A Tale of Two Candidates
Ted Cruz has won a historic victory in Iowa. Now he, Donald Trump, and Marco Rubio head to New Hampshire, a goofy sort of state where “Live Free or Die” has largely given way to the gritty Northeast ethic of “Gimme Stuff for Free or Die.” Cruz will no doubt get a bump from his Iowa win, but few people expect him to win or even do particularly well in the rather bizarre state of New Hampshire. Trump seems like a lock there, with a crowded field of non-entities jockeying for second place — although now that Trump is a Verified Loser, polls could change.
So I’m not going to get wound up over New Hampshire. Big Media will do its best to construct a narrative where Cruz has LOST ALL HIS MOMENTUM and CAN’T POSSIBLY WIN GOING FORWARD and it will all be rank B.S. When the SEC primary is over, the lay of the land will be much clearer.
In the meantime, however, I’d like to contrast two revealing pieces: one about Ted Cruz and one about Donald Trump.
First, there is this extensive profile of Ted Cruz in the Texas Monthly, titled The Field Guide to Ted Cruz. As someone who grew up in Texas I can tell you that the Texas Monthly is not a publication that is generally favorable to Republicans. But this piece by Erica Greider is worth quoting at length, because it is consistent with what I have learned about Ted Cruz from watching him for several months, reading his book (which he wrote himself), and closely following his positions and statements on various issues.
1) Ted Cruz is not a fire-breathing extremist.
. . . .
There’s no question that Cruz is a conservative. On constitutional issues, I’d say he’s the gold standard. But he’s not as extreme or ideological as people often assume. Maggie Wright, a Texan who has traveled to Iowa to volunteer, gave journalist (and Texas Monthly contributor) Robert Draper an admirably concise summary: “He’s for states’ rights, for all the Constitution, he will not allow us to bash the gays but won’t let anybody do jihad on the Christians.” Similarly, though Cruz is one of the few Republicans in Congress who passes muster with the right wing’s self-appointed purity czars, and he is contemptuous of conservatives who assert principled convictions they do nothing to advance, he is ecumenical about disagreement. “In any two-party system you welcome people with a variety of views,” he told me in 2013, after I asked if the Republican coalition could include leaders who support gay marriage, or even abortion rights.
. . . .
2) Cruz is also not a wild-eyed maniac.
. . . .
While reporting on Cruz in 2013, I was struck by his composure and calm. He remained serene and even-tempered at all times, even under potentially annoying circumstances—waylaid by a lone supporter with a homemade Ted Cruz poster who had been waiting outside the Heritage Foundation in the hopes of meeting him, even as several tense staffers were trying to hustle him back to the Senate in time for an imminently approaching vote; stoically talking to the journalist from Texas Monthly for hours, once on a day when he was also juggling half a dozen events in Central Texas, and once on a day when he was so sick he could barely get through a sentence without a coughing fit. He was impeccably polite and well-mannered with me, and in all the interactions I observed.
Even now, ten months into a grueling campaign, under intense media scrutiny and while being attacked from all directions, Cruz has remained focused and unruffled. He’s hardly unhinged, quite the opposite. If anything, his preternatural self-possession is the most unsettling thing about him.
Other “tips” about Cruz are that he has “nerves of steel,” and that he is smart, very strategic, really into the Constitution, and in it to win. If Greider has a criticism, it is that Cruz is very careful with his words to the point of being lawyerly — which is, I think, a fair point, but not one that bothers me.
Bear with me for just one more quote, from the point about Cruz’s love of the Constitution — because this is central to why I love this man:
Love him or hate him, Cruz knows the Constitution. By high school he had memorized the thing, thanks to an after-school program run by the Free Enterprise Institute, which had the teenage Cruz studying the Federalist Papers and traveling the state with a troupe of like-minded adolescents billed as the “Constitutional Corroborators.” His undergraduate thesis, at Princeton, was about the historical and theoretical underpinnings of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. After attending law school, at Harvard, he landed clerkships in a federal district court, then at the Supreme Court. And so on.
In light of his lifelong obsession with the subject, I am reasonably confident that Cruz’s diabolical plans, and thirst for world domination, are ultimately constrained by his own fealty to the supreme law of the land. What’s more, Cruz has specific expertise in the constitutional limits of the office he’s currently aiming for. His arguments against the president’s executive overreach have been backed by unique professional credentials, which actually exceed Obama’s. Both men are graduates of Harvard Law, and have been professors of constitutional law. Cruz is also the person who has successfully argued, at the Supreme Court, that an executive order issued by George W. Bush amounted to an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. If Cruz becomes president, he may start to feel differently about executive power, but at least he’s given the subject plenty of thought, and has reflected on the story of Joseph, who was doing well in Egypt, until there came a pharaoh who knew not Joseph.
How about that. A president who actually knows and respects the Constitution. Can you imagine? Today, I can.
Now, let’s move on to the second piece, which was pointed out to me by frequent commenter Sammy Finkelman. It is a New York Times compilation (purporting to be comprehensive) of Twitter insults by Donald Trump. As you might imagine, it’s amusing. But what I found noteworthy was to look at things Trump has said about his opponents, who would logically form the pool of people from which one might pick a running mate. The NYT has the full set of insults but I’ll just pick out a couple per candidate to give you a flavor:
- Rubio: “lightweight choker”; “Just another all talk, no action, politician. Truly doesn’t have a clue!”
- Ben Carson: “many lies by Ben Carson”
- Carly Fiorina: “if you listen to Carly Fiorina for more than ten minutes straight, you develop a massive headache”
- John Kasich: “dummy”; “Pathetic!”; “total failure”
- Rick Perry: “should be forced to take an IQ test”
- Scott Walker: “not smart”; “not presidential material”
- George Pataki: “terrible governor of NY, one of the worst”
- Lindsey Graham: “embarrassed himself with his failed run for President”
Now, I’m not saying he’s wrong about all of these observations. Some of them are amusingly on the mark. But . . .
. . . but, aside from the obvious boorishness of all this, coming as it does from a candidate for the Oval Office . . . one wonders how Trump would pick a running mate from such a crowd of stupid, unimpressive, weak failures.
Ah, but there is one guy who hasn’t received the same kind of biting criticism. According to the Times, the worst thing Trump has said about Chris Christie is this: “How is Chris Christie running the state of NJ, which is deeply troubled, when he is spending all of his time in NH? New Jerseyans not happy!”
Maybe he likes those New York/New Jersey values.
Speaking of New York . . . even some of the New York values crowd doesn’t much care for Trump. I’ll leave you with today’s New York Daily News cover, courtesy of Beldar:
Just as a reminder that the boor is also a loser.
UPDATE: New York Daily News, not Daily Mail. Thanks to Sammy F. for the correction.
Ding.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:18 amThe real losers are the people of New York who get their “news” from a paper that would rather pump up a tie between a democrat/socialist and a communist, neither a native son to a home grown New Yorker, with New York values just because he’s a Republican. Even knowing full well over the years of business and construction etcetera, Trump has employed thousands on New Yorkers. These brain washed gen-X’ers side with the philosophy of “gimme free stuff” because they’re taught to in govm’t schools. Now that Trump has lost New York can be flushed, it’s totally full of…..
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:30 amWait a minute… you’re saying Donald Trump is a loser?
Colonel Haiku (d17996) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:32 amThanks for offering me the chance to make this clear.
Donald Trump is a loser.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:34 amYes, they are the real losers, but we should also remember that Donald Trump is also a real loser. On account of how he lost.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:35 amTrump supporters: he’s laughing at you.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:42 amIt’s not Gen-Xers who put the Geritol Brigade up there. It’s the Baby Boomers. If we limited the franchise to people under 65, Hillary, Bernie and Trump would have f-f-faded away two elections ago.
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:44 amIt is abundantly clear (at least to me) that Donald Trump really is the reincarnation
Bar Sinister (c62a89) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:00 amof P.T.Barnum.
Maybe so, nk, but Kim Kardashian, Kanye West and Mark Zuckerberg wouldn’t be much of an improvement…
Colonel Haiku (d17996) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:03 amHell has frozen over if that article appeared in the Texas Monthly. Thanks for the link, and as I suspected last night, your post-Iowa write-ups were worth the wait.
Sean (1d5074) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:13 amYou’re probably right nk. I always get confused with the gen-Xers, BB, M and all. I think I’m a BB at 65. I hope you got the point though. The real problem with America is so many idiots willing to vote for the president of Sweden.
But Trump gets to return to New York a loser. No ticker-tape parade, no commercial endorsements, no gold medals. Just shame.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:19 amPatterico, I read that article a while ago, and it fascinated me. You could tell the author wanted to dislike Cruz, and tried to. But Cruz was polite and well spoken throughout.
Is Cruz perfect? No. No one is.
I also got a kick out our Cruz’s college roommate carping about all this nasty stuff from his Princeton days. It is to laugh. Because Cruz didn’t respond in kind…and I will bet he could. Most of us were kind of jerky in college.
And it makes the roommate look bad.
It’s interesting. I have “friends” on Facebook who (I checked their timeline) were extremely defensive of the Obama girls, saying that they should not even be mentioned, and how awful it was that people advanced a political cause with children. Yet that same person posted that video of Cruz and his daughter, mashed up with an “Alien” movie.
It ended up with “If you like this guy, please defriend me. I won’t miss you.”
And it’s funny. That person loves her some Bernie. I mean, I could start in on Bernie’s rich and varied personal history, but what is point?
