This is huge! The big man makes a big splash and the cascade begins. From t
he NYT report:
The endorsement came a day after Mr. Rubio, in a withering debate performance, turned his guns on Mr. Trump for the first time, and followed up this morning, calling Mr. Trump a “con artist.”
Mr. Trump welcomed the endorsement with warm praise for the New Jersey governor. “He’s been my friend for many years, he’s been a spectacular governor,” said Mr. Trump, standing with Mr. Christie at a press conference in Fort Worth, Texas, for the endorsement.
“I am proud to be here to endorse Donald Trump,” said Mr. Christie, noting they have been friends for a decade. Mr. Trump “will do exactly what needs to be done to make America a leader around the world again,” said Mr. Christie.
That vastly overshadows Marco Rubio's bad comedy routine this morning as he (of all people!) makes fun of Trump for sweating: “First, he had this little makeup thing applying, like makeup around his mustache, because he had one of those sweat mustaches." And stoops to talking about Trump wetting his pants:
Then, Mr. Rubio said, he asked for a full-length mirror. “I don’t know why,” he said, winding up to his punch line: “Maybe to make sure his pants weren’t wet.”
In fairness to Rubio,
Trump made a very big deal last night about the water pouring out of Rubio:
"He’s a meltdown guy. I mean, I’m looking at him, he’s just pouring sweat, I’ve never seen anything like it. I don’t know what the problem is, but he’s just pouring down sweat. We have to have somebody that doesn’t sweat."
AND: I see that
Christie Trump is responding to Rubio on the makeup issue:
[H]e saw Mr. Rubio backstage with “a pile of makeup,” he said. “I said Marco, easy with the makeup, you don’t need that much.”
Posts
244 comments:
1 – 200 of 244 Newer› Newest»This should cancel out Mitt's endorsement of Rubio.
So Trump builds the bridges and Christie shuts them down?
(For the humor impaired, that was a joke.)
I recommend that all our liberal friends who intend on buying foreign real estate should do so now. I imagine the real estate agents will start tacking on a post Super Tuesday surcharge.
Chris cut a great deal to become VP or AG. New York values.
Trump endorsed by a certified loser.
Trump and Christie are so, so unlikable. They have the bully demographic locked down.
Vice President Christie?
You know what they say: "It ain't over 'til the fat man sings."
Did I just hear Begley's head explode?
Don't cry Begley
It's just entertainment.
When we wake up next year, George Washington will be serving as President again, with Thomas Jefferson and Abe Lincoln in his cabinet.
It's all good.
Hope Christie won't be Trump's VP. We can only handle one loud mouth ass at a time.
Heads exploding all over twitter. He must have cut a deal and been paid off, they screech.
It couldn't possibly be that some people prefer Trump.
I hope he makes him AG.
Maybe Rubio should call Trump "louche."
Next to Trump, the one Republican candidate I hated most was Christie.
I hated Christie for his shameless pork-barrel politicking with the Not-Really-A-"Hurricane" Sandy bill.
You want more federal pork? You want deals with east coast Dems? You'll love President Trump.
Two assholes that deserve each other.
Christie as Attorney General would be a brilliant move.
I have been saying this for months. Christie and the Donald are bosom buddies. You might even call them cronies due to their long-term symbiotic relationship as Governor of NJ and billionaire businessman with interests in Atlantic City. That is why Christie avoided attacking Trump the entire time.
And people are kidding themselves if they think Christie still believed he had a path to the nomination when he went after Rubio in the debate. No, the truth is that was Christie's first hatchet job as a Trump surrogate. He was already toast and he knew it.
Make no mistake, the fat man is going to be pilloried by the GOP for this, and his very public embrace of Obama will resurface in an attack ad. I doubt Christie really cares since he's term-limited and probably angling for a role in the Trump administration. If Trump does not win the nomination, thought, Christie ought to consider becoming a Democrat.
Hah, well, now we know why he ripped Rubio in that NH debate.
Trump should go Full New York/Jersey Alpha Male and pick Guiliani as VP, and make Christie AG.
Chris Christie?
That's a strike against Trump.
“Maybe to make sure his pants weren’t wet.”
That may be the first actually funny line of his campaign.
Housewives of the Republican Party.
Giuliani is also backing Trump.
I think there's more a-coming. Logjams breaking and all that.
BDNYC, you make an excellent point about Christie going after Rubio on behalf of Trump in the debate. Something I hadn't thought of.
Trump said Rubio was troweling on the makeup before the debate. Don't let them see you sweat, especially Trump.
In every debate Donald Trump was friendly to Chris Christie - or at least wanted to cite him as a witness about the fact that Atlantic City went down (Chris Christie always ignored that)
This surprises me. I still would like to make sure this is not from the Onion.
It probably really is based on personal contact. It really shows, again, that Chris Christie has no judgment.
Althouse, you really underestimate Rubio's wet pants joke. It was pure gold. Scott Adams would have to approve, if he's being honest, because the imagery is so powerful. Trump peeing his pants is not just about his cowardice, which is an obvious object of the joke ... it is also Trump being a septuagenarian who has lost control of his bladder. It's a brilliant joke.
Perfect pair; Trump and Christie.
A failed and bankrupt casino operator and his enabler.
Christie was really shameless on The Sandy Pork Bill:
http://www.breitbart.com/blog/2013/04/30/joel-pollak-battles-chris-christie-on-twitter-over-sandy-relief-funds/
Giuliani is another Republican whose blind side is with all of the federal pork he wants for New York City.
Senator John McCain -- always hated by Tea Party types -- was a paragon of virtue on that Sandy Pork Bill. He and former Sen. Coburn battled the waste and tried to expose it.
Christie trying to screw the establishment for not supporting him. I think in most debates he had interesting things to say and was preferable to Robio or Cruz.
I think that understand the Trump people a little better today. I think that they're sick and tired of these fucking pussies and assholes about whom they can't do a fucking thing. But there's this one candidate, and he's a dick. And dicks may be dicks, but they also fuck pussies and assholes. And if we can't do anything about these fucking evil pusssies and assholes and the fucked-up world they're dragging us kicking and screaming into, then the next best thing is to send someone who'll fuck them. Will Trump get done what needs to be done? No way! But you know what? Other people have promised to get things done, and they ain't done shit. And while Trump may not get things done, maybe he'll at least cause those pussies and assholes we hate to stroke out. Because if we can't save America, maybe we can at least kill the fuckers who killed us.
Is that about it? Is that the argument?
That is, "we can't save America, but at least we can cause the editorial board of the New York Times to have heart attacks." Is that the theory here?
Yes!!!
The wife and I have been wondering if The Donald would pick Kasich as Veep. Now it is clear he will take Christie.
I think Trump wins Ohio anyway. And with Christie he is going to win New York and Pennsylvania.
Besides Christie will attack the enemy like a good trial lawyer. But Kasich only talks about his 1990s glory days when he was the one who did Newt Gingrich's job, or something.
YoungHegelian said...
I recommend that all our liberal friends who intend on buying foreign real estate should do so now.
Can President Trump issue an executive order holding everyone accountable for their threats? It's been done before.
Maybe Christie can get Trump to build a new tunnel to New Jersey with all those ready shovels lying around.
Is that about it? Is that the argument?
Yes, that is the argument. Along with, Dakha Dakha Jihad.
America, Fuck Yeah!
AND: I see that Christie is responding to Rubio on the makeup issue:
[H]e saw Mr. Rubio backstage with “a pile of makeup,” he said. “I said Marco, easy with the makeup, you don’t need that much.”
It was Trump who told him to go easy with the makeup.
East Coast Democrat endorses East Coast Democrat. Readers shocked.
Trump will win, since it has been proven, that whomever Christie hugs is the winner.
