Top Three Reasons I Support Marco Rubio
Well, the media has not been left wanting for new material this past week. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have been featured in a steady stream of controversial emails and tapes which reinforce the fact that both candidates have serious character deficits and are wholly unfit for the presidency. Of course, most of us already knew that, but MSM (mainstream media) and FNC (Fox News Channel) manage to stay busy jockeying to prove which candidate is most unfit. It’s a full-time job.
The humor in this, if there is any, is that so many seem surprised by it, especially Republicans. I’ve lost count of how many Trump surrogates I’ve seen interviewed who rail against the media for releasing all this information so close to the election. I’m pretty sure that’s Politics 101. The term “October surprise” comes to mind, and there’s no shortage of dirt on either side. The big question is: who will emerge as the least bad candidate? That’s a pretty sad state of affairs in a presidential election, in my humble opinion.
Anyone who has been on the planet within the last 30 years knows that Hillary Clinton is an abysmal human being. The scandals behind Hillary are legendary. Enumerating them would be time consuming; especially if you include those associated with husband Bill, her partner in crime. Notably, she lied about the situation in Benghazi that led to the death of four Americans, and she was just investigated by the FBI for failing to protect classified information when she served as Secretary of State. Wow! That’s kind of relevant when contemplating giving her the most powerful position in the free world.
Donald Trump is the other side of the same coin. Of course, he’s never held public office so we can’t fault him on his record, but he has a plethora of personal and business issues that haunt him. Again, it’s a long list. The highlights (or lowlights) are that he’s an admitted sexual predator (see Howard Stern tape) who is currently facing a civil suit for rape, numerous allegations of sexual assault, and will stand trial for fraud and racketeering charges associated with Trump University. Again, wow! Not a great resume for a presidential candidate.
I can still remember a time when Divorce was the nail in the coffin for someone with political aspirations. As a country, we would be absolutely giddy if that’s the worst thing our presidential candidate had in his closet. Think: Ronald Reagan. Those were the days.
As I’ve stated before, I voted for Marco Rubio in the primary. Of course, he sinned by working alongside the Democrats to try and improve the immigration process in our country. Like Reagan before him, he was under the misguided notion that we send people to Washington to actually try and get things done. That cost him the nomination. Apparently, some voters are more comfortable with their representatives refusing to give an inch to the Democrats, so they can later accuse them of accomplishing absolutely nothing while they’re in Washington. Or, they like the Ted Cruz types, who pontificate on the purity of their conservatism and perform fake filibusters on national television while they read their children’s favorite bedtime story, Green Eggs and Ham. It’s a slippery slope.
Let’s be honest. MSM is in the tank for Hillary Clinton and FNC supports Donald Trump. MSM played it smarter; they knew Trump was the weakest candidate against Hillary, so they propped him up throughout the primaries. They wanted him to win, so they did everything they could to help. Now that they’ve accomplished their goal of giving us the weakest GOP candidate, they’re busy dragging up anything and everything to convince voters what a horrible person he is. It’s not a hard sell.
FNC, on the other hand, legitimized Trump’s candidacy with unprecedented free media coverage. They presented him as a credible candidate when anyone with a modicum of common sense could see he was in over his head. Did you watch the debates? He didn’t understand most of the discussion, so he opted for juvenile stunts and insults. Roger Ailes helped lay the groundwork for a Trump campaign. He actually told his news hosts, “We’re finished with Rubio”. Now, after Ailes contentious departure from FNC, he’s a full-fledged Trump adviser. I guess dirty minds think alike.
I’m almost amused by Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and their ilk who are pre-blaming those of us not enamored of Trump for a Hillary Clinton victory. Well, the loss is on them. They ignored every poll which clearly stated Trump would lose to Hillary in favor of their vendetta against “establishment” Republicans. They wanted to stick it to the GOP, so they made Trump their man. Lesson: Don’t make important decisions from a place of anger. The best decisions are made in a calm manner, armed with knowledge and facts.
Well, he can be their man, but he’ll never be mine. I like the conservatism of the late great Bill Buckley, and I resent Trump for making a mockery of it. He is definitely his own worst enemy in this race. His best chance of success is to keep his mouth shut, and his fingers off the Twitter feed.