The scorched earth approach to politics is ascendant again.
Heck, I have a good friend—a lawyer in Berkeley—who went on and on about Cruz looks like Joe McCarthy, and is a terrible person. But that friend thinks Alan Grayson is the cat’s meow.
Weird times.
But in the final analysis, I come back to something from Thomas Jefferson, and I will bet you Cruz agrees:
I appreciate the posts, Patterico, and I wish I was present IRL to share a toast with you.
Many of us feel the same. It would have been YUUUUGE.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:29 amSounding lawyerly does not bother Pat for some reason.
Ustuplay (4dd398) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:30 amI hope Trump’s Fan Boys aren’t having coffee this morning. After all, coffee’s for closers—not losers.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:54 amBernie: I’m going to a fundraising dinner in Hyannis with the upper plate, tonight.
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:05 amMrs. Sanders: Better wear your lower plate too, Bernie. That fundraiser chicken can be tough.
he was very prescient about Mr. Walker
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:35 amIs Cruz planning on campaigning hard in New Hampshire? Or will he get a jump on South Carolina?
Dejectedhead (fc552d) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:38 amNew Hampshire just got a lot more interesting. Who will take the lead in the Dixville Notch midnight vote?
crazy (cde091) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:44 am17-Dejected Head
mg (31009b) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:48 amHe is in N.H. solid through the 2-8, with a couple showings in N.C.
I plan on driving up to see him on the 7th.
“Weird times”
Buck up, Simon! When the going gets weird, teh weird get going!
Colonel Haiku (d17996) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:01 amWhen HRC loses, she can get a job teaching NFL referees how to flip coins. She’s apparently got her people trained to make them do anything she wants them to.
M. Scott Eiland (1edade) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:21 amHow can Trump deliver his promise to make China behave itself, if he can’t even defeat a Canadian in Iowa?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:24 amIt depends on what the meaning of “cheating” is, M. Scott.
Colonel Haiku (d17996) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:35 amit’s mean to get Mr. Cruz’s hopes up like this
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:40 amCruz us the first conservative to win the Iowa Republican Caucus since…Bush Sr.? Maybe even Reagan?
I have even better news: Americans are stupid. Gullible, impressionable dumbasses. The kind of people who make up their political minds watching debates. But that’s a good thing because Cruz is a master at debating. He’ll change minds during the debates like he did with the ethanol hick in that video that was posted here. So I’m hopeful that a truly deserving man gets elected. On the other hand, I’m scared stiff that last night an openly Communist, freedom-hating slaver like Bernie Sanders nearly won the Democratic caucus.
CrustyB (69f730) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:45 amTruth be told CrustyB, he probably DID.
Rorschach (8ddea0) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:47 amPat, stop dancing around it and tell us how you feel.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:58 amSarah Palin endorses losers. Does anyone know who she’s rooting for in the Super Bowl?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:03 amIt’s all I can do to remember P, PG, R, and X.
It ain’t over yet, Rev. Suddenly though, Cruz is looking a whole bunch better. That pleases me.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:04 amHeck, I have a good friend—a lawyer in Berkeley—who went on and on about Cruz looks like Joe McCarthy, and is a terrible person.
Your friend is a lawyer, at Berkeley, who talks highly of Ted Cruz and looks like Joe McCarthy?
That’s a rough row to hoe for both of you.
JP (bd5dd9) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:06 am…versus a closet Communist, freedom-hating slaver like Hillary Clinton.
Hmmm…all things being equal, guess the more transparent one almost made it. Almost. Gotta love what Democrats value nowadays.
Pons Asinorum (49e2e8) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:12 amActually Crusty, I’m sorta hoping he takes the nomination. 1) the amusement factor will be YUUUUUUUUUGE, and 2) it makes the choice really stark foe even the average intelligence voter. The only danger there is we really do wind up with a grouchy President Marx.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:14 am“because Cruz is a master at debating”
It’s not going to be a one on one debate, we sometimes forget. Cruz can beat Clinton and the moderator, no problem. The real test is the media borg, including FNC. The media hasn’t even begun to gun for him…..and we know how they drove the pretty darn moderate Mormon Romney’s unfavorables in 2012 (voted Gov of Mass for crying out loud).
I think there might be some agreement around here re. hoping Rubio doesn’t get any NH momentum. If it quickly goes to a 3 way race that’s not good for anyone.
East Bay Jay (c65ac0) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:31 amYes, Jay, people who live up to their religious principles are subject to media jihad. Cruz had better gird his loinal area.
Colonel Haiku (d17996) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:35 amGOP frontrunner Donald Trump says that his experience in Iowa “was a great one” and that he was honored to place second after spending “very little there – a fraction of Cruz [and] Rubio.”
This in my opinion counts for something, dollar spent per vote.
Ustuplay (4dd398) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:35 amUstuplay, are you kidding? Donnie got more FREE advertising than anyone in the country during the past few months. He doesn’t need to buy radio ads in the Cedar Falls market when he’s on television 24 hrs a day.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:39 am“Cruz is also not a wild-eyed maniac.”
Really? Because somebody in the Cruz camp plays real dirty.
The mailer, lying about Trump’s opposition to abortion and amnesty, telling people Ben Carson just dropped out of the race.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/breaking-carson-accuses-cruz-camp-of-foul-play-at-iowa-caucuses/
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/disgusting-cruz-camp-smearing-donald-trump-at-iowa-caucus-sites/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/31/2907803/
Read ’em if you have the guts.
formwiz (6b3a5a) — 2/2/2016 @ 10:46 amI don’t see Cruz getting much of a bounce out of Iowa in NH. If someone has gained momentum it’s Rubio. These races usually narrow down to 3 candidates. In 2012 Santorum and Gingrich were competing for the same voters which helped Romney. This time around we could see Rubio and Cruz knocking each other off all the way to the convention, so I think Trump is still in the driver’s seat.
Gerald A (5dca03) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:01 amformwiz, losing is no fun, huh?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:01 amAnybody seen ropelight? There’s a disturbing lack of Drudge Polls on this thread.
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:08 amPatterico, does the fact that Trump failed to spend the money for an effective ground game fill you with any sense of dread…six thousand votes short of winning. Cruz recognized traditional GOTV, adequate precinct captains and disciplined messaging as key to having a hope to prevail.
Trump is not stupid (perhaps lazy and cheap). No doubt if he wants to win the nomination, his tactics will change in the near future. Look for future primary analysis reflecting his investment of folks on the ground.
Reagan didn’t make the last Iowa debate, lost the state primary…won 44 states for the nomination. Absolutely terrifying.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:09 amHillary is better than Sanders the way that puke is better than poop.
CrustyB (69f730) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:11 amThis was a good victory for Cruz, and my previous concerns about his campaign staff and methods have proven to be unwarranted, or at least not as significant as I feared. Iowa does present Trump with some difficulties, but I thought he was gracious in his brief remarks last night. And buying a farm in Iowa probably makes good sense. The Paul Ryan budget passed in December allows foreign pension funds to buy property, including farm land, in the U. S. for the first time, and this increase in qualified buyers can be expected to drive property prices up.
The FEC has just posted presidential campaign contribution data thru 12/31/2015.
The map presentation (here) is a quick way to get at the summaries, and it is possible to download individual donor information by clicking on a state or using the query box at the bottom of the box.
Carson is leading the Republicans with $54 million, followed by Cruz ($47M), Bush ($32M), and Rubio ($28M). I heard Cruz mention his donations in the middle of January, so this isn’t “news”, but the availability of the individual donor data allows for further study. Clinton has raised $112M, with Sanders at $74M. Overall, Republicans raised $238M, Democrats $193M.
Carson should have significant reserves, and perhaps he will mount a better ground game in the next few primaries. I thought his complaint about Cruz supporters saying he had withdrawn were more of an admission of an oversight on his part than anything having to do with Cruz. If your opponents can convince your supporters that you’ve quit, doesn’t this suggest you’ve been rather laid back in your outreach?
BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:13 amTrump’s challenge…an articulate Cruz fully prepared to point out his conservative transgressions (universal healthcare, partial birth abortion, eminent domain, pro-Schumer and Pelosi, pro crony subsidy of corporate insiders, etc), the unaffiliated anti-Trump PACs willing to spend tens of millions to stop his candidacy, and then the Democrats are strident and supported by the MFM. Trump has a lot of angry and voting folks behind him…wonder how many will stay the course despite the flaws that will be made evident 24/7 in the coming six weeks.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:29 amEpiphany…the best thing that could of ever happened to the Cruz campaign was that the gloves came off between the two front runners. Trump is incredibly vulnerable, he should have played nice for another month or so.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:38 amThe gates of Hel are filled with the screams of his victims!
