cruz. they re very strong with special segments. you make a good point on paul. i ll tell you, i m not sold on bush right now. when you look at what he s supposed to represent, the theory behind bush and match it with the poll numbers, i m seeing resistance among republicans to the bush names. i m wondering if republicans are looking pragmatically and saying do we want to put another bush up there? is there too many bushes for the country? i know people might roll their eyes. the one i keep coming back to is chris christie. the thing i ve always noticed about chris christie covering him in new jersey and trying to imagine this nationally. and a lot of people say the jersey thing won t play in iowa. it won t play outside of new jersey. i m picturing them coming after him. i m remembering how much somebody like mitt romney struggled in the debates. chris christie is such a natural in those settings. look there could be explosive moments where he ticks people off and it backfires. i thi
does he have a point? well, one of the themes of his argument is that the only way you can take away a franchise is if there is some financial misconduct, if you don t pay the bills, don t pay the players. so the moral clauses, the statements to his girlfriend, what ever she was, certainly are not financial impropriety. again, i don t think it s a winning argument because the nba can decide what s financially damaging to the league and they have filed extensive affidavits with the league saying, look at all of the sponsors who have left. look at all of the players who won t play. that is a financial implication of sterling s comments. all right. let s go to page 8 now of the document, jeffrey, where he references anderson cooper s interview here, cnn. he says the interview does not violate the constitution and talks about v. stiviano s
sport of basketball. does he have a point? well, one of the themes of his argument is that the only way you can take away a franchise is if there is some financial misconduct, if you don t play tay the bills, don t the players. so the moral clauses, the statements to his girlfriend, what ever she was, certainly are not financial impropriety. again, i don t think it s a winning argument because the nba can decide what s financially damaging to the legague and the have filed extensive affidavits with the league saying, look at all of the sponsors who have left. look at all of the players who won t play. that is a financial implication of sterling s comments. all right. let s go to page 8 now of the document, jeffrey, where he references anderson cooper s interview here, cn ncn. he says the interview does not violate the constitution and talks about v. stiviano s
might want it. kids might play. that s the whole point of it. this is to make sure we regulate it so kids won t play. using the uber example they knew who i am where i was. kids are not going to play. if we don t do it and do it right we will have more moan momentum for lax web sites there s no rules for any consumer of any type. when uber driveings somewhere they see you. the 15-year-old kid can be gambling. they want his money they don t care what it is. this wouere would be protectn place. i believe we can do it and do it right if we allow the states to regulate it. to allow the offshore sites to do it means zero rprotection in place for kids. thank you congressman.
i ve got news for him. you know, in modern times no one has ever been able to do that, to lock out african-americans and lock out latinos and lock out the lgbt community, lock out women, lock out anyone who is non-white and male and still win a nationwide election in this country. so if he wants to play these politics, he can play them well right there in texas. but i ll tell you where it won t play. won t play in new jersey. won t play in cal. won t play in illinois. won t play in some of these states he s going to need to pull together to win a primary campaign and a gop win for president. can that work, dana? such a small base where he s talking about the future of the gop but he s really going back to the past in terms of this kind of lack of diversity, lack of fairness and lack of inclusion? can that work in a republican primary? has the tea party really dominated so and intimidated