My prediction is that Hillary Clinton will win. The Electoral map already favors her, and though Donald Trump did manage to tighten the gap for a while, she’s now back on top. This close to the election, with the numbers being what they are, it will take something close to a miracle to clinch this for the GOP. This is especially upsetting in a year when we had the gift of running against the likes of Hillary.
Since I don’t like either candidate, my conscience tells me to vote down ballot, and that is what I plan to do.I believe Jonah Goldberg said it best in a recent interview: “When given a choice between two crap sandwiches on different kinds of bread, I’ll skip lunch”.
“She’s a radical. If she gets in, whoa! Everybody had better fasten their seat belts”
President Richard Nixon spoke those words about Hillary Clinton to Monica Crowley, during the 1992 election cycle, when incumbent President George H. W. Bush was challenged by Arkansas Governor, Bill Clinton.
Of course, President Nixon was referring to the possibility of Hillary Clinton becoming First Lady, but the quote is prescient. I would love to know what the late President would have to say about the very real chance that she may soon be the first female President of the United States.
Richard Nixon knew Hillary Clinton from twenty years earlier, when she served on the committee to impeach him over the Watergate scandal. Nixon resigned rather than put the country through the ordeal of an impeachment trial, but in retrospect, Watergate pales in comparison to the Clinton transgressions. And they are many!
Even before Bill Clinton won the presidency, his extramarital affairs made headlines, prompting an exclusive interview with 60 Minutes where he, with a dutiful Hillary by his side, could defend himself directly to the American people. It was a successful maneuver, and he emerged unscathed from the same allegations that cost Gary Hart his 1988 presidential candidacy.
Shortly after Clinton’s election, the Whitewater controversy emerged, and Nixon was incensed that the Republicans failed to hold the Clinton’s feet to the fire as the Democrats had joyfully held his. The suicide of Hillary’s friend, former law partner, and White House counsel, Vince Foster, who had links to Whitewater, sparked further interest when it was discovered that files related to the Clinton’s went missing from his office the evening of his death.
President Nixon believed that Bill Clinton’s election, “lowered dramatically the moral gauge not only for the presidency but for the country”.(Crowley) Through his involvement in Watergate, Nixon acknowledged his own damage to the ideal of the presidency politically, but now it was also damaged personally. The time when someone seeking the office of the presidency was held to a higher standard of morality and character appeared to be over.
After his election, President Clinton began to consult with Nixon on foreign policy issues and invited him to join Hillary and he in their private quarters at the White House. Nixon quickly developed the opinion that Hillary was the real force behind Bill Clinton.
He said, “she’s the brain; he’s the vessel” and described her as “ice-cold”. “She represents everything she claims to condemn: all of that money-making greed and opportunism she and her gang criticized the Reagan era for-well, they are just as guilty of it. Hypocrites! Their hearts bleed for the poor just as long as they aren’t poor.”
With all Richard Nixon’s experience interacting with world leaders over his forty-plus years in politics, I would imagine he was a rather astute judge of character, and he was wary of Hillary. Apparently, the same cannot be said for the average American voter. Hillary is still ahead of Donald Trump in the polls, and I think she will be hard to stop. The media used to refer to President Reagan as the “Teflon candidate”, but Hillary is way ahead of him on that score.
She is immune to scandal, above culpability and evidently above prosecution. Since they entered the political arena in Arkansas over forty years ago, the Clintons have been involved in a shocking number of personal and political offenses. None have slowed their momentum. It is hard to imagine that anything will.
The election cycle of 2016 should have been an easy win for the GOP. After eight years of America’s destruction at the hand of Barack Obama, ANY credible Republican candidate would have made quick work of Hillary Clinton. Her unfavorable rating is exceeded only by Donald Trump’s. The ONE candidate Hillary Clinton consistently defeated in all the primary polls is the candidate the GOP chose to represent them.
So, the woman that President Nixon warned us about 24 years ago, is most likely going to get her shot at the top job this November.
Fasten your seat belts!
Crowley, Monica. “Part II.” Nixon off the Record. New York: Random House, 1996. N. pag. Print.
Crowley, Monica. “Part II.” Nixon in Winter: The Last Campaign. New York: Random House, 1996. N. pag. Print.
