Said Donald Trump, as if he were running for President simply for the feelings that swell within him. Trump is attacking Walker now. He's saying that Wisconsin is "in turmoil" and "a disaster." To be fair, Trump is lashing out after Walker's campaign sent out an email that said Trump's other name was "DumbDumb" (which really is lame — name calling? I thought Walker was above that).
Trump told the crowd Saturday that he had helped Walker win his race because he admired the candidate’s “fight,” but didn’t know what he was fighting for. “I’ve been very nice to him,” he said.
But after Walker’s fundraising email went public, Trump declared: “I can finally attack.”
So you see the message here: Don't attack Trump or he will target you. It would be foolish to stand down because of that threat, but it's also foolish to attack Trump in Trumpish terms (like calling him "DumbDumb").
“A guy like Bush, a guy like Walker, are controlled by the people who give them money,” Trump said. “They will be bombarded by their lobbyists who donated a lot.... The other guys running, the Republicans — they protect each other," Trump said early in his speech. “Me, I don't care.”
That's the position from which Trump plays. The others need a good response, not lame repetitions of the the smug assurance that Trump is ridiculous. Not that he isn't. He is!
पोस्ट्स
९६ टिप्पण्या:
Isn't Trump just saying what all politicians really feel - "put me in first place so I feel better". He is the voice of the political id.
Donald Trump is not capable of sustaining the interest of the people who speak to pollsters through Labor Day, let alone the interest of people who will actually vote in Republican primaries. He is like a mad RINO charging about the camp, leaving random wreckage. I would observe that Ted Cruz has taken a much more productive response to the Trump phenomenon. I would also note Ted's denunciation of Mitch McConnell. But YOUR position, Professor, is that Cruz can't be president of all the people.
Instead of calling him names, why don't these 'idiots' think about what part of his message is resonating with people and why?
No mention about his valid criticisms. We don't talk about how a promised $1 billion surplus actually was a $2 billion deficit, as we would have to then discuss the tax cuts and giveaways that put us in that hole.
Nor any discussion of the huge borrowing for road projects, even as road maintenance budgets shrink.
When Trump is mocking Walker, you know it's bad,
His talking points are straight from the Mary Burke campaign. Trump (D) is letting his true political leanings show.
To ridicule Trump or not to ridicule Trump. That is the question. Trump is always the question.
It's time for the cliche that if you cannot beat them, join them. Walker needs to get better writers and do a 24/7 Donald a Trump Roast that is funnier than Donald's zingers. I bet Garage can suggest good material. And that sweet man from Texas whose name we always forget can add some Texas one liners.
But the question is how to hit a Trump with a blow he feels at all. The man loves verbal war.
Like Rush used to do, Trump plays a larger-than-life persona that's actually self-deprecating humor.
The plus for Trump is that he ridicules the media.
The hatred for the media out in the ordinary land is huge. That's the political plus.
To my admittedly limited knowledge Donald Trump has never, in spite of his billions, participated in any activity that did not directly benefit Donald Trump. The man's avarice is equalled only by his egomania. The only thing Trump enjoys more than a profitable real estate parlay is a bout of shameless self-promotion.
Ronald Reagan famously said,"Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Republican." In my analysis Trump is behaving more like a subversive plant than a serious candidate. If true he'd be behaving exactly as he is now, goading and belittling his "fellow" Republicans, hoping to distract them into a tu qouque response, which can only benefit Hillary. The smart play is to ignore the braggadocious douchebag. Much sooner than later people will grow tried of him. His campaign will be "cancelled" just like all of his other obnoxiously self-aggrandizing projects.
So we're what, three weeks into Trumpnado? Walker has seen Trump's M.O. and know's that Trump will "punch back' if provoked. Yet, Walker goes ahead insults Trump in a fund raising letter anyway. Why? This is not a typical Scott Walker strategy. He's firm but respectful.
Possiblities:
1. He has internal and external polling that Trump is falling in the polls.
2. He feels he can counter attack Trump effectively.
3. He want's to show the country he's not afraid to get into a fight.
4. All of the above.
The country is in the toilet. Why not be amused on the way down?
Trump is fun !!!
DumbDumb ? Lame.
Walker is lame.
I'd have a collection of zingers about his failed businesses and (especially) all of his bankruptcies. Find some small business owners that he screwed by going bankrupt.
