"House Lannister has no rivals."
Baratheon Lannister princess. Doran reminds Areo that push may come to shove. Not everyone in Dorne is happy about the proposed nuptials. Areo and Doran need to protect Myrcella and Trystan. 
Bob Hope and Bing Crosby have disguised themselves as North Africans I mean Jaime and Bronn have disguised themselves as Dornish and joined a caravan that's headed for the water gardens. Bronn is singing a typically bawdy song about Dornish women. The actor used to be a singer. Go figure. Anyway apparently no one notices that the not so dynamic duo don't really have a typical Dornish look. And no one is there is to check that the people entering gardens where the Prince of Dorne, his heir and Princess Myrcella are residing actually have official business being there. Right. This is akin to just waltzing into the White House and telling people you're with the landscaping crew. Anyway Jaime and Bronn find Trystan and Myrcella and try to take Myrcella. Myrcella doesn't understand why her uncle Jaime is there. She doesn't want to go with him. And Trystan notices the blood on both men's clothes. But it's at that moment that the Sand Snakes go into wondertwin powers activate! status. A battle royale breaks out but no one is really hurt. One of the Sand Snakes does manage to (temporarily?) spirit Myrcella away but Areo breaks up the fight and arrests everyone. His men also detain Ellaria. You kind of wonder why this wasn't done before but whatever. 
What I liked- Littlefinger being Littlefinger. Although I don't think it's in character for him to let the last surviving incarnation of Catelyn Stark (Sansa) out of his sight, it is in character for him to immediately betray the Boltons and work an angle for his own advancement. Still perhaps Cersei might want to investigate HOW Littlefinger knew Sansa Stark was at Winterfell and WHO helped her get there before she gives Littlefinger anything. But Cersei has always been a woman to react emotionally and not wisely.
- The High Sparrow getting Margaery to perjure herself. He may look (and smell) like a homeless beggar but he's a lot more dangerous and smarter than he looks.
- This episode did bring home the pathos of being alone in the world for both Arya and especially for Sansa.
What I didn't like- The Sansa Stark rape scene. I never thought it made any sense for Sansa Stark to willingly marry into the family which had helped to betray and murder her own. This isn't book material, and that's all I'll say about that now. Perhaps it's unrealistic for Sansa to have escaped being raped by Joffrey, Littlefinger, The Hound or any of the other rough men she's run across but it also seems a bit much to have Ned and Catelyn's oldest daughter held prisoner in her own home and raped by someone who makes Joffrey seem stable. It was also a mind-rape of Theon FWIW. I feel like we already know that Ramsay is pure evil. I don't need rape to develop Sansa's character. If Sansa really wanted revenge it would make more sense for her to stay in the Vale and attempt to use family connections there. Powerful scene but I thought it gratuitous.
- The Sand Snakes continue to not impress. I thought the fight scene with Bronn and Jaime was silly. Just an episode ago we saw Bronn take out multiple swordsmen in seconds yet he's having trouble with women who are much smaller than he is? That aside as mentioned the security around Prince Dorne was horribly lacking. Perhaps instead of introducing the Sand Snakes throwing a spear through some guy's head, there should have been some better backstory about their exploits or Areo/Doran speaking with worry about their reaction? I don't necessarily blame the actresses but it's just not working for me.
- Dorne in general bores me but that could be an issue with the source material.
- There are other families in the North besides the Boltons. I would have liked to see some sort of nod to families who lost people at the Red Wedding and now must decide their next move.
- Slavers, slavers everywhere but Jorah and Tyrion just happen to run across an all black group? Hmm.
- For some reason watching Trystan and Myrcella I kept thinking of One Direction or any other insipid boy band of the day.
*This post is written for discussion of this episode and previous episodes. If you have book based knowledge of future events or have seen future leaked episodes please be kind enough not to discuss that here. NO SPOILERS. NO BOOK DERIVED HINTS ABOUT FUTURE EVENTS. Most of my blog partners have not read the books and would take spoilers most unkindly. Heads, spikes, well you get the idea....