I Voted for Rubio…
Just before the presidential election of 2012, Fox News Contributor, Laura Ingraham, made the comment, and I’m paraphrasing, “If the Republicans cannot win this election with all the failures of the Obama administration, they don’t deserve to win.”
Well, I would say the same is true in the 2016 election, but even more so. The past eight years of the Obama White House has put the country on a fast track to hell in a handbasket. Aside from the abysmal failure of Obamacare, the weak economy, the amoral climate that we now find ourselves in, (courtesy of the liberal agenda) we have the Fast and Furious debacle, and the tragedy of Benghazi, where four Americans lost their lives. I could go on, but you get the point.
If there was ever a time when the incumbent party could be easily ousted, it would be now. The major difference we see in the 2016 election versus the 2012 election, is the caliber of our GOP nominee. Donald Trump is no Mitt Romney; not even close. Out of a fertile field of seventeen candidates in the primary election, the Republican electorate decided to saddle themselves with the absolute worst choice. Instead of selecting ANY of the intelligent, well-spoken and informed individuals in the running, they went with the least knowledgeable and most controversial. Further, they selected the one candidate who consistently lost to Hillary Clinton in every poll.
Now, they expect those of us who have never supported Trump to fall in line behind him. Well, I’m not buying it. And Ingraham, a known Trump supporter, now tells us, “If Trump loses this election, it will be the fault of the “Never Trump” people”. In her opinion, our refusal to support the inept Trump guarantees Hillary’s victory, even if we don’t vote for her. Well, in my humble opinion, those who voted for Trump in the primary get to carry that burden. They saw the polls, they listened to his bombast, and they knew he had no substantive knowledge of government or foreign policy. They ignored all of it. Their vote was more about expressing their disapproval of the GOP, and less about the good of the country.
There is no way that anyone with the political acumen of Newt Gingrich, Rudy Guiliani, Pat Buchanan, or for that matter, any of the commentators at Fox News, can honestly say that Trump is a qualified candidate. No way. If you watched even one of the debates, it was painfully obvious that the man had no idea what he was talking about. He could not argue intelligently with them about policy, so he went personal against them and their families. He made outrageous and erroneous comments in an effort to steer the dialogue away from the subjects about which he was unfamiliar and uninformed. Any viewer with even a modicum of political savvy could see right through his ploy.
But the media and many of those in the political arena, gave him a pass. Of utmost importance to them was sending the message that they were through with “establishment” candidates, and Trump delivered it perfectly.
Now, with the polls showing Trump trailing Hillary, they’re in damage control mode. They still sing his praises, and they overlook his constant self-immolation, but they lay the groundwork to cover themselves when he loses. They do not intend to take the fall or bear the guilt for their faulty thinking; they want to lay it squarely at the feet of those of us who saw through Trump from the first debate.
Well, sorry. I’m not having it. I won’t be their “out”. As the saying goes, “They made their bed…
With the presidential election less than three months away, I guess it’s time to give up on Mitt Romney entering the race. A year ago, early September to be exact, I kept a photo on the home page of my blog. It was side by side pictures of Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio, and the caption read: The Dream Team, Romney/Rubio 2016. That was back when I was almost certain Mitt Romney would announce his candidacy for the 2016 election, and I couldn’t think of a better running mate than Marco Rubio.
Of course, Mitt never entered the race, but Marco Rubio did. I made it a point to learn as much as I could about Rubio, and in no time, he had my full support. His autobiography, “An American Son”, sealed the deal for me.
Fast forward to this past March, when Rubio suspended his campaign, and it looked like Donald Trump just might be our de facto nominee. Mitt Romney took to the airwaves soon after and publicly eviscerated Trump. He made a compelling argument for why Trump would be a disaster of a candidate, and I agreed with him. Of course, plenty of pundits castigated Mitt for his effort’s, but I admired the fact that he would as the so-called standard bearer of the GOP, speak his mind.
I was not the only one who thought it might signal his late entry into the race. I’ve never been a supporter of a third-party candidate, (I still resent Ross Perot) but if there was ever a year when it could work, it would be 2016. After Kasich and Cruz suspended, I kept waiting for Romney to jump in and save the GOP, but it never happened. It doesn’t appear that it will.
Governor Gary Johnson is making a bid, as is Evan McMillan, although it’s doubtful that McMillan will have an impact on the race. Governor Johnson is seeing an increase in his poll numbers that may garner him a podium at the presidential debates. However, his pro-choice platform will keep me from supporting his candidacy.
Of all the names tossed around over the last few months, Romney was really the only one who could have proven a threat to Trump. Candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich still have a future ahead of them in political office, so it would have been a huge gamble on their part to run third-party. If they didn’t win, to quote Charles Krauthammer, “the longest political suicide note” in history.
Mitt Romney on the other hand, is unlikely to ever seek political office again, so he had little to lose by getting into the race. He already had the name recognition, he is a thoroughly vetted candidate, and he can most certainly gather the financial backing necessary to be competitive. He would have made a wonderful alternative to Donald Trump, and I truly believe many in the GOP, as well as Independents, would have flocked to support him. I think he could have swayed those Democrats who cannot forgive Hillary Clinton for ousting Bernie Sanders, or those who just plain don’t like or trust her.
This could have been Mitt’s year. I am still not sure what kept him from throwing his hat in the ring, but like many who are never-Trump and never-Hillary, I wish he had decided differently.
Donald Trump’s latest “deal” is negotiating the conditions under which he will agree to debate Hillary Clinton. A nonpartisan group, the Commission of Presidential Debates, (CPD) scheduled the debates almost a year ago, and they are currently slated for September 26, October 9, and October 19. The first two debates are opposite NFL football games, and Trump is not happy. He claims to have received a letter from the NFL arguing that the times are “ridiculous” (although this is in dispute), and he argues that it will adversely affect the number of viewers. Actually, the two 2012 debates that fell on the same night as NFL games garnered the lion’s share of spectators.
Trump is using his usual “rigged” system approach, and made a tentative commitment to participate, pending a fair outcome in the negotiations. In contrast, the Clinton campaign has agreed to abide by whatever the committee decides and appears eager to engage in the televised debates. Presidential debates have historically benefitted the underdog candidate, and with Hillary Clinton leading the polls, Trump would reap the reward of a good performance. This is vintage Donald Trump though; he is in his comfort zone when he wheels and deals, and his approach to the political scene differs little from his approach to big business.
However, the CPD seems immune to Trump’s efforts and intends to go forward with the established schedule. It’s not in Trump’s best interest to maintain his stubborn stance, and unfortunately for him, he cannot draw from his argument in the primary that his appearance equals high ratings. Debates are always a ratings draw, and many voters make their final decision on a candidate based on his or her performance.
Trump is a loose cannon, and anything is possible with him, but it would be ill-advised for him to take the debates lightly. Hillary Clinton is a formidable opponent, and Trump would be wise not to underestimate her. If he’s nervous at the prospect of facing her in a debate setting, he has every reason to be. His bombastic comments carried him through the primary debates, and took the focus off of his lack of knowledge, but in a one on one format, that will not be the case. If he’s smart, he’ll listen to his advisers and do the necessary prep work to improve his chances. Smarter candidates than him have failed miserably in these match-ups.
One thing is for certain, it will make for some great television viewing.
God governs in the affairs of men
The following paragraph appears in “Light in the Darkness”, by Father Jonathan Morris. The speaker is Benjamin Franklin, and he is addressing George Washington at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Apparently, the founding fathers were clear on who was in charge of the process of making America. I think it serves as a great reminder for all of us during this contentious election cycle.
“The small progress we have made…is, I think, a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding…I have lived, Sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that GOD governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that “unless the LORD build the house, they labor in vain who build.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel.”
How You Can “Make America Great Again”
Dear Mr. Trump:
Congratulations on your victory in the GOP primary election. Although I did not vote for you, I commend you for a successful campaign. As the late President Nixon once said, “Politics is not for the fainthearted”, and as a novice, you managed to overtake some serious and highly credible competition.
Despite my lack of support for you personally, I must admit your strategy was impressive. As most winners do, you played to your strengths. Your method of branding was sheer genius. What you lacked in substantive knowledge, you made up for in shrewd marketing.