The Trump Phobics need to watch Christie's endorsement speech. He summed it up. He said from personal knowledge that Trump is an experienced executive who fights to win. He wants that man fighting for the American middle class against both parties that have long cooperated in a Wall Street/DC Axis of Theft.
Ann Althouse wrote
This is huge!
It's yuuge. Get it right next time.
Blogger Oso Negro said...
East Coast Democrat endorses East Coast Democrat. Readers shocked.
The new definition of Democrat must be, people I oppose.
Be careful. If you keep calling good people Democrats, you'll give Democrats a good name.
Re: Simon:
That is, "we can't save America, but at least we can cause the editorial board of the New York Times to have heart attacks." Is that the theory here?
Well, not just the editors of the New York Times. Also the leadership of the Republican Party, and half the otherwise-unfireable civil service, who have promised us they will resign if Trump is elected President.
"This should cancel out Mitt's endorsement of Rubio."
Mitt made a bit of a fool of himself by talking about Trump's tax returns. Harry Reid was all over it right away.
Of course the WSJ hates Trump, too. They should read Peggy Noonan's column.
The Trump Crowd probably doesn't care about NPR and its coverage of events like this. I'm first in line, to observe NPR's liberal bias whenever I can do so credibly and carefully.
But these kinds of stories will write themselves, with or without any NPR "bias":
Christie: calling Trump's ban-the-Muslims plan ridiculous
Christie: wondering why the major networks allow Trump to phone in interviews from his apartment, wearing "jammies."
Christie, on Trump's qualifications to be president: "Donald's a great guy and a good person, but I just don't think he's suited to be President of the United States... I don't think his temperament is suited for that and I don't think his experience is."
http://www.npr.org/2016/02/26/468273477/new-jersey-gov-chris-christie-endorses-donald-trump
Also, a Trump / Christie ticket would be a little heavy on the endomorphic look. He needs someone trimmer to balance him out.
I'm honestly a little surprised Rubio attacked Trump last night. He looked like he had a nice path to the VP slot in his future, playing Robin to Trump's Fat Batman.
Al Sharpton has joined those who say they will leave the country if Trump is elected.
This could become a landslide!
But these kinds of stories will write themselves, with or without any NPR "bias":
Have you never paid attention to a primary before? This is always the way it happens. Always. The candidates attack each other, then they come together when its done.
This is huge!
Cannonball!
I think it's more like desperate man wants a date to the prom.
The Donald just weakly tried to steal the pee joke by saying he saw Rubio leave a puddle on the ground. Very pathetic. Oh and he's still saying "competition" and "state lines" and "it's going to be so beautiful" about his healthcare plan.
The Donald is clearly rattled. I'm loving the mockery.
The cascade begins. Like the first ball in a long string of ball chain, headed over the edge of a cup.
Not really a surprise. It was pretty clear after Christie's lame attempt to take out Rubio that Trump had offered Christie full rights to the buffet at one of his casinos.
Christie for Secretary of Transportation!
Trump is being Trump but Rubio is now changing who he is. It was fine for him to knock Trump back a few times last night, but attack mode doesn't work for him. He's the smooth talking optimist. He needs to go back to his regular mode.
George Will suggested Christie as "Trump-lite."
Will George follow?
Trump des Willes
OK Trumpbots. Let's say he wins the presidency. Then what? Who's going to populate the federal bureaucracy to work for him? Slack jawed yokels like Sheriff Joe? Are you insane?
Oh and the Donald is talking now about re-writing libel laws, whatever that means.
Trump just said he would effectively repeal the First Amendment and New York Times v Gertz.
One RINO endorses another RINO.
YoungHegelian said...
I recommend that all our liberal friends who intend on buying foreign real estate should do so now.
I saw Al Sharpton threatened to leave the US if Trump wins.
It's like there is a conspiracy to make me vote for Trump.
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse...
"I'm honestly a little surprised Rubio attacked Trump last night. He looked like he had a nice path to the VP slot in his future,"
I am, too. Maybe he got wind of the Christie thing.
Trump is given to empty threats, unlike Obama who I take very seriously.
"Trump just said he would effectively repeal the First Amendment and New York Times v Gertz." I saw the clip and it looks like he was threatening the "malice" part of the decision. I doubt he has a case but it might be a brush back pitch.
Reagan fired the PATCO controllers to show Breshnev he was serious. The "dead microphone" thing was another brush back to Moscow.
From the article: Seeing his political career facing an abrupt conclusion after his failed presidential campaign, he expressed his anger Friday at Senator Marco Rubio, whom he was said to be upset with, blaming the “super PAC” backing the Florida senator for halting his momentum in New Hampshire with a string of slash-and-burn ads.
There was mention in the article about which Trump policies Christie finds compelling, just that Trump will do exactly what needs to be done to make America a leader around the world again.
Christie is just ticked off, at Republicans in general (at least those who faulted him for hugging Obama in 2012), and Rubio in particular.
I am waiting for one specific policy proposal Trump supporters believe, righteously, that a President Trump will accomplish. Put your marker down so that we may measure your perspicuity.
Prof. Althouse, you are vastly overestimating the following that Chris Christie has in the Republican Party.
Christie finished in 10th place, with 1.8% of the vote, in Iowa. He finished in 6th place in New Hampshire with 7.4%, his single best showing -- and that in another northeastern state. And of course, he was gone before South Carolina, having run out of money or any hope for continuing. He won not a single delegate. That puts him in company with, for example, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Jim Gilmore, and so forth.
This is something that is newsworthy, sorta, kinda -- but only because it marks the end of Chris Christie's political career in the Republican Party, not because it's going to help Trump or swing any votes.
The only word I can think of for Christie today is "craven." Two-thirds of the Republican Party is surely saying to themselves that which I'm saying, which is: Chris Christie is dead to me. He doesn't have the excuse of stupidity, and he certainly knows better than to fall for Trump's lies, so that makes Chris Christie an active co-conspirator in Donald Trump's con job.
Freeman Hunt said...The cascade begins. Like the first ball in a long string of ball chain, headed over the edge of a cup.
Those things work in physics because of gravity. In chemistry, we call it thermodynamics.
The Republicans thought they had those forces on their side. They misread Nature.
The obese Obama-hugger gives a big fat kiss to Trump. Fatso serves the strong man.
eric said...
But these kinds of stories will write themselves, with or without any NPR "bias":
Have you never paid attention to a primary before? This is always the way it happens. Always. The candidates attack each other, then they come together when its done.
Right. I was waiting for you, of all people, to suggest such a thing. Trump and Christie, just like all other politicians. Playing games with what they say. Not really meaning anything. Words, just for the sake of how they sound. Political gamesmanship. Rolling over for each other. Keeping the federal money spigots flowing.
"Prof. Althouse, you are vastly overestimating the following that Chris Christie has in the Republican Party."
You're wrong, the timing is great for Trump because it pushes aside the spin by the Republican elite that Trump took a beating from Cruz and Rubio last night.
chickelit:
Any comment about what conservatives thought?
"I like how trump tries to pronounce 'trowel', as he uses two syllables. I don't hold it against him though, as I know he's never really seen one."
He is a builder, do you really think he hasn't been on a construction site?
Ted Cruz should think seriously about dropping out of the race and endorsing Rubio.
And Rubio should think seriously about nominating Cruz for the Supreme Court vacancy.
Rubio in White House.
Cruz in Supreme Court.
That's a good fit for both men.
Of course Christie would endorse Trump. He loves embracing Democrats.
I don't know if this will help Trump but it was a good move for Christie. He went from being an second tier failed candidate to being the most influential Republican in American history (or so it seems by reading Althouse.)
Endorsements haven't made a whit of difference since the days when union members voted for whom they were told to vote. Many, many moons have passed since that political climate was extant.
I literally can't think of a single person - friend, relative, acquaintance - who ever made up their mind about for whom to vote because of an "endorsement".