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:44 amBut not the screams of the dead, of course. No, no… wounded screams… mainly whimpering, a great deal of complaining and tales of sprained deltoids and… gout.
paper, any relation to happyfeet? Your prose is fun and certainly a fresh spin on our maniacal political hand-wringing.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:47 amit doesnt matter how good cruz is if he cant win the general
this election cycle theres 20 percent of democrats…DEMOCRATS…not independents…that arent going to vote for the democrat nominee…democrats may not even get 80 percent of the black or latino vote
who you think there going to vote for…cruz…rubio…
theyre going to vote for trump…if he can live through the ridiculous nomination process ladies
the fight isnt in here ladies its OUT THERE and the fight isnt going to be won by the most conservative candidate…its going to be won by the guy that can defeat hillary or bernie in the general
odds are that aint rubio or cruz
cruz is the goldman sachs candidate and rubio is mccains boy and thats that
im voting for trump
no politician is going to fix the problems we have…politicians are the ones that got us here in the first place
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:51 amSound, just curious…but why does Trump make the most sense for a flag bearer? Is it burn it down anger inconsiderate of progeny or an unwarranted hope that he will not act on his proven recent Democrat convictions? Thanks, in advance.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 11:57 amWin, lose, or draw, pretty sure that was never going to happen. NEW YORK IS FULL OF DEMOCRATs and their cowering victims.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:01 pmI liked the speech last night from Cruz, except that it was way too long. I talked with a few family members and friends who really like Cruz and the principles he stands for, but all except for one thought he was kind of off-putting with that speech, due to length and (for a couple of them) some of his interaction with his parents. I think he could’ve said what he needed to say in less than half the time he spent, just my opinion.
Less rambling, more focused is the ticket.
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:06 pmsound, it took me minute to digest your recent comment (I’m certifiable mildly retarded). So, if I follow your reasoning…because a large number of Democrats will vote for Trump, I should also. Hmmm, yeah, no. I will make every attempt this election to vote my principles, stay away from establishment types and those supposedly recently baptized to conservative values. Some of us possess a conscience and have to live with ourselves.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:11 pm#45… yes, pieter! Cruz should stay on point, be fairly ruthless, while stressing that it’s not personal, but business. Be all “alpha” about it, which would drive Trump absolutely insane.
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:13 pmrecent democrat convictions…hmmm…you mean like rubio and amnesty
unwarranted hope…you mean like cruz being a goldman sachs benefactor
cruz and rubio are both politicians
trump makes sense because hes not a politician hes a businessman
politicians got us here
they aint going to get us out of it
ive been voting straight republican tickets for almost 30 years now what has it gotten me
its politicians like rubio and cruz and people that continue to vote for them like you that are responsible for trump
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CREATED DONALD TRUMP
you guys keep supporting cruz and rubio and maybe theyll beat bernie or hillary maybe they wont
trump makes sense because all i know is theres a bunch of people i work with that voted for obama TWICE that are breaking big for trump…i work in illinois…these are BIG BLUE CHICAGO ILLINOIS DEMOCRATS supporting trump
THEY AINT GOING TO VOTE FOR NO CRUZ OR RUBIO
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:14 pmCol, thanks and appreciate the concurrence. Can’t wait to see the deluge of unflinchingly accurate anti-Trump propaganda in TN in the coming weeks.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:17 pmOK, sound, got it. By all means vote for somebody past Obama voters consider the best hope for this country. Makes perfect sense…by folks from Illinois.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:20 pmTed Cruz is slime.
Lied about Carson dropping out, he did, to pick up some of Carson’s devout and honorable voters, he did.
Dirty Trixter (0ce382) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:22 pmDirty, here’s a joke you’ve probably heard a million times…how are politicians like your mom? Carson knows. Wink wink.
Please stop trolling.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:26 pmWow. This post. The entire story behind the “Carson will leave Iowa” story, it was a lie put out by Cruz. On caucus night.
Why do Iowans put up with this bullshit. Caucus my ass. A system designed by crooks to perfectly cover fraud.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:28 pmWow. This post. The entire story behind the “Carson will leave Iowa” story, it was a lie put out by Cruz. On caucus night.
Why do Iowans put up with this bullshot. Caucus my ascot. A system designed by crooks to perfectly cover fraud.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:30 pmThe only reason they’re voting for Trump is they’re hoping to get what Obama promised but couldn’t/wouldn’t/didn’t deliver. Trump is merely the dude on the right promising to slow the rise of the oceans.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:30 pmTed Cruz didn’t even meet my already low expectations for him. It’s to my credit that this is disappointing and to my shame that it is actually a little surprising.
However, never will I be surprised by Ted Cruz’s lack of ethics, honor, and class again: Cruz isn’t fit to hold his Senate seat, much less be President.
Dirty Trixter (0ce382) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:30 pmTrump’s Fan Boys are taking their loss hard. They’re angry and insulting when they’re “winning!” and they’re angry and insulting when they’re “losing!”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:39 pmI don’t know, maybe they’re just angry and insulting people.
Dirty, dirty, dirty…show me on the doll where the bad man touched you. Are you new to American politics, crave perfection due to an unmedicated predisposition, worry about gnomes stealing your underwear…I could go on.
You are obviously angry, concerned and adamant…it’s a good start but you need to take a deep breath.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:39 pmWell, sorry Dirty, but Obama can’t run again. Your choices are limited to Sir Hilary and Marx.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:40 pmok you vote for rubio whos been in favor of amnesty who was in bed with schumer and reid and every other democrat slime in the senate
or…or…vote for cruz who lied…i mean forgot…to tell everybody how hes literally in bed with goldman sachs…one of the other entities thats destroying our country
go ahead and support and vote for a politician dude…whatever makes you most comfortable and puts you in your happy place…ive been doing that for almost 30 years…straight…republican…tickets…for…30…years…im not doing it anymore
i voted for mark kirk…wont defund planned parenthood…ron johnson…voted to confirm loretta lynch and voted for that piece of crap budget bill…not voting for him this year…paul ryan…piece of crap budget bill…not voting for him this year either…john mccain…amnesty…the list goes on and on and on…
im actually trying to learn from my mistakes not continue them
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:41 pmpieter,
I don’t think you snap your fingers or open your wallet and magically you have a ground game. It takes time and planning.
I love that Cruz learned from Romney’s mistakes.
Patterico (e55d19) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:42 pmsound, you are right not to choose an establishment type…just don’t throw your vote away with someone who says all the right things but has a proven history contrary to your principles. That’s how nice girls get pregnant.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:45 pmPatterico, concur…but, again, the man is not stupid. He is still an incredible threat until effectively countered.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:47 pmAfter attending law school, at Harvard, he landed clerkships in a federal district court, then at the Supreme Court.
Contrast this with the “current occupant.”
One of the two is not like the other. One is waaay more qualified to the title ‘constitutional scholar.’ The answer is left as an exercise for the student.
Bill M (906260) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:49 pm++++I can sense the furious typing out there++++
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:58 pmWho owns a kindle and wishes they didn’t? Just curious without being actively bisexual.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:01 pmI don’t know what you have against Goldman Sachs, sound awake, but I put over $75k profit in one investment with them last year alone. You seem to think a candidate has to be perfect and do everything you want. Well, you’re not the only constituent and nobody’s perfect.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:02 pm“The only reason they’re voting for Trump is they’re hoping to get what Obama promised but couldn’t/wouldn’t/didn’t deliver. Trump is merely the dude on the right promising to slow the rise of the oceans.”
yeah…like no amnesty…like the border fence…like no more muslims…like no more obamacare…like deporting more people who shouldnt be here…like a bigger and more capable military…
yeah all those democrats really want him to be obamas 3rd term so much that 80 percent of them are voting for bernie or hillary
youre such a genius maybe you should run for president…you really do see beyond…you really do have this sixth sense…you should do a symposium
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:03 pmI deeply appreciate your permission and grace. Thank you so very much. But I don’t think I’ll be supporting Rubio. Is it Ok with you if I go with, say, Fiorina? Yes, I know about that face, but still…
Umm, so you don’t know which entity it is/was? Goldman Sachs is out of business. Has been for a while, now. So what ever beef you have with them, you’re a day late and a dollar short. As for the so called lie, you do know that it WAS disclosed on his personal filing, yes? So I’m not really sure just how much of a lie it can be.
Wow. I am just racking up the score here. You are the most permissive person I’ve ever known. Say, If we’re going to appeal to authority here, pray allow me to tell you that I’ve been voting Republican for nearly 40 years. In many cases, not what I really wanted, but better than the Democrat alternative.
Note that you don’t need to vote Republican if you like. Hell, you don’t need to vote at all if that tickles you.
I get that’s why Trump enjoys such support. More to the point, that’s why Cruz enjoys the support he has here. So toss your heart out there- who do you support, and why?
As John Hitchcock famously said a couple of threads ago, I never learn anything.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:04 pmI think the currant occupant as well as his wife have suspended law licenses as do both the Clintons. Such honorable people these socialist/democrats.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:06 pmHooray for Rev. Anybody remember a time when interest rates made putting money in a bank good sense? Some of us have to invest just to hope for a viable retirement. Nobody wants to talk about how retirees have taken a bloodbath these past eight years.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:06 pmsound awake,
It sounds like you’re throwing everything at the wall with the hope that something sticks. Truth is, Cruz and Rubio each has a lifetime of conservatism. On the other hand, Donnie Trump finally changed his party registration to Republican when he was in his 60s.
You sit there in judgment of Senators in blue states such as Mark Kirk in Illinois and Ron Johnson in Wisconsin proclaiming that because they voted on “X” in a way that appeases their constituents, that it means they cannot be trusted as conservatives.
Meanwhile, you are shamelessly shilling for Donnie Trump who has actually contributed money to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid—people who live on the opposite side of the country from him—as well as to New Yorkers Hillary Clinton and Chuckie Schumer. Trump has bragged about his relationships with Pelosi, Reid, and Schumer.
