Said AprilApple in the comments to the previous post, which sets the scene for tonight's debate.
I answered:
He can. The question is whether he decides that tonight is the night for him to play Adult in the Room (a role John Kasich chose for himself in the last debate). Trump still must squelch Rubio and Cruz and he hasn't yet seen whether either of them or both will decide on the Adult in the Room gambit. I think perhaps all 4 men will go for an elevated presidential demeanor. If so, it will be funny to see how it looks on each of them.
पोस्ट्स
२८५ टिप्पण्या:
285 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»I would sort of love to see them all of a sudden start saying nice things about each other--"you're terrific" "no, you're terrific" "I said you're terrific first!"--and quote Cicero and make nuanced, detailed responses to the questions. People would wonder if they all took Quaaludes.
But since Rubio, Cruz and Kasich's strategy now is reduced to carving out niches of delegates to force the decision at the convention, I suspect it will instead be very ugly. And as "presidential" as Trump tries to be, he won't be able to help himself if someone attacks him. Never in his life has he let any slight be beneath his dignity to respond to. So I'm not sure where you get this idea anyone will be "acting adult" (except maybe Kasich, who actually has to go back to a real political job when this is over).
The battle is between men and soap opera.
But the soap opera women vote. All the candidates except Trump are afraid of them
Fox will always go for soap opera women because they pay the advertising bills.
Lefites are free-riding on that news biz necessity.
The Trump supporters want it defeated in ridicule.
I'd go meta-presidential. None of our problems can be addressed unless PC is ridiculed out of the editors' chair. That would include Wallace and Kelly.
Trump's the guy.
Dr. Ben Carson was the adult brain surgeon in the operating room.
Funny. Yes it will more than likely be funny.
Sure he can act like an adult, but will he. Cruz and Rubio should aim to get under his skin.
Vietnam coward.
Trump University con artist.
Epic hypocrite who hires illegals and foreigners.
Spendthrift bankrupt.
Epic blowhard.
Bad personal character. Etc.
So it's your guy or the party gets it, eh Begley?
We must vote for Trump to find out what is in him.
I favored Trump from about August to December 2015.
Early in that period, he published position statements about immigration and gun control on his website.
I expected that he would continue to publish position statements on other issues and would master the range of major issues gradually.
I expected also that he would moderate his demeanor gradually.
Eventually I realized that he will not master the issues and will not moderate his demeanor. He has not improved on either aspect.
When Cruz published a sufficiently hard-line position paper on immigration, I switched to Trump.
I have hoped that Rubio would provide a satisfactory explanation of his participation in the Gang of Eight, enabling me to switch from Cruz to Rubio. However, I think Rubio will not explain himself more than he has, and it is becoming too late for such an explanation anyway.
So, I am staying with Cruz. If Cruz drops out, I will hold my nose and return to Trump. In this election, I am a one-issue voter on the immigration issue.
So now we can forget all the past bullsh*t?
Perhaps Trump can interrupt his way through it? Then whine and blame the meanie with blood spurting out of her eyes.
Trump did a phone interview on The Today Show this morning. Savannah Guthrie asked Trump which Trump would show up tonight? Would it be a Presidential Trump, or a combative Trump?
Trump said that he couldn't be Presidential while in this fight. He said it was a tough fight and that he would have to use methods that would not be Presidential.
I look am looking forward to seeing the Nasty Cuban Comedian's lounge act and the Canadian Liar's dramatic Shakespearian pauses talking about saving the GOP from the Presidential One while the mailman's son plays Will Rogers.
Tim in Vermont
Two weeks is a lifetime in politics. Cruz or Rubio can still win it.
Act like an adult = act politically correct.
The interruptions and doubling down are Trump's way to throw sand in the PC gears.
If you want to get at Trump, ask non-PC based questions. Give him nothing that needs sand in the gears.
Some character in a romcom, receiving the wafer in communion, "How long does this take to work?"
I expected also that Trump would improve his speeches.
Trump will continue, however, to ramble in his scatter-brain manner in every "speech".
Here is a link to Ronald Reagan's speech announcing his presidential candidacy in 1979.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAtYMD-H2UY
Compare that eloquent speech to any Trump speech.
How's Megyn Kelly on economics? It's boring to women and so boring to her.
Would she know anything about regulation and business failures? There's a very direct connection. She won't know it. She won't ask it.
Yes, but can sleep-deprived Donald Trump act like an adult?
If he loses, he can certainly make more money in advertising.
"Hi I'm Donald Trump and I have DIRECTV."
"And I'm sleep-deprived Donald Trump and I have cable."
The art of kicking PC to the curb has been lost. Trump is just a bully.
Two weeks is a lifetime in politics. Cruz or Rubio can still win it
I have nothing against legitimate criticism against any of them. I just wish people would lay off the stuff it's hard to take back. I'm not voting for Trump in the Florida primary, but I will vote for him the general, since apparently the media blackout on Sanders has sealed the nomination for Hillary 'The Hawk' Clinton. What I won't do is pelt him with cheap shots. If you want to talk about bankruptcies, fine. How many business ventures has he undertaken? What percentage have failed? If it turned out that the percentage was high, that's a legitimate point.
I'd like to hear Megyn Kelly on the minimum wage.
Show us that she's not an idiot. That would be a change.
Trump has a sense of humor. Larger than life persona is actually self-deprecating.
Trump Vodka. Trump Steaks. Trump Airlines. Trump Mortgage. Trump Water. Etc.
Define: Adult.
We have a lot of "adults" now down in Wash DC and within the beltway.
How has that worked out for us these last seven years? Or fifteen years?
If you think things are going fine. then the Vagina or the Little Marco are your guys. If not, you should be thinking Trump or Cruz (or Sanders I guess, but why not Stalin?).
And here's the thing. A federal grand jury has been empaneled on Hillary's email. She will be indicted. Biden will be the nominee.
I'll vote for him too, warts and all, because the idea of a full-on Clinton criminal enterprise is too much for the US to take.
rhhardin,
"If you want to get at Trump, ask non-PC based questions. Give him nothing that needs sand in the gears."
But that's already happened- like, I don't see how asking about the nuclear triad was, in any way, related to PC. Is there a non-PC answer to that? Apparently not, because Trump's best answer was to say "nuclear is the most important" and demonstrate he didn't even know what everyone was talking about.
Of course, that won't stop the majority of Americans- who can't even tell you what the three components of the nuclear triad are, nor what the ratio is between them- from still voting for him. It's very difficult for voters to care about something that they themselves don't understand.
Trump can act however he prefers. He is leading and the others are following. He hasn't been taking advice from you before, and look where that got him. Good luck, Mr. Trump, don't let the fools drag you down.
Flip side of the question: Can the Moderators act like adults?
From the previous post:Ron Jeremy, Presidential Debate Moderator.
I am Laslo.
I laugh that Trump supporters like his bravado, and yet care very little about his lack of substance.
Trump will argue that the is a u other, and can unify the party. The only reason it isn't is because he is such a douchebag. He insults Mexicans, Muslims, says McCain is a loser for getting captured, is the one pushing Birtherism for Ted Cruz. He totally insults Bush.
Now, suddenly, he wants to unify the party?
