Agreed.

I am thinking that the whole electoral college system is geared towards perpetuating the two party system insuring there is some sort of majority that needs to be reached in presidential elections. I have to say the two party system gives the entrenched power brokers too much power

Cruz's response ought to be, if he dares, "I don't need you." to the Republican establishment.

I didn't vote for Cruz, but Cruz should treat McConnell's statement as a badge of honor.

While I certainly disagree with some of Kasich's viewpoints, I am going to acknowledge very positively his work on the federal budget during the Clinton/Gingrich era. That was the only time since I was two that the federal government allegedly balanced its budget.

Hillary has now morphed sanders' talking points into hers which resulted in her last super tuesday dramatic gains over sanders. She is promising all things to all people, to be paid for by the "rich". I still think trump is the only candidate who can defeat her in November. She IS the establishment and trump is the anti establishment

What I find amusing is how the "polls" ( that I now see how utterly corrupt they are) kerp saying Trump has the highest unfavorability of everyone. Perhaps it is accurate, but I'm skeptical given the high ratings for many years of The Apprentice. If he was that unlikeable I think his show would not have lasted as long as it did.

Kasich is lacking the combative nature needed in the current form of politics (not that I think it should be that way, but it is what it is). Many think Trump will not win against her (and given the Democraps propensity for vote rigging that never gets investigated, identified or prosecuted) we may well see what Germany did in, I think it was, 1934?

I have actually been drawn to kasich as an administrator. He gives the impression of being a good person. But people haven't followed him at all outside of Ohio and Hillary would crush him with her rhetoric.
SCOTUS is a disaster already without another Obama appointee

A lot to consider in your post-
1) the polls that show high negative ratings fly in the face of my personal experiences. I find that there is some reluctance to openly admit supporting trump, a lot of people will express enthusiastic support for trump after they look around to see if no one is listening
2) trump is offering to free people from political correctness and offering to let them be who they are. This is one reason for the establishment hatred of him. He isn't under establishment control like Hillary. I think this is trumps big attraction. He is offering freedom from establishment intellectual slavery. He doesn't do it by intellectual arguments but by visceral appeals to how the establishment has messed things up- which people know to be true. He is offering leadership because he has been obviously successful
3) Cruz is offering a more intellectual approach buts based on the constitution which most people don't understand. Also he sounds like a southern preacher who is part of the political establishment also he doesn't have the commanding presence of Reagan or trump.
4) Hillary has handlers I agree. They tell her what to say and she appeals to the uneducated and entitled people who want freebies they don't have to earn. Her contributors give her money to get elected in exchange for favors when she is presudent

Yes, automatic recovery isn't going to happen without a change in philosophy. It was the collapse itself in AS that allowed John galt to reach people. But look at Venezuela- how bad does the collapse have to be before people abandon socialism? The collapse there may not be enough to effect positive change any more than in the US. It does amaze me that the Venezuelans are so ignorant as to not see what is destroying their economy

Well, since the 30's the dominate idea is "what will you give me?" Which usually gets "everything" and actually results in "nothing". Rinse and repeat, and re-elect.

Not a bad summation. I might not go so long on the list you made as a positive, he has irritated most of them to the NO side of the ballot, I think.

Well, he does have his shortcomings, and they will be his Achilles heel. Maybe he can overcome the resistance to his bombast, if you just ignore 80% of his crazy comments, occasional pearls seem to pop up. At least more than the other ones produced.

And that pretty much sums up the dysfunction of our politics. They hate their own members, and just keep on eating their young, and can't figure out why they keep losing. Of course, Cruz makes it so easy....along with Trump. I would vote for Kennedy right now....

Management is a primary job skill. That is what Kasich tries to sell. Unfortunately, bread and circuses preclude hiring someone who has that skill set without all the added baggage of money and PACs. Also, remember, the Constitution has been basically nullified by 200 years of "precedent" to the point SCOTUS cannot figure out if something is or isn't. Many times there are cases that go back and forth, depending on the political strings pulled. Look at the environmental things they have done in the last few months, one day they say no, one day they say yes, for pretty much the same issue. I would go with the Constitution Party if they didn't want to screw things up with their own special interest "add ons" they keep trying to justify as Constitutional. I don't think it takes a huge amount of legal sense to make such determinations, if that is all they do, but they have made that into a morass as well.