Don't use words like "lashing out" and "targeting" about Donald Trump. That is for "serious" campaigns.
Trump is cocking his snook at them and giving them Bronx cheers. It is for comedy, not serious.
If Trump were truly aligned with the Republican party, this exchange could be brilliant strategy to get free name recognition for Walker at the expense of the legacy media, a la David Brat.
Here's the tactic I'd like to see some push on. If the use of federal and executive power was admirable when Lincoln used it to quash the confederacy, but Congress' recent move to subdue sanctuary cities is bad, why are we trading partners with a country whose citizens are fleeing here for "asylum"? Then publicize Mexico's immigration laws and strict enforcement thereof.
But racism.
Think of Trump as the little boy who points out the emperor ain't got no clothes on, except that he is more Peck's Bad Boy than the angelic little innocent of Anderson's tale.
This likely helps Walker. At some point, the GOP front-runner (whoever it is) will face a $500 Million advertising onslaught from the Dems and media designed to sully his reputation. Not even Mother Theresa could come through unscathed from it. They will force a mistake and then pounce on it, and exploit it, just like their hero Saul Alinsky taught them. Senator George Allen lost a Senate seat because he called a low-level opposition staffer "Macaca" which was "perceived" as potentially racist.
So, Walker may have survived his Wisconsin onslaught with flying colors (which was awesome), but he's gonna have to survive an even bigger one to become Prez.
Let's see how he responds to the Donald. It may be like a sparring partner who toughens him up a bit.
Andersen.
and "none of the emperors".
Elect the rich guy. The rich guy isn't beholden to the big money. That seems to be his message.
In his business the banks have a lot of say over his fate. Big banks. Elect the rich guy who owes his soul to the big banks.
"When Trump is mocking Walker, you know it's bad"
When anyone infers anything from anything Trump says, you know it's bad.
He acts as a plant, may run 3rd party, and makes Hillary! victory more likely.
GOP candidates should refuse to debate him.
and not just the emperors.
The whole panoply of American presidential elections has devolved into theater of the absurd, and that is what trump is pointing out.
The pundits will never forgive him.
Wait a second. This email came from a Walker fundraiser, not from the campaign itself.
Walker's campaign vaguely chided the sender Slayton afterwards by saying, "the governor is going to talk about what he is for and not against and would encourage others to do the same.”
I am sure he has figured some angles so that he will at least break even on this caper, but even if he doesn't, having this much fun is worth dropping a few mils to The Donald.
Mark said...
No mention about his valid criticisms. We don't talk about how a promised $1 billion surplus actually was a $2 billion deficit, as we would have to then discuss the tax cuts and giveaways that put us in that hole.
This is Trump's big advantage, for the moment at least, he hasn't had to govern with the irresolvable conflicts that voters impose on actual politicians. Reducing taxes creates budget deficits without large cuts in expenditure. Bush Jr showed this quite clearly, turning a small surplus into a large deficit, which made the economy more vulnerable to his other idiotic economic policies.
Watch Carly.
Hillary Clinton must be defeated.
Carthage must be destroyed.
So here is a man using his own money to run for office, a man who is not beholden to c
Big donors, the mean big dark money donors. And this man does not filter his remarks like all other politicians.
So this makes him ridiculous. That and the fact that despite having a dozen businesses fail and yet he made a couple of billion dollars and has hired thousands. None of his competitors, of course, have ever failed at anything.
Blogger Bill said...
Wait a second. This email came from a Walker fundraiser, not from the campaign itself.
Walker's campaign vaguely chided the sender Slayton afterwards by saying, "the governor is going to talk about what he is for and not against and would encourage others to do the same.”
7/26/15, 9:08 AM
After my post I did a little more research and found was Bill found.
Silly me for believing Trump or the MSM
Trump is like fire - it can burn and destroy, but if channeled properly, can produce many good things. Target Hillary, Trump!
"The whole panoply of American presidential elections has devolved into theater of the absurd, and that is what trump is pointing out."
The clown-in-chief doesn't "point out" anything. He personifies absurdity.
This email came from a Walker fundraiser, not from the campaign itself.
Same thing.
That was what the John Doe investigation was all about. Scott Walker wanted direct control over all the various PACS that raise money on his behalf, and the WI Supreme Court ruled that he can do exactly that.
Is this an example of basically the only time that Iowa has been right?
Trump is "Jack's smirking revenge."