Timinvermont wrote:
So it's your guy or the party gets it, eh Begley?
that's been Trumps tactic since the beginning. Now suddenly you are angry that others are acting in kind?
"Being adult" as a "gambit." Hmmm.
Sure makes me proud to be a Republican.
"Trump is just a bully."
Being a bully implies picking on someone weaker who cannot defend themselves. So you are saying the other candidates are helpless weaklings?
No he is just doesn't pull his punches. It's about time we had someone on our side that fights.
that's been Trumps tactic since the beginning. Now suddenly you are angry that others are acting in kind?
I don't think so, but no, I'm not angry. I just think the empty ridicule is counter productive, one of these three guys is going to take on Hillary. As somebody around here used to say "Hillary delenda est!"
The ultimate adult is joining the fray, Mitt Romney. You want pastel, you got pastel.
Trump can "act" presidential, but then he has to discuss policy and stuff that he's not very good at. I can't think of any policy area for which people support him other than perhaps immigration. Trump is really just a poke in the eye, and that's something that appeals to maybe a quarter or a third of the electorate.
Trump may be playing a 3D game here that most of us just see. Most of us can't understand why he continues the bully/insult dog schtick. It's done its job, move on, be presidential, pivot to Hillary, etc. But who are we to deny that Trump's strategy hasn't worked better than ours every time?
Seriously, I'm sick of the insults and believe them counter-productive. I think he under-performed on Super Tuesday and is in danger of losing to Cruz (check out the firewall that's been erected right up the center of the country, from Texas through Oklahoma and Iowa, to Minnesota). Losing Alaska was troubling to me (well, troubling when in in my pro-Trump mode which is Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays, and some Saturdays). My gut tells me, Stop it with the bullying. Act presidential.
But he moves on and wins somewhere else. Now he's up 20 in Michigan. Scott Adams calls this 3D persuasion. While I truly think Scott Adams is teetering on the edge of sanity, I also think he's been pretty darn far ahead if the curve concerning Trump, the Comic Insult Dog.
*shrugs and walks off*
It seems your reflex to destroy whatever picture you think the media is projecting is getting the better of you. The man is not serious and a horrible businessman - a bully at best and a demagogue at worst.
"If so, it will be funny to see how it looks on each of them." Why will it be "funny?"
David Begley said...
And here's the thing. A federal grand jury has been empaneled on Hillary's email. She will be indicted. Biden will be the nominee.
Bet you a beer that she is not indicted.
Don't know where you are, but you'll have to come to NC to collect.
If I am wrong I would be happy to buy that beer. In fact I'd buy a beer for any Althousian who shows up at our party.
M Jordan wrote:
Trump may be playing a 3D game here that most of us just see. Most of us can't understand why he continues the bully/insult dog schtick. It's done its job, move on, be presidential, pivot to Hillary, etc. But who are we to deny that Trump's strategy hasn't worked better than ours every time?
has it though? You have lifetime republicans saying they will never vote trump. People say he is building the party, but he's actually fracturing it. I don't remember republicans (except for libertarians) saying they would NEVER vote Romney.
"I laugh that Trump supporters like his bravado, and yet care very little about his lack of substance."
Of course that remains to be seen. We have had plenty of policy wonks with detailed positions and glorious promises fold up and sell out time and again.
If all he does is secure the border that will be huge.
And here's the thing. A federal grand jury has been empaneled on Hillary's email. She will be indicted. Biden will be the nominee.
If that happens, the Bernie supporters will go apeshit --- and I couldn't fault them for it.
Also, let's not forget, Biden is a God awful campaigner who matches Trump for dumb comments without the good humor or entertaining personality to back it up. That HE is still their hopeful "savior" is a damning condemnation.
David Begley said...
Sure he can act like an adult, but will he. Cruz and Rubio should aim to get under his skin.
Vietnam coward.
Trump University con artist.
Epic hypocrite who hires illegals and foreigners.
Spendthrift bankrupt.
Epic blowhard.
Bad personal character. Etc.
3/3/16, 8:25 AM
David Begley said...
And here's the thing. A federal grand jury has been empaneled on Hillary's email. She will be indicted. Biden will be the nominee.
3/3/16, 8:43 AM"
First you mentioned Trump's parade of horribles which I agree are all true (but still not Hillary grade evil) then you mentioned Hillary's looming indictment and replacement by none other than a man so stupid that he was selected to be Obama's life insurance policy. Incidentally Biden is also rather scummy, he just isn't intelligent enough to have made any real money unlike the Clintons. So drop the nonsense and accept reality; there is a very real chance Trump will be the Republican nominee so if that is the case your choices are very clear albeit not that good. And no Democrat at their best will be better than Trump at his worst which says more about the deplorable position of the Democratic Party than about Donald Trump.
Bet you a beer that she is not indicted.
Don't know where you are, but you'll have to come to NC to collect.
If I am wrong I would be happy to buy that beer. In fact I'd buy a beer for any Althousian who shows up at our party.
I doubt she'll be indicted. But the stink on this is too much to gloss over and it allows a deep discussion of the criminal enterprise that is Washington. You had the government go after private citizens and nobody was punished. You had vets dying waiting for care and nobody was punished.
People don't like the connected getting away with murder. They hate the bigwigs who give to Clinton doing so, same as the government employees who ALSO give to Clinton doing so.
rhhardin said...
I'd like to hear Megyn Kelly on the minimum wage.
Show us that she's not an idiot. That would be a change.
The female journalist strategy on economics is to borrow a talking point and hammer away on it Rubio style while running out the clock. It doesn't play well to economic literates, but how many of those are out there?
Tank
But Obama will pardon her and the rest of her crew. Our long national nightmare will finally be over.
Obama's legacy of lawlessness will then be complete.
@MS: "Eventually I realized that he will not master the issues" That's funny.
Judging by his speeches, he hasn't even mastered his own "positions" as stated on his website.
"You have lifetime republicans saying they will never vote trump"
The question is are there more of them than converted independents, dems, and people who may not vote much but now are excited. The fact that republican primary turnouts are so high and the level of enthusiasm so intense makes me think the NRO bow tie and tassel crowd is about to get trampled in a stampede. But people who live in bubbles never see the freight train bearing down on them.
To act like an an adult - in this setting - means he'll have to act like a person who seriously wants to be president and it means he'll have to show an understanding of some of the basic issues and how to address the problems we face. No bumper sticker slogans; real substance.
He cannot do this in any way because he is completely unqualified to be president. He thinks judges sign bills. He doesn't know what the nuclear triad is. He thinks the president can change our libel laws with a stroke of the pen.
And note we are asking if he can ACT like one; not actually be one.
The Trump campaign is one of the biggest farces in the history of American presidential politics. He is worse than a joke; he's a dangerous one
Healthcare Reform to Make America Great Again
Regulatory reform and economic revitalization.
We're about to lose a few more "adults".
"Act like an adult" means show even faked concern about how it looks to women.
Women want control.
I wish Trump would read his own website.
speaking of PC busting...
RH - I've been holding this back for a LONG time. Hardin - Take your women fearing/ women hating misogyny and shove it up your ass.
Adult has other registers. I say that climate change lacks an adult peer review process.
That's about how it looks to men.
n.n said...
Healthcare Reform to Make America Great Again
Regulatory reform and economic revitalization.