They're only important to the media hungering for something about which to write or talk concerning the horse race.
Michael K
Reminds us of that great moment: the firing of every last one of the air traffic controllers. Those were the guys who told us it was impossible to replace them without planes crashing into each other, planes falling out of the sky, planes ramming each other on the tarmac. Poof. New guys came in and I was amazed, flying frequently as I did, that there was zero disruption. Some very slight delays based on safer spacing between aircraft. It was a beautiful thing that had an impact, for a while, on the entire bureaucracy. Maybe if Trump eliminates an entire agency the rest will be cowed, at least momentarily, into working full time.
Beldar,
2/3 of Republicans make up 16% of the electorate. The GOP is not flush with members, and the Dems are losing a lot of members as well.
Christie didn't do well with GOP primary voters. But he has some cachet with the national media, which trickles down to the electorate at large.
The national GOP is done. The national Dem is done as well. A growing number of voters don't identify with either of them, which is good news. Very good news.
Simon
Why, yes, that is the argument. Put well.
Birkel: I am waiting for one specific policy proposal Trump supporters believe, righteously, that a President Trump will accomplish. Put your marker down so that we may measure your perspicuity.
Uh oh, Birkel's back with the "markers" and the "policy specifics". Drama-queen core breach imminent.
(Btw, Your Majesty, you want "perspicacity" here, not "perspicuity". Things - arguments, documents - are perspicuous. People are perspicacious.)
RINO endorses statist liberal. What a SHOCKER!
It's incalculable what this means as Christie was so dynamic he gathered the support of DOZENS across the country!
When the change was made uptown and the Big Man joined the band
From the coastline to the city, all the little pretties raise their hands
I'm gonna sit back right easy and laugh
When Scooter and the Big Man bust this country in half
With the Tenth Avenue freeze-out
Tenth Avenue freeze-out...
"I literally can't think of a single person - friend, relative, acquaintance - who ever made up their mind about for whom to vote because of an "endorsement"."
Actually, my girlfriend, who wasn't sure about Cruz, appears quite likely to vote for him now based on Thomas Sowell's endorsement. An endorsement carries as much weight as the respect that is held for the endorser. Chris Christie gets negative respect from me, and as such, I consider this even more reason to reject Trump.
Moneywatch had a funny journalistic tick, common these days. They include a statement that the target never answered his phone, or the number was unlisted. But why would they need clarification. Is English their second language?
Trump has openly admitted that he uses tax strategies to reduce his load. Back in August, he said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that "I fight like hell to pay as little as possible." A request to his company for further clarification went unanswered on Friday.
What? They want a list of ways to reduce your taxes? I mean, you're Moneywatch - figure it out...
Blogger Birkel said...
I am waiting for one specific policy proposal Trump supporters believe, righteously, that a President Trump will accomplish. Put your marker down so that we may measure your perspicuity.
Isn't the only Trump supporter here Traditional guy?
As a Cruz supporter who likes Trump, I'll go with two things. Building a wall and tax cuts.
Chris Christie is gonna do what Chris Christie is gonna do. As governor of New Jersey he was very useful compared to the alternatives given he was willing to take on property taxes and the teachers union, these two issues being very interrelated. For those of you declaring him a RINO, you have not experienced the joy of the New Jersey RINO. Many of them are completely indistinguishable from Democrats on essentially every policy, and that is by New Jersey standards. Frankly, some are indistinguishable from the left-wing of the Democratic Party. Maybe you do not want him as President, and I can completely understand that, and the Obama hug was foolish, but his predecessors included Jon Corzine and Jim McGreevy, both of which should really be in prison. New Jersey did worse than Christie and will almost certainly do worse afterwards.
He'd probably make a good Attorney General. If he gets to prosecute Hillary Clinton, you will enjoy the experience.
chickelit said...
Freeman Hunt said, "The cascade begins. Like the first ball in a long string of ball chain, headed over the edge of a cup." ...Those things work in physics because of gravity. In chemistry, we call it thermodynamics.
I think it's more of a fluid dynamic study.
Are any of the anti-Trumps types here actually predicting that Cruz or Rubio are going to win a buncha states on Super Tuesday?
OH OOOOOO He's been endorsed by a RHINO. The horror. The lack of purity. OOOooooooohononono.
On the other hand, some one who is not strictly ideological, but nevertheless is tough and relentless and really wants to fix stuff, might have a better chance of getting the idiots in Congress to do something. A much better chance.
It's hard to govern without some compromises, which is the main reason Obama has governed so badly.
Put another way, if you insist on everything or nothing, you are going to wind up with nothing.
The crowd seemed to be strong as Trump at the noon announcement and rally in Ft. Worth. There must have been some TCU student power in the rally crowd today.
The wonderful Pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas was there too and gave Trump a better endorsement than Christie. Strong Christian Trump gave him back a pledge to defend Christianity.
"Touch not the Lord's anointed" comes to mind. That was the Ironsides battle cry in the Revolution of 1644 at Naseby, fighting alongside Scot Presbyterians, to defeat the Absolute monarchy and establish the rights of man and elected Parlements that came over with our ancestors from England to the New World. Now we need to make it great again.
eric: Isn't the only Trump supporter here Traditional guy?
No, I'd call myself a Trump supporter. (Strange bedfellows, eh?)
(Btw Birkel isn't interested in his question. In a previous thread some people wasted their time answering in good faith to the same shtick he's attempting to start up again here, ending in an impressive meltdown into incoherence on Birkel's part.)
Bay Area Guy said...
Are any of the anti-Trumps types here actually predicting that Cruz or Rubio are going to win a buncha states on Super Tuesday?
Speaking only for myself, I am not predicting anything. I'm very tempted to predict that Trump will get the Republican nomination, and then get schlonged in the general election. I can see how Trump might get the nomination, with a mere plurality of votes in the big primaries; but polling (and not just my personal hatred) makes me think that Trump has too many negatives to win. And that sensible middle-American voters will reject him.
Perhaps -- by doing everything he says he would not do -- Trump could get hooked up with some very good campaign financing, and SuperPAC support, and a massive public relations campaign could soften his image.
And the Democrats could implode.
So I am not suggesting that Trump won't win; I am arguing that he shouldn't win.
Texas is sometimes described as a winner take all primary. It's not. It's a complicated mixture of selection by statewide vote and by congressional district. Winner take all at the state level only kicks in if one candidate gets more than 50% of the vote. If you want to wade through it, look here. https://www.texasgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Texas-Delegate-Selection-Process-to-GOP-Convention.pdf
BDNYC,
"OK Trumpbots. Let's say he wins the presidency. Then what? Who's going to populate the federal bureaucracy to work for him? Slack jawed yokels like Sheriff Joe? Are you insane?"
I think this won't be much of an issue. First, the political appointees are only the Schedule C guys, so the vast majority of civil service and Schedule B employees will still be around. Second, the majority of political appointee candidates will have no problem accepting a gig in a Trump Administration - in fact, many will relish the opportunity to serve under a President (and a White House staff) that is likely to have such a poor command of the details that they will have free reign over their portfolio.
eric:
I appreciate your bravery. There will not be a wall. That is my position. We shall see.
Anglelyne:
Pedantry suits you well. When you are proven wrong, I will be here awaiting your denials.
"Prof. Althouse, you are vastly overestimating the following that Chris Christie has in the Republican Party."
I don't think that's her point. Remember she's been talking about smart educated people endorsing Trump, and a preference cascade? This could be it starting. The point isn't that Christie has millions of voters hanging on his every word, it's that he breaks the taboo of publicly supporting Trump.
And it should give those -- like me -- who think Trump will have trouble in the general election and that Rubio is more electable, some pause. Perhaps not. Chris Christie is a re-elected republican in a blue state. His judgment on electability might be better than mine, or yours.
