Texas Republican Governor's 1st Debate | October 27th, 2021 11,183 views Streamed live 16 hours ago
Wise Conservatives 252 subscribers Greg Abbott's recent actions as Governor have spurred three primary Republican challengers to #fireabbott. These candidates are unified in one goal - replacing Abbott with a truly conservative governor.
Greg Abbott was invited to the debate, but his office politely declined to attend.
All of these men have garnered endorsements on the state and national levels, and all have the potential to make it into the run-off. Where will your vote lie?
RULES: During the debate, each candidate will be given two minutes to respond to a question presented by the moderator. After the pre-written questions have been answered, the Moderator will begin asking questions that were written by the crowd.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
"If the Union is dissolved, I shall return to my native State, and share the miseries of the people, and save in defense will draw my sword on none" Robert E. Lee, February 1861 following hearing of Texas secession.
Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3So, what did y'all think? Anybody else able to listen to it? Any comments, leanings either way?
It sounds like any of the three would be survivable.
Chad Prather is unseasoned. I think there would be risk of him being bullied. On the other hand, he knows gee from haw. The common sense is strong in that one.
I remember I was disappointed about a position Alan West took a few years ago. I can't remember the issue. On the basis of this debate, he is really strong. I liked Alan West originally, and I like him again.
Huffines lacks polish and smooth delivery, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
Huffines came closest to my opinion about TEXIT, which is heavily based on my reluctance to renounce American citizenship. Let's put someone with strong ideals in office. We should see what we can do to correct our current American crisis with a fight as part of the union before we fight against it. One year, or two. Not forever.
If that doesn't work, we'll face a terrible fact. Governments are willing to kill to win an argument.
The energy would be better spent making America stronger and a more perfect union.
Assuming, of course, that's an option.
And let's go, Brandon. We have to remember that.
“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” Thomas Jefferson
I agree with everything you said, and would be happy with any one of these three gentlemen.
I am a Texit supporter however, because I think the federal government has gone way beyond any hope of reformation - there is simply too much power concentrated in that tiny corner of the globe and those who have it will not ever be willing to give it up. Especially for a concept of republicanism, freedom, limited government. They no longer have any limits.
My first choice right now is West, followed by Huffines and Prather (for reasons you expressed above). That could change.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
Thank you for your kind words, Sanguine. I do not oppose Texit as much as I long to re-chain America to its Constitution.
There are some immediate steps I would like to see Texas take toward Texit. Establishment of a currency, for example, which I realize is a Federal crime. We need it. I would favor shared ownership of tangible assets. Bitcoin in the real world, somewhat like Stablecoin. Call it an abstracted barter system. A currency backed with physical capital like the dollar used to be. Make it immune to toxic players with controls on the physical assets behind the system. We've already got a State bullion depository. Seems like Lone Star currency wouldn't be a huge leap.
Although I favor a healed nation, a strong Texit movement is good therapy. We need secession on the table.
We also need a crime free Mexico. I'm not sure how that can be accomplished. We can't partner with corruption, either from officials or from rogues. Close down trade across the Rio Grande and hope sober minds get more traction. That's probably the only healthy option.
One of West's best moments was his level-headed response to CRT. He's not a native son of the Lone Star, but his comments were like a Texan would talk to a Texan. No intent to offend, no thought of pulling his punches.
“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” Thomas Jefferson
Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3So, what did y'all think? Anybody else able to listen to it? Any comments, leanings either way?
It sounds like any of the three would be survivable.
Chad Prather is unseasoned. I think there would be risk of him being bullied. On the other hand, he knows gee from haw. The common sense is strong in that one.
I remember I was disappointed about a position Alan West took a few years ago. I can't remember the issue. On the basis of this debate, he is really strong. I liked Alan West originally, and I like him again.
Huffines lacks polish and smooth delivery, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
Huffines came closest to my opinion about TEXIT, which is heavily based on my reluctance to renounce American citizenship. Let's put someone with strong ideals in office. We should see what we can do to correct our current American crisis with a fight as part of the union before we fight against it. One year, or two. Not forever.
If that doesn't work, we'll face a terrible fact. Governments are willing to kill to win an argument.
The energy would be better spent making America stronger and a more perfect union.
Assuming, of course, that's an option.
And let's go, Brandon. We have to remember that.
I also am in favor of reining in the oppressive federal government by re-establishing the basis of their existence, and that is to serve the states, not the states serve the feds.
The initial rebuke must take place by becoming serious that real change will come by bringing to a vote by the citizens of this state whether the state should pursue, not to actually achieve, the possibility of secession.
Too many people believe that only secession will achieve the goals of reigning in the feds. I believe that is incorrect as the mere threat of secession will bring many other states to consider the same, and a tidal wave will develop that will prove difficult to stop.
I also believe many of the fears spread around like the loss of Social Security by secession will be put to rest as a non-sequitur by study of what it takes to proceed with secession and the analysis will clear out the webs of deceit throw against us.
I too believe that a return at the federal level to Constitutionality is the best course; however, I am uncertain whether this is achievable with the erosion of our rights and the almost unbelievable escalation of federal controls under this administration and Congress, and the threats of the perfidy of our election process and economy underway.
Finally, I am a patriot first and foremost of my state, secondly of the USA. I have always been that way in spite of living in several other states and overseas. I was born in Texas and will die in Texas. I will do what is necessary to preserve my state and its great heritage and values rather than succumb to outsiders who do not.
"If the Union is dissolved, I shall return to my native State, and share the miseries of the people, and save in defense will draw my sword on none" Robert E. Lee, February 1861 following hearing of Texas secession.
Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3So, what did y'all think? Anybody else able to listen to it? Any comments, leanings either way?
It sounds like any of the three would be survivable.
Chad Prather is unseasoned. I think there would be risk of him being bullied. On the other hand, he knows gee from haw. The common sense is strong in that one.
I remember I was disappointed about a position Alan West took a few years ago. I can't remember the issue. On the basis of this debate, he is really strong. I liked Alan West originally, and I like him again.
Huffines lacks polish and smooth delivery, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
Huffines came closest to my opinion about TEXIT, which is heavily based on my reluctance to renounce American citizenship. Let's put someone with strong ideals in office. We should see what we can do to correct our current American crisis with a fight as part of the union before we fight against it. One year, or two. Not forever.
If that doesn't work, we'll face a terrible fact. Governments are willing to kill to win an argument.
The energy would be better spent making America stronger and a more perfect union.
Assuming, of course, that's an option.
And let's go, Brandon. We have to remember that.
I also am in favor of reining in the oppressive federal government by re-establishing the basis of their existence, and that is to serve the states, not the states serve the feds.
The initial rebuke must take place by becoming serious that real change will come by bringing to a vote by the citizens of this state whether the state should pursue, not to actually achieve, the possibility of secession.
Too many people believe that only secession will achieve the goals of reigning in the feds. I believe that is incorrect as the mere threat of secession will bring many other states to consider the same, and a tidal wave will develop that will prove difficult to stop.
I also believe many of the fears spread around like the loss of Social Security by secession will be put to rest as a non-sequitur by study of what it takes to proceed with secession and the analysis will clear out the webs of deceit throw against us.
I too believe that a return at the federal level to Constitutionality is the best course; however, I am uncertain whether this is achievable with the erosion of our rights and the almost unbelievable escalation of federal controls under this administration and Congress, and the threats of the perfidy of our election process and economy underway.
Finally, I am a patriot first and foremost of my state, secondly of the USA. I have always been that way in spite of living in several other states and overseas. I was born in Texas and will die in Texas. I will do what is necessary to preserve my state and its great heritage and values rather than succumb to outsiders who do not.
Thu Oct 28, 2021 12:30 pm (Last edited: Thu Oct 28, 2021 12:34 pm)
Unfrozen Cave Water Cooler
0
The Unfrozen Cave
Print view
reply