Damn Few: Making the Modern Seal Warriorby Rorke Denver w/ Ellis Henican
Denver writes of serious conflicts between superior officers from "Big Navy" as he calls them, who tell SEALs that the request to increase headcount wasn't really a suggestion but an order, and those stubborn lower level instructors who, when pressured to alter standards or do outreach, make the training even more difficult. The SEALs are not necessarily scalable.
The vast majority of this book is not about combat. It's about the internal struggle Denver undertakes to become a better SEAL, a better team member, a better officer, a better husband and better father. Denver is keen to point out that SEALs are not Supermen. Nothing they do could be done without the support of the larger military and society. Denver also starred in the film Act of Valor, a fictionalized account of some SEAL missions. The film was notable for having real SEALs.
A second police report, containing the ex-wife’s side of the story, was taken by police at 4:41 a.m. Sunday. She said Smith had invited her to stay the night at his house, and, when she arrived, “she was met by a naked (Smith) and an (unknown) female,” the report said. “At this time she became angry and upset, and both started verbally arguing. “At some point during the argument (Smith) grabbed her by the back of her head and shoved her face first into the carpet. Victim stood up and was struck by (Smith) 4-5 (times) in the face with closed fist causing cheeks on both sides of her face to swell.” Smith’s ex-wife told police she ran out the front door, and he chased her with “an (unknown) type long gun and followed behind. She observed muzzle flash (three times) as suspect began firing at her,” the report said. The ex-wife said she ran into a nearby alley as Smith fired the rifle. She said she went into the nearby home of a friend, “who allowed her to call 911 and clean her wounds.”
The friend later tried to retrieve the ex-wife’s 2015 Mercedes Benz GLA250, but that it was “unable to start due to gunshot damage,” the report said. Evidence technicians later found three suspected bullet holes in the vehicle’s hood; two in the driver’s side headlight; two in the driver’s side front fender; and one each in the driver’s side door, windshield, and rear driver’s door pillar, the report said.
LINKMy thinking is that if Smith did not want his ex-wife at his home he never should have opened the door. Nothing good came from that decision. Perhaps he thought he could calm her down. Or perhaps he and the ex-wife were indeed planning to have some adult fun but the ex-wife did not know another woman would be there or didn't know that that particular woman would be there. Who can really say what's going on in someone else's private life. I have always thought that if someone is an ex there is likely a good reason for that status. Why change it? The problem for Smith is that although the differing stories around the confrontation inside the house may be unverifiable, the ten bullet holes in the car and his own alleged admission of firing the gun would seem to make this a pretty simple case of assault. The only reason to use a gun is if you're defending yourself from another person's deadly force. Even if Smith's crazy ex was throwing chairs at his home windows I don't see how that would legally or otherwise justify shooting at her or her car. But once some people lose their temper and HULK out so to speak, there is no reasoning with them. Still, as far as I'm concerned it's a fair expectation that a State Senator should be able to avoid situations that are more likely to show up on Worldstar than C-Span. I wonder why the other woman in this tale has not sought to press charges for assault?
Should Smith's fellow Senators expel him from the State Senate?
"Kill the boy and let the man be born."The Unsullied are said to be the finest warriors in the world. They ask for no quarter and give none. And yet so far they've yet to impress with their battles against the lightly armed and generally unarmored Sons of the Harpy. One reason for this is that the Unsullied are not designed or trained for police or occupation duties. As mentioned before, seven to nine foot spears can be devastating when properly massed on a battlefield. But in a street fight the weapons and tactics of The Unsullied might be more hindrance than help. The Sons of the Harpy have forced The Unsullied to fight when and where their supposed advantages are neutralized. GRRM and to a lesser extent the show creators are apparently making commentary on the types of wars the US and other Western colonial nations have fought since World War Two. Often the stronger military is unable to completely or thoroughly defeat the indigenous resistance and must come to terms of some kind. Sometimes they even get ignominiously kicked out. The White Man's Burden gets heavier and heavier over time. Obviously Daenerys Targaryen doesn't see herself as a colonialist. She thinks of herself as a liberator. Her primary opposition is more akin to the southern terrorists in post-Civil War America than it is to the Kenyan struggle against British colonialists. All the same she is down two of her military leaders thanks to the rebellious Sons of the Harpy. Ser Barristan is dead while Grey Worm is unconscious for three days. Angered, Daenerys flirts with the idea of just feeding all of the upper class leaders to her dragons, whether they are guilty or not. She makes an object lesson of one. The dragons burn him alive and squabble over the smoking remains. The others, including Hizdahr, are arrested and imprisoned. Daario thinks that Daenerys needs to retrench in one section of the city and slowly go house to house looking for insurgents Sons of the Harpy.