It’s cognitive dissonance the way you compartmentalize Trump’s flip-flops and flirtations with ‘the other side,’ yet if you can prove that Mark Kirk or Ron Johnson voted “Yea” in favor of naming a post office after Franklin Roosevelt, you scream that it is evidence they’re closeted communists.
Trump has really high negative rating according to numerous polls, so your supposition that he’s the only one who can win the general election is not only unfounded, but it’s probably just wishful thinking.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:07 pmSorry- I misspoke. Goldman Sachs isn’t out of business. It was one of the other big investment houses, and of course now, I can’t think of the name.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:07 pmGoldman Sachs better not be out of business, Bill H, or somebody’s owing me a boat load of cash.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:11 pmoldman sachs “controversies”:
4 Controversies
4.1 Sale of Dragon Systems to Lernout & Hauspie
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:15 pm4.2 Involvement in the European sovereign debt crisis
4.3 Employee’s Views
4.3.1 Greg Smith resignation letter
4.3.2 What Happened to Goldman Sachs by Steven Mandis
4.3.3 Cristina Chen-Oster and Shanna Orlich Lawsuit
4.4 California bonds
4.5 Personnel “revolving-door” with US government
4.5.1 Former New York Fed Chairman’s ties to the firm
4.6 Insider trading cases
4.7 First Quarter 2009 and December 2008 financial results
4.8 Involvement with the bailout of AIG
4.8.1 Firm’s response to criticism of AIG payments
4.8.2 Final AIG meetings on September 15 at the New York Federal Reserve
4.9 $60 million settlement for Massachusetts subprime mortgages
4.10 Abacus mortgage-backed CDOs
4.10.1 2010 SEC civil fraud lawsuit
4.11 Other prosecutorial actions
4.12 Alleged commodity price manipulation
4.12.1 Goldman Sachs Commodity Index and the 2005–2008 Food Bubble
4.12.2 Aluminum price and supply
4.13 Oil futures speculation
4.14 Initial public offering kickback bribes
4.15 Taylor-related civil and criminal cases
4.16 Danish utility sale
4.17 Libya investment losses
4.18 Improper securities lending practices
Pieter, I have long term investments and of course some healthy IRA’s having been self employed all my life but I also have trading accounts and I just love short-term trading. Not day-trading so to speak, but take the last six weeks, you have no idea how much I made flipping stocks in this volatile market. But ya gotta have balls of steel. And I do it at a Level II account with E-Trade. Easy as blueberry pie.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:16 pmRev, 75k profit…ssshhhhhuuuuush you silly, Bernie is listening. Your ill-gotten wealth belongs to the proletariat, or haven’t you got the memo.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:16 pmRev, impressive. You are a much better man than I, Gunga Din.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:19 pmsoud awake, one can come up with a similar litany about any yuuuuge company, especially in finace and banking, which deals with and is regulated by the government. This is no more than a corporate version of “when did you stop hitting your wife?”.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:20 pmI honestly don’t give that much of a damn about Cruz’s Goldman Sachs loans. Apparently, he reported them on some forms and didn’t on others, therefore, most likely oversights (although I’m more skeptical of his declarations on that than I was).
The big problem is in the past 24 hours he’s proven himself personally dishonest and disreputable. He has won a Pyrrhic victory.
Dirty Trixter (0ce382) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:20 pmRev, as a soldier been relying on TSP…very mixed feelings as to returns.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:21 pmsound awake, maybe you should try a sleeping pill. Or caffeine.
You’re obsessing over the company that Ted Cruz’ wife works for as proof that we should vote for Donnie instead of Ted, but on the other hand, any evidence that Donnie Trump’s personal companies have had problems (uh, multiple bankruptcies?!) is just a distraction as far as you’re concerned.
Desperation is not attractive.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:22 pmim not compartmentalising anything…i know trumps past
hes not a politician thats why im voting for him
im not voting for another politician
i also supported fiorina and carson
they arent politicians either
but theyre gone now
the only guy running for president in the united states of america right now thats not a politician is trump
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:22 pmcognitive dissonance…dont use big words you dont understand
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:24 pmAmerica
Goldman Sachs Will Pay $5 Billion To Settle Financial-Crisis Claims
Updated January 14, 20168:22 PM ET Published January 14, 20167:32 PM ET
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/01/14/463107541/goldman-sachs-will-pay-5-billion-to-settle-financial-crisis-claims
yeah all companies go through this…
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:25 pmhappyfeet, you’re panicking because Donnie Winner turned out to be Donnie Loser.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:26 pm“The Democrat establishment knows a lot of registered Democrats favor Trump. According to The Upshot by Civis Analytics, a Democratic data firm, Democrats in the South, Appalachia and the industrial North support Trump.
In early January Mercury Analytics, a research company with clients that include MSNBC and Fox News, conducted an online poll. It revealed a full 20% of Democrats said they would go against the party line and vote for Trump in a general election.
Independents are a large factor as well.
An IVN poll conducted in September showed 25.9% of them going for Trump.”
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:28 pmWow. Medved sneers Cruz’s speech last night was “over the top”, wonders what’s wrong with him, and then says Trump’s concession speech was “classy”. Yes, he used Trump and “classy” in the same sentence.
The establishment knives are out.
Dana (9d174a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:29 pmSound, here’s a thought experiment specific to your commentary…
Who has politically supported Reid-Pelosi-Obama-Schumer-Hillary-Deblasio?
Who has politically supported establishment Republicans with the explicit intent of defeating TEA party candidates?
Who has politically advocated Democrat talking points on universal healthcare, TARP, partial birth abortion and eminent domain?
The fact he hasn’t held office should not deter you from your better judgment.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:32 pm“It’s cognitive dissonance the way you compartmentalize Trump’s flip-flops and flirtations with ‘the other side,’ yet if you can prove that Mark Kirk or Ron Johnson voted “Yea” in favor of naming a post office after Franklin Roosevelt, you scream that it is evidence they’re closeted communists.”
like i said dont use big words or ideas you dont understand…
straw man much…
Straw man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the logical fallacy. For other uses, see Straw man (disambiguation).
“Man of straw” redirects here. For the novel by Heinrich Mann, see Der Untertan.
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.[1]
The so-called typical “attacking a straw man” argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent’s proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., “stand up a straw man”) and then to refute or defeat that false argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the original proposition.[2][3]
This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining “battle” and the defeat of an “enemy” may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:34 pmsound awake, I didn’t say all companies do anything. Lose the attitude. I said you can come up with a litany of charges, investigations, law suits and claims against just about any successful company that has dealings with the government. When I was in the financial services business we had a saying: “If you’re not under investigation you’re doing something wrong”. That’s because as soon as you start to make money the government and the lawyers are all over your a$$.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:35 pm“Wow. Medved sneers Cruz’s speech last night was “over the top”, wonders what’s wrong with him, and then says Trump’s concession speech was “classy”. Yes, he used Trump and “classy” in the same sentence.”
thats because medved is establishment too…straight up…rubios his boy…
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:36 pm77 & 78… Lehman Bros.?
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:38 pmAfter Benghazi, no, I do not see it that way at all.
With that said, we are essentially on the verge of arguing about which piece of crap in the toilet bowl should be flushed first. I’m good with flushing twice, works for me.
Pons Asinorum (49e2e8) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:40 pmEver since the left started regulating toilets you have to flush twice. No choice.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:42 pmsorry Dirty, but Obama can’t run again. Your choices are limited to Sir Hilary and Marx.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 12:40 pm
But… it’s a BIG BUT, it says nothing about a douchebag running for one, two, three, Hell, even four terms or more.
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:42 pmYes, Colonel, I believe it was Lehman Bros. They lost %80 of my funds when Oppemheimer figuratively backed up the truck and scooped up all the Lehman share they could in the mistaken idea that Lehman would not be left twisting in the wind. They lost all our money. Must be nice to never have to risk their own money.
felipe (56556d) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:44 pm“Heist of the century: Wall Street’s role in the financial crisis
Wall Street bankers could have averted the global financial crisis, so why didn’t they? In this exclusive extract from his book Inside Job, Charles Ferguson argues that they should be prosecuted
It is no exaggeration to say that since the 1980s, much of the global financial sector has become criminalised, creating an industry culture that tolerates or even encourages systematic fraud. The behaviour that caused the mortgage bubble and financial crisis of 2008 was a natural outcome and continuation of this pattern, rather than some kind of economic accident.
This behaviour is criminal. We are talking about deliberate concealment of financial transactions that aided terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation and large-scale tax evasion; assisting in major financial frauds and in concealment of criminal assets; and committing frauds that substantially worsened the worst financial bubbles and crises since the Depression.
But cluelessness was most definitely not an issue with the senior management of Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley. As we saw, Morgan Stanley started betting against the bubble as early as 2004. Conversely, JPMorgan Chase mostly just remained prudently above the junk mortgage fray. Goldman Sachs, though, was in a class by itself. It made billions of dollars by betting against the very same stuff that it had been making billions selling only a year or two before.”
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/may/20/wall-street-role-financial-crisis
yep…nothing to see here…
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:44 pmTrump and veterans…when did he start caring about soldiers? Check the timeline, he has contributed millions to Democrats when he gave less than 60k to the troops. He has exploited a small minority for his political gain. His recent gambit during the last debate was sad and insulting. Some of us noticed and are rather unforgiving in our jaundiced view.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:45 pmtheres a difference between being under investigation and ponying 5 big large ones as a settlement
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:46 pmsound awake, speaking of straw men…you’re grasping for straws.
Perhaps if you’re fortunate enough to run into Dorothy, the Cowardly Lion, and the Tin Man, you will discover some compatriots generous enough to accompany you down the Yellow Brick Road.
We’re discussing nominating someone who can not only beat Hillary or Bernie, but who can also stand up to ISIS, Iran, China, and the left wing socialists in America.
Whereas, you are discussing Goldman Sachs and Mark Kirk…and how running away from Megyn Kelly was a stroke of genius.
Donnie Trump admires Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer—that’s why he contributed money to their warchests. And he likes Hillary. That’s why he invited her to sit in the front peau at his most recent wedding.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:50 pmgoldman sachs is just out there doing business as usual thats all…
nothing to see here…move along
minion…drone…
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:50 pmThe world is on fire and there may be as many as 3 or 4 Supreme Court Justice nominations to make during the next 4 years, yet sound awake is obsessing over Goldman Sachs. This is why he’s a Trump Fan Boy—his head is simply not in the game.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:53 pmCS, hear hear and well said. Harumph. Trump cares only about his brand…all ego and no visceral concern for the little people. His advocacy is proven by his financial support for progressives and on air repeating of their talking points.
Why are some of the electorate so wilful to ignore his history? Mystifying.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:56 pmCruz needs to hit Alfalfa with a hook. Un American to be proud of a third place finish. Loser.
mg (31009b) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:56 pmTeh Guardian… just a notch below News Of The World…
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:57 pmGoldman Execs Sold $700M Of Stock, Most Of It During Their Bailout
Financial Times | Posted 05.25.2011 | Business
Read More: Goldman Sachs Bailout, Goldman Sachs Stock, Goldman Sachs, Goldman Bailout, Business News
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/01ca4732-6fed-11de-b835-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3z3Amk61Y
Goldman Sachs pay out $111million in bonuses despite taking billions in bailout money
By Daniel Bates
Updated: 15:02 EST, 16 December 2010
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339220/Goldman-Sachs-pay-111million-bonuses-despite-taking-billions-bailout-money.html#ixzz3z3As6lcj
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Goldman Sachs to pay mind-blowing $23 billion in holiday bonuses, one year after taxpayer bailout
BY Scott Wenger, Samuel Goldsmith
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 11:00 PM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/money/goldman-sachs-pay-mind-blowing-23-billion-holiday-bonuses-year-taxpayer-bailout-article-1.381140
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 1:57 pmsound, if I concede your point that GS is evil will you let it go? Last point though, which of the candidates owes more to Wall Street and thus beholden? Could it be Tru…
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:00 pmsound awake, when you were fired by Goldman Sachs, did they not give you a reasonable severance package?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:05 pmCS, you hit an important concern…USSC justice appointment. Unfortunately, most Americans fail to see the gravity. I wish it were otherwise.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:05 pmThe world is on fire and there may be as many as 3 or 4 Supreme Court Justice nominations to make during the next 4 years, yet sound awake is obsessing over Goldman Sachs. This is why he’s a Trump Fan Boy—his head is simply not in the game.
im not obsessing over goldman sachs…im making the overwhelming point that goldman is as dirty and bad is the day is long…and theres people on this blog that want to dismiss that in spite of all the evidence…this is called proving a point not obsessing
talk about cognitive dissonance…
oh yeah and cruz took their money…what there wasnt another bank anywhere to get funding…he had to have known this was going to come up
yeah my heads not in the game…youre right…i guess i should just keep doing the same thing over and over and over and over and over again and hope for a different result…just like an insane person would…
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:08 pmLike I said sound awake, as soon as they are in bed with government and the lawyers as in “taxpayer bailout”. You obsess over GS…it’s all of’em! Goldman isn’t the exception…they’re the rule. And Trump was a player. You heard him, he’s a “dealmaker”. Well, so was Goldman. They are crooks and so is Trump. They pay each other off for their turn at the public trough.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:08 pmJust so I am clear, in Mr. Awake’s world, all the sins of Goldman Sachs from time immemorial are fully transmitted to Ted Cruz through his wife’s employment there since 2005? No matter when or where in the company these atrocities occurred, Heidi Cruz bears full responsibility for each and every infraction, and her husband is thereby unfit to serve as dogcatcher. Does that sum it up, SA?
prowlerguy (3af7ff) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:08 pmI’m beginning to wonder if SA isn’t a sock puppet account created so that Patterico could say “See, there is the unthinking, unreasoning dullard that I’ve told you about. All Trump supporters are JUST LIKE HIM!”
prowlerguy (3af7ff) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:10 pmthink about it for like…gee…i dont know…maybe one second…youre like a little girl…
if i was fired by goldman sachs…i would have gotten millions and millions on the way out…and i would be a cruz fanboy like yourself
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:11 pmTrump spent his entire career paying off politicians to get jobs done and buildings built. Now he just wants to change teems and become the payer instead of the payee.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:11 pmAnother epiphany…progressives won the culture war ten years ago. Hollywood, MFM, district Federal courts and public education guide our path. CS hit it on the head…appointing judges, killing the power of unelected bureaucrats and reinstilling a civic sense of republican-constitutional understanding is boring.
Millenials overwhelmingly support socialism, the middle aged and elderly are the bulwark to the pending insanity. This is a losing proposition. The young should have been instructed as to the efficacy of our understanding…but nope. We lost, get your free sh!t at the expense of previous generation’s sacrifice for liberty.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:18 pmsound awake, you appear to have more anger for Goldman Sachs than you do for Hillary, Barack, ISIS, Iran, China, etc. At least we never hear you mention how bad THEY are.
It certainly sounds like there’s a personal vendetta against Goldman Sachs.
Donnie Tough Guy has probably engaged in more crooked deals than the Corleones, including four bankruptcies which he says he filed for because that was the best way for him to play the system at that moment in time.
What we’re saying is that you’re picking at Cruz and Rubio because they have flakes of dander on their shoulder, or their hair is out of place, or they have a mole on their cheek, whereas your guy Donnie Tough Guy has more obvious deformities than Jabba the Hut.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:20 pmpoliticians got us into this mess…lets vote for another politician to fix it…what a great idea…
ahh…time to go to work…good night ladies…
GOOD NIGHT SIR!!!
sound awake (4f316e) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:21 pmIgnore sound. He is either unwilling to see the folly of reasoned counterpoint or directed by his therapist to stand up for his opinions regardless their futility. Please don’t be mean or cross due to his “condition”. I say we take a collection towards his meds. I care, so should you.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:26 pmsound awake, it’s like you’re one of the philosopher kings in the Kevin Smith film “Clerks.”
So what if Cruz and Rubio are “politicians”?
Your hero Donnie Trump wants to become one. So if we vote for him and he ultimately becomes one—doesn’t that automatically make him a bad guy in your eyes?
I mean, Cruz and Rubio are each in their first term in the Senate. It’s not like they’ve been there since the days when you were working in the mailroom at Goldman Sachs.
Trump is the guy who admits he’s been buying influence from politicians for decades. Yet you only ascribe malfeasance to the prostitute—but not to the john.
See, you guys on Trump Incorporated don’t have a vision. You guys don’t have governing principles on which to campaign. All you can do is say, “That guy over there is a jerk and he stinks!” or “I’m going to make America great again! It’s going to be great! And wonderful! And fantastic!”
But how is that much different from “Hope and Change”?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:32 pmCS, “johns and prostitutes” could be the title of a political diatribe best selling according to the New York Times…at the very least, I’d buy your book.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:36 pmThank you, pieter. I think it would be a book without…”a happy ending.” (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:41 pmPffft, way too funny, CS. Dying early for some us over 50 is the only “happy ending” fate will allow. If I see another Obama get office, Trump, well…if SMOD doesn’t occur I can only hope for a massive stroke.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:45 pmHow about answering the question, SA? How does Mrs. Cruz’s employment at Goldman Sachs, where she was never party to any of the myriad sins (in your eyes) other than working for the same company in any way disqualify her husband for elected office?
For the sake of argument, let’s stipulate that Goldman Sachs has done some bad things. No need to list them again. Given that, a) how is Mrs. Cruz in any way culpable of or tainted by those bad things and b) how does her taint transfer to her husband?
prowlerguy (3af7ff) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:48 pmOK, Trump supporters…do any of you have children that will inherit this earth? Just wondering, ‘cuz if you did it seems unlikely you’d wish more cronyism and big unaccountable government on your kids…just sayin’.
BRB, got to take my kid to her job. She’s as politically dumb as it gets, still love her and want a viable future for her ilk. Kisses all.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:52 pmWow… NPR… Guardian… Daily Mail… Financial Times… Daily News! Seems to be a serious veer off on to the left fork.
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 2:59 pmI can’t believe I just did this, and I’m about to go take a long, hot shower in which I may scrub myself with lye soap if I can find any, but:
I just read the top of Donald Trump’s Twitter feed — that is, his most recent tweets (which he wrote) and re-tweets (which others wrote but he highlighted and republished to a vastly larger following).
I’m not going to try to do that embed-the-link-so-you-can-read-the-128-characters-in-big-font-here thing (which I hate, as I hate Twitter generally), nor even to link the entire Trump Twitter Feed (which sounds like exactly as obnoxious and vacuous a product as it actually seems to be), but here’s his last tweet before the caucuses (all-caps and weird/missing punctuation his):
Followed today by only:
Actually it’d be equally true, but much closer to the mark, to say, “very nearly in 3rd place, at the front of the pack of losers like Jeb Bush.” But anyway, he continues with:
I won’t dispute that it’s an “honor” of sorts to have duped as many good Iowans and other Americans as Trump has, for now, successfully duped. And it’s also true that Trump didn’t spend much money on anything but hats, which isn’t something to brag about, but rather an indication of overconfidence, inexperience, and foolishness. But the “came in a strong second” is, objectively, an obvious falsehood. He came in as weakly in second place as he could possibly be, without being in third place instead. This is so very typical of Trump’s reflexive, continual dishonesty that it could be a representative 128-characters to depict his entire campaign. Next:
Recast into a more truthful statement, this would be, “More people came to vote against me than any previous candidate ever to run in Iowa.” That’s objectively true, if you look merely at Cruz’ and Rubio’s competing totals. As for his “second highest” point, that’s technically true, but Rubio’s third-place finish also eclipsed prior winning vote totals, so it’s another one of Trump’s many half-truths at best. Then:
It’s amusing to see Trump bash the media for the specific purpose of trying to keep his media buzz going. He’s going to be a YUUGE success, though, in continuing to capture media attention all the way through his defeat or withdrawal, though. That is, because of his celebrity, Trump will indeed be a spectacularly famous loser.
And next, my favorite of Trump’s few tweets so far since Iowa, though, is undoubtedly this one:
This is the bridge tweet. Trump fans, I make this prediction with total confidence: He’s increasingly going to start insulting you — for not working hard enough on his behalf, or something — as he continues to lose.
“Not worth it.”
That’s what the crybaby says just before he takes his football and goes home, isn’t it?
And then:
Somehow his spell-checker helped him through “flamboyant” but couldn’t manage the word “night.” U 2 can B like Trump, if you’re vulgar and sloppy. But putting that aside: Is this the best criticism he can level against the candidate who’s come from way behind and defied all the polls to beat Trump like a rented mule? That Cruz’ victory speech was too long?
I heard lots of people call Trump’s concession speech “gracious,” and I’ll grant that it was commendably short and that he did include a sentence of congratulations to Cruz and everyone else, including Mike Huckabee. But what actually struck everyone — friends and foes — about Trump’s concession speech is that it was totally out of character with everything else he’s done in this campaign. On Twitter, the real Trump — the mean Trump, the childish Trump — reappears.
The final Trump tweet as of this moment:
Enjoy it while you can, Mr. Trump. We know now that, true to Lincoln’s dictum, you haven’t fooled all of the people — nor even a plurality of them — long enough to win a real election instead of an opinion poll. And I think, to again rely on Lincoln’s words, that even your “some of the time” is coming to an end.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:08 pmSound- But whats the point of voting for Trump when he’s the R version of Obama? Why should I care that nothing will change under him except the party?
Patrick Henry, the 2nd (adaa24) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:12 pmhe doesn’t have to fool nobody
he just has to be a more better choice than Mr. Cruz or marco sleazio
how hard can this possibly be
happyfeet (a037ad) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:12 pmI support Trump, but not for the reasons that Patterico et. al. want to project onto those they disagree with.
For every day that Trump remains a viable candidate, the Overton window gets bigger and bigger. Things that were verboten and could never be said even in private company are now debated on the national stage. Before Trump entered the race, the only difference between (R) candidates was exactly how quickly we could get those illegals citizenship and how many taxpayer’s dollars would we hand them as they crossed the border. A wall, deportation of illegals, getting rid of anchor babies, and cracking down on visa violators were not even on the table, yet they are now the baseline. Without Trump in the race, there would be a sprint to embrace amnesty again by all the other candidates, based on the delusion that they could get the Hispanic and Muslim vote.
It all comes down to controlling immigration. Nothing else matters, because when (R) politicians talk about “shrinking” the size of government, they are never talking about actually making it smaller. They are simply talking about slowing down the train a few MPH. And even if they actually shrink entitlements, it won’t make a bit of difference if the number of recipients drastically goes up. Then, in four years, our demographics have changed to the point that there will never be another (R) president, nor conservative Supreme appointed. Ever. And all the gains made in those short four years will be undone in a matter of months via the newly expanded executive order and rule-making powers.
That being said, I’m not sure he has the temperament to be a good CiC or oversee such a large bureaucracy. His mercurial nature will undoubtedly cause some problems. For those reasons, along with others, I don’t think I want him to win the nomination. But I KNOW I want him running, for as long as possible.
prowlerguy (3af7ff) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:14 pmThanks, Patrick, for the link to the TM article. I agree with you about it.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:22 pm“S’cuse me, sir. Mister Cruz? Uh- I’m Lieutenant Columbo, LAPD. I hate to bother you but we got a call downtown from immigration. Something about your citizenship, sir. About you being born in Canada? It’s probably nothing, sir, and my boss, the captain, well– he wants me to follow up and I know you’re a busy man but if you don’t mind, could you show me your naturalization papers and passport for my report?”
“You know, my wife and I really love Canada. The bacon and the beer. Hockey, too. She’s a big hockey fan. She’s planning a vacation in Alberta. My wife, she does all the planning. Likes to go in the fall. November. You have any suggestions on hotels up there?”
“… Cruz Inn. Hmm. That’s very good, sir. VERY good. Thank you.”
“Oh, just one more thing, Mr. Cruz. The Constitution says you have to be a natural born citizen to be eligible to be president. And these papers say you were born in Calgary. That’s in Canada, right sir? They say you lived there four years, too. And your passport says you only gave up your Canadian citizenship about fifteen month ago. Can you explain all this sir?”
“Well, not right now. I’m sure a court can clear this up for you in no time. sir. I’ll just finish this up from my notes and get out of your hair. Thanks for your time, sir. And for that tip on the inn in Calgary.”
DCSCA (a343d5) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:23 pm“For every day that Trump remains a viable candidate, the Overton window gets bigger and bigger. Things that were verboten and could never be said even in private company are now debated on the national stage… A wall, deportation of illegals, getting rid of anchor babies, and cracking down on visa violators were not even on the table, yet they are now the baseline. Without Trump in the race, there would be a sprint to embrace amnesty again by all the other candidates, based on the delusion that they could get the Hispanic and Muslim vote.
It all comes down to controlling immigration. Nothing else matters.”
– prowlerguy
Yeah, what a massive, varied, and unprecedented enlargement of “the Overton window” you’ve laid out there. Previously verboten topics like [Mexicans, Mexicans, Mexicans, Mexicans, and Mexicans] can now be discussed in a productive and open-minded conversation free of silly PC strictures. As long as we can talk proudly and openly about our distaste for “anchor babies,” everything’s gonna be alright. Thanks, Trump!
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:28 pmDCSCA. Long time no see.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:30 pmthe political establishment relies on cheap foreign labor, this was the path that europe chose, importing a people incompatible with their culture, at the next high skill level, they import
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:37 pmforeign professionals,
Amazingly amazing when you hear someone support Trump for the acknowledged sole reason of immigration…can they not find one other that they trust to control the border? Trump+immigration+Democrat baggage=future regret. We should have never disparaged the lost souls who unquestionably swallowed the Obama cult, we have our own desperate socialist brown shirters.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:55 pmthe party machinery, doesn’t much like cruz either, pieter,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 3:59 pmnarc, what is your point? Not being liked by the GOPe should be an indicator as to whether the candidate fits the bill to serve. Burn it all down and still winning, Cruz is our best hope. Trump is a brief campaign march in a long war, burning Atlanta to the ground, without consideration for Reformation.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:06 pmYah- Lehman Bros. High finance was never my strong suit. That explains why I play with old French cars for a hobby.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:13 pmIf you have either a Renault Alpine or one of those mid-engined R5s I am jealous, Bill H.
Colonel Haiku (029078) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:21 pmTwo points, Sound:
1) You are on a site that is definitely, almost vehemently pro-Cruz. You might want to pull yourself together and realize that. Which brings me to-
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:23 pm2) Read Ropelight’s posts. He’s done a far better job than you so far defending Trump.
Gawd, don’t I wish I had an R5T1. Those are a genuine E-Ticket ride. I mess around mostly with Citroens.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:25 pmIt’s been fun…moving to the new thread to bitch about the Democrat candidates.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:28 pmCruz is done. He barely eeked out a win. His ground game is to get out the vote of like minded voters. He doesn’t change minds or hearts, he’s just angling to get some sort of representation on the convention floor. The race is between Trump and Rubio.
Ustuplay (4dd398) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:39 pmWhy is this connection to Cruz and your use of it to smear him so important? Do you really have to work that hard to convince yourself that it’s “Trump, or chaos 2016!!”?
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:39 pmWhat do those people have to do with Cruz? Why do you have to refer to people other than Cruz to make your point? You’re actually making the OPPOSITE point.
That kind of stuff works with stupid people.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:49 pmhe borrowed against his wife’s account, four years ago, sheesh there should be a statute of limitation,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 4:51 pmI don’t know that I’ll vote for Tammy Duckworth for sure, but I know I’m not voting for Kirk. Tammy is not a bad girl, but I just might just skip that part of the ballot.
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:10 pmLehman Bros. Bankruptcy of
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:16 pmBesides which, Cruz didn’t take “their money”. He borrowed from his own account.
