Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Maybe they'll invite Zero so The Donald can tell him, "You're fired".
Is this a pay-off so he doesn't run as a third-party candidate? As long as it's interesting, I don't mind. It certainly doesn't cost me anything, unlike most political pay-offs.
Never met a Republcian.
Great! Every question will be some version of: where did Obama go wrong; why did he fail; where is he; what does he do....
If this is a plan to find the least serious least credible least informed politico ever in order to make the candidates look better by comparison, I don't think it's going to work.
I find it hard to believe that the cnadidates all agreed to this and wonder how much control the have ceded & to whom regarding the format of these debates.Woo gets to moderate the next debate -- Stephen Colbert?
I suspect the debate will devolve into total chaos within ten minutes, as each participant and the moderator all strive to one-up each other.
Hopefully Trump will say "You're Fired!" if he gets any particularly lame answers to his questions.
Hat Boy, you're FIRED!
There's none of you can hold a candle to my Ivanka!
It's bound to be very classy.
This is an improvement on an MSM dope.
I think this is a great idea. Trump is interesting... and knows big time business America.
No one has agreed to attend as of yet, according to Daily Caller.
So? Donald Trump will do a better job than many of the so-called journalists who have moderated the GOP debates this season *looking at you Scott Pelley and Anderson Cooper*.
"If this is a plan to find the least serious least credible least informed politico ever in order to make the candidates look better by comparison, I don't think it's going to work."At least Trump doesn't wear his hairpiece crooked...
Drinking game for GOP Debate starring Donald Trump: Rule #1 – When Donald asks about President Obama’s birth certificate, drink until dead.* (*This is just a joke. Do not kill yourself no matter how much you may want to.)
From think tanks at Constitution Hall, to Donald Trump, the Soupy Sales of politics, in Des Moines. From the sublime to the worse-than-ridiculous. That's one debate I can safely skip. Nothing to see here ... move along!
dbp said... Hopefully Trump will say "You're Fired!" if he gets any particularly lame answers to his questions.-------------Good one! I am laughing out loud here.
"You're all Fired!"Well, the debates are sort of like a reality show anyways...
At least Huntsman gets it. Asked if he would participate, he replied by email: "Lol. We look forward to watching Mitt and Newt suck-up to The Donald with a big bowl of popcorn."It'll be interesting to see if any of the others have as much sense.
Trump is protecting the Usurper. He was called in specifically to seek the Birth Certificate (even though Where birth occurred means nada, since Obama was born a British subject of a British subject father), in order to provide cover for the real issue-- Obama's birth as British subject.So yes , it will be interesting to see how he further protects the Usurper. Probably by setting himself up as a 3rd party candidate.You are way behind law prof, but then even you voted for a Usurper. Imagine, a "law prof" voted for an ineligible candidate!!
Why. I can't think of anyone less qualified to moderate a debate than "The Donald". Vicki from Pasadena
I will predict this is the best debate of the bunch. A lot of people only know Trump from stereotype. He's a damn brilliant and thoughtful guy. He will handle this event with respect and ask good and tough questions.
He's a damn brilliant and thoughtful guy. He will handle this event with respect and ask good and tough questions.He's a self-aggrandizing clown and will handle this event like a self-aggrandizing clown.
Hmm. Interesting. Anyone who thinks this will be a GOP foot rub is dead wrong. Trump will do his best to show up most of the candidates, and he'll try to get Newt into an area where he can hang with him for awhile.I'm not hot or cold on Trump, but he can be compelling. This is the first debate I'd watch over the shocking meat video.
Herman Cain better drop out now or get worked over by Trump. Trump isn't going to put up with feigned ignorance or dissembling.
Good Gawd, Mick!Do you check under the bed before you go to sleep?
As gimmicks go, this is a pretty good one. I think it'll make more people tune in.
Yeah Vicky, a talking head news reader like Wolf, Pelley, Wallace, Brian Williams or maybe the Hispanic guy one network used to ask the question about immigration reform are so much better qualified than Trump or the average cook, baker or candlestick maker.
I'm not a big fan of Trump, but he sure has hell has accomplished quite a bit in his life; if they're going to do something completely different from the usual newsreader acting as a moderator, Trump is probably as good as anyone.For starters, he's met a payroll. That puts him leagues ahead of the nightly news poseurs.wv: pubrag - Newsmax is not your usual pub rag...
It's a great idea to not have "journalists" for a change. They just are not the smartest people and they don't ask important questions. A business person is perfect, but Trump is not the one I would prefer.Ideally a panel of business people; or even better, a panel of regular citizens including a business person, a public employee, a rabbi, and a transvestite Alaskan bush pilot.
At least Trump knows something about the biggest issues in this race: creating jobs and economics.That already makes him better qualified than any previous moderator, or the current President for that matter.
This will be a good show. Finally we will be able to talk about the economy with an actual businessman instead of some leftist blowhard. Trump was just on Fox talking with Greta. He said he liked Huntsman as a man but his policy on China is a disaster. I think we will finally get tough talk on China. China is a human rights disaster not only within its own territory such as in Tibet, but in the countries it supports such as Myanmar and North Korea. Every time we buy anything from China we support the extinction of Tibet, and the dog cages that Myanmar allows to its less illustrious dissidents, to say nothing of the bvast prison camps of North Korea.
China has been a major force for evil in the last 60 years. It should be talked about a lot more. They seem to care a lot about appearances, but the world has been giving them a free ride. A little worldwide criticism could have saved a lot of lives and prevented a lot of evil, but world opinion is a pathetic little creature with no backbone or wisdom that panhandles while scorning it's benefactors.
bagoh20 said..."China has been a major force for evil in the last 60 years. It should be talked about a lot more. They seem to care a lot about appearances, but the world has been giving them a free ride. A little worldwide criticism could have saved a lot of lives and prevented a lot of evil, but world opinion is a pathetic little creature with no backbone or wisdom that panhandles while scorning it's benefactors."So true; but until we cure our addiction to entitlements, growing the government beyond the average post-WWII federal tax take of 18% of GDP, and deficit spending, pissing off our fascist bankers (they say they're "communists," but really, they're fascists) by calling them on their manifest abuses is ill-advised.We can start by electing a president who doesn't believe the sole purpose of the private economy is to spin off wealth to be "spread around" to favored voting blocs and constituencies.
"calling them on their manifest abuses is ill-advised."It may have costs, but it's worth it. Besides, they can't do anything about journalists, writers or other individuals speaking up around the world. It's unfortunate that the opinion writers of the world have so little to say about China's extremely bad influence. They produce reams of crap denouncing the U.S., while expecting us to show up for every need, which we generally do.
"It may have costs, but it's worth it. Besides, they can't do anything about journalists, writers or other individuals speaking up around the world."Journalists? Writers? You mean, like Thomas Friedman?First, he'd have to get off his knees...lol!
Given the context of our times over the past 10ish years or so, or at least the last 5ish, this is not the least bit--much less very--strange, not even a teeny-tiny (or an eenie, weenie) bit. For the same reason, it's not all that interesting, either, except for maybe (that is, maybe) why other people think it is.
He can't be any worse than Giggles Cooper.Will Trump's hair get to ask any questions?
"Jason (the commenter) said...Is this a pay-off so he doesn't run as a third-party candidate? As long as it's interesting, I don't mind. It certainly doesn't cost me anything, unlike most political pay-offs."Plus it will allow you and JAC some quality 1 on 1 time.
"Donald Trump will moderate the Dec. 27th Republican debate."[facepalm]Donald Trump will moderate his own PR session. It will be a circus.Whoever agreed to this should be shown the door.
"Interesting"? Your threshold for what qualifies as "interesting" is remarkably low. More like "embarrassing." Maybe Donald Trump can ask them all a birther question. The contestant—oops, I mean "candidate"—whose answer sounds the most racist wins a walk-on role on next season's Celebrity Apprentice.This country is now the equivalent of a game show.
It's a shame that Althouse has largely retired her cafe-post habit.
I think it IS interesting, because it's definitely new, he could be great, or he could be an abomination. What could be more enticing. I predict high ratings - easily higher than any debate so far.There are few televised events that are a combination of such importance and unpredictability. I'm no fan of Trump, but it's an awesome idea.
Remember, Trump does reality shows for the money, and he's very successful at it. Trump also is a real business man and pretty successful there as well using entirely different methodology.He's a smart man, and knows what to do here to make it a success. The question is which kind of success is he going to go for. I hope he aims high. It could change campaigns in a significant and needed way: taking it out of the stale, biased, predictable hands of news reader journalism graduates. They have been boring us to death for years, and not helping us much in the vetting process. It needs change badly.
It's unfortunate that the opinion writers of the world have so little to say about China's extremely bad influence. They produce reams of crap denouncing the U.S., while expecting us to show up for every need, which we generally do.It's that great sucking sound. Much of influential business signed on for it, even promoted it and politically lobbied for it (note: successfully), not to mention a significant enough of small biz types who did the same, at least philosophically.Why anyone would expect any other result than the reality of what has transpired is beyond me. What was it that they expected, and why? Why? And what?
madAsHell said... "Good Gawd, Mick!Do you check under the bed before you go to sleep?"Yes. Now answer this question:Since the purpose of the natural born Citizen requirement is to prevent foreign influence into the Oval Office (it's only req. of the POTUS and VP), then how is it possible that one born a British subject (like Obama, who may be a British subject to this day) is a natural born Citizen?Until any of you can explain away the precedent of Minor v. Happersett, which is National Law, you have no argument that Obama is not a Usurper. And if any of you are lawyers, you should be ashamed, including the "law prof"."The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners."
Zachary Paul Sire said... ""Interesting"? Your threshold for what qualifies as "interesting" is remarkably low. More like "embarrassing." Maybe Donald Trump can ask them all a birther question. The contestant—oops, I mean "candidate"—whose answer sounds the most racist wins a walk-on role on next season's Celebrity Apprentice.This country is now the equivalent of a game show."Trump is helping Obama by his Birth Certificate drama-- by keeping the Conspiracy Theory alive, obscurring the Constitutional catastrophy of a non natural born Citizen (born a British subject) being installed as President. Trump knows exactly what he is doing. He is a Banker insider, and he is helping the Bankers that installed Obama. Why do you think no bankers went to jail after the continuing economic meltdown?
What next, Survivor Island?
Maybe this is where we finally get rid of the theater of the absurd of presidential debates moderated by blowdried pinheads.If so, good riddance.
Trump would be a lousy Pres, but might make for a good debate.I wish Mick were running so he could participate.
I think I would vote for The Donald over most of the honks that are now in the field.
Great! Every question will be some version of: where did Obama go wrong; why did he fail; where is he; what does he do....As opposed to the lame stream media's gotcha questions designed to make Republican contenders look dumb. Foreign policy example - "Who is the vice Premier of Potsylvania?"I'll bet The Donald and Huckabee (in his debate) will do their best to keep the candidates focused on their platforms. Lets watch and seeWhy. I can't think of anyone less qualified to moderate a debate than "The Donald". Except almost any member of the MSM. Telegenic airheads all.
Trump is a liberal game show host pretending to be a Republican. He will bait them into bashing China, bashing OPEC, and bashing Obama. He may even get one or two of them to question Obama's birth certificate. They will look petulant, angry and mean. I can't believe the candidates are going to agree to do this. It's a disaster in the making.
Post a Comment