Speaking of political marriages to old respected families, Myranda and Ramsay Snow are evidently taking a short breather from doing the do when Myranda explains that she's not very happy about Ramsay's upcoming marriage to Sansa Stark. She explains this while standing nude at a window, which doesn't quite seem to make sense but for those keeping count there is male nudity here as well. Ramsay reminds Myranda that although he still intends to keep her as a mistress, she's only a kennel keeper's daughter and would be wise not to irritate or bore him. He's getting married and that's that. He doesn't want to hear her mouth on the matter. After some mild pouting, Myranda bites Ramsay. It's time for more nasty S/M sex. Sansa hears from yet another servant that she has friends around and to light a candle in the highest window of the broken tower should she ever be in dire straits. OK. This is starting to irritate me a bit. When we last saw Winterfell it had been occupied by the Greyjoys and later sacked by the Boltons. All the inhabitants were dead or had fled. So where are all these Stark loyalists in Winterfell supposed to have come from? Even if the Boltons had taken them away to the Dreadfort, would it make sense to allow them back at Winterfell? Brienne watches from afar and finds another Stark loyalist to carry a message to Sansa Stark, over Podrick's feeble objections. Anyhow Myranda catches up with Sansa at the broken tower. There's some awkwardness as Sansa can sense that this girl doesn't really like her. When Sansa says things are different Myranda enthusiastically agrees with that assessment. She directs Sansa to a crate in the kennels where there is a surprise waiting for her that will hopefully help her remember just how different things are now. That surprise is Theon, who, caked in his own filth and that of the dogs, won't answer to his name.
At the Wall Sam is reading information about Daenerys to Maester Aemon, who is upset that Daenerys stands by herself as the last Targaryen. Jon enters and wants to speak to Aemon alone. He wants some advice but Aemon tells Jon that he must man up and make his own decisions."Kill the boy" is how he puts it. Many people will dislike Jon as Lord Commander. There won't be any joy. But he may find strength. Aemon is not interested in being a wet nurse to a Lord Commander. Jon has reached a decision. It's not popular. Jon decides that the Wall's purpose isn't to protect the Seven Kingdoms from the wildlings but to protect all of Westeros from the White Walkers. Allowing the White Walkers to attack and convert the wildlings would be bad. So Jon has asked Tormund to lead the wildlings thru the Wall to resettle lands south of the Wall. Tormund agrees provided Jon accompany him to show good faith. But Jon's Night's Watch brethren don't like this idea. Not one stinking bit. There's too much bad blood. They've been fighting the wildlings for generations. They've lost loved ones (Night's Watch members and actual blood relations) to the wildling attacks and raids. Even Jon's supporters like the boy Olyvar are not in support of this decision. Seeing your parents murdered and butchered in front of you can have that impression on you. Olyvar's pain and disappointment in Jon is visceral. Despite Sam's non-martial appearance Stannis is impressed with the fact that Sam killed a White Walker and urges him to continue his research on how and why White Walkers are vulnerable to obsidian. Stannis decides the time has come to march on Winterfell. He's bringing Shireen, Selyse and Melisandre with him. He thinks they're safer with him than hanging around men who haven't seen women in years and/or are rapists and thieves.
What I liked- Little hints that despite her "good" nature, Daenerys may well have some of the same capriciousness and cruelty as her father.
- A blink and you missed it shout out to a fan favorite theory.
- Most of the story was given over to the political situation in the North. I found these sections to be the most compelling.
- I like that I don't know what's coming next in the story even if some people (like GRRM's editor Jane Johnson) are not super happy with divergences from the books.
- Myranda's reintroduction of Theon to Sansa was fantastically creepy in the best horror movie sense. Myranda is not someone you turn your back on or let near your food.
- It's worth pointing out that legends claim that the Wall was built by Bran the Builder, the supposed founder of House Stark. Who better than another scion of House Stark to decide what the purpose of the Wall should be?
- Stannis the grammar Nazi remarking on the correct usage of less and fewer.
- Davos' quiet but solid loyalty. He's honest and will tell you when he thinks you're wrong. But if he's with you he's with you for life.
What I didn't like- Given the implacable hatred towards the wildings shared by most of the Night's Watch I wished this episode or some of the previous ones could have taken some more time to portray Jon struggling with the idea of letting the wildings thru the Wall. This is a huge step. I don't think that the show explained enough why Jon wanted to do this. Jon certainly didn't make a compelling case to his brethren. Not at all.
- Rather than show Stark loyalists working and serving in/around Winterfell I would rather have seen a few of the northern lords who are Stark diehards away in their own castles and holdfasts pondering their options.
*This post is written for discussion of this episode and previous episodes. If you have book based knowledge of future events or have seen future leaked episodes please be kind enough not to discuss that here. NO SPOILERS. NO BOOK DERIVED HINTS ABOUT FUTURE EVENTS. Most of my blog partners have not read the books and would take spoilers most unkindly. Heads, spikes, well you get the idea....
Avengers: Age of Ultrondirected by Joss WhedonThis was a good summer movie that was very obviously aimed at a worldwide audience. You did not have to speak English as a primary language in order to understand or enjoy this movie. In some aspects I guess that's a good thing but in other ways it wasn't. But you don't go to movies like this for character development or long soliloquies that only are of interest to aspiring screenwriters. You go to movies like this to watch things go boom and to enjoy (depending on the angle of your dangle) the fleeting down blouse shots of attractive women or shirtless shots of attractive men. The dialogue, when you could hear it was pretty snappy, but as mentioned forget about character development. This will be an atypically short review because of time constraints and because this film is not at all that different from the first Avengers film. If you liked that film or generally enjoy comic book movies you will enjoy this film. The differences are few. I am not an Avengers expert but my brother, who is, assures me that this storyline and primary villain was created long before the somewhat similar storylines in Terminator and The Matrix. If you will permit an aside some of the oldest myths and actual histories feature a creator begetting children who will kill him/her. The Greeks had the Uranus-Chronus-Zeus cycle. King Arthur had Mordred. The Roman emperor Nero murdered his mother (and alleged lover) Aggripina. The Norse Aesir will do battle at Ragnarok with some of their own monstrous offspring and lose. And so on.
Maybe there is something in human nature that continues to be called back to this theme. Perhaps Freud was onto something. Or maybe not. Who can say. Anyway that old myth is what drives this movie. It's updated technologically but it's the same story. The mad scientist/creator brings his "child" into being. But the created child doesn't want to play his assigned role and proceeds to attempt to destroy or take over the world. It goes without saying that it has a special dislike for its parent. It resents its parent and wants to show that it is better than its parent.Here the "child" with the Daddy complex is the artificial intelligence/android Ultron (James Spader). He is created by Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) with the reluctant assistance of Dr. Bruce Banner/The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo). In what is a return to some of the themes of the previous Avengers movie as well as the Iron Man movies, Tony Stark remains a complex individual who prefers to do good as much for the kicks and excitement as from any sense of morals. He also doesn't really play all that well with others. His animating ethos is that it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to ask permission. Not that he really believes in asking for forgiveness either. When you're as rich and intelligent as Stark is, little things like regulations, rules and teammates are annoyances to be overcome. This is in direct opposition to Steve Rogers/Captain America's (Chris Evans) beliefs. Rogers is the titular leader of the Avengers. He thinks there must be structure, rules and order. The fact that the people he's dealing with are superpowered make such rules more, not less important, as Stark believes. And Rogers does what's right because it's right. Period. He's not interested in glory, publicity or shortcuts. The two men clash more and more throughout the film, setting up future more serious conflicts.