He's become the nation's political id. Saying things that should be said, that need to be said. He's the jester, the fool (in the traditional sense of the word). The man in the silly belled hat insulting the king. He's been put here by Loki to make the candidates in both parties up their game or fade into obscurity. Blowing up a political process that badly needs to be blown up. He may be ridiculous but he's making the other bullshit politicians look ridiculous, and that's a good thing. Look at him as a test: anyone who can respond to him and rise above the ridiculousness might just deserve to be president.
Anyone still think Trump isn't a Clintonite plant? For crying out loud, has he said one nasty thing about Hillary yet? How is anyone still fooled by this?
A party that elevates this guy deserves their fate. I guess I'll resign myself to the Clinton restoration.
Setting one's self as the alternative to Trump is a strategy for victory.
@Brando, I think if Trump were a Clinton plant I don't think he'd have raised the downsides of illegal immigration as an issue. As pm317 says, one hopes that the RNC is taking note. One fears otherwise.
But it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to discover that one of the "good works" that the Clinton Foundation is doing is quietly pouring money into Trump's campaign.
----We don't talk about how a promised $1 billion surplus actually was a $2 billion deficit
You usually don’t post so mendaciously.
++++++++(Walker’s) union reform was so successful at generating savings that Walker massively paid off debt, gave taxpayers a tax-cut and still finished the budget with a surplus.
When Walker took office in 2011, the GAAP deficit was at $2.9 billion, but that number has shrunk to $1.3 billion at the end of fiscal year 2014 (FY14), according to the latest Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CARF) published by the Department of Administration.
The GAAP deficit differs from the typical budget deficit because it does not rely on simple cash-based accounting. While the state's standard fiscal year surplus or deficit is determined by how much cash is taken in and how much is spent over a one-year period from July 1st to June 30th, GAAP accounting takes into account actual obligations.++++++
http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2014/12/wisconsins-gaap-deficit-shrinks-by-16-billion-in-past-three-fiscal-years/
Big Mike--I think it's exactly what he'd do--it both puts pro-reform types like Bush on the spot with anti-reform Republicans, while splitting up the GOP over the issue and scaring away Hispanics and moderates who might otherwise have given the GOP consideration next year. Hillary can't win unless the GOP does as bad with Hispanics as they did last time.
Donald Trump wears his outsider nihilism very badly.
“Me, I don't care.”
Thou doth protest too much.
"Anyone still think Trump isn't a Clintonite plant? For crying out loud, has he said one nasty thing about Hillary yet? How is anyone still fooled by this? A party that elevates this guy deserves their fate."
Indeed.
Plus Trump isn't even serious about dealing with illegals, supposedly his signature issue.
"“We have to do something,” he continued. “So whether it’s merit or whether it’s whatever, but I’m a believer in the merit system. If somebody’s been outstanding, we try and work something out.”"
The buffoon is squishier than Bush.
---- Reducing taxes creates budget deficits without large cuts in expenditure.
But Walker’s budgets had secret sauce. Act 10 ended the siphoning of government money to unions and saved the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Thus he could reduce debt, fully fund the rainy day fund and return some of that savings to the taxpayers in a taxcut and still end the budget with a surplus.
Sorry to rain on your bumpersticker parade.
----That was what the John Doe investigation was all about.
You are referring to the now-discredited facistic attack on conservatives for expressing their political opinion. Eric O’keefe’s lawyer has said he is very pleased with how discovery is going in his lawsuit against Inspector Javert, er I mean Chisholm.
Surplus, unknown?
That's funny, because it was quite clearly reported that we had a $2.2 billion dollar deficit running into this budget cycle - thus the cuts to UW, education, etc.
http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/state-faces-billion-deficit-heading-into---budget-cycle/article_5a3d6933-5937-5b23-8cd7-3bc16bf07edb.html
If we are doing so well, why are we cutting education? Why isn't transportation fully funded? Why are we raising fees on State Parks and Trails?
You don't do those things in response to a surplus.
Quastor, Your comments registered with me. I'm sure not with everyone though. I Had to Google: Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. Good one.
" Target Hillary, Trump!"
That is the one thing we have not seen and it raises the obvious question.
ARM, I was about to say we agreed again but then you posted your ridiculous second comment.
Bush Jr showed this quite clearly, turning a small surplus into a large deficit, which made the economy more vulnerable to his other idiotic economic policies.