I'm surprised Walker hasn't endorsed anyone yet. Or did he and I missed it?
The low life double personality Rubio is still hammering the assertion that Trump is a con Man. He is being paid well by the GOP Establishment guys to scorch the earth as they lose to Trump so Trump wins a destroyed Party's Nomination.
At this point they want Hillery as President, who takes their bribes and does their bidding. Trump is Kryptonite to the GOP Donor Class Taipans, such as Adelson and the Kochs.
The final Days of the Third Reich saw the same insanity. Hitler ordered all Germans to blow up everything in Germany and to die, all so the Russians and the Americans won only a scorched earth. And like the GOP, the Germans were so stupid that they did it.
eric said...
"Yes, that is the argument. Along with, Dakha Dakha Jihad. America, Fuck Yeah!"
Well, okay, but then that means that you've despaired of it ever getting fixed, right? I mean, otherwise it's just a self-indulgent primal scream, and a strangely-timed one when we have a potential nominee whom no one accuses of being a squish who won't try to get it done.
Here's my other question: What happens next? Say Trump gets the nomination, and when he wins, man, do those pussies and assholes get fucked hardcore. Al Sharpton leaves the country, Paul Krugman strokes out and turns into one of them Cylon hybrid jobbies, mass resignations from the fourth branch, you name it. The hammer of the gods is dropped on Cosmopolitan America, and all of us here in Red America go "yeaah! America, fuck yeah!" Okay? Fine. But what happens next? It's like going to Vegas, you get drunk, you blow a lot of money, you pick up a lady and have a riotous romp, but the next morning you're going to wake up and you're still stuck with all the same problems as before, only now you're broke and your head's sore. Sometimes it happens, but is it really something you'd call a plan?
Yes, yes, traditionalguy.
Name the achievements you foresee after a Trump nomination.
@Chuck
So I am not suggesting that Trump won't win; I am arguing that he shouldn't win
And that is totally fine for the primary.
But, it's getting late in the day. Come next Tuesday, the primary will be effectively over. And, going out on a limb, I predict Trump will win it. (sarcasm off)
So, when you predict that Trump gets schlonged in the General, isn't that more poetic license, than political advocacy? RCP average has him down only 2-3 behind Hillary in the General.
If the ultimate goal is to defeat Hillary (which in my mind it is), and if Trump has a more than reasonable shot at defeating her, then all this caterwauling about Trump is a red herring, unless you're going to argue that Trump is so bad, we should be voting for Hillary.
The problem is people are toggling back between: (1) I oppose Trump, because he can't win and (2) I oppose Trump because he will be a bad President.
Folks should simply pick 1 or 2, and not toggle between them.
As to 1, it is demonstrably false that Trump can't win. The RCP average says it's a close race.
As to 2, it is overbroad -- the better question is whether Trump would be a worse President than Hillary. Reasonable minds can differ, but I think Trump would be better than Hillary.
Ergo, despite my support of Rubio in the primary, I am learnin' to love Trump.
And, so should you.
Looking on from the outside, more or less, as a rather interested observer -
the US political process seems an exercise of futile thrashing among people, high and low, who are unwilling to recognize the gravity of the coming crises.
Abroad we have threats of global war; China in crisis and rattling sabers to distract its people, Russia I think likewise, unstable countries falling or on the brink. Everyone is buying arms at an rate not seen since the Cold War.
The global economy is dropping into a general crisis. It all feels rather like the 1930's.
In the US you have already had a Great Depression with comparable real unemployment rates, except that a small fraction of the population has insulated itself very well.
It is strange that the arguments in every direction, whether from the "populists" or the "technocrats", are so very trivial.
While some candidates sling mud, the Donald slings water on national tv. Apparently Rubio is all wet figuratively and literally.
The Hillary campaign really should think about simply putting Chuck and Begley on the payroll.
.....if they aren't already....
Re: eric:
Isn't the only Trump supporter here Traditional guy?
I'm not exactly a Trump supporter, but in my view the only Republican candidate left who could credibly serve as President is Kasich, and he has, to a first approximation, zero chance of becoming the nominee. Rubio and Cruz are basically Republican Obama -- articulate, sure, but woefully inexperienced. Prime VP material. I would bring up a comparison with Dan Quayle, but that would be unfair to Quayle, who had more and deeper relevant experience than either of them when he was nominated to serve as VP alongside Bush I.
In that set of circumstances, I am likely to support Trump if I end up voting for a Republican, and I would support Trump over Rubio or Cruz. I find Cruz's soupy lawyer-voice extremely off-putting and his (winning) tactics in Iowa loathsome (the voter violation form more than Carson rumours), but I would still support Cruz over Rubio, largely because of his demonstrated attitude towards illegal immigration, whatever empty excuses he may spew today. But -- you say -- isn't Trump probably going to be worse than Cruz and Rubio on all the issues? Well, sure. But if we are to be governed by rank inexperience, I think it's more important to punish the governing classes for their disloyalty than it is to grind out incremental policy victories here and there. Trump is that punishment. He is the flail of God -- if we had not committed great sins, God would not have visited a punishment like him upon us.
I would support Trump over Sanders. I would probably support Trump over Clinton II, for the reasons listed above, but I would be open to persuasion.
buwaya: "It is strange that the arguments in every direction, whether from the "populists" or the "technocrats", are so very trivial."
It has been said that we argue most vociferously over the most trivial. Something pertaining to academic lounges.
Birkel. I'm sure he will build his fucking wall. Want to place a friendly wager? I'll give you 3- 1 odds.
Winston Churchill - "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil." As a life-long Republican, I will have to swallow hard and make a favorable reference to Hillary. I just can't stomach the image of Trump sitting in the oval office. God help us all.
Rubio has no plans to stay in politics after this election. One has to assume that Rubio, at this point, is planning his post-politician career, serving his masters.
Trump has been so successful that it’s beginning to be boring. I almost wish Trump would lose a primary or two in order to see how he would react under adverse circumstances.
Prediction time:
Soon I believe various Republican politicians will begin to realize that Trump has long coattails and will hasten to buy a ticket on the Trump Train. Winning all the Super Tuesday states should do it.
After that should come the realization that Trump will also attract a sizeable portion of disaffected Democrat voters, especially after The Bern is shown to be a hot house flower unable to flourish outside of the East coast college enclaves of excited lefty campus activists. Sanders will be finished off by Hillary come the “SEC” primary but will continue his campaign until the Democrat convention, where he will be given a prominent spot on the convention stage in an attempt to win back his supporters.
Following that Trump will demolish Hillary during the general election – which will be a Trump landslide.
I wouldn’t be counting on Christie to be Trump’s VP pick. AG is more likely.
About Trump’s tax returns: He’ll release them after Super Tuesday, if they are not leaked by the IRS beforehand. They’ll be picked apart by various MSM types attempting to bring Trump down – but to no avail. They’ll be no “smoking gun” simply because Trump has been audited so many times that the returns have necessarily been scrubbed of any doubtful transactions years ago. No one will care except for TDS(Trump Derangement Syndrome) types. If Trump has broken tax laws he should at this moment be in jail but he hasn’t and isn’t – so, like so many issues thus far promoted by the MSM, the returns are really a non-issue.
But because the stakes are so high, the MSM, under the guise of “vetting” Trump, who they laughably claim has not yet been vetted, will let loose a couple of dirty tricks. These too will be ineffective.
On Hillary’s impending indictment: It ain’t gonna happen. Hillary knows about too many skeletons in the Obama closet. Obama will leave it to President Trump, who will decline to prosecute after a cursory investigation.
Balfegor: " Rubio and Cruz are basically Republican Obama -- articulate, sure, but woefully inexperienced."
Whoa. Completely unfair as both Rubio and Cruz are operating off a diametrically opposed set of fundamental values as their baseline for policy.