Stark's intention was to outsource the Avengers' responsibilities to Ultron. Ultron decides that humanity itself is the greatest threat to Earth. He goes rogue. The other Avengers, including Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Hawkeye (Jeremy Remmer), Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and associated lesser superheroes and S.H.I.E.L.D agents must try to stop Ultron. Ultron is growing more powerful by the day. He has also recruited superheroes of his own, Wanda and Pietro Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen and Aaron Taylor Johnson) who have a bone to pick with the Avengers, Tony Stark in particular. This movie was 141 minutes long. As you might imagine some of the extended fight scenes dragged a bit. I can't say I was ever bored exactly but I wasn't always on the edge of my seat either. When trying and failing to lift Thor's hammer (no phallic tension there right?) Tony Stark makes a snarky aside that attracted some feminist ire. The joke was silly but was very in keeping with Stark's persona. People overreact. There is a fair amount of humor in the film that plays on silly gender stereotypes. And that's fine. A subplot with two of the Avengers struggling with romantic feelings for one another really doesn't go anywhere. I did like Hawkeye's verbalization of the truism that compared to the other Avengers he's significantly underpowered. Nevertheless he keeps up. And he has a few secrets of his own. James Spader's voice oozed evil and disdain. He was very well cast. Other actors and actresses include Don Cheadle, Andy Serkis, Idris Elba, Cobie Smulders, Anthony Mackie, Claudia Kim, Paul Bettany,Josh Brolin, and Hayley Atwell. To sum up, fun film but not quite as good as the first one. Marvel godfather Stan Lee makes his customary cameo. TRAILER
The US court of appeals has ruled that the bulk collection of telephone metadata is unlawful, in a landmark decision that clears the way for a full legal challenge against the National Security Agency.
A panel of three federal judges for the second circuit overturned an earlier rulingthat the controversial surveillance practice first revealed to the US public by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013 could not be subject to judicial review.
But the judges also waded into the charged and ongoing debate over the reauthorization of a key Patriot Act provision currently before US legislators. That provision, which the appeals court ruled the NSA program surpassed, will expire on 1 June amid gridlock in Washington on what to do about it.
The judges opted not to end the domestic bulk collection while Congress decides its fate, calling judicial inaction “a lesser intrusion” on privacy than at the time the case was initially argued.
“In light of the asserted national security interests at stake, we deem it prudent to pause to allow an opportunity for debate in Congress that may (or may not) profoundly alter the legal landscape,” the judges ruled.
But they also sent a tacit warning to Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader who is pushing to re-authorize the provision, known as Section 215, without modification: “There will be time then to address appellants’ constitutional issues.”
“We hold that the text of section 215 cannot bear the weight the government asks us to assign to it, and that it does not authorize the telephone metadata program,” concluded their judgement.
"The orders at issue here contain no such limits. The metadata concerning every telephone call made or received in the United States using the services of the recipient service provider are demanded, for an indefinite period extending into the future. The records demanded are not those of suspects under investigation, or of people or businesses that have contact with such subjects, or of people or businesses that have contact with others who are in contact with the subjects – they extend to every record that exists, and indeed to records that do not yet exist, as they impose a continuing obligation on the recipient of the subpoena to provide such records on an ongoing basis as they are created. The government can point to no grand jury subpoena that is remotely comparable to the real‐time data collection undertaken under this program."
Hillary ClintonWhy she can win: Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. All your votes are belong to us. Clinton has the money, the name, the media attention, and the air of invincibility. For those voters who really, really, really want to see a woman in the Oval Office, she could also be the culmination of years of dreams. And right now there's no one else in the Democratic Party who has the name or the organization to compete. The Clinton machine is sucking up a lot of the available donor money and the professionals who are needed to run a multi billion dollar campaign. Clinton is in it to win it. She obviously wants to be President very badly. There's no shame in that. There is in some quarters a nostalgia for middle class accomplishments during her husband's Presidency. Clinton is ready to take any and all rivals to poundtown. She's back. And this time...it's personal.
Why she can't win: She has a lot of negative baggage around her husband's honesty and the couple's alleged history of playing fast and loose with facts, restrictions and laws. Most of this won't matter to her likely voters but some of it will matter to voters on the right who view her as Satan's daughter. Some voters on the left also may see her as too beholden to corporate interests and just another big business democrat. To the extent that the 2016 campaign will include questions around race and the criminal justice system, Clinton will be hurt as until recently those are issues she avoided. Also she was supposed to be the inevitable candidate in 2008 before she got mollywhopped by the Hawaii Kid. I'm not sure she thinks fast on her feet or actually enjoys the campaign scrum. If the economy should worsen or there is some unforeseen foreign policy crisis over the next eighteen months then Clinton will have to perform a balancing act of explaining what she would do differently than the current Administration without enraging voters who support the Obama Administration or legitimizing the loons on the right who claim that the Obama Administration is the worst ever. Also, as NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre snidely stated, "Eight years of one demographically symbolic President is enough." There are some voters out there who want to see a white man as President, apparently quite badly. Clinton won't be able to change their minds. Clinton also needs to be able to justify to likely voters why she wants to be president. If she can't then expect the caricatures of "Because it's my turn dammit!!" to fly fast and furious, as some have already started.
Bernie SandersWhy he can win: He's far more verbally adept than Clinton and enjoys getting into a good robust discussion around economic inequality, corporate malfeasance and health care. Given a fair shot, some of this rhetoric might resonate outside of his northeast liberal base. There's a fair amount of Don Quixote in his appeal. He could definitely surprise some people.
Why he can't win: Neither the Democratic Party nor the larger American electorate will vote en masse for a declared socialist to be President of the United States. Despite the rising economic inequality, outsourcing and falling wages and numbers of the middle class, most voters will never get past the socialist title to look at Sanders' record or ideas. We haven't reached that point yet. And a skilled opponent can easily turn Sanders' passion against him by using it to portray him as just another doctrinaire East Coast liberal who wants to take your guns, make you marry someone of the same sex and eat tofu to save the environment. Even though the South has a (well-hidden) progressive streak in spots, as Democratic nominee, Sanders would probably lead the Democratic Party to a nationwide whupping unparalleled since 1984. The media will do its best to ignore Sanders. He won't have the money to rival Clinton. He's relying on individual contributions, not a SuperPac.
Carly FiorinaWhy she can win:On any given Tuesday anything can happen. It's a long shot but if I could see the future I certainly wouldn't be where I am currently. Go big or go home. We all have dreams to pursue. If someone wants to be President, step into the ring and battle it out, I say have at it.
Why she can't win:Most people only know her, if they know her at all, for spectacularly failing at Hewlett-Packard. She laid off 30,000 people before being forced out. She later decisively lost the 2010 California Senate election to Barbara Boxer. In other words: loser. Now everyone has to take a loss sometime in life but I don't see how Fiorina will be able to rebrand herself as a winner when her most recent and most important public performances have been disastrous. Is it possible? Sure. Just not very likely. Her primary role will be to remind women voters of all political persuasions that Hillary Clinton may not necessarily represent their interests. Ironically though much like Clinton, Fiorina has yet to show that anything except ambition is driving her interest to be President. That's true of all candidates of course but the trick is to not make it so obvious. A candidate must find the balance between saying vote for me because I want to be President as opposed to here's why you should vote for me because you want me to be President.
Marco RubioWhy he can win:He's young and photogenic. He has a home field advantage in the swing state of Florida. He can help to try to neutralize the media image of Republicans as the party of "old white men".He's conservative but often manages to come across as reasonable instead of judgmental or scolding.
Why he can't win:He's young and photogenic. That could work to his disadvantage. Rivals will claim that low information voters chose President Obama for similar reasons so why in the world should the country make the same mistake again. He's also shown some flexibility on immigration issues. Such flexibility tends to be anathema to the Republican base. People remember such things. His appeal to Hispanic voters who aren't Cuban Floridians could be highly overestimated. Rubio's positions on climate change and evolution could be and have already been easily mocked.
Rand PaulWhy he can win:People are tired of war. Paul is at this point the only candidate on the right who seems to even occasionally question the number of wars the US is involved in, why we have so many military bases over the world, the level of foreign aid, and if the Constitution still applies on questions of civil liberties and domestic surveillance. He's also questioned the number of people we imprison. If you're eager for some serious conversations about the correct application of law and the Constitution, if you want to discuss the proper limits of banking and the dangers of loose money, if you are fiending for someone to stand up and say "No. That's not America's job!" then Paul is someone to whom you should pay attention.Why he can't win:Paul straddles the line between libertarianism and conservatism. Where his father is a libertarian with conservative leanings, Paul seems to be more of a conservative with libertarian leanings. When push comes to shove, as it often does when you are in positions of leadership, Paul usually totes the conservative line. For example his co-signing of the letter to Iranian leadership sent a message to everyone that regardless of what his father or some other libertarians might think of neo-conservatives, Rand Paul is a man who is willing to do business with them. Although he's one of the few conservatives willing to talk about the impact of the War on Drugs on black communities, he still manages to be tone deaf in his associations with open racists and his statements about the black community. Paul gives off the strong vibe that given the chance he'd just as soon eliminate the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act of 1964 and 1965. That won't help him make any inroads in the black community. And he's still not trusted or well liked within the neo-conservative community. For everything he says or does with which I agree there's an equal statement or vote that leaves me saying "huh?". I suspect that's a feeling shared by a number of likely voters.
Ted CruzWhy he can win: If you want your conservatism uncut and don't want your conservatism stepped on, make your conservatism the C-Funk and watch Cruz drop the bomb. This man is 99.44% conservative. He wants you to know that. He wants everyone to know that. He will spend a great deal of time making sure that you know that. If you are really really really really really really really really really really really angry about the direction in which the country has gone over the past eight years you're probably not as angry as Cruz is.
Why he can't win:Outside of movement doctrinaire conservatives and apparently a majority of Texas voters, no one likes this guy on a personal level. Apparently his intelligence and drive are off the charts, as even people who disagree with him admit, but his tendency to see the world in strictly Manichean terms strongly limits his ability or desire to work well with others. A rather strong resemblance to Senator Joe McCarthy won't help his chances. Cruz was not born in the United States. Although he's probably eligible to be President and is more nativist than most nativists, the issue of his Canadian birthplace will come up by hook or by crook, you can be sure of that. His racist father's statements will also play a part in defining Cruz should he somehow win the Republican nomination.
Ben CarsonWhy he can win:He's a brilliant surgeon with a compelling backstory who could appeal to those conservatives who are primarily interested in cultural issues.
Why he can't win:Many of the conservatives who are primarily interested in cultural issues also have zero desire to vote for a black man for President. See that Wayne LaPierre quote about Hillary again. That little problem notwithstanding, Carson occasionally comes across as the benignly demented bigoted uncle at family gatherings. Just out of the blue this person will say something that if said by a non-relative would have you calling them out of their name, throwing up hands or angrily leaving. Carson seems to enjoy saying things like this. In fact I suspect that he sees being able to say such things as the point of running for President in the first place. I believe he will discover that the point of running for President is to win. It's not to run your mouth or lead a moral revival. Although Carson has run hospital divisions and sat on corporate boards I think he will discover that running a campaign is a little different.
Mike HuckabeeWhy he can win: He's going to work the same side of the street as Carson but without the disadvantage of being black. He could lock up the social conservatives who are sick and tired of being taken for granted by the Republican establishment. They want one of their own in the driver's seat or failing that someone they can trust implicitly. They need a hero. Huckabee just might be that man. He's also hit the "Islamic terror" meme pretty hard which might endear him to the neo-conservative pro-military intervention wing of the Republican party. He wants to recapture the Reagan magic and unite all of the disparate wings of the Republican party. Ahem. Those libertarians will have to sit at the back of the bus and not complain.
Why he can't win:The genial smile, careful cadence and aw shucks Southern accent hides a mean streak. Huckabee also has a history of saying some rather nasty things about people who differ from him politically or otherwise. Like Carson and to a lesser extent Cruz Huckabee seems to think that running for President is all about fighting for certain cultural and moral values and emphasizing that he's not one of those transgender-loving gun-hating Prius-driving soy-latte-sipping secular sissy boy coastal liberals. He's a real God fearing grits eating American!!! This might help in some primaries but would be disastrous in a general election. Some other Republicans have questioned Huckabee's overemphasis on geographical and cultural affinities to stand in for political identification. Huckabee has also gained back most of the weight which he initially lost after a Type 2 diabetes diagnosis. Looks matter. I don't think people are going to send an overweight man to the White House, which is why Jeb Bush is currently on a crash diet.