You recognized what many politicians did not; the degree of anger among American citizens. You sensed their frustration with Washington and the machinations inside the Beltway. You knew they were disgusted with the climate of political correctness that is now pervasive in our society. You are a smart man. You seized the opportunity to be their deliverer.
As a businessman, you know the importance of advertising; of keeping your name and product in front of the consumer. You also know that the success of the media is dependent on ratings, and you used them to your advantage. They did the work for you, for free. All you had to do was be yourself and feed them a steady diet of grandiosity and they provided you with continuous news coverage. It was a really good plan and it worked.
It was soon apparent that the more outrageous your behavior and comments, the more attention you received. You gave the voters exactly what they wanted; the antithesis of the traditional politician, and they ate it up. You gave them a voice, and they gave you their undying support. They didn’t care about your deficits in the inner workings of government, or domestic and foreign policy. They didn’t care whether you could provide insightful answers in debates. They just wanted to be heard and entertained, and you did both very well. You are quite the showman.
You have now completed the first part of your task. You have managed to win the nomination to the highest and most prestigious office in the land, and you have done it without any political experience or qualifications. Again, congratulations.
You are poised now to fulfill your campaign slogan of “Make America Great Again”, but you still have one final battle and it will be the most difficult. You have to defeat Hillary Clinton. Can you do it? Every poll during the primary predicted you would lose in a match-up with Hillary. Your competitor, Senator Marco Rubio, actually had the best poll numbers against Clinton. Glenn Beck, who supported Senator Cruz, even predicted that Marco Rubio would “crush Hillary” and “make her look like she’s a 1000 years old”. Can you do that? The current polls still show you running behind Hillary. Some of the greatest political minds in the GOP are convinced you cannot win. Are you willing to take that chance? Do you want America to take that chance?
You know what a nightmare Hillary Clinton would be for America. It would be like Barack Obama all over again, and perhaps worse. Do you want that for our country? Since you are a successful businessman, you know when to make the deal and when to back off. You know all about good and bad risks. Do you think you’re a good risk? Would you stake your fortune on it? If not, then please don’t stake America’s. We cannot afford to lose this election. Our children and grandchildren need us to fix this country or they may never know the freedom and prosperity that we have enjoyed. The stakes are really high.
You can still be a winner. You can be the real hero of this election. You can go down in history as the man who “made America great”, but it most likely will not be as our President. The odds are against you. Can you pass the mantle of leadership to someone who can defeat Hillary Clinton? When you go to the podium Thursday night to formally accept the nomination, can you sacrifice your ego for the benefit of America and implore the delegates to award their votes to someone who can defeat Hillary Clinton?
Your supporters will follow your lead, no matter what. You have tremendous power right now. Please use it on behalf of America.
A tweet this morning by pollster Frank Luntz did not sit well with me. “The GOP must unite before November 8th, or lose until (at least) 2020.”
Of course, Luntz is not the only one calling for unity. Today’s Twitter feed is brimming with demands for voters to rally behind Trump, and for former candidates like Ted Cruz and John Kasich to endorse him. Prominent members of the GOP are noticeably absent from this year’s convention, and the Trump supporters see it as a betrayal to the Party. I am quite certain that if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton in November, the GOP members who did not support his candidacy will be vilified.
My problem with all this is twofold. First, every poll since the beginning of the primary season has shown Trump losing to Hillary Clinton. He is not a strong candidate. If you nominate someone who is unlikely to win, you cannot blame others for the loss. His success in the primary is not the result of his exceptional knowledge of Government and domestic and foreign policy; he is actually seriously deficient in these areas. He won because, as a businessman, he recognizes the importance of “branding” and he did it very well. He gave himself an effective edge over the other candidates by harnessing the anger of the voters and giving them a voice. He played to his strengths; celebrity and grandiosity, and it worked for him. However, his strategic victory does not make him a more credible candidate or any more likely to beat Hillary Clinton. Some voters chose to ignore the polls and vote for him in the primaries, and they may very well pay the price in November.
Second, no one has the right to “shame” anyone into endorsing or voting for a candidate they loathe. As free citizens, we all have a right to our own opinion and our vote is just that, “ours”. Just because we identify with a certain political party doesn’t mean we have to like or support every candidate within the party. Trump’s disapproval rating ranks right up there with Hillary Clinton, and the #NeverTrump movement made it abundantly clear that many in the GOP were aggrieved at his candidacy. If you know there is strong opposition out there, then don’t be surprised by it. We are all called to follow our conscience, and that is ultimately the determining factor in how we choose to mark our ballot.
This primary season started off with seventeen candidates for the nomination. The voters had a plethora of talent to choose from, and in my humble opinion, they chose poorly.
Can Trump Be Stopped in Cleveland?
As the Republican National Convention draws closer, those of us not enamored of a Donald Trump candidacy wonder if the window of opportunity is closing to “dump Trump”. Now that Trump has secured the necessary delegate count to clinch the nomination, is there any hope of stopping him?
There is still plenty of noise in the news and on social media about efforts to unbind the delegates. Kendal Unruh, a Colorado delegate, is leading one group, and Steve Lonegan, former state director of the Cruz campaign in New Jersey, is leading another. In order for a motion to unbind delegates to be brought to the floor, a minority report would have to be issued by the RNC Rules Committee.
This committee is composed of 112 members; one man and one woman from every state and territory, including Washington, D. C. They meet together a few days before the official start of the RNC Convention. It takes only 28 votes from the committee to formally issue the report, but this move in itself is predicted to cause chaos among the delegates.
Polls since the primary season began have consistently shown Trump losing to Hillary Clinton, and the latest polls have her leading with double digits. Roughly one-third of Republican voters say Trump is unqualified for the presidency. Those leading the effort to unbind delegates see disaster ahead for the GOP should Trump be the candidate in November. Trump appears to be his own worst enemy, as he continues to make headlines with racist comments and to conspicuously demonstrate a general lack of knowledge on the inner workings of government and especially, foreign policy.
Party standard-bearer’s like Mitt Romney, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush and John McCain have all decided to skip this year’s Republican Convention in Cleveland, which does not reflect favorably on Trump, and his so-called status as a unifier.
In what the anti-Trump movement sees as an affirmation of their desire to unbind the delegates, Speaker Paul Ryan voiced his opinion that all delegates should be free to vote their conscience. Curly Haugland of North Dakota, a member of the RNC Standing Rules Committee says the practice of binding delegates did not begin until the 1976 Convention, when pro-Ford delegates passed the rule in an effort to deny the challenger, Ronald Reagan, the nomination. He concludes that the delegates are in fact free to vote their choice even on the first ballot.
Wisconsin Governor, Scott Walker, told the Associated Press, “I think historically, not just this year, delegates are and should be able to vote the way they see fit”. The Weekly Standard reported this week that John McCain agrees saying, “I think it’s up to every delegate to make up their own minds”.
Of course, this exercise is just academic without someone waiting in the wings to assume the mantle for the GOP in November. It will be difficult to stage much of a coup without an alternate candidate. Names like Ted Cruz and John Kasich have been tossed around, and both of the former candidates have declined to endorse Donald Trump. Trump commented in a recent interview with the New York Times that unless an endorsement is forthcoming, neither of them will be invited to speak during the convention. It’s doubtful either of them are unduly upset by Trump’s ultimatum.
And what about Mitt Romney? As the former GOP presidential candidate, he has been very outspoken in his disdain for Trump. His news conference last March, in which he gave a scathing review of candidate Donald Trump, was seen by some as “too little too late”, while others disenchanted with Trump pushed for Mitt to step in and save the Republican Party.
Chances are, this is all just a pipe dream and we will end up with The Donald, but it is something to think about. Of all the possible contenders, Romney would be among the most likely. At 69, it’s doubtful he will seek the nomination again so for all intents and purposes, this would be his last chance. He is already a thoroughly vetted candidate and has excellent name recognition among voters. His 47.2% showing against President Obama’s 51.1% in 2012, proves he can handle the pace of a general election. He could indeed be another “greatest comeback” like Richard Nixon in 1968. In my opinion, he has less to lose by jumping in than someone like Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio, who have a considerable political future ahead of them.
At the very least, garnering votes for a minority report will force a discussion on the binding of delegates that could impact future elections. Also, ending the practice of open primaries in those states that currently conduct them could preclude the GOP from facing another bizarre election cycle like 2016 has proven to be. One thing is for certain, our answers are less than a month away!