Of course, Rubio is lying to our faces about immigration which he intends to collapse on in a rather fantastically dramatic "failure theater" sort of way in the first 6 months of his potential presidency, but I still wouldn't equate him with Obama.
OK, Trump supporter here. I don't know what Trump will do, and not one of you can tell me what your favorite candidate will do, either. I've been voting since 1968, and I've witnessed one broken promise after another from both parties. OK? Got it? I like Trump because he's not a Republican or a Democrat. He's not a politician, and it's evident by his so-called gaffes, and that's a good thing. He seems like, well, a regular person going through life, trying to adjust to the new job. If, and I repeat, if, he is anywhere successful it would be the best thing to ever happen to this country, where not being a Republican or a Democrat can win an election, and get at least half of his promises to come true.
... and Birkel, name the achievements you foresee after your choice for POTUS is nominated. Go ahead, I'd like to hear them.
Rubio's OKC speech and last night will win the election for Rubio.
He finally identified Trump as the con-man that he is.
Under BDNYC's theory of democracy
The unfirable civil-service get to meet and decide whom they are going to agree to serve under as president.
Anyone they 'don't agree to' can't be elected.
Nice racked.
Laver10: "Winston Churchill - "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil." As a life-long Republican, I will have to swallow hard and make a favorable reference to Hillary. I just can't stomach the image of Trump sitting in the oval office. God help us all."
Well, then you are an utterly unserious person who should henceforth be ignored since you apparently have no difficulty with the image of Hillary sitting in the oval office.
Of course, your operational support of Hillary might just be a case of curiousity as to how much money she and Bill can raise while selling influence at the Presidential level with all the levers of power in their grifter mitts.
I love how yesterday Chris Christie was anathema to most of these Trumpists.... a RINO... he handed the 2012 election to Obama. And now? Chris Christie is great!
Just admit it, you have no principles. You just want your team to win.
Althouse said...This is huge! The big man makes a big splash and the cascade begins. / That vastly overshadows
Clever.
I don't remember paying attention to Christie's fingers--are they what would be considered normal length for an adult human?
Ted Cruz, who spent weeks focused on defeating Marco Rubio, said in an interview after the fiery Republican presidential debate on Thursday that Mr. Rubio would be a better nominee than Donald J. Trump.
So then stop trying to disqualify Rubio, drop out and endorse him!
I love how yesterday Chris Christie was anathema to most of these Trumpists.... a RINO... he handed the 2012 election to Obama. And now? Chris Christie is great! Just admit it, you have no principles. You just want your team to win.
Uh, are you reading the same thread as me? Because nowhere in this thread has anyone said they think Christie is great. I see a lot of reasons why they think Christie endorsed him, and I see a lot of reasons why Christie is NOT great for endorsing Trump.
Could you point out where you think you're seeing this?
A two way race would settle this issue.
Birches: "I love how yesterday Chris Christie was anathema to most of these Trumpists.... a RINO... he handed the 2012 election to Obama. And now? Chris Christie is great!"
Well, the same thing could be said in the other direction.
Birches: "Just admit it, you have no principles. You just want your team to win."
There seem to be quite a few "conservatives" using every lefty tactic to attack Trump without irony.
See Romney re: Trump taxes. Harry Reid thanks Mitt very much for letting him off the hook.
So then stop trying to disqualify Rubio, drop out and endorse him!
I have a feeling if Cruz doesn't do so well on Tuesday, you'll see exactly that.
I've tried to get my head around the Trump phenomenon. I've compared him to a Latin American strong man, but that just doesn't quite work. I think Rubio hit the nail on the head. He's a con artist.
Hopefully, it's all moot, because Hillary will slaughter him. And then surprise, surprise - more gridlock. Oh, and probably a couple of Supreme Court appointments to go with it. Just what we need, a solidly liberal court. God help us all.
RE: grackle:
Trump has been so successful that it’s beginning to be boring. I almost wish Trump would lose a primary or two in order to see how he would react under adverse circumstances.
Well he has lost a primary -- Iowa! And we saw how he reacted. He was initially gracious. Then he started claiming there were dirty tricks played, and that there ought to be a do-over. Then he won New Hampshire and he stopped complaining about Iowa.
Or sorry, were you drawing a strict distinction between the primaries and caucuses? (Is that the distinction?)
Rubio is going to win the election now, David Begley? Doesn't he at least need to win one single state first? Florida is out of the question, I hate to tell you.
Donors ask GOP consulting firm to research independent presidential bid
A group of Republicans is moving quickly to research ballot-access requirements for independent candidates in case Trump wraps up the GOP nomination next month - Politico
Fucking GOP won't stay bought! At least the Democrats know how to deliver what's been paid for!
This election is about a lot of things but one huge underlying motif is MALENESS. Trump stands in the center of the drwarves like Trump Towers, spewing insults, bullying, cracking jokes, spinning yarns, riffing, unprepared, unpolished, and unapologetic. The guy's speeches aren't speeches at all; they're riffs. He works some lines that he's used over and over again, adds a wrinkle, monitors its effect, repeats it if it's good, hops to another topic ... no teleprompter, no text, no nothing but The Donald.
This is the anti-Obama. Obama, the wannabe athlete who throws like a girl, bowls a 39, and misses 20 out of 22 shots at the hoop (caught on video which marked the end of his b-ball days), wear Mom jeans and a helmet to bike across the meadow. And not just the anti-Obama but the anti-all the politicians who Trump says repeatedly, "Just talk." Talking, the gift of the girl world.
Trump really is the alpha male. The insults, the bullying, the ... I guess I've said all that. But that's one of the biggest factors in his success. I think he marks a societal evolutionary turning point.
I very seldom give the Huffington Post any props, but they had a great link: "Jesus H. Christie"
Yeah. Trump wanted a new vote in Iowa. That's not the way it works. Guess that wasn't taught at Wharton.
Every president looks like a con artist to the losing party. Obama made Professor Harold Hill look honest.
Fabi, I hope you're right. Unfortunately, the odds are stacked against sanity right now.
George Orwell - "Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist."
Hillary vs. Trump - I'd like to sit this one out and not vote, but George will haunt my dreams. God helps us all.
`@Birches...We want a smart and tough leader that we can trust to fight to WIN and not abandon us in the middle of the fight or after the fight is over.
That sounds easy to find, but it is not easy to find at all. When we do find it, we join up and do our part.
Both Trump and Christie have that kind of strength and character. Are you determined to believe in Pure Conservatism as preached by Conservative Radio mega millionaires who support Super Godly Liars. That leader is impossible to find out side of Walt Disney World. It is an electric rabbit leading you around a dog track to nowhere.
Trump really is the alpha male. The insults, the bullying, the ...
More like a PUA. Or maybe like a fortune teller who counts on people to forget all the things she got wrong and be amazed whenever she guesses close.
I think it's less important to explain why Trump is winning, than to simply accept the fact that he is winning (and likely will win by next Tuesday.)
I Callahan: "I have a feeling if Cruz doesn't do so well on Tuesday, you'll see exactly that"
As a Cruz voter, I fear that more than the Donald since Rubio will collapse on immigration immediately and immigration is the only issue that matters this time around.
Laver10: "Hillary vs. Trump - I'd like to sit this one out and not vote, but George will haunt my dreams. God helps us all."
Nobody said it would be easy, or desirable, or our top choice.
You go to war with the army you've got. Politics is the art of the possible, not preferable.
"But what happens next?" Simon, Simon, there you go again, calling for plans and thinkin' and stuff. Who cares about that when American is great again?
Crowing about the Christie endorsement shows just how Trump will take it to the "GOPe." It will be a group hug.
Of course, Trumpkins will be immune to disappointment. After all, we have already been told by one of his prime supporters on this blog that his main plank about his main issue is the "stupidest" thought he ever had. Looks like we are going to be stuck on stupid for a while longer.
