 1913. Rather than monetize wealth as intended by the Constitution, the FED chose to monetize debt as verified by an 11/1/82 letter from the Dept. of Treasury saying “the actual creation of money always involves the extension of credit by private commercial banks.” I.E., what we call ‘money’ and use as a medium of exchange isn’t really money which - by definition - must be a ‘storehouse’ of value. When asked where the ‘money’ to pay the interest on the borrowed ‘money’ was to be found, the Dept. of Treasury said in a 1/6/1993 letter that “money for paying the interest on borrowed money comes from the same source as other money comes from.” Under this system of ‘money’ (debt) creation, Americans have amassed a public and private debt in excess of $50 trillion and face about another $45 trillion in unfunded obligations. The total ‘money’ supply with which to meet these obligations is about $6.1 trillion. Obviously, they cannot be met under existing monetary policy. Due to this unconstitutional monetary policy, our states are in economic turmoil and Americans are - and every generation to come will be - in economic bondage. Clearly, the way in which our medium of exchange is created must be changed. Will you support a responsible effort to do so yes no
Item - Thirty governors pledged "to restore to the States and the people the prerogatives and freedoms guaranteed them under the Constitution." Will you act in support of this pledge? yes no
Walter Myers - excellent dissertation on detecting a candidate positions. I use a simpler 5 question plus 1 question. Question 6 - What is your position regarding the national Popular Vote compacts. Their answer says a lot about awareness of the progressives intent and constitutionality insight. The original PDF used is attached.
As I understand the proposed Popular Vote concept of electing a President or anyone else I find it to not only be unconstitutional but idiotic. The electoral vote concept wasn't provided for by accident. The Popular Vote would put the election of our President into the hands of a few located in the major metropolitan centers; a real death blow to the Republic we were to have and which has already been transformed into America now being a nation-state of the global prison know as the New World Order and under which Americans - like the people of most countries - are being "governed" in accordance with the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto.
I agree completely. Apparently the PDF file attachment did not attach. So I tyr again.