There was the slight matter of the dot com collapse followed by the 9/11 attack. Obama has run the economy into the ground and raised the debt to $20 trillion and not a peep from you and the rest of the far left.
Obama is a big disappointment for a good portion of the Democrats since 2008. He has been one for Republicans all along. There is a silent majority which is very unhappy with the media and the political situation in the country and some of whom won't go out of their party but they do like what Trump is saying. He is neither D nor R but a firm T. He thinks he represents the silent portion of the dissatisfied electorate in the country from both parties. He sees an opportunity to bring balance and likes the adulation. Something tells me he is a good guy but perhaps, not presidential material. But what is presidential material after Bush and Obama?
The Donald is not a Republican. He's a Donaldcan. Or is that Donaldcrat?
Trump is on the R side because he can take on the media and the Obama administration incompetence from this side of the aisle better than to compete with Hillary in the primary on the D side. Smart GoP candidates should examine what he is doing right. Take on the media, show them up and show up Obama shenanigans.
---That's funny, because it was quite clearly reported that we had a $2.2 billion dollar deficit running into this budget cycle - thus the cuts to UW, education, etc.
Tough to understand perhaps, but that “budget" was an UNCONSTRAINED forecast.
======The "structural deficit" is a state government concept and some states do not even calculate, or calculate using different methods. In this state, LFB assume there are no growths in revenues or expenditures all the way through June 30, 2017.
Revenues tend to grow, and Walker's team has proven they can manage the expense side of the budget. Many folks (and even legislators) do not understand that we do not tell the Governor (executive branch) what they have to spend - we tell them the maximum they can spend. This means the Governor's team can find cost savings, and simply spend less than the maximum amounts the legislature stipulated.
http://www.rightwisconsin.com/perspectives/6-Things-The-Media-Wont-Tell-You-About-the-Structural-Deficit-274453591.html
Did you know many states don’t even consider a Structural Budget forecast?
-----why are we cutting education?
You are unaware that the Wisconsin legislature restored Walker’s proposed education cuts?
Funding will be flat the first year of the budget and go up by about $69 million in the second year,
http://newsok.com/highlights-of-wisconsin-budget-passed-by-legislature/article/feed/861338
Please tell me that there isn’t just a little waste in public schools when MPS is the 4th highest spending school district in the country, but has catastrophically awful reading scores and graduation rates.
------Why isn't transportation fully funded?
Back to back multi billion dollar interchange repairs forced into temporal proximity due to Walker’s predecessor RAIDING the transportation fund. Why wouldn’t you spread the TWO POINT THREE BILLION DOLLAR cost of the Zoo interchange over several years rather than trying to pay for it in one budget?
But what is presidential material after Bush and Obama?
I will answer my own question. Presidential material in today's environment is a blank slate -- people know nothing about you but what the media makes of you. This time around unfortunately for the media, they are out of luck. They are searching and searching but what they have to work with are octogenarians Hillary, Bernie, Biden, Warner and their fucking goddamn history for 8 decades.
Oh, then there is O'Malley with his special six packs. I recently noticed O'Malley speaks with a faux Brit accent -- where did that come from?
"There is a silent majority which is very unhappy with the media and the political situation in the country and some of whom won't go out of their party but they do like what Trump is saying."
You mean, they like that we need to "work something out" for illegals who have been living in the shadows? They like that GOP was to blame for prior recession? They like all his great ideas for reducing the deficit, fixing entitlements, standing up to Iran and Putin, and . . .?
The takers among the "silent majority" will be that much more unhappy with "the political situation" when a politician tells them small government means lower benefits. It won't be Trump.
He'll stick to what he does best: sell hot air.
Trump won't target Hillary. His target is Obama.
Michael K, Bush Jr. was a failure on economics by the standards of his own party, much less any objective standards. A conservative doesn't turn a small surplus into a massive deficit during good times, and economically they were largely good times, in the rest of the world at least. A conservative doesn't start a massive military operation without figuring out how to fund it. He was an imposter who seriously damaged the conservative brand.
I don't understand why you dead-enders on Bush Jr don't just pack it in and acknowledge what a remarkable failure he was. It would make it a lot easier to get another shot at doing better next time.
Blogger pm317 said...
Obama is a big disappointment for a good portion of the Democrats since 2008.
Not based on his approval ratings.
Brando: I think it's exactly what he'd do--it both puts pro-reform types like Bush...