Now you are firing on all cylinders. That is a pretty good summation. You should apply to Fox and replace Rove.

He really does need a tone control. That is pretty clear at this point. But then, Bonehead was a pretty glib panderer, and McConnell is even worse, and they keep/kept electing them....

Trump has record breaking negative ratings among the public at large. Hillary is at least known for not being trustworthy. Hillary is easy to beat if her opponent knows what to say and doesn't become in the campaign either another Romney wimp or a religious conservative zealot. Cruz would have to know what to say in basic principles as well as convincing policy goals -- without being crushed by the leftist guilt appeals to altruism. Cruz is said to be close to Reagan, but doesn't have Reagan's personality.

Trump reduces everything to the lowest level of school yard taunting, which only gives Hillary an opening to appear better than she is as the progressive media dominance crushes him by pretending to by civilized. They have already started that, with Trump's obliging help.

Much of the "master politics" is not in any one individual, but the party machines where the "pros" know how to manipulate and how to "get out the vote" from known supporters. That is the part that is the mechanics of it, out of the intellectual realm of appealing to political principles, and was especially exploited by Obama twice.

The circus we are seeing is the chickens coming home to roost form the long standing anti-intellectualism in politics, especially in most of the Republican Party. But it won't remain an entertaining circus and they will not leave us alone.

Ayn did not, however, say that "statist ideas need to play out until they collapse society before enough people" will create a "truly free society". She emphasized repeatedly that the political course of a society depends on the dominant ideas. The progression of statism can only be reversed with better ideas more popularly accepted. Without that it will collapse the society, but the recovery is not automatic. Without the better ideas there will be no replacement with a free society, only different versions of the statist-collectivist mess with no protection for rational individualists or anyone else.

I think you have a better understanding than I of what happened. Politics in America IS a circus now. I just want them all to leave me alone and not destroy the money for the time I have left. I don't expect much more during the rest of my life. I think ayn rand was right unfortunately about statist ideas need to play out until they collapse the society before enough people will band together to form a truly free society

The firing was a different issue. A campaign spokesman was fired for a misleading video accusing Rubio of not taking the Bible seriously. What a circus.

Cruz never said that Carson had dropped out. A campaign official forwarded the CNN news report (not article) that Carson was going back to Florida instead of campaigning right before the NH primary. Other supporters apparently described that as a leave of absence (still true), and then others magnified it into believing he was dropping out -- as they all tried to get votes to switch, as they always do. Rubio supporters did the same thing.

Rubio pretended that his campaign would never do anything like that as he adopted a phony holier than thou righteousness to further attack Cruz. What a circus.

It became more bizarre when Carson said he was only going to Florida for a change of clothes. Who goes from Iowa to Florida to change his clothes? What a circus.

Trump further escalated this into a nonsensical accusation of 'vote fraud' by Cruz and demanded another election, as he publicly smeared Cruz himself for being a "liar" and for "dirty tricks". And that is what showed up in the "news" and has been spread ever since, including the sensationalizing headlines about a "shameless whisper campaign". Mud sticks. Especially Trump mud. What a circus.

But none of it make Cruz a "liar", and contrary to Trump, who had viciously smeared Carson, this minor corner of the circus based on a misunderstanding didn't make any difference to the Iowa results.

Cruz's subsequent apology for what had ultimately spread out of the campaign has been converted into an admission of guilt. What a circus.

Those with the least interest in ideas in their pursuit of a free-for-all cage match are the first to to become hysterical in their substitute for a campaign of ideas -- by both partisan activists and in the media reporting.

Someone putting a foot in his mouth doesn't change the man. ;)

Additionally, the talking heads that say he just needs to tone down his rhetoric and Act more Presidential seem to think that makes him a different person. It just proves him to be what is wrong with other chameleonic politicians.

Electing a president today is like electing a king. A president should be more like a city manager in my view. The constitution is the unchanging basis of the society. The congress passed laws. And the president manages the bureaucracy. The presidential qualifications would be good administrative skills. We aren't there now- congress and the president get together and pretty much do what they want

Ok. I remember something about someone getting fired over it and Cruz apologized. There is so much complication and misinformation out there