John Hitchcock (b09b88) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:22 pmThe world is on fire, yet Team Trump’s fans are talking about Lehman Brothers and Goldman Sachs. Last week it was Ted Cruz’ mailers. But they never seem to get animated enough to talk trash about ISIS or Iran or Hillary nominating Supreme Court justices.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:26 pmIt’s a horses*** issue. A lot of people borrow money, for personal or business reasons, using their homes (or accounts they cannot cash out without substantial penalties) as security. It’s the easiest application process and the rates are the lowest since the risk is non-existent. But that’s how Alinsky plays. With plausible lies.
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:28 pmbut enough about bush and kasich, are we serious about the islamic state, who red queen opened up a fresh beachhead, the sepah who were awarded for the impressment of our sailors, yet another premature capitulation by mcturtle, then back to the Thunderdome,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:31 pmCruz wants a VAT. I can never really support him as long as this is so. I can never agree to hand this taxing power and control over state transactions to the federal government. Anyone with sense who has lived in the world knows that whatever promises are made about changing tax law (especially income tax, e.g. “fair tax”) are made, we will end up with both. And they will only become more and more vampiric with time.
SarahW (455c47) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:48 pmtherein lies the rub, the vat is with windows vista, dark magic conjured on mount doom,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 5:51 pmThey will tax the vampires, too. And take their castles under TIFF eminent domain and turn them into hotel-casinos. 😉
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:02 pmno, nk, strigoi get professional courtesy,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:05 pmRe loans, I invite the world — and especially Trump supporters — to compare & contrast.
Trump took a large fortune measured, by inflation-adjusted dollars, in the billions, which he got from his daddy.
He then borrowed billions of dollars of other people’s money, giving them in return either his own or — once he got better lawyers — his namesake companies’ solemn promises to repay those loans. He used the money to build an empire of casinos, sex, and sleaze, which he then repeatedly washed, rinsed, and repeated though the bankruptcy courts to leave those gullible creditors with, on average, less than a penny on the dollar. He brags about this while flying around in airplanes and helicopters, looking down on the Americans he’s cheated. In his current deals, he trades exclusively on his name. Even when a creditor insists that he put in some of his own personal money, in an attempt to shame him into keeping his promises to repay what they’re loaning, he still defaults — as was true in the development of his current “flagship” property, the Chicago hotel.
Cruz bet his and his wife’s own very modest life savings, a retirement account, on his campaign. If he fails, no one but he and his wife will take the financial hit.
Trump brags about self-funding his campaign. That’s horsesh*t: He’s not making real campaign expenditures, he’s buying and handing out gimme-caps with his name on it. His campaign is almost entirely reliant on free media buzz and Trump’s well-proven capacity for suckering people with the active connivance of the media. That’s what reality TV is, and that’s the only thing he’s ever been any good at.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:08 pmUPDATE: New York Daily News, not Daily Mail. Thanks to Sammy F. for the correction.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:08 pmI cannot support a VAT tax because it’s hidden and added each step of the way from the original producers to the end-users. Nobody sees the VAT. A national sales tax I can get on board with, provided the income tax is stricken from the Constitution and permanently barred by the Constitution BEFORE the national sales tax is taken up outside the Constitution.
John Hitchcock (b09b88) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:11 pm@ SarahW (#159), re VAT taxes: You’re badly mistaken. I suspect you’ve been reading some other candidates’ spin, and you’ve been suckered by it. If you’re going to repeat talking points from some other candidate, please provide links. If you think you can prove your point from Cruz’ own words — which I’m quite sure you cannot — then provide links to Cruz’ campaign website or other sources undeniably within his control.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:12 pma hundred years ago, they would be blaming yellow fever on carnegie’s smelters,
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/02/guess-what-the-sierra-club-blames-for-zika-virus-spread-hint-not-mosquitoes/
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:16 pmHe brags about this while flying around in airplanes and helicopters, looking down on the Americans he’s cheated.
“He brags about this while flying around in his private jet with 24-karat gold plated sinks and gold silk on the walls, looking down on the Americans he’s cheated. ”
There.
Dana (86e864) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:19 pmGold plate, not solid gold? What a parvenu!
nk (dbc370) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:22 pmI get your point CS, but I think this was brought on by my confusion between Goldman Sachs and Lehman Bros. I was in a hurry to get out of the house to a dr’s appointment, and misspoke.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:23 pmSorry Bill H. It was brought on because a certain person is obsessed with Goldman Sachs, not because of a little misspeak on your part.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:27 pmgoldman is as they say too big to fail. it supported the skydragon, beyond petroleum, and a whole host of scams, lehman on the other hand, bet the eight way on the oil play, and even had a stake in afffordable housing, they were doomed from the getgo,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:27 pmBill H, I’m sorry, I actually didn’t even notice that you had mentioned them. I wasn’t referring to you in particular. Earlier today, there was a Trumpie going on and on about Goldman Sachs. It just seems to be a theme where they focus on these distracting issues, rather than the big “meat and potatoes” issues that are important. They never seem to get angry about ISIS and all that.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:29 pmnow more then likely, as with obama, doc brown’s campaign is not undisposed to a little assistance from the octopus, they just have to keep in on the qt,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:37 pmWhat on earth are you rambling about, narciso?
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:43 pmyou think these campaigns will get no lucre from the big banks, this is the only they prevail, well besides the basenghi opposition,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:45 pmNow we get down to why that Saudi prince wants Trump out of the race.
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:46 pmI’m not hurt by it, I just thought it might be my brain fart. But yah- someone had an obsession for a lie that was bordering on psychotic. Eh- moving on….
Bill H (dcdd7b) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:50 pmin more relevant news, not whether ghidra or rodan prevails,
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=56af55d9e4b0012bd712ec47
a friend would note you consider the third selection, his own literary contribution,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:50 pmWhatever one thinks of Goldman Sachs, the idea that since Cruz got a loan from them or his wife works there means he’s somehow tainted by all of their real or imagined misdeeds is yet another trip into idiocy, on a par with equating him with the establishment Republicans who are all against him (well maybe not quite that stupid).
But if we are really going to embrace that idea then what are we supposed to think about Trump?
Donald Trump is Owned by Goldman Sachs
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:13 pmneither one care about this victory,
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2016/02/aqap-provides-social-services-implements-sharia-while-advancing-in-southern-yemen.php?
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 7:51 pmso those new transfers to oman, will eventually make their way to yemen,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 8:12 pmhappyfeet, January 26:
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:22 pmGood luck with that, Patterico.
Simon Jester (a99ea2) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:25 pmThe ubiquitous happyfeet is never around when it’s time to get his nose rubbed in it.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:32 pmpikachu is watching the finale of the expanse, the triumph of the eugenic conglomerate, basically stempro, two hundred years in the future,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:39 pmLook at the Trump concession speech.
He has a problem with his neck. Like a slipped disk or something. There is a marked restriction to his head movements.
It made no sense strategically to skip the Fox debate. I think his neck was bothering him, and that’s the real reason he passed on the debate.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:54 pmMaybe the sun was in his eyes.
Pons Asinorum (49e2e8) — 2/2/2016 @ 9:57 pmRiiiight. Somehow the neck doesn’t stop him from hosting a fundraiser and otherwise engaging in a normal range of campaign activities but it prevented him from debating. Makes perfect sense.
papertiger reminds me of the typical spokespersons for Obama, Clinton etc.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/3/2016 @ 6:27 amGerald A,
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/3/2016 @ 6:50 ampapertiger may be finally realizing what we long ago realized…that Donnie Trump is a pain in the neck. (LOL)
it’s not as simple as it looks,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/02/03/daily-202-hard-feelings-complicate-ted-cruz-s-effort-to-consolidate-evangelical-support/56b13dc5981b92a22dedb3e6?postshare=8041454509468451&tid=ss_tw
narciso (732bc0) — 2/3/2016 @ 6:54 amNow, Donnie Friendly has just tweeted that Cruz “stole” the Iowa Caucuses. Losing is hard.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:03 amFirst Breitbart-In-Name-Only quoting Political and now the WaPo, all three of them great friends of Cruz, telling us all the things wrong with Cruz. I’m convinced. Cruz should just pack it up and go home. He doesn’t have a snowball’s chance.
nk (dbc370) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:07 ami owe you two pancakes
sleazy ted pulled a goldy sacky on lispy fruit loop Dr. Ben Carson!
oh my goodness not even Mr. The Donald is that clever
happyfeet (831175) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:07 amMr. Feet, you should buy Patterico a full breakfast. Being a poor loser should have consequences.
There are wonderful gift certificates.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:12 ami have to wait on the finale
i love how it’s departing from the book it makes it more watchable
i’m reading that wool series the first book is gripping – some clunky plotting here and there (love at first sight is a key plot device – gack), but the guy really does have some talent and I’m curious where it goes
it’s basically maze runner in a silo so far, but still very fun
happyfeet (831175) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:12 amyes yes Mr. Jester!
if the Ted n Heidi show gets picked up this fall and they are become THE premiere harvardtrash white house power couple of the millenniums I will for sure send Mr. P a tasty brunch for his whole family somewheres appropriate through the opentable I promise you
and then we’ll all just have to hunker down and make the best of it, content that our sad little country, its greatness decisively behind it, will have been spared having that disgusting old lady pick at its bones like the scummy sleaze-vulture she is
happyfeet (831175) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:21 amcan’t wait for this one.,
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/leonardo-dicaprio-produce-post-apocalyptic-861162
narciso (732bc0) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:24 amhappyfeet, since your man-crush Donnie waffles on the issues, maybe you owe Patterico a plate of waffles rather than pancakes. Of course, with Donnie’s loss in Iowa, I also see some egg on your face. 😉
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:25 amWell, hf, you kind of promised something to Patterico. You should deliver. And every snark after makes you look…well…like you are more upset at being wrong than about facts.