Or maybe like a fortune teller who counts on people to forget all the things she got wrong and be amazed whenever she guesses close.
Ha! Ann does this!
@Drago: "As a Cruz voter, I fear that more than the Donald since Rubio will collapse on immigration immediately and immigration is the only issue that matters this time around." I don't follow. You dislike a supposed Rubio collapse more than Trump's actual promise of general amnesty? (After first getting the illegals out blah blah blah.)
Fabi said...
"Doesn't [Rubio] at least need to win one single state first?"
No, but he can't win if Trump keeps winning a plurality, because those WTA states coming after Super Tuesday are going to drop on the race like an anvil. Trump wins unless the fundamental dynamics of the race change. Either Rubio drops out or Cruz does, one or the other, but if they both stay in their hoping against hope that the other one will drop out thus propelling them into the lead, they both lose. I'm sure that there's an elegant game-theory explication of the problem, which seems to be like but not quite the same as the prisoner's dilemma.
Sebastian: "I don't follow. You dislike a supposed Rubio collapse more than Trump's actual promise of general amnesty?"
First off, it's not a supposed Rubio collapse. It's what he's already done. Right in front of everyone. Let's not begin now pretending that never happened and a big 'ol RESET occurred that put everything right.
So already Rubio is already lost to me on that issue. Which is strange for me to say since I was a big Rubio backer until the Gang of 8 insanity.
So I could just as easily rewrite your comment in the reverse and ask you to defend it.
So why don't you?
I've hit my limit on "already's" on my previous post......already.
AllenS:
If a President Cruz were inaugurated, I would expect him to directly challenge the federal bureaucracy, in the same way Governor Walker challenged the bureaucrats in Wisconsin. He would try, I believe, to break the federal employment unions, decrease the hurdles to firing the incompetents, and root out the corruption that Liberal Progressives foist upon us through the IRS, EPA, DOJ, DOE and various other alphabet soup agencies.
I believe he would strike at the heart of the entrenched Washington D.C. interests because he believes in limited government. Witness the attacks by Graham, McCain and others as evidence (but not proof) that he sincerely wishes the size and scope of government reduced.
Birkel:
Anglelyne:
Pedantry suits you well. When you are proven wrong, I will be here awaiting your denials.
Since I haven't made any claims here beyond idle speculation regarding winners or losers, or on the probability of Trump being able to accomplish anything his supporters hope he does (I am on record as being mildly hopeful but agnostic), I'm curious to know which "claim" I've made here that is subject to being "proven wrong".
No, wait, iirc I have made a positive predictive claim re this election cycle: that if he was elected, Rubio would do 100% of jack shit to secure the border, enforce immigration law, or reduce immigration, legal or illegal. Now this is a claim that can be proved right or wrong by the course of events and the rules of ordinary terrestrial logic, and I would be delighted to see it proved wrong.
You all have not had a genuinely talented demagogue run for president yet. This time there is a real talent at work. Not the greatest talent, but far more so than the competition.
I suspect that Andrew Jackson, for one, may have generated a similar impression as Trump, had he been working with modern technology and a modern media environment. But conversely it was easier for such as he then, with wraker institutions and fewer filters.
No similarly colorful warrior would have reached his position and authority in modern times, as there has been little tolerance for this in over a hundred years.
It's not because Trump is strange, but because the modern US experience is limited. I suspect it's because of the heavy modern institutional filters keeping the full range of talent out of play.
Simon: "Either Rubio drops out or Cruz does, one or the other, but if they both stay in their hoping against hope that the other one will drop out thus propelling them into the lead, they both lose. I'm sure that there's an elegant game-theory explication of the problem, which seems to be like but not quite the same as the prisoner's dilemma."
It would have to be Cruz (my guy) dropping out to make a real difference since Cruz and Trump are trying to occupy so much of the same ground. There is no way Rubio is dropping out with the entire establishment encouraging him to hang on (with no doubt many promises of support even if he loses as long as he fights the good fight).
Which, by the way, I really have no problem with as that is how the game is played.
Birkel: "If a President Cruz were inaugurated, I would expect him to directly challenge the federal bureaucracy, in the same way Governor Walker challenged the bureaucrats in Wisconsin. He would try, I believe, to break the federal employment unions, decrease the hurdles to firing the incompetents, and root out the corruption that Liberal Progressives foist upon us through the IRS, EPA, DOJ, DOE and various other alphabet soup agencies.
I believe he would strike at the heart of the entrenched Washington D.C. interests because he believes in limited government. Witness the attacks by Graham, McCain and others as evidence (but not proof) that he sincerely wishes the size and scope of government reduced."
Birkel summarizes nicely why I support Cruz.
But I think it's going to be Trump.
buwaya puti: "You all have not had a genuinely talented demagogue run for president yet."
This is quite true. The press waxed romantic over obambi but that could not really hide forever the fact that obambi is about 3 inches deep in terms of intellectual heft and is completely out of ammo when he has to "wing it".
For the Donald it all comes so easily he slides into hyperbolic hyperbole continuously. And after Obambi, who can really say that this is simply the new "lay of the land".
Welcome to the new world. We didn't intend to end up here, but here we are.
coupe said...
I like how trump tries to pronounce 'trowel', as he uses two syllables.
2/26/16, 1:28 PM
Because there aren't two syllables in it? As a longtime mason tender, yeah, it is pronounced "trow-el", with two syllables- like towel, with an r in it. Don't know where you're from or what accent pronounces trowel as monosyllabic, but a grammatical diagram of the word would show two syllables.
buwaya: the US political process seems an exercise of futile thrashing among people, high and low, who are unwilling to recognize the gravity of the coming crises.
Yup. In your opinion, which countries' political classes, if any, do you think are clear-eyed about, and preparing for, what's coming?
I'm sure others here would be interested in your observations on this.
Anglelyne:
So you do not cast yourself a Trump supporter?
Remember that everything that flows out of Little Man Rubio's mouth for the next several weeks will be a useless event except as it acts as a professional application of Roundup Trump Killer to the General Election voters in November. Rubio is now an agent for Hillery Clinton's insiders.
There is NO chance that Rubio wins anything this year except future considerations from Reince Preibus' Donor Team to be paid half now and half later. And it probably includes his own Republican Party Visa card.
@Drago: you wrote in the future tense -- Rubio "will collapse." Hence my comment. You replied: it's what he has already done. I suspect you and I are in fact on the same wavelength, so I don't mean to pick a fight, but I still don't get it: why be more concerned about Rubio reverting to Gang of 8 shenanigans than Trump's actual, clear, promised general amnesty?
Anything thoughtful to offer, traditionalguy?
@ Average Joe...I always pronounce trowell the same way as Powell. But many county southern folks say Pile for the name Powell. So the could also say trowl. It is a border speech pattern. I always like hearing them say far for fire.
Well he has lost a primary -- Iowa!
Nitpikky alert- that's a caucus.
traditionalguy:
So that is a resounding 'no'.
Drago said...
"It would have to be Cruz (my guy) dropping out to make a real difference since Cruz and Trump are trying to occupy so much of the same ground."
Precisely for that reason, it has to be Rubio who drops out. If we want to stop Trump, Rubio has to drop out and he and his backers have to get behind Cruz because if Cruz drops out, a significant fraction of his supporters will simply move over into the Trump column. They don't want an establishment hack, and they perceive Rubio as such.
"There is no way Rubio is dropping out with the entire establishment encouraging him to hang on (with no doubt many promises of support even if he loses as long as he fights the good fight)."
And this is the problem. The only thing that frightens the so-called "establishment" more than candidate Trump is candidate Cruz.
Speaking of "trowel", how about the conflation of "troll" and "trawl"?
Two very different words with different derivations, but online, people routinely say "troll" when they mean "trawl". The most common use of "troll" is as a noun or new verb to connote the classic meaning of a troll.
Let's trawl for trolls who trowel the wall.
I'm pretty much with grackle.
I think the preference cascade is beginning and we are in for a wild ride.
Rubio did more than the gang of 8. He cosponsored a McCaskill anti-college male bill that is even worse than most of the present rape culture Obama stuff.
He has no common sense. It is all consultant driven. Cruz would be OK but he is not getting traction. If he loses Texas, which seems possible now. it's over.
averagejoe said...
"coupe said... 'I like how trump tries to pronounce 'trowel', as he uses two syllables.' Because there aren't two syllables in it? As a longtime mason tender, yeah, it is pronounced 'trow-el'"
The runt of the litter, Trow-el was always overshadowed by his better-known kin, Kal-el and Kara zor-el
Birkel said...chickelit:
Any comment about what conservatives thought?
None, other than why couldn't conservatives have seen this coming all along? It has seemed obvious to me for months now. You don't "win" by stopping someone; you win by listening to a majority of voters (not future voters) and not foreign sensibilities.
Sebastian, I agree we are in general alignment.
My point is a fundamental one: Rubio collapsed on immigration before and he is being supported by those on the repub side who desire a dem win on this issue.
There is simply no way around that while Cruz and Trump are despised by those guys. Thats all any of us have to go on. Choose accordingly.
I'm beginning to believe that this election represents the dissolution of the Republican party. If Trump doesn't get the nomination, I fully expect him to run third party. If Trump does win the nomination, I expect to see someone else run third party to capitalize of the large number disaffected conservative voters. No matter who wins, there will be a large portion of the pie that feels alienated. I think Someone will run to fill this demand.
The most unfortunate result of all this, of course, will be a Hillary victory. That assumes the Democrats can avoid a Republican style implosion.
"None, other than why couldn't conservatives have seen this coming all along?"
Conservatives did see this coming all along. But that categorization now officially excludes the entire republican establishment. Much to my dismay.
"And this is the problem. The only thing that frightens the so-called "establishment" more than candidate Trump is candidate Cruz."
It bothers me that Cruz is so disliked by his fellow Senators. Trump has proven that he can work with politicians and is a successful, well respected businessman in NY and he loves our country which would be a nice change. I wish he was more pure regarding his political views but he clearly has obvious qualities.
"Trump has proven that he can work with politicians and is a successful, well respected businessman in NY and he loves our country which would be a nice change."
Lol @ all of that.
@Birkel: Don't you wonder who these "major Republican donors" are who are desperately seeking an independent spokesperson for their interests? And what exactly are their "interests"? Names please.
And, I seriously doubt that Trump would be leading so were it not for the spectacular unelectability of Hillary Clinton. Who exactly is behind her facade? Names please.
I'm beginning to believe that this election represents the dissolution of the Republican party. If Trump doesn't get the nomination, I fully expect him to run third party. If Trump does win the nomination, I expect to see someone else run third party to capitalize of the large number disaffected conservative voters. No matter who wins, there will be a large portion of the pie that feels alienated. I think Someone will run to fill this demand.
Given what's at stake, I think that Trump will be fighting all the way through the convention.
dreams:
I am despised by those senators. So are you. That they do not know US personally does not reduced their ability to despise us.
"Yup. In your opinion, which countries' political classes, if any, do you think are clear-eyed about, and preparing for, what's coming?"
The Chinese. They are purging the party, cracking down on dissidents, increasing control of HongKong. The party elements, as individuals and cliques, are organizing massive capital flight.
Some of the crackdown no doubt is meant to prevent or punish this.
Externally they are preparing for war. Or at least a much more serious game of "chicken".
Whether what they are doing is going to help their interests, who can say. But they know they have to prepare.
"The most unfortunate result of all this, of course, will be a Hillary victory."
No, I think she is over. Even an idiot third party attempt to deny Trump the win will not work. This is the French Revolution in its early stages. What we have now are the Girondins.
chickelit:
I wonder not at all. The supporters of both parties are the men Adam Smith described ~240 years ago. They are the men who supported Obamacare.
Laver10 said...
"Hopefully, it's all moot, because Hillary will slaughter him."
If a Democrat wins in the fall, whether Hillary, Bernie, or Joe, I have a hard time seeing how this country stays together. On the other hand, if Trump wins, I'm not sure that it survives either. I'm suddenly very pessimistic that our two nations can remain united in one country.
Rubio does have a serious problem with anxiety as has been evident in most of his public appearances and probably countered a little by his sticking to his talking points. This has little bearing on his beliefs or his competency but it comes across to many as his being unable to stand the heat. That business with the drink of water during his unfortunate reply to the State of the Union speech a few years ago is typical of what I am pointing out.
I might point out that if he replied on this forum, he would have to state that he is not a robot.
Just for the record I am a trump supporter. In fact cast my vote Monday in Texas for him. Happy to do it and hope to do it again.
Michael K:
As I recall, the Girondins were ultimately executed during the Reign of Terror.
buwaya: The Chinese. They are purging the party, cracking down on dissidents, increasing control of HongKong. The party elements, as individuals and cliques, are organizing massive capital flight.
Some of the crackdown no doubt is meant to prevent or punish this.
Externally they are preparing for war. Or at least a much more serious game of "chicken".
Whether what they are doing is going to help their interests, who can say. But they know they have to prepare.
Thanks for the response. Anybody else? My impression from the depths of Flyoveria USA is that European leaders (with the exception maybe of some Eastern Euros, and Russia, if we include them) are stoned out of their minds on their own happy gas, but they may be more pragmatically self-protective than they appear. (Too bad for ordinary Europeans, though.) Japan?
Birkel: So you do not cast yourself a Trump supporter?
Birkel, if you could stop responding with non sequiturs, I might be able to take you seriously.
I asked you to point out which "claims" I have made re Trump (at least, that's what I assume you're referring to) that are subject to being "proven wrong". It's possible I may have made such claims, and forgotten that I did. But your response to my request, above, is a complete non sequitur. Since you respond in this fashion over and over again, I can reasonably make inferences about your perspicacity, which are not flattering.
Steve Uhr,
"Birkel. I'm sure he will build his fucking wall. Want to place a friendly wager? I'll give you 3- 1 odds."
Oh, hell yeah, NOW this blog is gonna get fun! Put me down for $300 against your $900 conditional upon your definition of "Trump will build his wall." I reserve the right to seek more favorable odds the more liberal you get with your definition in terms of time and space.
Do you have Venmo or PayPal? Where are you geographically? We need to discuss how we put the money in escrow.
Alexander Hamilton - "If we must have an enemy at the head of government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible." Yep, voting Hillary.
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...I'm beginning to believe that this election represents the dissolution of the Republican party.
Well, the Democratic Party died first. Tell me, how can a candidate be fixed and "decided" so many years in advance? Where is the whole generation of future aspirants after her? Her candidacy is just awaiting the rubber stamp.
I just heard Governor Christie saying that he didn't think Senator Rubio was ready to be president.
Which was just like Christie saying Trump was unqualified to be president, right?
Or was it somehow different?
Funny how most of these people have titles; Senator Rubio, Senator Cruz, Governor Kasich, Governor Bush, Governor Walker... Trump is just Trump. His handlers go out of their way to call him "Mr. Trump" in that manner that ballplayers and general managers call team owners "Mister." But every time I hear someone call Trump "mister," I think of all of the schmaltzy gold lettering at his properties, and the hokey waterfalls at his golf properties. (For the golf-centric, Trump's signature waterfalls at golf courses have become the butt of jokes throughout golf course architecture. There is a good case to made, that the golf course operations business is Trump's favorite occupational endeavor, and one where -- very much unlike Trump University and Atlantic City -- Trump has found a modicum of success. But even doing something that he knows about and clearly loves, he's made a mark as a really bad stylist.)
@ I Callahan
Alright, maybe the Trumpists aren't saying Christie is great, but they're suddenly silent about how much they can't stand the guy. Remind me if grackle or eric has ever said anything not negative about Christie before today.
European realists -
Poland, Hungary, Czechs, Baltics, now Belgium, Denmark, (now)Norway, on occasion Austria, Switzerland (of course). They are closing borders.
Laver10 said...
Alexander Hamilton - "If we must have an enemy at the head of government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible." Yep, voting Hillary.
Kudos to anyone who can sensibly quote Hamilton! Our First Federalist!
I've been saying all afternoon I'd vote for Trump if he were the nominee. That's how loyal I am to the Party. But if four more years of Obillary left the country in such a state of disarray, we could see a wave election in 2020 like 2010, and the decennial redistricting would be so comprehensive, Republicans would hold the House for another 50 years.
Birkel said...I wonder not at all. The supporters of both parties are the men Adam Smith described ~240 years ago. They are the men who supported Obamacare.
Can you use another name for the ones Smith described 240 years ago? Perhaps you mean Royalists?
Plus, would Adam Smith be siding with the Mexican and Chinese governments today?
I would appreciate an answer to my last question from anyone.
-- BREAKING NEWS --
Loud obnoxious bully endorses another loud obnoxious bully.
I thought the cascade had begun? Ann, where are the other endorsements?
Blogger Birches said...
@ I Callahan
Alright, maybe the Trumpists aren't saying Christie is great, but they're suddenly silent about how much they can't stand the guy. Remind me if grackle or eric has ever said anything not negative about Christie before today.
I have a love hate relationship with Christie. When he talks tough on drug laws and such, I love the guy. When he opens his mouth about immigration, I hate him.
Not sure why you think I've changed my tune on him. He will make a great AG. That's about it.
chickelit said, "...would Adam Smith be siding with the Mexican and Chinese governments today?"
What would David Ricardo do? That's the real question.
Probably both Smith and Ricardo would shy away from prescribing policy, but they might suggest that in the long run, Mexico and China, both statist economies, would tend to lose out.
We should hope for each of those nations to prosper, for the good of their citizens and for the good of the rest of us. But we should hope for the death of both nations' political regimes.
One of my Italian cousins emailed me last night, comparing Trump to Berlusconi. Seems right on to me.
RE: Steve Uhr & Bobby:
"Birkel. I'm sure he will build his fucking wall. Want to place a friendly wager? I'll give you 3- 1 odds."
Oh, hell yeah, NOW this blog is gonna get fun! Put me down for $300 against your $900 conditional upon your definition of "Trump will build his wall." I reserve the right to seek more favorable odds the more liberal you get with your definition in terms of time and space.
Before anyone puts money down on there actually being a wall, remember that Trump is running for President of the US, not Dictator. He still has to get any budget through a Congress that will still be led by people who think illegal immigrants are the best kind of immigrants and screw all those foreign losers who tried to follow the law.
A wall is the target, but what you're betting on isn't just whether Trump will do his best to follow through on his signature policy, but also whether Trump will be able to persuade Congress to execute on his signature policy. He might! I can see scenarios where they get it through using reconciliation as was done with Obamacare (the idea I have heard floated is to apply confiscatory taxes to remittances sent by illegal immigrants -- that could make a wall-building bill revenue positive). But he is going to face heavy opposition not only among Democrats, but also among Senate Republicans.
Althouse is delusional if she thinks this is going to spark a cascade of endorsements. Christie is not admired or respected by conservatives, and with this endorsement he has completely discredited himself. Might this lead to a Giuliani endorsement? Maybe. Wow! Game changer!
Of course the Trumpkins will say they love Christie now that he's endorsed their dear leader. But the Trumpkins are weak, fearful people who are easily manipulated, so Christie should not feel too good about that. If Trump fails to win the presidency, Christie is DONE and might find it difficult to work as a private attorney given his already tarnished reputation.
Wow, this should bring both of Christies supporters into the Trump fold. What a game changer! I suppose the Prof is being facetious.
Fat, unpleasant bully endorses less fat, unpleasant bully. This should lock up the thug vote.
"but they might suggest that in the long run, Mexico and China, both statist economies, would tend to lose out."
Curiously, in both China and Mexico its been much easier and cheaper to build private infrastructure and operate manufacturing industries than in the US, and that is besides labor costs. And that is taking corruption and cronyism into account. US corruption tends to be more of the one or two steps removed sort, but I think should not receive a pass for that reason. It is merely more sophisticated. And in many cases they offer superior logistics and infrastructure facilities also.
I also wonder just how statist either are, these days, vis a vis the US, or certain parts of it.
chickelit:
Perhaps my reference was too vague. But I do not think I shall spend my time telling you why.
Anglelyne:
Make a prediction then. Start now. Drop the 411. Let us bathe in your glory, lo these many months hence.
LePage of Maine endorses Trump.
"One of my Italian cousins emailed me last night, comparing Trump to Berlusconi. Seems right on to me."
One could think so, indeed. There are parallels with Forza Italia, etc.
If so, the Trump phenomenon could go on for a long while.
Balfegor,
"A wall is the target, but what you're betting on isn't just whether Trump will do his best to follow through on his signature policy, but also whether Trump will be able to persuade Congress to execute on his signature policy."
I'm well aware of this. One of the reasons I jumped at taking 3-to-1 odds is because I have thought through all of those obstacles and deem the likelihood of his being able to actually implement his stated vision at less than 25% (which makes 3-to-1 odds worth considering).
I'm not going interested in a "well, he'll try his best, but if Congress thwarts him that still counts!" kind of bet. I'm only interested in betting that, at the conclusion of Trump's term (willing to say terms, but will want more favorable odds), "the wall" will not be constructed. And, again, Steve Uhr needs to define what "the wall" is because I'm not on-board with some symbolic 20-mile stretch of wall being built and Trump calling that "success, because of [insert mitigating circumstances here]" (which could very well happen). Assuming we can iron out the details, hell yeah, I'm in.
In this corner...
Marco "The Shiv" Rubio!
"I float like a butterfly.
I sting like a bee.
Rope-a-Dope for six months,
Look out on March 3!"
And in this corner...
Donald "Wet Pants" Trump!
"This is my hair. This is my hair! Tug on it, it's real. It's my hair!
I do not repeat myself. I do not repeat myself! I am not repeating myself!"
And he's already in trouble. He's reaching to tag Putin. No! Putin's no help! It's all over.
No! Wait! He's got another tag team partner. Oh no! It's...
Chris "Cannonball" Christie!
"I'm #6 in New Hampshire. But #1 in your hearts!"
"Republicans would hold the House for another 50 years."
What House ? There comes a time when entropy takes over. We are very close now.
Maybe Trump is the peaceful revolution.
""One of my Italian cousins emailed me last night, comparing Trump to Berlusconi. "
Pretty good comparison. Not bad at all but maybe not the way you think.
And yet, there is no shortage of examples to illustrate the cultural appeal of narcissistic antiheroes, whether fictional (Walter White of Breaking Bad; Batman, and James Bond), all-too real (Silvio Berlusconi, Steve Jobs, Kanye West, and too many professional athletes to name), or a mix of both, such as the so-called Wolf of Wall Street. We are attracted to them despite their self-absorption — or perhaps, even because of it.
Why?
After decades of scientific research, psychologists have begun to deconstruct the seductive power of narcissists, explaining the precise mechanisms underlying their charm and ability to get ahead in all domains of life. Here are the key findings:
Read the rest, as Glenn says.
25% should say 75%, which is obvious to any gambler. I must have switched perspectives in my head while typing.
Post a Comment