"The latest Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll shows billionaire Trump with the support of 23 percent of likely Republican caucus participants, followed by Carson at 18 percent. When first and second choices are combined, Carson is tied with Trump."
Is Trump clearing the path for Carson? Trump may be causing people to recognize that they don't want a traditional politician more than that the nontraditional person they want is Trump.
August 30, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
66 comments:
I would take Carson over Trump. But then, I would take almost else anyone in the current crop over Trump.
Or maybe people are recognizing that a nontraditional politician doesn't have to be an obnoxious boor. Iowa is still part of the Midwestern nice belt.
I fear Trump supporters are going to wake up one morning feeling like they just spent a drunken night with Laslo Spatula.
For me, of the 74 candidates running for the R nomination, Trump is number 73. Not sure who is last, prolly the Bushster. I do love the Trump comedy show, just not my guy.
Carson would be OK, but there are several ahead of him. Carson would get the Clarence Thomas treatment.
What DavidD said.
Trump is growing on me a bit. He is doing something important. I still think he may fail to cross the finish line without falling but Carly Fiorina seems more likely to benefit. Carson is a very nice and extremely smart man. Running a neurosurgery department may not be enough executive experience.
Well, the 2012 Iowa caucuses were won by . . . Rick Santorum.
Social cons/theocons are still a big part of the active base there.
Like the rest of us, they may enjoy Trump talking smack to MSM, but he's not where their heart is.
@MichaelK: "He is doing something important."
In challenging old pieties, yes. Question is whether it will carry over to better candidates, without backfiring in actual, you know, elections.
"Question is whether it will carry over to better candidates, without backfiring in actual, you know, elections."
Yes, he is the ghost of Perot.
Saying Carson is "sneaking" up on Trump is racist.
White candidates "catch" up.
Sneaky thing you did there, Althouse.
I'm catching up to you.
I am Laslo.
Not likely. America doesn't need another black President.
Trump performs an invaluable service for America. He laughs off the political correctness that has enslaved 3 generations. He clears the way, makes smooth the path for those who can stand up to the deceit and emotionalism of Progressives. Scott Walker has walked the walk, stood up to the violence of Union parasites, and prevailed. Scott Walker is the best choice for President. Ted Cruz who has shown his mettle standing up against the foaming corruption of the Washington, DC establishment would be a good apprentice as Vice President.
@Ron
Carson does not act black.
In any way you want to construe that.
Dr. Carson would make an excellent surgeon general (or HHS director, perhaps).
I saw my first and the only one so far Ben Carson Car sticker in Denver couple of weeks ago.
"Dr. Carson would make an excellent surgeon general (or HHS director, perhaps)."
or Secretary of Education.
DavidD said...
I would take Carson over Trump. But then, I would take almost else anyone in the current crop over Trump.
8/30/15, 8:05 AM"
And Trump over any Democrat.
I'd really prefer someone with some business acumen, negotiation experience, and without that curious lack of general knowledge.....and I can do without the constant race baiting.
Ben Carson angered a lot of America's military veterans on Thursday.
Military Times, 28Aug15: "Presidential hopeful Ben Carson’s comments suggesting the Veterans Affairs Department should be eliminated drew quick condemnation from multiple veterans groups, who called the idea short-sighted and ill-informed."
Link:
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/veterans/2015/08/28/carson-dump-va-reaction/71312038/
How did angering military veterans work out for John Kerry in 2004?
Carson would probably not do anything else but Pres. Education, HHS, etc are bureaucracies, not a good use of his intelligence.
Would Carson have stood up to the Fox moderators and tossed Anchor-baby Jorge Ramos, or would he have nodded along like Michael Steele when the panel were comparing Republicans to Nazis? I regretfully expect the former.
[Trump] laughs off the political correctness that has enslaved 3 generations. He clears the way, makes smooth the path for those who can stand up to the deceit and emotionalism of Progressives.
The Dynamite before the Paving Machines.
Saying Carson is "sneaking" up on Trump is racist.
At least the Professor didn't have Dr. Carson "hustling" to "fetch up".
Carson's polling data in Iowa is trending upwards fast -- quick, let's make him the new future frontrunner in yet another media effort to get at Trump. After all, Trump wouldn't dare trounce Carson.
Did I miss something?
As much as I admire Dr. Carson, I would not want him as President.
Surely, he, as a world-renowned pediatric neurosurgeon, understands the value of experience.
Not just any neurosurgeon, no matter how earnest, can separate conjoined twins.
I dom't know If Carson would make a great front runner. He's too measured and soft spoken. He'd make a PHENOMENAL VP nod.
Carla Fiorina/Carson/ Scott Walker/Carson Marco Rubio/Carson. Bobby Jinal/ Carson.
except for
And after 8 years of Obama, people think they can trust these poll numbers..
"How did angering military veterans work out for John Kerry in 2004?"
I think Carson is recommending closing the VA and letting vets get private care. In the Obamacare era, that is no help. Get rid of Obamacare and it might work.
We would still need the VA or something like it for rehab.
"How did angering military veterans work out for John Kerry in 2004?"
Those veterans have been waiting in line for months. I'd be pissed, too.
Not just any neurosurgeon, no matter how earnest, can separate conjoined twins.
Are the D and R parties the "conjoined twins"?
Michael K said... [hush][hide comment]
"How did angering military veterans work out for John Kerry in 2004?"
I think Carson is recommending closing the VA and letting vets get private care. In the Obamacare era, that is no help. Get rid of Obamacare and it might work.
We would still need the VA or something like it for rehab.
Four Hospitals within 12 miles of my home. Mt neighbor, a bronze star recipient who left a kidnet in Viet Nam has to drive 35 miles to see a Dr. Brother in law, Viet vet waited over a year each for back and knee operations. That just ain't right.
Funny that two non-politicians with no government experience are at the top.
Would it make any sense to elect one of them president? Looking at it another way, would they likely be worse that the other contenders? They at least are people with significant success in life, as opposed to just success in getting elected. I would add successful governors as persons with significant success in life.
We need presidents to get the big issues right. I might be comfortable with Carson. Not Trump. Walker, Perry, Bush and Christie have been successful governors.
One thing Trump shows is how to respond to hostile liberal media people. The question by the CNN reporter was great. The reporter asked about "protesters" outside. Trump responded accurately with how it was an attempt to inaccurately describe the situation. Republicans have been trained to be nice to the media and just parry with their talking points. I think the Trump approach is better, because is makes him look stronger, shows the bias of the reporter and deter future biased questions. Carly does it pretty effectively in a different way - she turns the question around to the extreme positions of Hillary. The media person asking biased questions is almost always helpless when confronted.
"Blogger D.E. Cloutier said...
Ben Carson angered a lot of America's military veterans on Thursday.
Military Times, 28Aug15: "Presidential hopeful Ben Carson’s comments suggesting the Veterans Affairs Department should be eliminated drew quick condemnation from multiple veterans groups, who called the idea short-sighted and ill-informed.
How did angering military veterans work out for John Kerry in 2004?"
As a veteran, I think the VA has outlived its lack of usefulness. It is corrupt and horribly mismanaged. For those veterans needing care, give them a card or vouchers to receive care at civilian facilities. They'll get better care at lower cost. .
As it plays out, I more and more see Trump as Hermes. He is bringing us out of a bad place and into a good place.
His hair style gives him a Hermes look. His air force gives him his winged heels. And his staff with two intertwined snakes gies him the dual wisdom neede to succeed. And he gives the award out for the most beautiful Goddess in his pageants.
I second Larry J's comment.
As Carson moves up in the polls, he will become more visible and scrutinized by the public and the media.
As he becomes more visible and scrutinized, he will fall back in the polls. Not because he is a bad candidate, he isn't. I like Carson and he is a top choice of mine.
However, he is an imperfect candidate. And his imperfections can't hold up against the perfections of more unknown candidates.
Somehow, Trump is unique in this regard. Carson isn't unique in the same way Trump is.
This can only help Trump. It will build an inevitable narrative. Carson will be the first "anybody but Trump" candidate. But like the 2012 cycle, the anybody but Trump candidate will fade, over and over again.
You'll see.
"Mt neighbor, a bronze star recipient who left a kidnet in Viet Nam has to drive 35 miles to see a Dr. Brother in law, Viet vet waited over a year each for back and knee operations. That just ain't right. "
Yup. The VA should be good but it is another bureaucracy and has been infected with the same lack of accountability. Get the acute care out of it and let it run the chronic rehab which it is actually pretty good at.
Acute care of any kind will be crippled until Obamacare goes away.
The non-traditional candidate we need is Carly Florina.
traditionalguy wrote: As it plays out, I more and more see Trump as Hermes. He is bringing us out of a bad place and into a good place.
Add to that his mercurial nature.
I am with Larry J and Big Mike. Michael K probably has a good point about rehab, but if it's needed and there's money in it it can probably be done better in the private sector. One of my college friends is a, now retired, orthopedist who interned at a VA hospital in the 70's. He says it was as bad then as now.
The Veterans cabinet post and what it does has been a sc since it was an arm of the post Civil War Presidential politics. It had the mass voting bloc of the GAR and their children organized with commemorations and annual awards ceremonies that erected monuments at the courthouse and at the battlefields. If that wasn't enough, it was also the original Federal Benefit slush fund that
Politicians dared not to decline to fund.
Carson is right of course. But the tentacles of politics run deep in the VA.
I was in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War (volunteered, not drafted).
1. According to the article, Carson said, "Veterans Affairs should be folded in under the Department of Defense?”
Do you think putting the VA under DoD, fighting for money every year against military programs, is a good idea?
Do you want the Secretary Defense to manage an even bigger bureaucracy?
2. Larry J's comment: "For those veterans needing care, give them a card or vouchers to receive care at civilian facilities. They'll get better care at lower cost."
The FBI says, "Health care fraud costs the country tens of billions of dollars a year."
I don't know which way is actually more cost-effective. Do you?
3. I read the horror stories, too. I know two guys who had problems with the VA. I also more than two dozen vets who are happy with the VA.
I can string together a series of isolated incidents to make any organization look bad.
4. What makes you think the doctor down the street has the experience and expertise to deal with the unique medical problems of some vets?
5. My last question is political: Was it wise for Carson to get into a unnecessary fight with veteran organizations at this point in time?
I don't think so.
Correction to my last comment: ". I also more than two dozen vets who are happy with the VA" should read "I also know more than two dozen vets who are happy with the VA."
Both Trump and Carson are impressive men. If you met them at a dinner party or school fundraiser or on the golf course, and didn't know anything about politics, you'd think, met this cool neurosurgeon and this big-hitter developer, great guys.
They have each built stellar professional careers. In the USA, we used to celebrate such success stories. Myself, I still do.
As for politics, that's get trickier. Neither has held elective office. They've never had to deal with the political power of unions or leftists. Trump, however, has mucho experience in front of a camera from his tv show, so he handles the gotcha questions like an expert. He just hits back, and they slink away like Jorge Ramos.
And, of course, as President, either of these men would be infinitely better than the scheming, corrupt Hillary Clinton or the socialist Bernie Sanders.
The question is, Can they win the General Election? Not theoretically, but based on data.
My simple answer is, I'm not just not sure, let's see how the primaries play out. Let's give them each a fair shake.
So, that's what I'm doing. Certainly not jumping on the Trump bandwagon, but also not demonizing him.
I agree with Carson. The care of veterans with actual war wounds or other injuries should be folded in under the DoD. Veterans needing general medical care that was promised as a benefit at their time of service should be included in a government "insurance" program.
Fiorina!
Caring about veterans is a fiction, as far as Americans are concerned. There was a rush of memorial stadiums after WWII and that was that.
How could Americans be so cruel? The idea was veterans got what they deserved, a free country.
Thank you for your service is a pretty recent meme gone PC.
It comes from a confusion of honoring those who are called and go, with veterans group politics playing on that.
Blogger D.E. Cloutier said...
I was in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War (volunteered, not drafted).
1. According to the article, Carson said, "Veterans Affairs should be folded in under the Department of Defense?”
Do you think putting the VA under DoD, fighting for money every year against military programs, is a good idea?
>>>do you think the VA doesn't have to fight for money each year???
Do you want the Secretary Defense to manage an even bigger bureaucracy?
>>>if he gets a competent administrator for a VA under his supervision, THAT person will be managing the VA bureauscracy, not the SecDef.
2. Larry J's comment: "For those veterans needing care, give them a card or vouchers to receive care at civilian facilities. They'll get better care at lower cost."
The FBI says, "Health care fraud costs the country tens of billions of dollars a year."
I don't know which way is actually more cost-effective. Do you?
>>> I dunno....pre-Obamacare how often did you hear non-veterans complaining they had to drive miles to see a specific doctor or wait months or years to get treatment??
3. I read the horror stories, too. I know two guys who had problems with the VA. I also more than two dozen vets who are happy with the VA.
>>>>funny, innit, how the latter aren't speaking up, but the former are, with specific complaints that have been verified by the media and Congressional investigations. Where's the public group (not secretly funded by the Obamanoids) that says the VA's just hunkey-dorey?
I can string together a series of isolated incidents to make any organization look bad.
>>>>SO WHAT??? You call that an "argument on the merits"???? You're essntially saying that ANY set of complaints is unjustified, by the very fact that SOME people aren't complaining!
4. What makes you think the doctor down the street has the experience and expertise to deal with the unique medical problems of some vets?
>>>False analogy. There are trauma specialists throughout the health care system. If faced with unique situations they consult with others. You simply ASSUME w/o evidence that vets have "unique" medical problems. Even if so, the specialists who handle them would still be in demand in the private sector, post VA.
5. My last question is political: Was it wise for Carson to get into a unnecessary fight with veteran organizations at this point in time?
>>>>>perhaps they, like you, will address the issues with the current scandalous situation at the VA, instead of simply getting "angry" and assuming that "all is well" at the VA.
The Fisking endeth.
If Carson is part oof the current "crop" in the "field" of candidates, is that a racist statement? Is Tom "Cotton" running? Where's the outrage and the riots? Walker/Cruz 2016! -CP
"a good point about rehab, but if it's needed and there's money in it it can probably be done better in the private sector."
The VA has for years had a good program for specific war wounds which, with IEDs, are mostly amputations. Private care is pretty good but is mostly concerned with diabetics and elderly. Young healthy amputees are more a challenge and the VA has done pretty well with them AFAIK.
Obama and the Democrats have politicized every bureaucracy so I don't know now. My only VA experience was a psych hospital when I was a medical student and that was pretty good. Also a long time ago.
If we are going to discuss veterans and health care, isn't the first step to differentiate between the ones who get injured and the ones who don't? If a person spends 30 years in the military and doesn't get a hangnail, then, on separation, they should get Medicare like most people. The ones who are injured should continue to receive special care.
The VA hospital system is actually closer to socialized medicine than Obamacare is. In fact, the VA hospitals most closely resemble the British NHS. (Even Canada's single-payer system has private hospitals and private practice.)
There's no longer any excuse to keep a socialized medicine system for the veterans. There are excellent civilian rehab hospitals, and veterans can get vouchers instead that can get them treatment at America's finest world-class private teaching hospitals.
So the front-runner barely has 5 more points than a guy without any personality whatsoever. Heck of a field, Republicans!
My only VA experience was a psych hospital when I was a medical student and that was pretty good.
As a student or as a patient?
As much as I admire Dr. Carson, I would not want him as President.
Surely, he, as a world-renowned pediatric neurosurgeon, understands the value of experience.
Apparently he surely doesn't.
But he's a Republican. Republicans are allowed to use their inability to understand something as a credential.
What Larry J said at 12:41 is right on. Then we should move the Veterans Home Loan program to the FHA where loan grants are done in cooperation with private lending institutions.
That leaves the VA with administering health and disability claims, death benefits and military cemeteries. Agency incompetence already proves that this DOD agency will continue to screw up even reduced functions - so the Social Security Administration is likely to be the only government agency with enough locations to serve veterans.
Carson is a very nice and extremely smart man. Running a neurosurgery department may not be enough executive experience.
The Johns Hopkins Neurosurgery Department lacks the immaturity and recklessness that would need to be managed in a Republican presidential administration.
The non-traditional candidate we need is Carly Florina.
This.
Carson will have to erase doubts about his 2nd amendment positions.
Rhythm and Balls said...
"The Johns Hopkins Neurosurgery Department lacks the immaturity and recklessness that would need to be managed in a Republican presidential administration."
And this experience would be way to honest and forthcoming with public records requests for a democratic administration. They don't delete enough emails to work for Obama or Hillary.
R&B's: "The Johns Hopkins Neurosurgery Department lacks the immaturity and recklessness that would need to be managed in a Republican presidential administration."
There did seem to be a rather substantial lack of the "necessary" and "brilliant" and "Non-Cowboy-y" and "3-dimensional Chess-y" little plastic "Reset" buttons in the last Republican administration.
Plus, no pharmacists on the Bush staff.
Significant hurdles to overcome, clearly.
Further, one would be hard-pressed to identify a more appropriate gift to the Queen of England than a compendium of Obama's "greatest" speeches.
Now that Ritmo has awakened, the thread will go to shit.
Bye,.
I suppose we should be grateful that Obama and his staff didn't think to have ipods loaded up with his speeches that had been translated into Austrian prepared for wider European distribution.
I wonder if anyone here has ever been in a VA hospital as either in or out patient?
My first experience was about 15 years ago when my brother in law had a stroke. He got great treatment at the San Juan PR VA Hospital. My son, when in Med school did a rotation there and convinced me to sign up. I did and have had nothing but absolutely first class treatment there.
A couple of years ago VA opened an outpatient clinic in the next town over from me. I go about twice a year for routine visits and am treated very well. Always saw the same doc in SJ and always see the same (different)one in outpatient.
I am not retired, I have no service related injury. I have to pay for the service but that is $50 per visit and have to pay for my meds. $8/month per prescription.
I have no experience with VA anywhere else.
Having said that, There is no reason someone like me should be cared for by the VA. I suspect that generally, much of the VA services could be handled better by private doctors and services. There are some services that VA could provide better and tose should remain. I suspect that those would mainly be dealing with service related injuries.
What Carson said makes nothing but sense to me.
John Henry
@Drago Did you mean "Obama and his corpsemen"?
D.E. Cloutier said...
I was in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War (volunteered, not drafted).
1. According to the article, Carson said, "Veterans Affairs should be folded in under the Department of Defense?”
Do you think putting the VA under DoD, fighting for money every year against military programs, is a good idea?
Do you want the Secretary Defense to manage an even bigger bureaucracy?
2. Larry J's comment: "For those veterans needing care, give them a card or vouchers to receive care at civilian facilities. They'll get better care at lower cost."
The FBI says, "Health care fraud costs the country tens of billions of dollars a year."
I don't know which way is actually more cost-effective. Do you?
For a case study in how the VA operates, you can start with the new hospital they're building near Denver. It's about a billion (with a "b") dollars over budget. Have you ever heard of a private entity spending over $1.6 billion to build a single hospital? Off hand, I don't know of a single US government ran health care system that could be used as a model for efficiency and good service. Government agencies don't have to worry about cost effectiveness because they know they can always hit up the taxpayers to cover their inevitable shortfalls. People don't care as much when they're spending other people's money as when they're spending their own. This is a problem with all third-party (or single) payer health insurance systems.
As for medical fraud, most of it is most prevalent with government health care systems like Medicare and Medicaid. The VA had its own fraud taking place where administrators were cooking the books to cover up the poor care veterans were (and are) receiving so they (the administrators) could get bigger bonuses. This was widespread across the VA but to date only a single person has been fired. To my knowledge, none have been prosecuted. In fact, the VA was given at least a billion dollars more money so they've proven that when you're a bureaucracy, crime pays quite well indeed.
Post a Comment