We're about to lose a few more "adults".
3/3/16, 9:08 AM
I just went to the link you posted. Exactly what I would have proposed for healthcare. I don't know who Trump hired to be his brain on this but it is encouraging.
How can you be interested in life if the war of the sexes isn't of interest?
I recommend Thurber's cartoon series of that name.
“But people who live in bubbles never see the freight train bearing down on them. “ Yes. I have been saying this in a different kind of way, which I won’t repeat here.
I will add that Drumpf is living in the biggest bubble of them all.
What's new in the war of the sexes is that the news media have the soap opera woman audience yet run under the banner of being serious people.
This is badly misplaced. Trump is getting at it.
No wonder women fear him.
They could wind up looking unserious.
"You have lifetime republicans saying they will never vote trump."
Which seems a remarkably short-sighted position to take, given that they've spent my entire life telling us that we need to win one for the Gipper and back the establishment's choice, because electability.
Dole, Bush II, McCain, Romney. Libertarians, Nationalists, Evangelicals, et. al.: drop trou and bend over because MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION EVA and GOTTA BEAT THE DEMS.
Electability trumps Ideology... never mind it doesn't succeed as a strategy even on that level.
Only now it turns out that they don't particularly care about winning as an end-all principle either, and Hilary Clinton - the Democrat they have literally spent a quarter of a century saying we had to keep out the white house... meh, if we can't have our guy, then fuck it, give her the white house.
Message received.
"Judging by his speeches, he hasn't even mastered his own "positions" as stated on his website."
But he says as President he'll "put the smartest people in a room and come up with solutions."
Yes, that's how he thinks a president enacts policies.
And exactly - or even roughly - what will these solutions be? Well, you have to elect him first to find out.
No other candidate can get away with this, none. Why his supporters let him do it is simply incomprehensible to me. As he himself boasts, he can shoot someone and his supporters wouldn't leave him.
He wasn't joking.
So this is the GOP establishment's last chance to take Trump down.
Will you/they shut up if they fail tonight?
I recommend Thurber's cartoon series of that name.
I'd stick to the dog cartoons.
Trump's wife is very impressive, watch this video.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/index.html#/v/4783802801001
Limited blogger,
Not likely they will. If they were going to shut up, it would have been when Trump broke the impossible-for-him-to-break 20% ceiling. But if not then, definitely the 25%... or the 35%.
I look forward to, "Ha! Hilary won Minnesota and DC! So much for uniting the ENTIRE country, Drumpf!"
Why can't a smart MAN like Trump read his own web-site and commit some of it to memory?
And no Democrat at their best will be better than Trump at his worst which says more about the deplorable position of the Democratic Party than about Donald Trump.
In some ways, Hillary is the "best" type of Democrat. She is thoroughly corrupt and opportunistically poll driven. That means she can be expected to do the right thing at least some of the time as public opinion shifts. Obama was so damaging because he was and is a true believer.
The idea that Trump at his worst is always preferable suggests insufficient imagination. Trump fires all weapons at his disposal when slighted. Up to now his weapons have been his sharp wit, media savvy, Twitter feed, and retained lawyers. Wait until he's overseeing the IRS and the other executive branch organizations.
"Why can't a smart MAN like Trump read his own web-site and commit some of it to memory?"
He is at the age when short term memory starts going bad. It has happened to me though maybe not everyone that age.
cuban bob:
If you (rightly) concede that Trump's "parade of horribles" is true, then why make him the GOP nominee?
My choice right now, preparing to vote in the Michigan primary, isn't whether Trump is worse or better than Hillary Clinton. It has nothing to do with whether or not Mrs. Clinton will be indicted. My choice is who is the best Republican presidential nominee.
And that choice doesn't depend on whether there are 14, or 2, candidates. Trump is the LEAST REPUBLICAN candidate. He's the LEAST RELIABLY CONSERVATIVE candidate.
My choice is easy, in the first instance. #NotTrump.
If you think a person is completely unqualified to be president, doesn't have the ability to handle the job - ability emotionally and intellectually - shouldn't you oppose that person?
Add to that his or her policy views - such as they are.
Not only should you oppose such a person you have an obligation to do so.
No Trump. Never.
Dunno. I don't read Trump's website. Maybe he doesn't either.
PC has to be taken down before anything can happen. Trump can do that.
He'll have a cabinet and he fires people.
Hope for the best given that the first step has been accomplished.
Business guys shut down what doesn't work. Ideologues don't.
"Yes. I have been saying this in a different kind of way, which I won’t repeat here.
I will add that Drumpf is living in the biggest bubble of them all."
Really. And what is the freight train bearing down on Trump he can't see? A sea of redfaced emasculated cuckservatives shaking their tiny impotent fists at him?
He is as far from living in a bubble as you can get. He is nationwide, 24-7. The most talked about person in the country. For good or ill, but that is by definition the opposite of living in a bubble.
AprilApple said...
RH - I've been holding this back for a LONG time. Hardin - Take your women fearing/ women hating misogyny and shove it up your ass.
Vote Hillary.
Richard Epstein agrees with you guys that Trump is a complete disaster, but Epstein is blind to the effects of PC.
He hinted at it in the press conference but wandered (or knowingly marched) away from it.
Limited blogger said...
So this is the GOP establishment's last chance to take Trump down.
Will you/they shut up if they fail tonight?
I doubt it. I think they will get physical and use some sort of intimidation next. If you think of what's at stake for them personally, it doesn't surprise me.
Alexander,
Speaking only for the libertarians (and unofficially at that), I think you're making a mistake thinking that we should necessarily support the Republican nominee. A lot of libertarians look at who is controlling Congress when they make their calculations about whom to support for President -- for many of us, sometimes gridlock is preferable to one party having control of the legislative process. If the Republicans were to have the White House and both houses of Congress, we fear that the social conservatives will push through laws and policies that are quite objectionable to us-- from privileging "traditional" forms of marriage to enforcing narcotics control, pushing asset forefeiture, restricting civil liberties, etc. etc.
On the other hand, a President Clinton (for whom I would personally likely never vote, but some Libertarians will) might constrain and be constrained by a Republican Congress.
It's easy for Republicans to tell Libertarians "you should support our candidates," but when Republicans are only for limited government on some things and all for government interventions on other things, well, you should see why we don't all agree to that.
Epstein thinks the effects of PC are a mere political disagreement open to reason.
He missed the New Yorker cartoon, cited by Wayne Booth as the title of his book, wife to husband, "Now, don't try to reason with me."
The war of the sexes is eternal, not to mention very amusing.
AprilApple said...
RH - I've been holding this back for a LONG time. Hardin - Take your women fearing/ women hating misogyny and shove it up your ass.
April goes all Auntie Em on Miss Almira Gulch. Except for the part about being a Christian woman.
Dorothy Parker pointed out the Thurber actually likes his difficult, bitchy women.
Bear that in mind when you read Thurber.
I'm still waiting for a full blog-post from Professor Althouse on the subject of Donald Trump, libel laws, and the First Amendment.
One reason -- for her blog's readership -- is that I think people are curious about the issue. Plenty of laypersons might not understand the details, but they are (as law school concepts go) pretty readily understandable.
A second reason -- to which I have already alluded -- is that the topic is in Althouse's wheelhouse. I never had the privilege of taking a class from the Professor, but she is more than qualified as an expert for purposes of a blog discussion. (The blog probably doesn't have the budget, for Floyd Abrams.)
A third reason -- and I have mentioned this one before as well -- is that of all of the frivolous lawsuits filed by Donald Trump over the course of twenty years or more, one of his most recent and most hairbrained litigation stunts was his lawsuit against Tim O'Brien and his publisher for "Trump Nation." Where Trump sued because the author reported (on the authority of three different financial analysts familiar with Trump finances) that The Donald's net worth was in the millions, and not billions. And so, naturally, Trump sued for $5 billion. And the case was promptly and conclusively dismissed.
Trump is not a great and respected business leader. He's a crank. And I am somebody, in the litigation business, who takes frivolous lawsuits more seriously than, say, TMZ.
Who ever said I was a good Christian?
I'm a terrible Christian.
Bobby,
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the establishment has spent decades bemoaning it when libertarians and other fringe-groups associated with the right didn't support their man. And now when it's not their man, suddenly GROUP LOYALTY AGAINST THE DEMOCRAT goes completely out the door.
My approach is that nobody owns your vote, and nobody has the right to offer you a shit sandwich and demand you eat it cause it's better than the other guys. If they want your vote, they ought to earn it.
What rankles me is the hypocrisy of the GOP elite.
Trump says he likes women. That ought to be enough, you'd think.
I'm not charmed to have Zsa Zsa as first lady, but what can you do.
I do think there is a huge war of the sexes going on with Trump v. Rodham. In my Twitter timeline, nearly all of the most strident and outspoken #NeverTrump tweeter are women. I don't actually follow a lot of Trumpers, but there is a palpable male vibe there. And I myself and can feel the misandry oozing from Hillary Clinton.
rhhardin, get a new act. Yours got old a long time ago.
Rh is cool. He just hates women.
Paul wrote:
The question is are there more of them than converted independents, dems, and people who may not vote much but now are excited. The fact that republican primary turnouts are so high and the level of enthusiasm so intense makes me think the NRO bow tie and tassel crowd is about to get trampled in a stampede. But people who live in bubbles never see the freight train bearing down on them.
trump May in fact have a ceiling of about 40% of republican voters. The remaining 60% are not particularly fond of him. And at least 20% I'd argue will never vote Trump. No matter what.
This is due to Trump being so divisive and insulting.
Like it or not, the outsiders and Trump supporters need establishment repubs so if he wants a base bigger than 40% he better start kissing some ass. But he is incapable of doing so. He's so immature he'll say now is the time for everyone to come together. Then someone will say something negative about something he has yet to address and he'll say "you're a loser. You're ugly. You're dishonest." Blah blah blah.
He has therefore painted himself into a corner where he will not get the support he needs. I notice this with the tea party as well. They slam the establishment. They caucus those establish repubs and target districts to remove squishes. But then when those same squishes attack them back they get mad that the establishment would say negative things about the tea party as if they weren't throwing bombs to begin with.
And remember when the libertarians took their ball and went home and didn't vote for Romney? THEY didn't seem to care that it meant we'd get four more years of Obama.
Chuck said...
cuban bob:
If you (rightly) concede that Trump's "parade of horribles" is true, then why make him the GOP nominee?
My choice right now, preparing to vote in the Michigan primary, isn't whether Trump is worse or better than Hillary Clinton. It has nothing to do with whether or not Mrs. Clinton will be indicted. My choice is who is the best Republican presidential nominee.
And that choice doesn't depend on whether there are 14, or 2, candidates. Trump is the LEAST REPUBLICAN candidate. He's the LEAST RELIABLY CONSERVATIVE candidate.
My choice is easy, in the first instance. #NotTrump.
3/3/16, 9:28 AM"
Chuck you aren't listening. I'm not saying Trump is my first choice or my second choice or even my third choice. I'm voting in my primary for the most conservative candidate on the ballot but I'm not blind to the reality that Trump is appearing to be the most likely winner of the primaries. If that is the case then the choice is rather simple: Trump or a hell of a lot worse. The Democrats have run the least competent, least capable and certainly by far the most corrupt candidate ever. So is there even a real choice in November if it is Trump who is the nominee?
Does feminism even know that men are amused by feminism?
ARM -
I don't vote with my vagina or my uterus, or even my wiminz feelz. I would never, could never, will never, vote for a criminal.
You know what they say about men who hate women.
If Trump is the nominee I think part of the backlash will be Republicans losing the House and Senate.
You know who is a good Christian? Trump. Corinthians 2 baby.
2 Corinthians. Best god ever.
Trump is not a wonk.
You want a wonk, vote for the ultimate wonk, Hillary. She is completely flawed, otherwise, but she can recite a 100 point policy position verbatim.
If Trump wins the nomination it will be interesting (in a car accident sort of way) watching Congressional candidates campaign with him.
They'll be asked whether they believe Bush lied to get us into a war; whether it's acceptable to kill the families of terrorists; whether it's acceptable to torture; whether funding Planned Parenthood is the party's stance; on and on and on.
Trump is no only opposing the Democrats; he's opposing the major planks of his own party.
It's absurd. This whole campaign is absurd.
Oh, I forgot, our own loveable wonk is joining the party - Mitt Romney.
We're pretty far along on this thread, so I think I can safely ask whether it's OK to put the leavings from last night's chicken curry in the chicken feed for this morning. Both a philosophical and a biological question.
Well JR you have your comforting figures concocted to convince you of Trump's unelectability. I think you are in for a rude awakening when the Trump train runs you over in November. But neither of us is an infallible prognosticator so we shall just have to see.
tim in vermont said...
Two weeks is a lifetime in politics. Cruz or Rubio can still win it
I have nothing against legitimate criticism against any of them. I just wish people would lay off the stuff it's hard to take back. I'm not voting for Trump in the Florida primary, but I will vote for him the general, since apparently the media blackout on Sanders has sealed the nomination for Hillary 'The Hawk' Clinton. What I won't do is pelt him with cheap shots. If you want to talk about bankruptcies, fine. How many business ventures has he undertaken? What percentage have failed? If it turned out that the percentage was high, that's a legitimate point.
Ezacly.
but she can recite a 100 point policy position verbatim.
A hundred ways to spend other people's money.
Just heard peals of laughter from the wife reading Trump's response to Mitt Romney's calling him a phony. Trump called him a stiff. Hillarious. Cuts right to the heart of the matter.
Blogger AprilApple said...
I laugh that Trump supporters like his bravado, and yet care very little about his lack of substance.
I don't think he lacks substance. His position papers especially.
His speeches? Absolutely. But the speeches don't make the man.
I think requiring a presidential candidate to know fourth grade level civics is not asking for a wonk.
He's completely unqualified.
At the very least his supporters should ask - demand - that he understand the basics. But they're a cult and they won't or can't even ask for that.
Steve M. Galbraith, you're correct. It is a cult. It's idiocracy. Many movements in American history have been proud to proclaim their lack of knowledge and lack of self-awareness.
Steve M. Galbraith said...
I think requiring a presidential candidate to know fourth grade level civics is not asking for a wonk.
Perhaps Obama cold explain the US principal of "separation of powers" to the ignorant Trump?
CatherineM said...
If Trump is the nominee I think part of the backlash will be Republicans losing the House and Senate.
3/3/16, 9:46 AM"
Perhaps but I don't see how it favors the Democrats for Congress if their presidential candidate is indicted. So let's see how the Democrats try to work their anti-Trump message in congressional races. Every Democrat candidate running anti-Trump messages is going to have to defend why they are supporting a grifter, criminal and traitor. Only prosecutors grant immunity and they just did. The shit just got real.
All right, he's completely unqualified. I give up. You win.
Alexander,
"My approach is that nobody owns your vote, and nobody has the right to offer you a shit sandwich and demand you eat it cause it's better than the other guys. If they want your vote, they ought to earn it."
I agree with you here. I'm not a registered Republican, so I don't feel the least bit required to vote for the Republican nominee out of any sense of party or ideological loyalty. Ironically, Trump can probably get my vote more easily than most of the other Republican candidates, but he's going to have to earn it.
Even when I agree with Trump in theory, he has a way of overstating the case so much that I I cant agree with Trump. For example his position on waterboarding. I'll defend Bush's limited use of waterboarding on very select targets. But Trump seems like he'd waterboard anyone they captured. That's not how waterboarding is supposed to work .
Yes, it is effective, and yes its not as bad as chopping off heads, and sometimes its necessary. but its not the default interrogation for any person we capture. And I"m not sure if Trump gets the distinction.
eric wrote:
I don't think he lacks substance. His position papers especially.
His speeches? Absolutely. But the speeches don't make the man.
do you really think he reads his own website? Those position papers were written by his staff. I doubt he even knows what's in them.
My new principle? Don't vote for anyone who wishes she (or he) had a penis.
Terry said, "Perhaps Obama cold explain the US principal of "separation of powers" to the ignorant Trump?"
So your argument is that because we've got an ignorant fool in office now, we should elect another one?
Limited blogger,
"Trump is not a wonk."
I'm not looking for a wonk. I'm looking for someone who at least knows the basics about national security and foreign policy... Like what the nuclear triad is or how he's going to beat ISIS.
Blogger Bob Ellison said...
Terry said, "Perhaps Obama cold explain the US principal of "separation of powers" to the ignorant Trump?"
So your argument is that because we've got an ignorant fool in office now, we should elect another one?
3/3/16, 10:08 AM"
I think he is saying being an ignorant fool is no impediment to getting elected and reelected president or vice president.
Perhaps but I don't see how it favors the Democrats for Congress if their presidential candidate is indicted.
There is a non-zero chance of this happening, but it's not a election strategy. Right now it's in Hawaiian-Birth-Certificate territory.
"So your argument is that because we've got an ignorant fool in office now, we should elect another one?"
I will never vote for Trump, Bob Ellison.
My point is that ignorance of civics can be fixed. Hatred of the United States cannot be fixed.
"Act like an adult = act politically correct.
The interruptions and doubling down are Trump's way to throw sand in the PC gears."- Rhiardin
Actually acting like an adult= acting like an adult
Acting like an adult means not responding to every insult with juvenile retorts.
What is the saying-- When you can't argue on the facts, change the subject and attack the person?
The strategy that Cruz and Rubio should take is to treat Trump like the juvenile he is. Dismissive, condescending, scolding. Reagan could do it with a smile. I realize neither Cruz or Rubio have the experience that Reagan brought to the 1980 election, but they should spend some time watching and reading him. Which points out a flaw in both of them-- their youth and inexperience (more so Rubio). All the more reason they need to study Reagan.
I realize that Clinton and then Obama perfected the 'Rapid Response Team' and the 'Scorched Earth Policy' and used them effectively.
Unlike the progressive/leftist/liberal politician that can get away with outrageous accusations with a 'partial pinocchio' conservatives do not have the cover of the MSM.
Compare that eloquent speech to any Trump speech.
I thought his press conference after Super Tuesday was fairly eloquent.
But Trump isn't a speech guy. He basically says what's on his mind and he's pretty good at it.
I've been mining youtube for old Donald Trump interviews. He's been remarkably consistent over the years!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJprbO1mbUs
Steve M. G. -
I think requiring a presidential candidate to know fourth grade level civics is not asking for a wonk.
Added: I agree!
While people are sick to death of stale talking points out of ALL politicians, there is an excepted norm that the potential president have a basic grasp and understanding of the top issues, and that he/she be able to articulate them.
Terry,
"Perhaps Obama cold explain the US principal of "separation of powers" to the ignorant Trump?"
That's a pretty typical response from a Trump supporter: "yes, my candidate is ignorant about X, but so is Obama!" We're not talking about the current President- most of us here recognize that he was incompetent, most of us knew that going in; the issue here is how do we get a more competent President this time... By electing someone who is also ignorant of basic facts? If that's the case, sure, Trump is your man.
I am not considering voting for Obama. I am, however, considering voting for Trump. Therefore, Trump has to show me that he understands some basic things about national security and foreign policy.
Bobby said...
Limited blogger,
"Trump is not a wonk."
I'm not looking for a wonk. I'm looking for someone who at least knows the basics about national security and foreign policy... Like what the nuclear triad is or how he's going to beat ISIS.
3/3/16, 10:10 AM"
Vote for any other candidate in your primary. However the first basics a person who takes an oath to faithfully defend the constitution and execute the laws is not to break them. Maybe Hillary will be the first president to address the nation from the presidential jail cell. I'm sure she will look fine in her orange jumpsuit and manacles.
Terry, well said, and I understand.
cubanbob,
"I think he is saying being an ignorant fool is no impediment to getting elected and reelected president or vice president."
We already know that. You're saying because history demonstrates that being an ignorant fool is no impediment to getting elected President, then we should not care if we have an ignorant fool as President... Over all the non-ignorant-fool options available...? Is that really what we want for this country?
"Perhaps Obama cold explain the US principal of "separation of powers" to the ignorant Trump?"
That's a pretty typical response from a Trump supporter:
But I am not a Trump supporter, Bobby. I will never vote for Trump, not because he is ignorant of civics, but because he is not a conservative.
How many of the other GOP candidates understand civics well enough to know that the executive does not legislate, and must enforce the immigration laws passed by the people's congress/
Editing is crucial.
"He's been remarkably consistent over the years!" As in, he was for the wars in Iraq and Libya before he was against them?
Worst of all - if possible - is that I have no idea as to who Trump would name as his Cabinet or from whom he would get advice.
Anyone? Any Trump supporter know who he might have as Attorney General?
A President, especially someone like a Trump with no government experience on any level, has to rely on the people around him. For advice and to carry out his policies.
Nobody knows who will fill this for Trump.
And yet we're just supposed to accept his candidacy as inevitable.
The whole thing is a farce.
Blogger Henry said...
Perhaps but I don't see how it favors the Democrats for Congress if their presidential candidate is indicted.
There is a non-zero chance of this happening, but it's not a election strategy. Right now it's in Hawaiian-Birth-Certificate territory.
3/3/16, 10:15 AM
Did I miss the hearing about the one hundred plus FBI agents investigating the Hawaiian birth certificates and a federal prosecutor granting immunity in that matter? In a few months if she is still around, it (Hillary's criminality) will be part of the election strategy for both presidential and congressional elections.
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were wonks and they set the ME on fire. It is not just knowledge but judgement. Same with the masters of the universe who financed the rise of China on the backs of working Americans. All super smart knowledgeable guys. Trump is not an ideologue so there is a fighting chance that he will display better judgement than the neocons and masters of the universe who cratered our economy and threw away our strategic position in the ME and the far east.
Will be interesting to see how many ad-worthy quotes Romney will deliver to the DNC.
Bobby said...
cubanbob,
"I think he is saying being an ignorant fool is no impediment to getting elected and reelected president or vice president."
We already know that. You're saying because history demonstrates that being an ignorant fool is no impediment to getting elected President, then we should not care if we have an ignorant fool as President... Over all the non-ignorant-fool options available...? Is that really what we want for this country?
3/3/16, 10:23 AM"
I'm not saying we shouldn't care or that is what we really want for the country. I'm saying you and I are but two grains of sand at the beach and the two of us alone don't determine who will be the Republican nominee. What I am saying between the ignorant fool and the criminal traitor who is also an ignorant fool I'll chose the lesser of the two evils.
@SMG: "Nobody knows who will fill this for Trump." Including Trump.
Bigger issue: nobody knows what kinds of judges he will nominate/appoint. Including Trump.
AReasonableMan, yes, judgement is important.
China's economic rise is a triumph for the world. You think not?
Trump is a clown. "Cratered our economy"? You think Trump's gonna do better?
"Trump is not an ideologue". So someone with principles is a bad guy? We're supposed to elect a schmuck who knows nothing about anything and is willing to compromise on everything?
Will Romney head to Canada as well?
Maybe there will be walk across moment for hand size comparison.
So, the answer as to whom Trump will name is to point elsewhere?
Yes, appointing wonks or experts is not a guarantee of success. Recall the "The Best and the Brightest" generation? But the response to that failure isn't to say "I don't care."
Asking who he will name - he's 1/3 of the way into his campaign - isn't asking too much. Who a candidate gets advice from tells us something about the views of that candidate.
With Trump nobody knows. But to his supporters that's a plus. Because as they've shown, they don't care.
I'm contacting my board of elections, I want my vote for Romney rescinded.
As in, he was for the wars in Iraq and Libya before he was against them?
Iraq? Debateable.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/
He's been consistent in that he thinks America is getting played as a fool because of incompetent leadership.
If you're looking for consistency among the political class, it will take you a while( as in never).
cuban bob:
Why are you skipping ahead to November? This is primary season. We Republicans are trying to pick the best nominee. Set aside who you might vote for, if the choice is Trump or Clinton. Because that's an awful choice.
I'd prefer a choice between the ticket of Rubio/Kasich, against Hillary Clinton and Cory Booker. That's an easy choice.
I am trying to make this easier, not harder.
Mitt Romney should be ashamed of himself for giving this speech.
I'm contacting my board of elections, I want my vote for Romney rescinded.
I'm watching Mitt and I suspect Democrats will be admiring his brilliance on Trump later today.
Funny that the GOPe which is abhorring the behavior of somebody else, has stooped to this.
If Romney believes that Trump is unqualified to be president and will do harm to it he has an obligation to speak out.
He would be shameful for NOT trying to prevent damage to it.
>>I think requiring a presidential candidate to know fourth grade level civics is not asking for a wonk.
I have a fifth grader. They don't teach civics anymore.
They do, however, teach recycling, and saving the earth by putting your plastic bottle in the special bin.
Patriotism is not taught in school. But my kids get plenty of that at home.
I registered as a Republican back in 2012 cause I wanted to have a say in the primaries. I voted for this schmuck in the primary and the general. I'm changing back to Independent tomorrow.
This is the single most embarrassing thing I've ever seen.
Apparently some Trump supporters believe that if you think a candidate will do harm to the country he should remain silent.
Well, that's apparently what Trump has done all of these year. Where has he been?
But not everyone is immoral and unethical as Trump. Some people have principles and won't sell them like a piece of real estate.
Never, ever, Trump. Never.
Alexander:
Ditto to you, as to cuban bob.
I'm not saying that I wouldn't hold my nose and give Trump my vote in November. I am trying to avoid that possibility altogether. This is primary season. I think all the Republican candidates are preferable to Trump. I am trying to block Trump from the nomination, because that is what is at issue now. Let's get a better nominee. Don't confuse the issue.
He's a shitty candidate for my party. But I am a loyal Republican.
What a tiny, miserable man. Just cause you couldn't get it done, you think you can come in and destroy the people's choice?
Bob Ellison said...
China's economic rise is a triumph for the world. You think not?
From the perspective of the US obviously not. In the never ending struggle of nations it is obviously better to have weak enemies. Of course, a lot of bankers now have much stronger bank accounts, so I guess we should just shut up and celebrate the triumph of the quislings.
DNC: "thanks for the soundbites, doofus"
MSM: "thanks for the soundbites, doofus"
Trump: "thanks for the soundbites, doofus"
There is ZERO chance that Hillary will be indicted before the election. Why on earth would Obama's DOJ indict his preferred successor? Yes, 2 months ago, they floated the idea of Joe Biden running, but ultimately rejected it.
There is no way on earth that AG Loretta Lynch indicts Hillary. None.
Why didn't he stand up to Obama, like he's standing up to Trump?
If he was half as 'courageous' then, we wouldn't be nominating a 'pub this time around.
ARM,
"It is not just knowledge but judgement. ... Trump is not an ideologue so there is a fighting chance that he will display better judgement than ..."
There is a chance of that. There is also a chance that- not knowing any of the relevant facts or details, and with no discerning principles to guide him- Trump would be easily seduced by less scrupulous actors and led around by his advisors. That makes his identifying who these smart advisors he intends to bring in much more important than for the other candidates who are at least informed on the details. And that gets back to Steve Galbraith's point about not knowing whom Trump is going to choose as these advisors.
Without sufficient knowledge, good judgment becomes much, much more difficult.
Hope all you GOPe'ers are proud of this moment
@Chuck
I'm not saying that I wouldn't hold my nose and give Trump my vote in November. I am trying to avoid that possibility altogether. This is primary season. I think all the Republican candidates are preferable to Trump. I am trying to block Trump from the nomination, because that is what is at issue now. Let's get a better nominee. Don't confuse the issue.
It is too late in the day for this. National Review and conservatives should have picked a candidate (Cruz or Rubio or someone else) months ago to challenge Trump, and they didn't.
Trump exploited this fractured opposition, and won many states. That's the fact, jack.
Romney thinks Trump will harm - intentionally or not - the country.
But he's supposed to be silent about it. Just let it happen and make the best of it. Country be damned.
That's Donald Trump's principles. Me first, country? Eh.
Because the US is just like a piece of real estate that you can flip when you get a better deal.
Romney's speech will be focal point of debates tonight, by moderators and contenders.
Bobby: But that's already happened- like, I don't see how asking about the nuclear triad was, in any way, related to PC. Is there a non-PC answer to that? Apparently not, because Trump's best answer was to say "nuclear is the most important" and demonstrate he didn't even know what everyone was talking about.
I don't watch debates - they're dumb high-school debate formats targeted at the LCD, they provide no information about a candidate that isn't more quickly and easily retrievable elsewhere, and there isn't a single candidate who isn't nails-on-blackboard irritating to me whenever he opens his mouth. But occasionally I look up snippets, as I did when that "nuclear triad" thing was going 'round. Took the trouble to view the Trump and Rubio bits; that was about as much as I could stand. (Was there more than that?)
As I recall, Trump was completely lame in his response, doing what candidates do when they're caught off guard. Rubio was, obviously, giving a carefully coached, canned answer, and no, ahem, adult could conclude from that performance that Rubio had a grasp of military strategy or a knowledge of our military capacity any deeper than Trump's (or even that he'd heard of "nuclear triad" before his coaches sat him down).
As I said, that information is not available from debates. Even a superb, non-coached response that revealed true in-depth understanding on a specific issue tells you nothing about other "presidential" qualitites - learning capacity and the ability to find and take good advice. I have no evidence from that debate Q&A that either man knows anything of substance about nuclear triads; I do know from other sources that Rubio's foreign policy platform and advisors are, imo, bad news.
IOW, you seem to be putting an enormous amount of weight on something of very little substance. (And there is nothing hard to understand about "nuclear triad"; you're familiar with the term or you're not. Probably more people know something about what it comprises than are familiar with the term itself.)
I did a quick google to see if I could find Cruz saying anything more substantive, found this. Again, a bit of canned pol-speak tailored to sound knowledgeable, and, I guess, "tough on defense" to radio audiences. You really buying that Cruz has thought long and hard over the years about what the most important component of our nuclear triad is, or which is in most desperate need of upgrade? I don't. Nor would he need to have done, to be a good president. Now, if he had said, "I think we need to stop wasting money on our nuclear defense", or "I think we should nuke Moscow if the Russians don't get their fingers out of the Ukrainian pie" - that would tell you something useful about his views on defense.
Chest Rockwell (great name by the way),
"He's been consistent in that he thinks America is getting played as a fool because of incompetent leadership."
And so the solution is to pick someone who is so ignorant about the basics of national security and foreign policy that he can't tell you what the nuclear triad is or how he's going to defeat ISIS (but knows more about ISIS than do the Generals)? That logically follows?
It's always good when men and women of principle who care about the country and not the party or their own interests stand up for those principles.
For people with no principles this is galling.
Thomas More was hated, detested, for his stance.
"Hope all you GOPe'ers are proud of this moment"
Hope the Dems are happy with their choice between an ancient socialist and a pathological liar!
@cubanbob. I'm talking about odds, not process. The point is, don't build your election strategy on a deus-ex-machina. Even if there were a strong chance of Ms. Clinton or one of her aids being indicted before November, the Republicans still have to run a campaign, and knowing the Clintons, I wouldn't depend on that indictment being part of it.
AReasonableMan said...Bob Ellison said...
China's economic rise is a triumph for the world. You think not?
From the perspective of the US obviously not. In the never ending struggle of nations it is obviously better to have weak enemies.
Here we see yet again that it's power, power, power above all. Leftists and Trumpists (but I repeat myself) don't care about people, children, or kitty-cats. Power, people.
News will be all about Romney's speech. All day.
This is why we are so pissed off. We hired Romney to do a job. Instead, he lost. He failed to go after Obama and decided to be milk toast for the election.
But going after a fellow Republican? Oh, he can do that. Republicans love the spotlight that they can get when going after each other.
Disgusting.
Limited blogger:
If you are an independent, and so removed from the Republican Party, why get so worked up over my Party's nominee? Just keep to yourself until you have to make a choice in November.
And don't give me any crap about Donald Trump being "the people's choice." What is at stake right now, is the REPUBLICANS' choice. Trump, getting 35% of the vote, in open primaries with lots of non-Republicans supporting him, and all the while with net-negatives the worst in the entire race, is hardly a "peoples' choice." Trump is the choice of a not-very-Republican plurality, with 70% of Republican primary voters choosing someone else.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/donald-trumps-strongest-supporters-a-certain-kind-of-democrat.html?_r=0
I would not have chosen Trump but I too think he is now the candidate. It's the enormous numbers he is pulling into the GOP. Even if consultants began jumping off skyscrapers as if he were the Crash of 29, they couldn't change the fact that he brings people in to the party. But why do the consultants hate him so much? - he is a "country club Republican" or a "limousine liberal" just like them, except he's down on PC. PC is a cultural issue it seems, but maybe it's something more, more like Matrix or a gamer helmet that people wear and they think they are flying a plane and fighting in the skies when they are just staggering around in an empty room. But doing that keeps people playing the game from seeing the real pain of real people in this country.
I think also that Trump is running for office against the media and so it's showtime all the time. You answer the situation, not the supposed question. He isn't thinking "I'm the President", he's thinking he'll get the SOB's on the other side from him.
I think he will respect the military if in office - that is what he will do. If he improves the situation for business which he will try to do, then employment will go up. If he cuts down on illegal immigration then employment for Americans will go up some more. Employment is the key - not more government planning to help the unemployed. I believe he supports school choice - that will improve education. He will try to get Planned Parenthood to give up abortions and just do the rest or face de-funding. Well, there is no "the rest". I suppose he doesn't really understand that "the rest" is mostly tests attached onto abortion visits. But they will insult him and then we'll see.
Sorry, will leave the Republican party April 20th. Day after New York primary. Will be proudly pulling the lever for the next POTUS - Donald Trump.
Finally get to vote for a winner.
"I think also that Trump is running for office against the media and so it's showtime all the time."
Against the media? Trump and the media are playing the game hand in hand. They're feeding off and from each other. If the media was running against Trump they would be silent about him or at least minimize his attempts to take over the conversations. The media opposed Walker and others, not talking about him. Trump is their dream candidate.
The media establishment is all in for Trump, that's the big irony of his campaign. Everyone thinks they're protesting the Republican establishment but are really walking entirely in line with NBCe, ABCe, CBSe, CNNe, etc.
The people the media highlight are for the media's purposes, not for the sake of the country or objective debate.
Anglelyne,
"Rubio was, obviously, giving a carefully coached, canned answer, and no, ahem, adult could conclude from that performance that Rubio had a grasp of military strategy or a knowledge of our military capacity any deeper than Trump's (or even that he'd heard of "nuclear triad" before his coaches sat him down)."
Even if that were true (and I don't necessarily agree), it would demonstrate that Rubio at least took the time to learn about some very basic aspects of US national security policy, like when Carly articulated her ideas on the military force structure. We, in turn, got to hear at least what they've selected as a very basic foundation of their intended policy, knowing full well it's not everything, sure.
Conversely, with Trump, you're asking me to hope that he will appoint competent advisors and then heed their advice, but I have no way of knowing whom these advisors will be or what policies he's inclined to pursue until after he's been crowned? And this is somehow viewed as better? I'm not buying it.
Incidentally, I think Cruz is an idiot on national security and foreign policy. He's the Republican candidate that I'm least likely to support in the fall. I think it would go Kasich, Trump, Rubio, Cruz. But Trump is going to have to show me that he's willing to study the issues a bit if he wants my vote for President. The good news for him is that my vote doesn't matter one iota and he can win with the votes of people who don't know where Jordan or Nigeria are on the map.
eric:
You really are completely shameless, aren't you? I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, on the notion that you are more clueless than shameless.
You are whining about Republicans going after each other? After months of Donald Trump's insults and personal attacks? A kind of Catskill-comic campaign? You gotta be fucking joking.
Trump has taken this campaign straight into the gutter. A gutter of personal trash personal appearance attacks; a lowest-common denominator approach devoid of a single important or intelligent thought.
Now, I hope that not just other Republicans but EVERYONE goes after Trump on the rude, personal, insult level that seems to excite so many of that minority of Americans who actually like Donald Trump.
Trump is attracting an awful lot of new GOP primary voters. Potentially these voters could decide the 2016 presidential election in November. Job One of the GOP should be to keep these voters, it should not be to destroy Trump.
Bob Ellison said...
Here we see yet again that it's power, power, power above all. Leftists and Trumpists (but I repeat myself) don't care about people, children, or kitty-cats. Power, people.
Why not just roll over and say 'fuck me in the ass', because that is what this attitude really means. But, of course that is not your real attitude, when it comes to you personally. You made money along with the other quislings by financing the rise of China. Let's hope that you are not the first up against the wall when the consequences of your actions finally come due.
"You really buying that Cruz has thought long and hard over the years about what the most important component of our nuclear triad is, or which is in most desperate need of upgrade? I don't"- Angelyne
Ted Cruz sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, so yes for the last four years I suspect the issue has crossed his mind.
Yeah, Trump won.
Okay, what did you win?
What's his plan on the debt? On education? On entitlement programs? On the environment? Who will be his judicial nominees? Who are the people he'll appoint to key positions?
Or a hundred-and-one other issues?
Yeah, you don't care.
There is still a disconnect. The establishment Republicans are getting elected everywhere, or so I've heard, I haven't been laying out the map and counting. Richard Shelby won easily in Alabama. The anger expressed at the establishment Republicans seems to exist mostly at the presidential level. Doesn't this raise any questions about the seriousness of the electorate and this endeavor?
"What's his plan on the debt? On education? On entitlement programs? On the environment? Who will be his judicial nominees? Who are the people he'll appoint to key positions?
Or a hundred-and-one other issues?"
Bubble defined.
AprilApple:
speaking of PC busting...
RH - I've been holding this back for a LONG time. Hardin - Take your women fearing/ women hating misogyny and shove it up your ass.
That's not PC busting, that's an attempt at PC enforcement.
P.S. "women fearing/hating misogyny" is a bit redundant, no? And weakens the effect. "Take you misogyny and shove it up your ass" works better.
"receiving the wafer in communion, "How long does this take to work?"
About 30 minutes. Problem is you get the sniffles and a stuffy nose just when you need it least.
Some strange new respect is headin' Romney's way, I guarantee it.
Paddy O said...
...
The media establishment is all in for Trump, that's the big irony of his campaign.
...
You're not wrong! At least not for the time being. But when the choice comes down to Trump v Biden, or Trump v Clinton, watch out.
And when that shitstorm arrives, I will not abide the Trumpsters' claiming that their guy got jobbed by the media. Trump is an oppo-researcher's playground. He will be the ultimate disaster in a general election campaign. Goldwater, McGovern, Dukakis; they will all look like statesmen and serious contenders next to the Trumpocalypse.
"Incidentally, I think Cruz is an idiot on national security and foreign policy"- Bobby
Give me some examples of his positions on national security and foreign policy that lead you to this conclusion.
Romney's speech will fall on deaf ears and is a sad addition to his recent political history of reacting incorrectly at a critical moment.
Hmm, AReasonableMan. Not so reasonable after all. What do you know about me?
You don't seem to have parsed my recent comment well, either.
The loser Mitt Romney calling Trump a loser, that's rich. Couldn't they find a GOPe winner to call Trump a loser? No they couldn't.
"The media establishment is all in for Trump, that's the big irony of his campaign."
Just wait until its Trump and Hillary in the general election and see who the media establishment likes.
Bob Ellison said...
What do you know about me?
I know you are an apologist for the quislings in the financial industry.
Christie speaks at 1:00pm, Trump at 1:30pm.
Mittmentum lasted about an hour. Congrats.
Huh. How do you know that?
I'm not trying to bait you here (yes, I am). I'm just curious as to how your mind works (I really am).
Blogger Chuck said...
cuban bob:
Why are you skipping ahead to November? This is primary season. We Republicans are trying to pick the best nominee. Set aside who you might vote for, if the choice is Trump or Clinton. Because that's an awful choice. "
It is an awful choice, thats why I'm voting not Trump in my state's primary on the 15th. However unless there is some major turnaround one has to accept the real possibility of Trump being the Republican nominee and if he is then in November which will come soon enough it will be Trump versus the criminal traitor or a communist or the nation's village idiot if he is selected by the Democrat party elders. This past weekend I had the opportunity to briefly speak to one of my areas Republican congressperson who urged me to vote not Trump. I said I agreed but if he does become the nominee and gets elected I told the congressperson it's your job to make sure Trump doesn't go off the rails.
ARM -
How much money did the Clintons make in the financial industry that you so vilify? (the same industry that pays for your retirement)
On Dec. 2 of last year, Muslim immigrants Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik killed 14 people in a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. I cannot help but think that if any of the GOP (or Dem) candidates were asked how immigration laws should be changed in light of this attack, no one but Trump would have a ready answer.
The rest really don't care if every so often a few dozen Americans are killed by crazy Muslims. It's the price we pay (not them) for their being seen as being welcoming to immigrants.
Romney called Trump a phony. Trump replied "Sick burn, dude. At least I'm not Candy Crowley's bitch or a great big pussy!"
[That may not be the precise transcription]
"Trump is attracting an awful lot of new GOP primary voters. Potentially these voters could decide the 2016 presidential election in November. Job One of the GOP should be to keep these voters, it should not be to destroy Trump."-- Terry
Yes he is.
But I haven't seen much analysis on who these voters are and whether they will:
1. Vote for Trump if he gets the nomination and aren't just crossover votes messing with the process
2. Whether there is any chance these voters would stay in the R column if Trump isn't the nominee
As to question 2, I think it is probable that they are attracted to Trump, not the Republican positions, which is not to say that calling Trump an idiot, etc. (he obviously is NOT an idiot) is counterproductive.
As to question 1, you're guess is as good as mine, at this point.
Trump is a salesman, and he's been making the pitch in a way that doesn't attract me, but my concern is more about whether he can win the presidency. Attitudes about him are very negative at a time when the MSM really hasn't focused on his past in a way that could undermine his credibility. He already suffers from a credibility problem with conservatives, let alone millions of voters that haven't thought much about what his presidency might mean.
And so the solution is to pick someone who is so ignorant about the basics of national security and foreign policy that he can't tell you what the nuclear triad is or how he's going to defeat ISIS (but knows more about ISIS than do the Generals)? That logically follows?
Well, I'm not sure that's true. Trump is clearly not stupid. I'd say he's pretty damn smart. Is he ignorant on some political issues? Of course, he's not a politician. Politics is boring. But I'd suggest that he is light years ahead of 'learned' politicians when it comes to worldly knowledge, based on the fact that he's a capitalist who's done business in many countries around the globe.
I think at this point we need someone who isn't a lifelong politician. Where has that gotten us?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा