Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire WSJ says hillary is the conservative's only chance.

To survive.

Basics of the reasoning is that a Republican Congress can block everything extreme that Hillary wants to do.

Whereas the author believes that either Trump himself will go far off the Republican reservation working with a likely Democrat Congress, or that the followup blowback to his presidency will deliver an overwhelming super majority to the Democrats.

Not the first time it's been proposed. Quite a few of the #NeverTrump folks are in that camp.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-the-conservative-hope-1462833870

The comment section is going to be good. It's already started.

Pay to view.

I can access it from the Google search page. It's at the top.

https://www.google.com/?ion=1&espv=2#q=hillary%20wall%20street

They couldn't stand up to the first Negro Pres, how will they be able to stand up to the First woman Pres

OK, I just figured WSJ was in favor of hillary, as in, being more of a crook in favor of the WS bankers.

Beside the debt, what has Obama managed to get passed since Republicans took over?

Massive spending, but no gun control. No carbon tax. No signing on to UN Arms treaties. All his major actions have been executive actions and regulations which can be undone with the stroke of a pen by the next Republican President.

Don't cut the Republican majority in Congress short. If Democrats had kept it, we'd all be hiding our guns and ammo. Well, more of us would be, that is.

Let me see, not necessarily what he has passed, maybe a better way to look at it is what he has done. Illegal Mex Immigrant flood, Iran, Muslim Immigrants coming, forcing affordable housing (section 8) in the burbs, I could go on.

Oh and speaking of the Phugging debt, they are all complicit. The magic Negro knows the debt will break this country.

Thanks for the link Bristoe. You are correct . . . the reader's are savaging this still "wet behind the ears" WSJ opinion editor.

Interesting concept, a republican congress blocking a democrats agenda.

signature line material this

Two, and perhaps three, SCOTUS appointments.

Ya well the WSJ forgot one thing, two activist liberal SCOTUS justices that will provide the end around congress. Hillary gets to replace two for sure, maybe three, that my friend is "game over".

Obamacare, doubling of the welfare rolls, doubling of the national debt, massive tax increases. Other losses include gays in the military, gay marriage, etc. Two extreme left Supreme Court appointments.

The massive increase in entitlement spending under Obama is what will sink us, once they're hooked on welfare they never get off. It's a domino effect, it has to be paid for somehow so taxes naturally have to go up the more unproductive people you support.

Obama has accomplished about 90% of his agenda through one means or another, he's been remarkable effective at getting what he wanted. Republicans have mostly sat there and sucked their thumbs. Maybe gun control is a small victory, if you can call the status quo a victory, but keeping our guns is a small victory when the nation's being systematically dismembered around you.

Calhoun,



Obama had the house and the senate for his first two years and didn't do any of that.

And we're very lucky. They went for massive pillaging of the treasury and then ObamaCare. The carbon tax was narrowly defeated, gun control narrowly defeated, amnesty narrowly defeated. if they'd kept the majorities they would have gotten them through.

To the brilliant folks at the WSJ. Did you forget Scalia died? Obama got his SCOTUS nominations through and so will Hillary.

2 more liberal activists on the SC and it's game over.

Trump has upside and almost no downside. Hillary is fast track to tyranny.

Not 2, just 1. If Scalia is replaced with a liberal, then the 2nd Amendment being a personal right rather than a right for states to arm militias is gone.

It was 5-4, with Scalia's vote flipped it would be 4-5.

Your forgetting Tyrant Obama the Liar's "Help Iran Build Nuclear Weapons, ICBMs and Dominate the Middle East" treaty that the Republican Senate helped him ram down our throats. They could have easily stopped it by declaring that is was a treaty and holding a ratification vote.

Tells us all we need to know about how the establishment defines "conservative." To them it means globalist internationalist Zionist.

It doesn't let you read the article unless you subscribe to the WSJ.

Bwahahahahahahhaa... You mean, like they've blocked everything extreme the AIC has wanted to do??

Oh, yeah, THAT'LL happen - I'm certain...

Just like the Republican traitors blocked Tyrant Obama the Liar!

WSJ just added another nail to her coffin.

that saying brings such a wonderful visual to my mind's eye.

Hildibeast in a coffin! yes!!!

Goes to show the extent to which that word has been misappropriated by the variety of leftist known as neoconservatives.

Not to the tribal enemies of humanity in control of the Republican establishment. To them, any candidate who will advance the actual interests of Americans over those of their own is all downside.