Pay up. Talk is cheap.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:27 amI do like the waffle idea.
Except waffles are for losers.
Even YUUUGGEEE ones.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:28 ami will think of something Mr. Jester
i have a 9:30 see you later
happyfeet (831175) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:30 amNo contemporary GOP politician is worthy enough to be The Donald’s running mate.
askeptic (efcf22) — 2/3/2016 @ 11:30 amUnfortunately, Il Papa is not available.
#139 Leviticus : Yep, I must be a racist for not wanting my country to go through the destructive clash of cultures that Europe is going through now. For not wanting my wife and granddaughters to be forced to wear burqas or risk rape, assault, or murder you seek to label me. Wonder why?
There is another group who wishes to shout down any discussion by misrepresnting their opponent’s position (for example, “Mexicans, Mexicans, Mexicans”) and then throwing a label (for example, “racist”). They follow the teachings of Alinsky in these matters. Glad to know you are a proponent of their worldview.
#142 pieter : It took all of two replies and 41 minutes for the faithful here to go straight to Godwin. By the laws of the internet, you have lost the argument. If you had bothered to read my post at all, you would have seen I addressed your point of whether there were other candidates who would control immigration to the degree that is required. The answer was, and is, no. Before Trump entered the race, there were no candidates whose positions or legislative record would suggest that they were in favor of building walls, deporting those already here illegally, getting rid of anchor and grappling hook children, and tracking down those who overstay their visas. While some of the candidates have modified their positions in the face of Trump’s level of support, it is not their “natural” positions, and if left to their own devices, they would quickly devolve back to their open-door, take-em-all policies.
I have yet to hear anyone explain how a “true conservative” winning the presidency will make any difference if immigration is not addressed in a meaningful and significant way. If the “refugees” that have been and will be admitted before next January are allowed to stay, more refugees are taken under EU pressure, nothing is done regarding the borders, and we continue to offer a full range of benefits to these new residents; what difference does it make that a “constitutionalist” sits in the White House. He can’t approve budgets, he can’t make laws, and if he is constrained by his values, he won’t be able to circumvent a Congress intent on keeping the gravy train running. All you will have is four years of kabuki theater followed by eight more years of socialist “progress”.
Remember how funny we found all those people who suffered from Bush Derangement Syndrome? How they would attribute all sorts of evil acts to him, mock every slip of the tongue, and how all the ills of the US and the world were laid at his feet. Remember how anyone who supported Bush was a “Nazi” and a “war criminal” and should be hunted down and killed like a rabid dog? Remember how ridiculous they looked and sounded way back then? It had faded to a faint echo, but now it doesn’t seem to have faded all that much. Same tune, different lyrics.
prowlerguy (3af7ff) — 2/3/2016 @ 12:45 pmRepublican presidential candidates don’t usually select their running mates from among their rivals in the primaries.
Bush 41 didn’t, Dole didn’t, Bush 43 didn’t, McCain didn’t, and Romney didn’t. The last one who did was Reagan in 1980, and before that nobody since Thomas Dewey in 1948.
Joshua (9ede0e) — 2/3/2016 @ 12:47 pmI’m sympathetic to Cruz.He’s a bright man. But the family values thing only goes so far. Understand, on a whole host of issues-gay marriage and abortion especially- that ship has sailed.His appeal to Evangelicals that was big in Iowa precludes a whole host of states ever getting in his Electoral column.When GOPe plays that game, they are basically playing to the crowd as a prelude to selling out. Cruz doing so is no different. Abolishing the IRS sounds great, but somebody has to be the bad guy and collect taxes.
As to Rubio, the he’s a rent boy, an errand boy sent by grocery clerks, the most empty of suits. As hollow a vessel as you could imagine. And MORE WAR. Pass.
Trump is creative destruction, defibrillation paddles applied to the body politic, a break. I expect ultimately he may disappoint and fail us. But so has the GOPe every MOTHERF___ING TIME FOREVER. But if he does the One Big Thing right, that’s enough. And he cannot walk immigration back. If we don’t get that right soon, nothing else will matter.
He also puts chunks of the Northeast and Midwest in Electoral play for the first time in decades.No other Republican can do that. Which means the Dem candidate will have to spend resources in places they had assumed were givens.
As to him not being a principled “conservative”; what have the cucks wrought since the day Reagan went home but tell us one thing and then get to DC go along with progressive nonsense at every turn. We are supposed to hate Trump because he isn’t a conservative like the Bushes, McConnell, Ryan? PLEASE.
Bugg (db3a97) — 2/3/2016 @ 3:57 pmBugg:
I disagree. There are many issues that will need to be resolved in this area, things like “Can bakeries be forced to bake cakes for SSM ceremonies and/or fined/criminalized for refusing?” and other civil rights and religious rights issues. I want a President who will act like these issues have not been resolved yet, instead of someone who will act like it’s a done deal so sit down and shut up.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/3/2016 @ 4:17 pmBugg:
That’s a valid point but I’m not convinced typical blue GOP voters will support Trump. (They may not support Cruz, either.) That means anti-establishment candidates — assuming Trump remains anti-establishment, which is unlikely — will have to turn out new voters. Cruz has shown he can do that. Trump has shown he can energize people in polls but he needs them to vote, too. Maybe they will. It will be interesting to see.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/3/2016 @ 4:20 pmThe terms cucks, as used by Bugg, is a silly vapid noxious little term.
JD (f2dffb) — 2/3/2016 @ 4:24 pmJD, folks can disagree on candidates, sure. And I *really* dislike name calling because it is corrosive and serves the progressive cause.
But I continue to be surprised to hear how AWFUL people are who have very impressive ACU voting records. But that doesn’t fit bumper sticker thinking, does it?
Simon Jester (81b5fb) — 2/3/2016 @ 5:23 pmBut using “popular” silly names to call people does make you feel like part of some kind of club. WIth the cool kids.
Simon Jester (81b5fb) — 2/3/2016 @ 5:24 pmDRJ, I am more and more hopeful about Cruz. We shall see. I like his attitudes about the size of government and the role of the Constitution. I wish he could be a Supreme Court Justice.
Simon Jester (81b5fb) — 2/3/2016 @ 5:25 pmUnderstand, on a whole host of issues-gay marriage and abortion especially- that ship has sailed. (Bugg?)
I disagree. There are many issues that will need to be resolved in this area,
DRJ (15874d) — 2/3/2016 @ 4:17 pm
The ship that sailed is that the public is ok with a same sex couple having a relationship that is legally defined as marriage…and go live your life and leave me alone,
NOT
…and all of you have to like it.
I don’t know if people agree with me and see no reason to comment, or whether people would prefer to ignore me, or what,
MD in Philly (at the moment not in Philly) (deca84) — 2/3/2016 @ 5:59 pmwhen I bring up the topic of forced acceptance of transgender females who have male anatomy in the same locker room as anatomical females, and if the XX females (or their parents) don’t like it, ban them.
I have no desire and would stand against any harassment of people who do not easily identify as a male or female consistent with their biology,
but forcing the 99% to publicly humor the <1% is not going to be helpful to anyone.
MD,
I understand. Bugg was probably making the same point — that the ship has sailed on the legality of SSM and abortion — but I suspect liberals want to use that to claim the ship has sailed when it comes to that and any ancillary issues, including conflicting religious issues. They want to use the Supreme Court decisions as a bludgeon to prevent any and all religious accommodations. That is not the way the law works in this area and it shouldn’t be how the politics works either, but it will be if we have a Democratic or a moderate Republican President.
PS to Simon Jester — That would be nice (after Cruz has served two terms as President!), but I doubt it will happrn. Supreme Court Justices are confirmed in the Senate. It will be a generation or more before the Senate forgives Cruz for standing up to them, if ever.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:21 pmi am prepared to wait
happyfeet (831175) — 2/3/2016 @ 7:26 pmBeldar (fa637a) — 2/2/2016 @ 6:08 pm
He made a loan to his campaign, and if he bet anything, it was that he’d raise the money to pay it back by Election Day. He lost $545,000. That was the amount by which cash on hand at the end of Election Day 2012 plus $250,000 fell short of the amount of money he had loaned his campaign. It’s not legal to pay yourself back more than $250,000 from vampaign funds using money raised after Election Day. Federal law. Only a court, or Congress, can change that provision.
If he would have lost, he could have gotten the money back by joining a law firm. It’s winning that cost him money!
But his wife is still working (as a glorified financial planner, basically) and earning a high salary plus bonuses probably.
Trump also pays for his private jet. He would be doing that anyway, but it has to be accounted for as a campaign expense and paid for by the campaign. Contributions in kind are considered to be the same as contributions in cash, and must be reported (as well as limited in dollar amount for all but the candidate and/or spouse) So he periodically gives money to his campaign to pay its proportion of the bill by his jet maintenance company. Trump also has put a few people on salary. Maybe lawyers and accountants he’d have anyway, or he has a personal budget for them, but he has some political people, too. And he does run the occasional ad.
Sammy Finkelman (dbec95) — 2/4/2016 @ 6:53 am