¡Jeb! is not "pro-reform" in any meaningful sense.
...on the spot with anti-reform Republicans...
All Republicans (and all Democrats) are pro "comprehensive immigration reform", which is a euphemism for "our donors don't want us to control immigration and enforce immigration law, and we won't".
...while splitting up the GOP over the issue...
There is no "split" in the GOP. There is the GOP establishment, who take their marching orders from donors who want high-volume, non-stop immigration, legal and illegal, and then there are non-Democrats, many of whom, the slow-witted dears, are finally figuring out that they're seen as nothing but worthless "bitter clingers" by the GOP, too.
...and scaring away Hispanics and moderates who might otherwise have given the GOP consideration next year. Hillary can't win unless the GOP does as bad with Hispanics as they did last time.
Dear God, this is hilarious. Funny how the GOP is unconcerned that they've succeeded in "scaring away" the chunk of the electorate that could hand them elections. Hispanics aren't voting for you? Kiss ass harder! "The base" sick of your shit? Resolutely refuse to address any of their concerns, double-down on insulting them for having the cheek to have concerns about their own interests, and then blame them, not yourself, for Democrat victories because they didn't show up at the polls humbly asking "Please sir, may I have another?"
Look, Brando, all the GOP has is "if you don't vote for us you'll get [my separated-at-birth Democrat twin]", and it ain't working anymore.
And responding to Trump's antics like a bunch of prissy old women makes them look about as "serious" as he does. ("Well, I never!" - not a winning campaign slogan.)
Can you imagine Trump attacking Hillary? Ads with her cackling "We came, we saw, he died" ? Fetus' cut up for organs as Hillary explains why that is OK. Exposure of Clinton foundation donations traded for favors. Clinton foundation Haiti relief fiasco. Stuff others are to PC to hit her hard with? Would be very entertaining.
Dodging gunfire, named after Edmund Hillary,wanted to enlist in Marines, and don't forget Chelsea was in the neighborhood when Twin Towers came down. Most people are not aware of what a liar she is.
Angelyne--call it what you will, my point is that raising the immigration issue the way Trump is doing is exactly what Hillary wants. Now you may agree with what Trump pretends to believe, but that doesn't dispute that he is a plant.
The optimist in me believes that President Hillary will be too incompetent to do this country too much harm.
Donald Trump likes Hillary Clinton, and, to my knowledge, he hasn't taken that back yet.
ARM, LOL, you still have faith in polls? Poor poor man!
Ann Althouse:
The others need a good response, not lame repetitions of the the smug assurance that Trump is ridiculous.
Well, George Will had a couple of things to say about Donald Trump, today on Fox News Sunday.
He noted, for the record, that his wife was working for his latest target - Walker. I didn't know Walker was a target.
Anyway George Will basically called him a fraud and noted Donald Trump used to be pro-abortion and was for the election of Democratic Congress, and another thinbg or two. The trascript will be available by the late afternoon.
Brando: Angelyne--call it what you will, my point is that raising the immigration issue the way Trump is doing is exactly what Hillary wants. Now you may agree with what Trump pretends to believe, but that doesn't dispute that he is a plant.
Trump a Clinton plant? Sure, why not? Seems plausible to me. So what? My point is that your point is beside the point.
But what is presidential material after Bush and Obama?
Don't blame me, I voted for "Bob".
For those who keep repeating that Donald Trump is a Democrat in a Republican disguise, or a liberal in a conservative disguise, I'd suggest they read his positions on the issues.
http://www.issues2000.org/Donald_Trump.htm
The issues2000.org website is a pretty good website and you can read Walkers positions as well. Anyone you want to look up, you can look up there, and see if your preferred candidate matches up with Donald Trump. The site, which is non partisan, rates Trump as "Right Conservative".
It's a really good site to get an idea of what candidates have said about things in the past.
Blogger Brando said...
Angelyne--call it what you will, my point is that raising the immigration issue the way Trump is doing is exactly what Hillary wants. Now you may agree with what Trump pretends to believe, but that doesn't dispute that he is a plant.
This is so dumb. Why would anyone have to dispute that Trump is a plant?
You've not proved he is in any meaningful way. You're just trying to convince people not to vote for him and this is the most expedient way.
I'm officially tired of Donald Trump.
Unknown keeps telling us that kicking the can down the road when paying for Transportation isn't borrowing.
Nothing says Walker operative more than someone who won't even register a name
Sammy Finkelman said...
Donald Trump likes Hillary Clinton, and, to my knowledge, he hasn't taken that back yet.
You do realize that political caricatures bear very little relationship to the actual people, don't you? I have no trouble believing that Bush Jr is pleasant company.
"Reducing taxes creates budget deficits without large cuts in expenditure. Bush Jr showed this quite clearly"
Ah like Kennedy and Reagan? ARM's is a predictable over-simplification of the matter.
Some of what Trump says resonates with me. Saying he gave to Walker because of his fight without knowing what he was fighting for..doesn't. This aint a boxing match of his...but maybe that's how he ultimately views things.
Roughcoat wins the thread.
walter said...
ARM's is a predictable over-simplification of the matter.
While economics is inherently complex, you failed to address the reality of what happened and covered your failure with an empty ad hominem, suggesting that you have nothing.
The irony is that you started out iwth truth:
"This is Trump's big advantage, for the moment at least, he hasn't had to govern with the irresolvable conflicts that voters impose on actual politicians."
It's the spending that's the problem, ARM.
-----Unknown keeps telling us that kicking the can down the road when paying for Transportation isn't borrowing.
Hmmm, I invite you to post quote where I said specifically that. I outlined for you that In the adult world of financial decisions there are occasions when a big ticket investment is required and its costs are spread out via debt instruments. For example the Golden Gate was financed by debt.
http://www.roadtraffic-technology.com/projects/-golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco/-golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco4.html
Some of the US interstate system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System
If you know anything about the zoo interchange you would have objected to its being completion being delayed (which was discussed) to meet budgets. Its an economically damaging pain that we SE Wisconsinites need to get through as quickly as possible even if that means a little extra debt.
If recent history is an example, in two years Walker’s budget will again produce a surplus since it is based on conservative growth estimates.
You completely failed to acknowledge the MASSIVE reduction in debt that Walker achieved during his administration. Wisconsin’s debt went from 2.9 BILLION dollars to 1.3 BILLION dollars. He also fully funded the rainy day funds which had been raided by his predecessor.
This is the opposite of kicking the can down the road isnt’ it? Why don’t you admit it?
-----Nothing says Walker operative more than someone who won't even register a name
I know, it drives you alinskyites crazy when your opponent doesn’t have a name you can freeze and attack.
I’m posting this from a Wisconsin owned laptop in my beautifully furnished, oak paneled office deep in the Walker command bunker. Tell your gestapo Obenfuerher Chisholm to come and SWAT me.
Blogger Brando said...
Anyone still think Trump isn't a Clintonite plant? For crying out loud, has he said one nasty thing about Hillary yet? How is anyone still fooled by this?
He has said repeatedly that she is was the worst Secretary of State.
If you want to know who is responsible for getting Hillary elected, if we're going to assume that will happen, look to Boehner and McConnell, McCain and Grahamnesty.
Republicans are responsible for what is happening to Republicans. Maybe if they'd start paying attention to their own base and stop worrying about getting more latino voters, Hillary wouldn't have such a chance.
We aren't listening to you anymore and it's making you look silly. We're not going to be railroaded into voting for the "Moderate" anymore. We're tired of it. Voting for moderates has gotten us where we are now.
What to keep treating us like shit, Brando? Time to pay the piper.
From the link at The Hill,
"In response to the controversy, Trump fundraiser Gregory Slayton told the Wall Street Journal, “I didn’t mean that to be public but obviously I stand behind it.”
I think it's supposed to be, "Walker fundraiser Gregory Slayton" isn't it?
Otherwise, the story is confusing.
"Walker and Bush are controlled by the people who give them money! I on the other hand prove my integrity by screwing over my investors, tenants and employees! Vote for me!"
GOP candidates should refuse to debate him.
Which is exactly what they’ve done so far and … look what it’s gotten them.
richard mcenroe: "Walker and Bush are controlled by the people who give them money! I on the other hand prove my integrity by screwing over my investors, tenants and employees! Vote for me!"
A slightly less insane demand than perennially insisting that "the base" prove their integrity (pragmatism, patriotism, civic virtue, non-racism, fair-mindedness, etc.) by screwing themselves over.
"I don't understand why you dead-enders on Bush Jr don't just pack it in and acknowledge what a remarkable failure he was. "
I know you don't. Not my problem to try to teach economics to leftists who find math impossible.
Reading suggestion: After the Fall, by Nicole Gelinas She actually does not blame the the Community Reinvestment Act, which I think was a big part of the real estate bubble. It got a million people into mortgages they could not afford.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democrat retirement plans. They were out of control and crashed the economy. If you want to blame Bush for not reining them in, I can go part way there but not all the way. The Democrats took Congress in 2006 and put th pedal the metal on housing.
Pedal to the metal....
I don't care what his current poll numbers say, Trump is nothing more than a joke.
Right now he can bubble because nobody's running attack ads. As soon as they do, it bursts. For a simple reason -- Trump's record. Between policy quotes from his 2000 book "The America We Deserve", pointing out his historical trail of political donations (including to Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Charlie Rangel), and his giving over $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation, he's dead to conservatives. Appealing to moderates based on the "competent businessman" theory will run into his record of going bankrupt running casinos.
Trump is a candidate the way Clay Aiken was a candidate in S. Carolina. Meanwhile Trump was queried this weekend about the specifics of his immigration plan... and had nothing.
MK, one question, whose loans failed first, triggering the bank collapse? If you answer that question you will understand why you are so wrong.
Michael K said...
The Democrats took Congress in 2006 and put th pedal the metal on housing.
One more question. What year did the housing bubble burst? It wasn't 2008. In 2006 the cake was already cooked by six years of Republican economic 'leadership'.
Blogger AReasonableMan said...
Michael K said...
The Democrats took Congress in 2006 and put th pedal the metal on housing.
One more question. What year did the housing bubble burst? It wasn't 2008. In 2006 the cake was already cooked by six years of Republican economic 'leadership'.
Republican economic leadership? I hope your criticism is coming from the same direction as mine.
Which is to say, the Republicans did a poor job of stopping the Democrats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yga7TlsA-1A
Every Democrat during these hearings were hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil, as they defended Fannie and Freddie. The blame I give to Republicans is that they never have the balls to stop the Democrats and do what they know is right.
Republicans tend to have the right answers, but don't have the spine to implement them.
Democrats have the wrong answers, but they do have the spine to implement them.
Which makes a criticism of both parties valid, but for completely different reasons.
"In 2006 the cake was already cooked by six years of Republican economic 'leadership'."
I hate to call you a liar, ARM, but you are a liar. Read the book I suggested for you. You might, just might but doubtful, learn something.
OK, ARM, here is the left's explanation.
The poorest homeowners had very large mortgages, whereas the richest had very small ones relative to the value of their homes. The chart shows that poor homeowners in the United States primarily owned housing assets, and those assets were highly leveraged.
Leverage can be a very dangerous thing for borrowers when their home values plummet. Continuing the example above, if someone has a $80,000 mortgage on a $100,000 home, and the home drops in value by 20 percent to $80,000, then the homeowner loses $20,000, or 100 percent of their equity in the home. Home prices fell 20 percent, but the homeowner lost 100 percent. That’s the effect of leverage!
The devastating effect on poor homeowners can be seen in the chart below, where we track the evolution of homeowner net worth from 1992 to 2010 for the poorest and richest quintiles.
Now, what was your point again ?
It is tiring to try to talk to people who will not listen and will not learn.
Assuming Trump is ridiculous. Why aren't a bunch of prominent politicians (e.g. Walker) even more ridiculous.
Trump did make (supposedly) make billions. Walker's (essentially) a life long government worker from a state with less than six million people.
What's more ridiculous, Trump saying he'll charge a fee to Mexico for illegals, or Walker saying that he'll defeat terrorism the way he dealt with protestors in WI?
On the other side, it was ridiculous for BHO to say that Guantanamo would be closed shortly after he was elected.
For some reason we're ok with the political ridiculousness that we're trained to accept. Why is it that it's the institutional proponents and beneficiaries of the accepted ridiculousness who are the quickest to deride Trump? Why do so many, unthinkingly, follow their lead?
You can't stop Trump, you can only hope to contain him!
It's the runaway Trump Express, all aboard!
President Trump!
So if PB&J Ritmo?
Casey Stengel, when he first began coaching the Mets, and they were losing big, said: “You look up and down the bench and you have to say to yourself, can’t anybody here play this game?”
That’s what I want to say to the Republican bench as they face the Trump phenomenon. Based on current polls Trump would lose the general election if he got the nomination because his negatives are sky high. Yet polls tell us he’s the most popular candidate with the base of the Republican party. And the reason is blazingly obvious: he’s not afraid to embrace politically incorrect positions on illegal immigration, he promises the return of the American Dream, and he attacks the Democrat press with glee.
Trump’s not going to get the Republican nomination because Republican Party activists are not going to support him. Which makes me wonder why the Republican bench lacks the smarts to shut up and stop attacking him. Trump’s popularity among the public – especially the Republican public – has nothing to do with Trump as a person. He’s best known as a real estate developer, a shameless self-promoter with a series of trophy wives. He has a history of supporting liberal programs and liberal politicians plus he’s braggadocios, egotistical and arrogant.
Trump-the-man is not leading in the polls; it’s Trump-the-idea that is getting support. Here’s his idea in a nutshell: the problem with America is its government, not its people. His message embodies the spirit of America even as his persona is off-putting. Ronald Reagan said “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." In a way, Trump-the-message is Reagan without Reagan’s amiability.
That’s why McCain’s attack on Trump’s supporters as “crazies” backfired. People don’t think that unlimited immigration of poor people, many of whom are welfare cases, criminals or unskilled laborers taking American jobs is a good idea. And when Trump backhanded McCain on his hero status he wasn’t “destroyed” like the conventional wisdom said he would be. And it’s why Rubio, Perry, Jeb and others, who misunderstand the Trump phenomenon, didn’t help themselves.
It was not wise for one of Walker’s supporter to refer to Trump as a “dumdum” because it gave Trump an excuse to counter-attack, something that Trump does with glee.
If the people you want to woo are the ones who like Trump’s ideas you don’t attack the man who articulates those ideas; you embrace them. Ted Cruz is the only one on the Republican bench who seems to understand that. He stood on the floor of the Senate and called Senator McConnell a liar. That resonates.
In flyover country people are wondering why the Republicans are not doing the things they promised to get elected. They are ready to believe that the Republican establishment doesn’t care about the middle class, and they don’t want the Democrats’ charity.
They’ve seen good paying jobs in Appalachian coal mines become casualties of the president’s war on coal. They’ve lost solid, middle class work on the oil rigs of the Gulf to a president more obsessed with tomorrow’s temperatures than today’s families. And they’ve bid goodbye to Midwestern factory jobs while the president saddles employers with oppressive taxes and regulations.
They’re the autoworkers whose fathers punched in at $30 an hour, and they’re trying to get by on a $15 hourly wage. They’re the legion of middle class workers who once had employer-provided health insurance, but now have to pay for most of their medical costs themselves.
People went to the polls and elected Republicans. But instead of good jobs they find the Republican establishment supporting an Obama trade deal that will ship more jobs overseas. They hear Jeb and Rubio talk about “comprehensive immigration reform” and know that it’s all about cheap Mexican labor taking their jobs. They were promised an end to ObamaCare but found that the Republican establishment was fine with funding it. They like their guns and their religion but find that Republican appointees to the Supreme Court think they’re bigots and yahoos who had better get their head straight and bake cakes for gay weddings.
So whose fault is it that a billionaire who gave more money to Democrats than Republicans now leads in the polls? You can only screw the people so many times before they get wise. The Democrats have managed to do that to their Black base for over half a century. It appears that the white, non-college working class Republican base is wising up faster.
If Republicans find themselves stymied by a billionaire huckster who many view as a stalking horse for a Hillary Presidency they have no one to blame but themselves.
Alex said...
So if PB&J Ritmo?
I'm going with that theory.
I hear the only person beating me in Iowa is Scott Walker.
I agree that is unfair, why should Scott Walker be the only one who gets to beat Donald Trump? You’d think that there are more deserving candidates that would be lined up around several blocks each holding various implements of mayhem who should also get the chance.
Feelings are the absolute adjudicator of all things, per leftists, trumping mere reality, facts, evidence, procedure, laws, rules.
Pun intended.
So how Trump feels, or wants to feel, should create the reality he desires.
If Trump is "ridiculous", then what is Rush Limbaugh again?
An entertainer who sticks to his entertainment program, rather than run for office.
I think calling Trump a dumb dumb properly reduces the Trump phenomenon to the level it deserves and if Trump responds, all that will do is give Walker more press. Walker needs more press, and he has a flair for refocusing the press.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा