Hewitt Falls for Trump Line on Supreme Court
Hugh Hewitt beats his Supreme Court drum once again in advocating for the election of a con man to be the Republican President. Hugh describes an exchange he had with Donald Trump in which Trump not only promised to stick to his previously announced list or something very much like it, but also said that McConnell could block his nominees if they turned out to be very different. Hugh says:
There you have it. If Donald Trump departs from his list of future Supreme Court nominees, Donald Trump has authorized Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans to block that nominee and enforce the list. And I have no doubt that they would, because not only have they shown the collective spine to do so in the course of the Garland debate, here they have irrefutable evidence of the potential president’s consent to a future blockade if necessary.
Trump is thus now effectively stopped from effectively arguing against the Senate’s refusal to confirm an unacceptable nominee.
Now Ben and others can conjure up all sorts of hypotheticals wherein Trump backtracks or McConnell and the Senate GOP caves. But there is no way any additional proof can be brought forward on the subject. Clinging to objections that the Supreme Court argument has no weight now is in fact proof that “We can’t trust him” was cover all along to avoid the discomfort of counting the cost of helping to defeat Trump and elect Clinton.
There can be no more assurance to be given than has been given, and a lot has been given.
First, the notion that McConnell is going to block a Trump nominee — unless it’s an actual leftist with an actual leftist track record — is a joke. I say that as someone who told you that McConnell would block Merrick Garland as long as Obama is President. A lot of you didn’t believe me, but I was right about that — and I’m right to say that he isn’t going to block any Trump nominee.
But, to address Hugh’s next point, if McConnell tried, the idea that Trump would acquiesce because he promised to on the Hugh Hewitt show is also a joke. The problem with this is that it assumes Trump’s word is worth something. If McConnell blocked a Trump nominee, Trump would scream to high Heaven and claim the system is rigged. He would deny that he ever said otherwise on Hewitt’s show.
Hugh says: “There can be no more assurance to be given than has been given, and a lot has been given.” Well, sure. More assurance could be given. You could get assurance from someone whose word actually means something. But we don’t have such a person this cycle. So we’re left with a lot of gum-flapping.
P.S. Hugh also seems confused about what the alt-right is. Any time these guys become aware of my existence on Twitter, they unleash a barrage of Neo-Nazi Stormfront garbage. Hugh seems to think of them as purely anti-Establishment folks. His confusion is so great that he actually labeled Ben Shapiro a member of the alt-right on his show — which he now admits, in his column linked above, was a mistake — when Shapiro is, in fact, one of the key targets of this collection of troglodytes.
The mainstreaming of these people is one of the worst aspects of Trumpism.
Preach it.
SPQR (a3a747) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:38 amI think “alt-right” got co-opted somewhere along the way. Wasn’t the original idea that they would be millennial-led conservative/libertarians who were open to various lifestyles but were united by a loathing of the enforced groupthink of their leftist Obama-worshiping peers? But based upon what I have recently observed I think you are right that the uglier elements of the right are starting to fly the alt-right banner.
JVW (82196f) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:03 amMr. Trump’s judges will save the constitution (thank goodness)
stinkypig though
her judges despise America, they loathe America’s wee small fetuses, they find freedom to be repugnant, they glorify injustice, and they love to shove the stink all up in it
advantage: Mr. The Donald
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:09 amMcConnell would be more likely to block a “plain meaning” Constitutionalist than a statist.
NJRob (a07d2e) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:10 amI know a talk show host isn’t necessarily in agreement with what guests say or necessarily responsible for “supporting” a view by giving it air time,
but I was disheartened this morning listening to him and a guess talking about how good party leaders Ryan and McConnell are and how important it is to have a functional party that can reward friends, punish enemies, and make back room deals…
If I remember correctly, Washington (the general and president) was against the formation of political parties.
“No one does right, no, not one”
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:14 amSelfish ambition glorified, government by the people is gone.
Ok, Trump sucks. But you are not going to see an independent elected to the Presidency in our lifetime.
So you have a choice, Trump or Hillary. I don’t like it either. There were a lot of people fooled by the AstroTurf commenters, media and D machine working to assist Trump in the getting the nomination. We weren’t fooled. But it is over. So again, you have a choice, Trump or Hillary, period. Not supporting this fool is supporting Hillary, period.
Its time to get over it. The idiots that supported Trump won’t admit it, who cares. YOU have to chose a side, and if it isn’t Trump at this point, then it is Hillary. Johnson equals Hillary! ‘None of the Above’ equals Hillary.
It is time to quit the “I told you so”. It’s time to wear the “I voted for the idiot over the criminal” shirts.
Rich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:31 amThe peculiar thing is, Donald Trump seems to think the Second Amendment is a key Supreme Court issue. It probably shows you how much he knows. He probably got that from the second amendment people.
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:41 amHe has a good grasp of the issues that’s for sure. Let’s just hope the Senate will confirm the judges he nominates.
I worry.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:51 amSo, what are you going to do? Will you hold your nose and vote for Trump, vote Libertarian, vote for Hillary or not vote at all?
scr_north (50d658) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:51 amThe court is just his appetizer. It’s losing his meat and potatoes that has him spooked. Hewitt let the cat out of the bag several days ago on a cabler when he lamented on air, “If Hillary wins, conservatism is dead.”
Meow.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:52 amHH isn’t falling for anything. He’s a smart guy, which is why he has not given up on Trump.
Trump may or may not nominate all his judges from that list. But, Patterico, what list do you think Hillary is going to use?
Because, unless something remarkable happens, it will be either Trump or Hillary.
I am so sick of #NeverTrump. You guys might as well become Democrats, because that is who you are helping.
That said, I am not a fan of Trump, but so far, I expect to vote for him.
John Moore (e14975) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:56 am@11. He’s a smart guy, which is why he has not given up on Trump.
So “smart,” he backed a losing candidate through the primaries; insisted Trump would never get the nomination and predicted there would be a brokered convention. “Oops!” — Rick Perry.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:04 amRich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:31 am
The chances are around 1 in 30 or 35 in every election. It happens with Governors, occasionally. Well, from that maybe you’d say closer to 1 in 50 or 60.
It could have happened this year, had Michael Bloomberg had a different opinion of Hillary Clinton. It could have happened, hasd someone seen the need for it early enough. They may not wait to see how things pan out in 2020. It could have hapepned in 1992, had Perot had slightly more sense.
Why isn’t it: “Not supporting Hillary, is supporting this fool?”
I’ll tell you what. ‘None of the Above’ doesn’t mean eitehr Hillary or trump. ‘None of the Above’ according to taht thinking, means the worser of the two evils.
That was not the slogan in Louisiana in 1991.
http://photos.nola.com/tpphotos/2011/12/175duke.html
More people, if forced to choose, will go that way than the other way because…nuclear war, as the Democratic campaign keeps pointing out.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/29/hillary-clinton-is-right-donald-trump-threatens-world-war-iii.html
Except that’s not really true.
By the way, in the nterests of fairness and balance, there’s a pro-Putin progangandist by the name of Stephen Cohen, who also is a frequent guest on the John Batchelor show, who has come up with the idea that it’s Hillary Clinton who threatens, because she’s a “Cold Warrior” and would wind up in another Cuban Missile crisis.
So really, if you want Trump, you should be encouraging third party votes, or non votes. Polls will back you up. Hillary’s margin is slightly smaller with other candidates in the race.
More links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/opinion/election-from-hell.html
http://thetandd.com/news/opinion/vote-for-the-crook-it-s-important/article_9906d68f-a7bb-5c2d-a092-d355dbacb9c8.html
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:07 am7- See, that is where Jeff Goldstein was right about internationalism, and Patterico was wrong about the “reasonable listener” approach. We all know the intent of the founders with the second amendment when they created the constitution; it a a God given right of individual free men to protect themselves from enemies foreign and domestic. Get it into the court though, and having released the text from the authors intent and given it to those esteemed reasonable interpreters, they could easily decide the text means to them that only those belonging to a state run militia, armed by state militia, are permitted to bear arms. And if that is what the Supreme Court rules, it becomes the constitutional law of the land. Then, once that is accomplished the whole bill of rights is on the table.
And please don’t give me that molan labe stuff. They won’t go around confiscating weapons, giving hero’s like yourself a chance at heroic armed resistance. They will just pass a law that possession of a gun will get you 10 years in prison, and selling or manufacturing bullets will get you 15, and within just a few years after honest citizens are prosecuted whenever a weapon is discovered or used, the population will voluntarily disarm.
Don’t believe me? Well then, just go on working against Trump and when Hillary is elected, we’ll see. And I guarantee you, Patterico will be right in there prosecuting anyone arrested for possessing a firearm, because that’s the law, and he’s sworn to uphold it.
‘Cuz of honor…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:17 amHewitt backed no one in the primaries. I haven’t heard him say there would be a brokered convention. Maybe you’re confusing him with someone else.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:23 amThat should have been intentionalism, not internationalism…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:23 am#13 _ It’s not anybody but Hillary. That is just obfuscating that Hillary can be beat without voting for the troll Trump.
It’s just not that complicated. It’s Trump or Hillary, period.
Rich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:32 amThe premise is that a Republican majority can keep Trump on track, fighting nominees, etc., when needed. If the Rs are against something, you can be sure that the Ds will be for it. Which is to say in any confrontation over the Supreme Court, the Ds will be allied with Trump. So now it becomes a replay of the hard ball we’ve seen with Obama, and we know the Rs will fold if the stakes are raised high enough. This is the very reason Trump exists in the political world. He is filling a vacuum. That vacuum is Ryan and McConnell.
If the last three and half years have taught us anything, it is that weakness and cowardice are the core characteristics of the Republican establishment to date.
We will know that the winds have changed when Congress abandons omnibus budgets and each Department or Agency is held accountable by means of their budget, or lack of same. And when contempt of Congress is not the administration’s first line of defense.
BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:44 amI’m pretty sure there’s no “n” in “lie.” Just sayin’
Edoc118 (05a689) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:44 amThere will be one of two outcomes;
When Hillary is President, she’ll definitely nominate left wing lunatics to the Supreme Court.
When Trump is President, he might nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court.
In other words, Hillary WON’T nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court, but Trump might.
It’s like Dennis Prager has said — if you open door #1, there’s going to be a man-eating lion. But behind door #2, there will either be a man-eating lion or a beautiful woman. Which door are you going to open?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:46 amHugh still waiting for Don Con’s tax returns he promised a year ago
jb (4dd616) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:06 amin four years ted sore loser cruz will be even more smarmy to listen to, even more repulsive to look at, even more reviled by his peers, and his sacky will be even more all up in the sacky filth
take a moment to think on that
the magical thinking what holds that there’s a pendulum what’s gonna swing from electing a disgusting stinkypig to an embrace of the putative gloriousness of these two harvardtrash losers is fanciful to say the least
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:14 amCruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:46 am
Door number 3, assuming that Monty Hall will always offer you a choice but is trying to get you to lose.
The truth is, it is not really possible to tell what is behind either of these doors. Both involve serous odds making and gambling, more than usual.
In some scenarios, the worser of the two evils is better, and incompetence is a plus factor. (that’s certainly true when it comes to corruption, and malfesance in office.)
Thomas Sowell said: One way, it’s Russian roulette, the other way it’s a shotgun, and avoiding the choice is giving up.
It would seem then, you should vote for Russian roulette, but Thomas Sowell doesn’t seem comfortable with that idea.
The individual vote doesn’t really matter too much, but you always want to vote as if it did. Maybe the only thing that does matter, is what it seems to show you believe.
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:17 amI think it’s really unfair to say that Hugh has “fallen for a line.”
Hugh is not a Trump fan by any stretch of the imagination. But he realizes that we can’t take a chance on Hillary’s Supreme Court nominations, so we have to go with Trump. Because at least he MIGHT nominate conservatives.
It just seems that for the #NeverTrumpers, they would rather take their chances with Hillary’s left wing lunatic nominees.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:17 amThat’s kind of weird.
i want the door what has chicken salad and ritz crackers
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:18 amMuch in the same way “cuckservative” was co-opted by the Trumpites as a way of saying that non-Trumpys have given up their principles by trying to elect Hillary by refusing to vote Trump, a wild leap of logic from people who have abandoned all principle.
I’ll stick with the Hamilton Rule: “If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
We have no reason to think that Trump wouldn’t be as much a disaster on not just the SCOTUS, but on other federal judge appointments, to go with everything else.
William Teach (39d949) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:18 amGet it into the court though, and having released the text from the authors intent and given it to those esteemed reasonable interpreters, they could easily decide the text means to them that only those belonging to a state run militia, armed by state militia, are permitted to bear arms. And if that is what the Supreme Court rules, it becomes the constitutional law of the land.
That was the state of Supreme Court-interpreted Second Amendment from 1938 to 2008!!!!111!!1
The ignorance, the ignorance! But if they weren’t ignorant, they wouldn’t be Trumpkins.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:20 am20. Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:46 am
Trump’s left wing lunatic would get confirmed, but the Second Amendment people, as Trump said, might stop Hillary’s. Except that the NRA has no reason to care about the First amendment.
Last time:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elena_Kagan_Supreme_Court_nomination
If there was another issue, and it looked like not every possible nominee would fit into it, maybe.
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:24 amOn the Supreme court, the most important thing is what party has a majority in the Senate (with a Democratic president and a Democratic Senate, the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees will fall by the wayside)
Trump will name conservatives only if the republicans control the Senate, and he’ll use his list only one time.
Hillary may be prepared to battle to the point where the seats renain vacant and try to turn this into an election issue. She said she would make overturning Citizens United a litmus test, which, if done, is guaranteed to result in the nominee being opposed by all, or all but one or two Republican Senators.
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:29 amI emphatically support meaningless gum-flapping in this instance. Hillary Clinton’s gums are not flapping, and she has told us exactly the kind of anti-constitutional, self-aggrandizing, democracy-killing judges she will appoint. Compared to what Hillary promises, gum-flapping is almost too good to be true.
Patterico, why won’t you enthusiastically endorse gum-flapping?
Andrew (9eb6dd) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:30 amTo condemn the alt-right the way you do plays into the liberal/statist narrative. The alt-right, much like the Republican Party, is a big tent, which includes neo-nazis. Isn’t David Duke a Republican? Does that make us Republicans white supremacists? By your logic, the answer is yes.
The alt-right also includes a broad range of bright, unconventional conservative thinkers. The other day, Instapundit linked to a debate between Vox Day and Louise Mensch about marital “rape.” Vox’s perspective was a pleasure to read. Did you read it? You know, Vox Day is considered by many to be an alt-right neo-nazi, though nothing could be further from the truth. He is alt-right, however, and one of many freewheeling young conservatives to come out of the alt-right. They should not be so easily dismissed.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:30 am#23 Sammy,
In a Presidential election, it’s essentially a binary outcome.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:32 amEither Hillary or Trump is going to become the next President.
You can open door #3, but there’s probably going to be a clown standing there.
Shorty is losing Scott Adams.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:33 amHowever, Adams told Breitbart News he thinks that Trump can still pull off a “landslide” victory in November.
“I think he’s invested in winning. And I think his core personality is likely to re-emerge, which is ‘win at all costs,’ and I think that whatever that takes is likely.”
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:35 amyes yes!
his judges will save the constitution! except for that 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th amendments, the balance of powers, and probably a bunch of over things too.
so we’ll have the part about not quartering soldiers for sure (maybe).
i mean his judges despise America, they loathe America’s wee small fetuses, they find freedom to be repugnant, they glorify injustice, and they love to shove the stink all up in it
but they’ll be appointed by The Don! That’s all that matters
making The Don great again
sad feet (ddead1) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:36 am#28 Sammy wrote,
“Trump’s left wing lunatic(s) would get confirmed, but the Second Amendment people, as Trump said, might stop Hillary’s. Except that the NRA has no reason to care about the First amendment.”
No.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:38 amnk, it has never been the law that only members of an organized state militia could possess firearms, and you know it.
Nevertrumpers, if it wasn’t for lies, they would have nothing to say!
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:40 am“Trump will name conservatives only if the republicans control the Senate, and he’ll use his list only one time.”
Pure assertion stated as fact. The nevertrumpers best and only tactic.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:42 am#35 sadfeet,
Will you kindly provide us with your scouting report of Hillary’s potential Supreme Court nominations???
yes yes?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:44 amor no no?
I defended gun cases, jackass. More than you have had lucid thoughts. It was not the law, because neither Congress nor the legislatures passed such laws. But as far as the Supreme Court was concerned, they could have. The Supreme Court did not recognize the Second Amendment as an individual right until 2008, in the Heller case, and then it only applied to the federal government. It did not apply to the states until McDonald v. City of Chicago, in 2010.
You’re an idiot and a waste of time, and I’m sick of the ignorance, the stupidity, and the mendacity, of all you Trumpkins who are dirtying up this blog.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:49 amThe dems have a history of supporting a dem whether they are traitors, liars, crooks or rapists. The republicans have a history of eating their own. History is playing out again. The dems are supporting a lying crooked traitor. The repubs are eating their own.
We KNOW the type candidate hillary will nominate. You cannot count on a republican controlled senate holding off for 4 more years even if hillary nominates satan. Satan will ultimately be confirmed.
Jim (a9b7c7) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:51 amYou can hope that Trump will prove to be an unusual politician, actually keeping his promise.
Trumpkin isn’t even a perjorative word it just means someone what doesn’t wanna do stinkypig all up in it
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:51 am#42 Mr happyfeet,
There’s likely a certain satisfaction they take in rhyming the word with pumpkin. It’s cute in a Dr Seuss kind of way.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:56 amI just wish they found satisfaction in mocking Hillary as much as they do in mocking Trump.
Trump may be a little bit of a chameleon, but Hillary’s definitely a snake.
What I’m saying nk, is that a past court would not have allowed the state to outlaw and confiscate private gun ownership. A future court, packed with the picks Obama has already done, and the ones Hillary will pick, will outlaw private ownership of guns.
I don’t think either of us wants that, so why are you attacking me and defending Hillary’s clear purposes of doing just that?
That was a rhetorical question, we all know it’s just virtue signalling gone horribly wrong.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:02 pmMunchkins. Timid little creatures terrorized by the Wicked Witch of Westchester, ahem the West.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:03 pm#45 nk,
So you’re not especially fearful of a Hillary Administration — is that your point?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:13 pmthat’s cause she’s effing scary
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:13 pmand smelly
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:13 pmSo now anyone who likes Trump is a Stormfront reader when they question Patterico?
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:18 pmYou may think Trump is an idiot, but Hillary is a depraved lunatic. If she is elected by a wide margin, it basically spells the end of America. The only real question for the next 50 years is, can partition be achieved without civil war.
The only upside to a Hillary victory is that, since the left basically views Trump as a proxy for vanishing white America, they will do such a hate-filled victory dance it will be impossible to remain blind to what’s coming. They won’t let the mask slip, they’ll tear it off and shred it, all the while cackling at you.
hunson abedeer (80144e) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:18 pm#49 A stormfront aficionado. Reading does not make you an adherent.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:18 pm#50 What Patterico don’t get is the first set of people the Left will be run out of their jobs with some trump’ed up nonsense are the lawyers in Govt. And the Left will surely consider 8 more years of Barack as a mandate to do so.
Getcha popcorn ready Govt Bureaucrats on the right. They are coming for you first.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:21 pmMy parents grew up under Nazi occupation, followed by a four-year civil war. My grandfather lost a brother, two sons and two nephews.
Sammy Finkelman’s father was in a concentration camp.
You fat, spoiled, white, bourgeois, welfare class are to laugh at.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:22 pmPeople here don’t understand the Left. They simply have no clue no matter how many text books they read or Trump speeches they cite.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:22 pm#53 Not blood libel but pretty much the same concept.
NK, please tell me what makes you any different than the Bourgeois you vilify?
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:23 pmRodney King’s Spirit, odd. I was thinking the same of your “understanding” of the Left.
SPQR (a3a747) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:26 pmSammy – You need to wake up. If there is honor in voting for the guy you feel most convicted about, that honor goes away when your refusal to vote for Trump ultimately helps Hillary ascend to the oval office.
It just is not that difficult to grasp. So please listen up. A 1:35 chance of a third person winning is pipe dream. Always was. In the real world, that which has happened these past fourty to fifty years, your only hope of not putting Hillary in office is to vote for Trump. There is no other realistic alternative. To pretend otherwise is to be naive or a closet Hillary supporter. Period.
Rich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:28 pmmy dad worked at Sears for awhile when he was little
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:31 pmHow will Toomey, Rubio, Portman, Ayotte, Kirk and Johnson bell the Trump supporters who volunteer for GOTV efforts? Damage can be minimized by making sure they have the gas money to stay out in rural areas but some are sure to wind up in the suburbs where they will do damage.
Rick Ballard (d51940) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:31 pm#7
However –
A justice’s view of 2A is a good indicator of the justice’s view of the entire constitution. Take for example Stevens dissents in CU, MCDonalad, Heller and his majority opinion in Kelo.
Short summary of Stevens ‘s opinions
Kelo – government can condemn private property for private use
joe (debac0) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:32 pmMcdonald – gov and pick and chose which of BOR to incorporate
Heller – 2A says you have the right to own a gun when the govt gives you permission to own a gun (like why bother even having 2a in the BOR)
CU – gov can ban speech
SPQR … another lawyer without a clue who will cling to his papers as he is marched to his demise.
The Left cares not for your laws nor for your reason nor your degrees nor how smart you may be.
Hillary, while not a leftist, is sold out 100% to its cause. The other guy is not.
The rest is word f*ing.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:32 pm@15- Hewitt backed no one in the primaries. I haven’t heard him say there would be a brokered convention. Maybe you’re confusing him with someone else.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:23 am
No. You are. Start with this– and get educated.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/16/opinions/gop-open-convention-likely-hewitt/
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:33 pmWho on earth that posts here is that directed toward? And what’s with the racist stuff?
Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:34 pm#61 and if you doubt me just look at how rape allegations are treated nowadays on College Campi … it is coming to a home near you kiddos. Just like men crapping with my daughter was a big old joke 30 years ago — now here we have it.
Keep jacking off to hating Trump you legal eagle types — gunna get your nuts blown off first. They always get the Lawyers first. Then the Academics. Then the Media. Go look at Venezuela as our most recent example. They destroy from the inside out.
Leftists are very smart folks if you ask me. Evil, but quite smart.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:39 pmRev. Hoagie® — NK is condemning himself I think.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:39 pmHugh Hewitt: It’s time to change the convention rules and dump Trump
posted at 11:21 am on June 8, 2016 by Allahpundit
And the beat goes on…
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:41 pmJun 17, 2015 – BOOM! Hugh Hewitt says Ted Cruz is the FRONT RUNNER
…and on and on and on…
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:46 pmHugh Hewitt reverses on Trump
By Nick Gass [Politico] 06/16/16 06:48 AM EDT
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hugh-hewitt-trump-support-224410#ixzz4HQruHnt6
… and on… and on… and on…
Search ‘Florida weather’ on the Weather Channel site and Hugh Hewitt comes up.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:54 pm#63- well, to be honest I’m white, could lose a few pounds (a new challenge as I wave goodbye to my 40’s), and I’m middle class, mostly because I don’t have the love of money and material possessions necessary to motivate me to work toward such nonsense.
The welfare thing doesn’t make much sense as that isn’t usually understood as middle class. I could be considered spoiled just by virtue of being a middle class US citizen, viewed relative to people in third world countries, except I’ve worked hard all my life and feel blessed in what I’ve earned rather than entitled.
So, three out of five; not a terrible guess, but hardly the blistering insult nk thought he was delivering
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:03 pmHillary is expressing solidarity for BLM.
BLM’s next protest target is the Elvis Mansion in Memphis. Elvis is a well known racist and hated blacks and took singing jobs from them, so BLM has been blocking traffic by sitting in the middle of Elvis Presley Blvd.
THIS is an important issue… the continued corporate slave trade and systemic racism against blacks.
The BIG protest is scheduled for tonight, so there’s still time to hot foot it to Memphis.
Hillary will be there in spirit! Racism will end under President Hillary. Lots of votes being ginned up.
The anti-Trumpers will likely get on board. Lemme axe ya a question… why you muthafuckers be heppin Hillary.
BTW, California is considering including the study of Ebonics once again… so called “King’s English” is racist, and pending legislation will go forward to have all printed Kali government documentation in English, Spanish and Ebonic.
PTS (ce7fc3) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:10 pmRich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 12:28 pm
There’s about 1:35 chance of a third party candidate winning a U.S. presidential election, estimating it several years advance of the election. (actually the odds don’t diminish too much till about a year and half before)
We have actually, 1992, which was close enough to having hat happen that you can see it is possible.
A 1:35 chance means you would expect this to happen, all other things staying euqal, and they don’t over such a length of time, about once in every 140 years.
Maybe a multi-candidate race, resulting from one party disappearing, and the other splitting up is more likely, as happened in 1824 and 1860. In 1860, there was really a new second party.
From this point on, it’s difficult. You really need a repeat of the Whig strategy of 1836, only this time maybe successful. (different candidates in different states)
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:20 pm“in four years ted sore loser cruz will be . . .”
– happy
Regardless of which candidate wins this election, Cruz will continue have a bully pulpit in the Senate from which he can organize resistance, advance his long-term aspirations and further demonstrate his remarkable competence.
Little mention has been made on this blog of Cruz’ effort to elect his ally Carly Fiorina as the next party chair, but it is worth noting. Cruz is a smart cookie with a detailed long-term plan. Having Fiorina run the party can only help. Contrast that with Shorty, who, just 10 weeks out, continues to think he can wing it and win. Pathetic.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:42 pmmore like a pooper pulpit
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:42 pmOne person voting differently, or a thousand people, or even 600,000 people, wouldn’t much change that. You mean, if people in general, who felt badly about both, bit worse about Hillary, did that -assuming your whip count is right.
I wouldn’t think so.
In fact, there’s a very realistic alternatgive possibility, in the sense of possible. Just not one you can vote for.
It could happen to her like it happened to Alan Hevesi, (although I don’t think a Clinton would go away quite so readily.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/nyregion/25hevesi.html
He resigned before even being sworn in to his second term, but after he was safely re-elected. His aides got indicted in March, and finally he was indicted and pled guilty a year and half later to other charges.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_G._Hevesi
And now, read this, for example:
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/08/12/why-you-should-take-the-new-corruption-investigation-into-the-clinton-foundation-seriously
Preetinder Singh “Preet” Bharara, US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, has apparently taken over sponsorship of the FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
To indict before the election might be considered interference with politics, and they may not be ready.
He has to know that he must finish his work by January 20, 2017, or he will be dismissed and the whole invesigation shut down and the facts covered up.
I wonder what would happen if some Hillary aides, and maybe even Bill Clinton, were indicted before November 8? What of Hillary Clinton was named an unindicted co=conspirator? What if the indictment happened in November or December? Before the electorsd voted? After the Electors voted? What if she’s indicted, or going to be indicted, after the election, like Alan Hevesi?
Would she cut a deal not to take office? I think she’d avoid doing that. I think she’d go the Nixon route.
Sammy Finkelman (f5c867) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:45 pmMr. Trump’s judges will save the constitution (thank goodness)
The only candidates that Trump knows are:
Judge Judy
Denny Crane
Tom Hagen
Dan Fielding
Hamilton Berger
Barry Zuckerkorn
Lionel Hutz
Vinny
(yes, he employs a lot of lawyers, but even Trump knows they’re second-raters)
and “goodness” has nothing to do with it.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:48 pmDCSCA,
I remember when Hugh called for a brokered convention in early June (as you alluded to), in reaction to the juvenile general election campaign Trump was beginning to run.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:55 pmBut Hugh definitely had not supported anyone during the primaries.
Re this: “There can be no more assurance to be given than has been given, and a lot has been given.”
Everything a politician says — any politician, including even my very favorites — has to be discounted to reflect the politician’s credibility. So if the politician gives 10 solemn oaths on a stack of Bibles on worldwide TV, even oaths signed in blood, with appended silk ribbons and wax seals on really thick acid-free parchment that’s immediately put in all-nitrogen display cases in the Smithsonian Museum or the National Archives — you multiply 10 by the fraction representing the candidate’s credibility, based on past history and any other factor that affects credibility.
If you think the candidate only has a 70% credibility rating, multiply 10 times 0.70 and you get seven.
The problem is that no matter how many assurances Donald Trump ever gives about anything — the Supreme Court, the border wall, ISIS, anything — you have to discount those based on his credibility.
And I assess his credibility at exactly zero. Anything multiplied by zero is zero.
Take a pretty rosy scenario, for Trumpkins anyway: Suppose Trump wins, the GOP holds the House, and the GOP holds onto the Senate by its fingernails. Newly inaugurated Pres. Trump names Diane Sykes or David Pryor, both solid choices whose names he hasn’t quite bothered to memorize yet from the list of names he’s solemnly sworn to choose from (he forgot Pryor’s within 24 hours of mentioning him at a GOP debate), to fill the seat of the late Mr. Justice Scalia. Assume further that Harry Reid announces that he intends to lead the Dems in filibustering.
My full expectation in that scenario is that Trump will become frustrated and send his emissaries to Reid to work out a “compromise.” One will be found, one that will guarantee all the Dem votes, thus ensuring confirmation when the RINO votes are added in.
And we’ve got our next Mr. Justice Souter, someone selected from a list filtered by the Democrats.
If you tell me that’s an unlikely scenario, then I’ll tell you: You’re smoking crack. That’s the most likely scenario of any that I can imagine.
There are two New York limousine liberal Democrats, crony capitalists supreme, dishonest and corrupt and repugnant. I won’t vote for either of them, and I certainly won’t vote for the most erratic of the two in hopes that he’ll magnificently transform into something other than what he’s been all his life.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:58 pmhappy,
I think the Scott Adams/Breitbart piece was remarkable in a number of ways, but especially in the way it portrayed Adams’ cognitive dissonance.
My favorite part is when Adams claims Trump isn’t really dropping the ball because “he knows more than we know,” and that what he knows will change everything and lead to his ultimate triumph in November.
Didn’t you cringe, just a little, when you read that?
The problem in politics is that when facts/world events undermine one’s view, the rationalization/denial machine drops in to overdrive. Rethinking comes later, if at all.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 1:58 pmMr. ThOR i just wanna beat that stinkypig
it’s my one little thing I want
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:05 pmI’ve hated her since I first read about HillaryCare 20+ years ago.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:10 pmSammy,
And you are basing this hypothetical reluctance to swing an election based on what? Recent history, the Senator Stevens case in July 2008, shows the opposite to be true under certain conditions related to the politician’s resistance to “progressive” legislation.
If the DoJ wants to interfere with an election it will do so, what ever it takes. Consider this from the report exposing prosecutor misconduct in the Stevens case dated March 2012:
The naughty boys were given a wrist slap, but one took it to heart. Following Stevens’ death in a small plane crash in a remote part of Alaska in August 2010, Nicholas Marsh took his own life a month later. The other three are pursuing their careers in the government.
BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:22 pmBeldar,
As you know, death and taxes are pretty much the only guarantees in life.
I’d rather take the chance that Trump might nominate a “half-loaf of bread” such as another Kennedy or Souter or Roberts than take the chance that Hillary will give us another Sotomayor or Kagan or Ginsburg.
Because a Democrat President nominating a left wing lunatic is as close a guarantee in life as death and taxes. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:36 pmI don’t believe McConnell would enforce anything if Trump’s elected. I also don’t believe that if the GOP retains the Senate they’d block Hillary’s nominees, which is a ludicrous suggestion some people have made.
I believe Trump wants to appoint a pro-Second Amendment justice, in large part because I think he is genuinely opposed to effectively removing it from the Constitution via court decisions. And any pro-Second Amendment judge is likely to be fairly good on many other issues, which are just as important.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:42 pmUh didn’t Reid do away with judicial filibusters? Also Reid is retiring.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:50 pmRodney King’s Spirit, you really better hope that you are not threatening me.
SPQR (a3a747) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:59 pmMr. Trump will do really nice judges I think. I’m not at all worried about it.
Especially when i think about the sick perverted harvardtrash judges stinkypig’ll do on the court.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 2:59 pm73 – I wonder what would happen if some Hillary aides, and maybe even Bill Clinton, were indicted before November 8? What of Hillary Clinton was named an unindicted co=conspirator? What if the indictment happened in November or December? Before the electorsd voted? After the Electors voted? What if she’s indicted, or going to be indicted, after the election, like Alan Hevesi?
Would she cut a deal not to take office? I think she’d avoid doing that. I think she’d go the Nixon route.
This is so overly speculative. This candidate under these circumstances would more likely have everybody killed!
The intellectual gymnastics are not needed.
Vote Trump! Bitching about him is only to support Hillary. Grandiose speculating on wild dreams to remove Hillary is only support for Hillary.
Just stop it, eat the crap sandwich, and look to 2020.
Rich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:04 pm@75- Except he has. Just Google it— he changes like Florida weather. In Punditland Hewitt has the credibility of Ted Baxter.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:06 pmHillary directly broke the law in Emailgate, and escaped prosecution.
kishnevi (10c258) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:12 pmWhy would she be more in danger with Foundationgate, especially if there is no direct evidence that we know of that she personally broke the law.
DCSCA,
I’m not sure where/when you believe Hugh actively supported a particular candidate in the primaries this election cycle. It just didn’t happen.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:22 pmHe famously referred to himself as “Switzerland” throughout the entire primary season.
The reason that politicians, pundits, journalists, and writers all come onto his program for as long as a half hour or hour at a time is because they know Hugh will give them a fair shake by not going all “Mark Levin” on them.
@89- See 66, 67 & 68. Google it. It is easy to out him. A month before the convention, Hewitt was actively pushing Cruz stating he was the ‘front runner’ and puishing a dump Trump move. A month later he flips. He has little credibility in Punditland. Ask him what time it is and he’ll look at his Swiss watch and tell you it’s time to stop Hillary Clinton.
The first thing you have accept about Hewitt, is he is all about Hewitt. His slip last week on one of the cablers says it all: “If Hillary wins, conservatism is dead.” Which would make what he does essentially irrelevant. So given the alternative, he’s onboard the Trump train.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:42 pmafter all that we’ve been through
Mr. Trump will make it up to you
he promised to
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:50 pm@71. Cruz will continue have a bully pulpit in the Senate from which he can organize resistance, advance his long-term aspirations and further demonstrate his remarkable competence.
Pfft. As opposed to doing his job as a United States Senator. ‘Course four years is a long time and maybe those D.C. Madam phone logs will be me public by 2020.
Meanwhile, let’s go to the videotape…Foghorn Leghorn’s career is over.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:52 pm@76. “The Alamo strategy.” That was a lost battle, too.
We’re out of vanilla. You can have peach or walnut. Choose.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:59 pmyum!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:06 pm@ Gerald A (#83): I regularly make errors, and welcome corrections. But perhaps before accusing me of getting my facts wrong, you might want to look them up (italics mine):
Now I will quickly agree that this “limitation” is unprincipled and illusory — there’s no constitutional difference between the Senate’s advice & consent powers for SCOTUS justices on the one hand and lower-court Article III judges on the other. Indeed, I believe that Reid & the Dems actually gutted the filibuster back in 2011 through procedural rule changes that effective gave the majority leader power to block them through calendaring maneuvers. But whether you date it to 2011 or 2013, the filibuster has been a walking corpse, with the Democrats all pretending it’s alive but knowing it’s dead, and the GOP establishment, led by McConnell, stupidly believing, contrary to the evidence and history, that the Dems would permit a GOP filibuster the next time the Dems have a Senate majority and want a SCOTUS nominee confirmed.
This is actually an issue on which I’m to Ted Cruz’ right, and he’s with McConnell, by the way. The filibuster has always been an extra-constitutional remedy, based not on any specific language of the Constitution but rather entirely upon the Senate’s internal rules, which are revised and reenacted with each new Congress every two years. For the better part of two centuries it ensured — sometimes for better, sometimes for worse (civil rights) — that the Senate would be the “saucer” to cool the hot coffee of the more populist chamber, the House. But it depended for its power entirely upon comity — that is, mutual respect and restraint among statesmen of both parties who took the longest of views and understood the importance of limited government. No Democrat alive today can be so described, so it’s simply stupid and self-destructive of the Senate Republicans to pretend otherwise; they’re Charlie Brown, and the theoretical possibility of a GOP filibuster of a Dem SCOTUS nominee is now the football waiting to be snatched away.
As for Reid’s retirement, you’re right — but Chuck Schumer will be his successor, and he’s at least twice as dangerous as Reid because he’s much smarter, but he’s certainly no more trustworthy.
@ DSCSA (#87): You’re absolutely, positively wrong, as a matter of demonstrable historical fact, about whether Hewitt endorsed anyone in the primaries. I call b*llsh*t and point at you as the b*llsh*tter. And yes, I’ve googled it, and yes, I read Hewitt’s site regularly — he’s a friend, and he was kind enough to give me co-blogging privileges there during the 2008 election. He’s trying to be a good GOP loyalist and he’s making the best case he can for the party’s 2016 nominee now; I respectfully disagree with him about voting for Trump, but I will certainly defend Hewitt against the lies of the likes of you.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:06 pmPlacid little sheep want a shepherd to lead them to where the grass is sweet and plentiful and protect them from the wolves while they graze peacefully. What will you do with guns if the Supreme Court gives you permission to have them? Weapons are for people who do not need permission to have them. (But they do need two other things.)
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:17 pmMany of these people whining about Trump’s scotus picks supported a natural born Canadian citizen for President. They think it’s possible for someone to be born with several different natural born citizenships or they think natural born citizenship can be earned by an individual later on in life.
jcurtis (32a714) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:20 pmjcurtis, really? You want yet another asskicking on that topic?
SPQR (a3a747) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:25 pmOff Topic: This fills me with confidence…not. The latest email from Evan McMullin says “Since the beginning, we looked to Utah as the bellweather state that could determine the success or failure of this movement.” I wrote back to inform them that there’s no A in bellwether. I mean, come on. Now I’m got this image of someone trying to hang a bell on a storm system. Or of a flock of meteorological conditions that follow a leader.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:34 pmEvan McMullin is a poofty CIA sacky slut
grain. of. salt.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:45 pm#90 DCSCA,
The primaries were already over when Hugh was suggesting a “dump Trump” strategy for the convention.
Hugh was definitely not supporting any candidate during the primaries — it’s not really even a debatable point.
You’ve been conflating his analysis of the “horse race” with being a cheerleader for someone.
If you turn on “Baseball Tonight” on ESPN, and one of the in-studio analysts says that the Cubs are the front-runners right now, that shouldn’t be interpreted that they necessarily are “rooting” for the Cubs to win.
All you have to do is browse his Twitter feed during the earlier months of this year to see how often he said he’s remaining Switzerland, particularly in response to fanboys of various candidates who tweeted Hugh with their anger (and accusations!) about how Hugh asked too many tough questions of their candidate during one of the debates or on his radio show.
Hugh was very consistently explicit that he hoped that the William F. Buckley rule of thumb would elicit a conservative who is most electable to eventually emerge as the nominee.
Of course, now that the nominee has been decided, Hugh’s voting for Trump for the same reason most of us are; Trump’s the only hurdle left standing between Maude and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:46 pmBut that doesn’t necessarily mean he thinks Trump is a good candidate. The fact that Hugh keeps saying we have to vote for Trump if just for the sake of the Supreme Court is probably a poker-tell that Hugh perceives very limited issues which could motivate fellow conservatives to be excited about Trump’s candidacy.
I have a serious, sincere question for you nevertrumpers. What in the world motivates you to spend so much time arguing with Trump supporters?
I mean, Patterico is easy, he spends 5 minutes a day whipping up some silly anti-Trump post, and gets a bunch of hits with 200+ comment threads.
For myself, my motivation is from the day Trump announced his plan to build the wall under no uncertain terms, he was my guy, and since, his talk of suspending Muslim immigration until there’s a reliable way to vet, free trade deals that favor foreign interests and corperatists over Americans, all capped off by his glorious anti-PC screw the media style, I honestly believe out of all the republicans that ran he is the only one that has a chance of preserving our country and culture from the globalist political elite genius’s that are destroying our country along with the whole idea of the nation state. That, along with a great fear of what Hillary will do to us and our posterity is what motivates me to spend the time defending and boosting the Donald.
But you nevertrumpers…you say there isn’t any daylight between Trump and Hillary, you stress you won’t vote or at least not vote in a meaningfully way, the time of changing minds and being rid of Trump is long past, yet you continue to spend tons of time saying the same old things, he’s a con, a democrat, evil, stupid, and orange, and attacking us that defend him knowing full well you’re just shouting into the wind.
I have my own theories, but none that adequately answer how anyone can be so passionate and persistent with something you say makes no difference.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:48 pm#97 jcurtis,
Why don’t you just go search for Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:52 pmThe birther stuff is kooky.
shrink to fit and a button-fly too
levi’s 501 blues
shrink your own
personal pair
a lil loose here and a lil tight there
they’re so blue
we got the bloo woo woos
they’re so blue
harvardtrash sore loser ted got his ass kicked bloo woo woo woos
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:53 pmI have my own theories,
Yes, yes, you do. Stick to them. Talk to yourself. You have a very good brain. And probably very nice hair, too.
Or you could actually read Patterico’s posts. You know, the posts? They’re like at the top of the comment threads? There’s a bunch of them going back for months and months and months.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:58 pmThis argument might be convincing, if not for the Harriet Miers nomination. Republicans sunk that nomination of a GOP president. If they were willing to do that to a GWB nomination, they will have no reticence about doing the same to Trump.
Anon Y. Mous (9e4c83) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:02 pmLBascom, I’d be interested to hear your theories.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:03 pmAnother 16 future prospects released to the uae, like the Tunisian head of the Milan cell.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:09 pmCruz supporter, you either follow the constitution or you don’t. Cruz is a natural born Canadian and an American citizen through immigration law. Regardless if he renounced his Canadian citizenship.
Call it kooky if you want, but just that PERCEPTION will lose him enough votes that he will never be president. I mean, his core attraction is he supposedly he’s the constitution candidate, yet there’s legitimate reason to see he’s ineligible.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:13 pmYes its one of the weaker arguments, mcturtle needs to be put on the griddle, he’s as reliable as bob dole or Trent Lott.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:17 pmLBascom,
I was asking for your theories about why the #NeverTrumpers spend so much time trashing Trump voters if they really believe he and Hillary are merely an equitable “six of these, and a half dozen of those.”
I’m not interested in your birther theories. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:22 pm“LBascom, I’d be interested to hear your theories.”
More interested than hearing an answer to my question? Huh.
Well, Ill answer your question after I see if anyone answers my question. I’ll give you teaser though; my theories involve never getting a truthful answer because they won’t admit their reasons. Note I said reasons not reason, because I believe they all don’t have the same reason, and also note nk has already deflected.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:23 pm“Or you could actually read Patterico’s posts. You know, the posts? They’re like at the top of the comment threads? There’s a bunch of them going back for months and months and months.”
But they’re mostly boring, irrelevant, or fact-free talking points that are much less entertaining than trolling the commenters who may or may not be a more interesting version of Patterico.
Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:39 pmOk, just this once. Trump and his Slovenian hooker are low-class gutter trash who should not be allowed within a mile of the White House. I don’t care what he promises — any con man can promise the same things and look better doing it. I don’t want a piece of garbage like Trump telling me, or any other American, what to do. I would not follow him to war and I would not want any of our soldiers to be forced to, either. In a nutshell, he is not a good enough person to be President of the United States.
For a possibly stronger reason, the people who support him. He appealed to the worst, and he got the worst. The Ernst Rohm wing of alt.right. I want no part of them, either. They should crawl back in their holes and cling to their Turner Diaries while fondling their Mosin Nagants.
I am also concerned about social and moral issues, but those are not things Trumpkins would understand, so I will not even bother.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:40 pmThe neverTrump people seem to be living in the world of the underpants gnome.
1. Get Hillary elected
2. ????
3. Profit
Do they really think that the majority of conservative/republican voters are going to welcome these traitors back into the fold if Trump loses? Even with a bad showing, he’ll still get 90% of right-side vote and being the fringe minority who proudly claim they are the “republicans” responsible for getting Hillary into office is going to win over who, exactly?
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:41 pmThOR sez:
Vox Day, the freewheeling young conservative, responding to a Jewish writer:
Do a little research and you’ll see Vox Day has repeatedly mocked my friend Ken White of Popehat for his depression — something Vox Day learned about by digging around in . . . Ken White’s blog, where he has courageously written about his battles with depression, in an effort to help others.
Vox mocks a great man like Ken for such a stupid reason. Vox is small.
He also thinks he’s smarter than Thomas Sowell. Hahahahahahahahaha
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:43 pmLBascom, it doesn’t strike me as very complicated. The major parties have both put up candidates who are completely unacceptable, and who will need to be opposed with vigor regardless of which one wins. Might as well start the process early, and worry now about electing a Republican Congress who will have at the very least be broadly unsympathetic to many of Trump’s goals and who will be primed to oppose HRC with unrestrained ferocity.
M. Scott Eiland (1edade) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:45 pm“You’re an idiot and a waste of time, and I’m sick of the ignorance, the stupidity, and the mendacity, of all you Trumpkins who are dirtying up this blog.”
So what you’re saying is you hate the majority of people in your party. Well, why don’t you and Mr. Finklestein go join the party that’s traditionally given the reflexive majority haters a much more accomodating platform? It’s what all the ‘cool Js’ are doing.
Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:47 pmThe problem is all the issues you all claim to champion. Red queen is at the other end of, and I’m not buying rick Tyler’s argument that she won’t have a mandate, because squirrel.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:51 pm“Vox Day has repeatedly mocked my friend Ken White of Popehat”
Oh, so you just hate alt-rightists because lawyers gotta stick together, even if one is a flaming liberal who’d vote for the biggest and most successful racketeer family in politics. That’s definitely not something that deserves mockery, and no one ever puts their personal problems front and center for sympathy points, certainly not Hillary.
Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:51 pmStu Rothenberg notes the fat lady singing.
Why spend any more money for Clinton in Pennsylvania than Colorado or Virginia? Pennsylvania is no more competitive than either of them. Will Clinton request her PACs to divert money to the Democrat Senate and House election committees or just straight to the DNC.
Rick Ballard (d51940) — 8/15/2016 @ 5:54 pmVox Day is the kid who got pantsed in high school and learned to pose as a tough guy and spit out insults from across an ocean and a continent away.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:01 pmWho would that be? What universe are you living in?
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:01 pm@95, ‘I read Hewitt’s site regularly — he’s a friend, and he was kind enough to give me co-blogging privileges there during the 2008 election. He’s trying to be a good GOP loyalist and he’s making the best case he can for the party’s 2016 nominee now.’
=yawn= Then you should know better.
Hewitt is out for Hewitt and changes like Florida weather. BTW, as Trump reminds the entrenched it is the Republican Party, not the Conservative Party.
Walnut or peach? We’re out of vanilla. Choose. Oh, that’s right, you’re not voting.
________
@101- Switzerland? No. Casablanca, yes. But we can agree he at least didn’t feel the ‘Bern.’
The guy was on the wrong side from the get-go and he sees his meat and potatoes disappearing. THat cabler comment says it all: ‘If Hillary wins, conservatism is dead.’ That’s all he’s concerned with. So in desperation, he jumped on the Trump train. If not, he’d be lost in the Pundit Sea.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:10 pm@ LBascom (#102), who wrote:
The easy answer, the one I’m tempted to make, is that Trumpkin shills who repeat his lies and solicit votes for him, like you, are such obvious hypocrites, and it’s fun to puncture you.
You want us to take as “serious” and “sincere” a question which you immediately follow with ad hominem insults to the host who’s paying for the bandwidth which enables you to comment here. You’re neither sincere, but you are perfectly representative of Trumpkin shills. If you were sincere, you’d not be giving him page-views or leaving comments here, would you?
In fact, since the end of the primaries, I’ve reduced my own comments here by at least 90%, precisely because it’s so unproductive to discuss anything with Trumpkins or Trumpkin shills.
But I’m a fourth-generation Texas Republican and conservative, and I’ll be one after Trump is dust and the memory of his blow-out electoral college loss in 2016 is just a really bad memory. As such, I’ll continue to speak my mind, whether it annoys you Trumpkins or not, because you’ll wander back off into your swamp after this election, whining and grumbling and pointing fingers at everyone else except yourself and your cult-of-personality con-man messiah.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:15 pmMark Levin had some good things to day about Trump’s speech on immigration and favorably contrasted his positions with those of Clinton, who wants to bring in tens of thousands more Syrians. That’s of some note since he’s had little good to say about Trump. I think Levin will end up voting for him.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:16 pmA perfectly good reason to vote for Trump is BLM riots, cop assassinations, Mexicans assaulting people outside convention centers, Muslims shooting up nightclubs. Trump frightens and confuses these people, even if he shouldn’t, really. He’s too silly to make a good arch-villain, but these people aren’t exactly Ph.D.’s themselves. Hillary on the other hand will not only welcome this behavior, she’ll egg it on and probably even incite it.
nk — Turner Diaries is soooo passe. Now it’s Camp of the Saints. Do try to stay at least two steps behind.
hunson abedeer (80144e) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:17 pm#126
Mark Levin
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:17 pmhadsaid some good things to day about Trump’s speech on immigration…Vox Day now calling me a “lying little punk” in his comments because I said, in a private Facebook group, that I know little about him other than that he has insulted Ken White stupidly and beats his chest as an Internet Tough Guy.
He’s now divined that “Patrick Frey” is “Patterico” — good sleuthing, buddy! — and says I am a “lying little punk” because I know “perfectly well” who he is, and have even tweeted at him before!
Which, if memory serves, I know him as the guy who stupidly insulted Ken White and played an Internet Tough Guy — and I tweeted him to criticize him for the former and mock him for the latter.
I’m failing to see the “lies.”
But please, ThOR, continue to admire the brash freewheeling conservative!!
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:18 pmMr. Bascom: I will answer the question you posed.
We think Trump won’t do all those things you cite. He’s already wimped out on immigration, for instance, although he’s careful to softpedal it. And a number of his proposals are either nonsensical (what is extreme vetting? an new sport for the XGames?) or not realistic (trade war with China) or actually bad (he seems fine with handing back Eastern Europe to Putin. Make Russia Great Again!) He doesn’t want to be involved with nationbuilding. But he does want to destroy ISIS. So what happens in Syria or Iraq or Libya if we don’t engage in nation building?
And so on. Appointing a bunch of RINOs to the Cabinet and Court, if he does that much, won’t negate the damage.
Add to that that he seems comfortable with overuse of executive power, is not a social conservative, and his main qualification is trashtalking…
If I wanted a trashtalker for President I would vote for happyfeet.
And some of his supporters…I am an uncool J, and leave it at that.
kishnevi (55d84d) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:18 pmThe angriest I got during this campaign was when Drudge went after Ted Cruz with its demonic nonsense and clear Pro-Trump shilling.
From that point forward, I stopped being angry and grew up about this Election. I realized the only way for Hillary to lose was Trump to win.
I was also the only person to advocate early on that Cruz would do better cutting a deal with with Trump to “lord” over Congress while letting Trump run the Executive. A deal that could have worked nicely up until the idiotic speech in Cleveland.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:22 pmThe Senate voted Thursday to change its rules to prevent the minority party from filibustering any nominations other than nods to the Supreme Court.
I could envision Trump urging McConnell to end SCOTUS filibusters.
What would the scenario be if Kasich or Bush was President? I’ll tell you what WOULDN’T happen: Kasich or Bush urging McConnell to end SCOTUS filibusters. Probably not Rubio either.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:22 pmYou trust the same saudi, Qatari and Turkish proxies to rebuild syria, now who’s being naive. Meanwhile red queen is enlisting illegals in her voter registration, game set match.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:24 pm@99 millhouse
A wether is a castrated ram or buck. That may be the perfect thing to hang on a movement.
Pinandpuller (0845e7) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:29 pm@125- But I’m a fourth-generation Texas Republican and conservative, and I’ll be one after Trump is dust and the memory of his blow-out electoral college loss in 2016 is just a really bad memory.
You’d think a Texan would know not to put the cart before the horse. It is the Republican Party… not the Conservative Party.
New York, New YORK; a helluva town;
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:30 pmThe Bronx is up and the Battery is down;
The people ride through a hole in the ground;
New York, New YORK…
It’s a helluva town!
#84 Uhhh SPQR, no stupid. Learn to read. I am saying the Leftists go after the Lawyers first who would oppose them. Go learn some history. What a blithering idiot you are.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:31 pm1) Ohh a Blogger Beeyotch Battle. Yet they vilify Trump for less. Go figure.
2) Happyfeet would load up the WH with Goop.com dill-dos along with arranging the decor to look like a Gay man’s brothel. Yeah, a bit much for me even still in our day of LGBT inanity
3) Extreme vetting = PC way of saying NFW to your Visa Application. You guys always find ways to complain over nonsense. The speech today was on point.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:33 pmOT:
Gotta give the French some credit. They seem to finally figure out they are fighting to keep their culture alive from the forces of an alien middle age culture. No concern about PC crap it seems nor “racial profiling.”
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:39 pmIts been a long learning curve for them, to remember why Roland fought, why they spent 17 yeArs pacifying algeria, (at the midpoint they sent Dr Tocqueville to under why it was taking so long)
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:43 pmMax abrahms who has been a reasonable critic, saw some good points as well. John schindler is doing his Anthony seiner routine by contrast.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:45 pmI can only assume that this effort to get Hillary elected has decimated your readership.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:52 pmNice of you to remain loyal, Mr. Black.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 6:59 pmI don’t know if you Trumpkins know, you probably don’t because not knowing things is what defines a Trumpkin, but Patterico does not keep a Sitemeter. He does not count his traffic, let alone try to build it up for internet rank or ad revenue. Unlike the gold diggers who jumped on the Trump train, like Breitbart, Drudge, Day and sundry others, for that purpose. But don”t let me stop you from “uming” your ass, Mr. Black.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:05 pmClarice, whose American thinker pieces are featured here infrequently went after Nazi war criminals, prosecuted the killers of the umw leader, took up the case that became Norma Rae.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:06 pmP, you’re so darned butthurt, you’ve lost it.
Trump has published a list, and a pretty good one, of potential nominees to the SC. He’s promised to stick to it.
You have obviously done your famous mind-reading trick, and KNOW, just KNOW, that he’s lying.
If he’s lying, that means he’s not going from The List, but for someone else. Use your psychic gift, and tell us who. What worse-than-Hillary choice will he make, following the instructions of the progressive imp that whispers orders into his ear?
Do you realize how silly you sound?
If Her Royal Inevitableness takes possession of the Oval Office, it will be with assistance of #nevertrumpers like you who are busy sawing of their political nose to spite their face.
bud (791f49) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:07 pmI’m not sure I get it yet. Are you saying the reason you spend so much time going after Trump is because you want him to lose to Hillary? That Trump would be worse for the country than her?
I mean, what you’ve all mostly done is continue bashing Trump, you haven’t said what motivats you to bash him. What do you think you are accomplishing?
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:12 pm@101. A postscript. The way Hewitt presents his ‘analysis’ is cheerleading. It’s the coin of the realm in Punditland. They all do it– and far too much.
Frankly, the best way to absorb J.R. and Maudie on the stump is via C-SPAN, uninterrupted, and complete, sans talking head bites, paid surrogates, spinners and commercial interruption.
J.R. says things. Maudie says nothings.
And today, Maudie even let Walter do the Scranton rant. Ever been to Scranton? I have. My late grandmother was born there. And it’s easy to see why Grandma and Pappy Rodham and Uncle Joe got outta that town PDQ. A place frozen in time; a buckle on the Rust Belt. Scranton, Pennsylvania is not even close to middle class… it is far below it.
Just remember, a party that opens its national convention by showcasing illegal aliens as featured speakers on national television, coast-to-coast, is not a party that is good for America at this time. No way. And I haven’t voted GOP since the mid-80s. But this cycle I am. Because neither are conservatives. So regardless, it’s a win/win. Unless you cling to the SCOTUS ‘Alamo Strategy’– in which case, Trump may ‘Bowie’ your hopes a little.
______
The choice is four years of Dallas or four years of Maude.
So which do you want– Hagman haggling as Tilton, Principal and Gray jiggled into your living room on a 40 in., screen or the pantsuited Bea Arthur, wagging that finger like your first wive in 1975, nagging you to take out the trash in the middle of the 4th quarter of Monday Night Football?
And for the indignant and indecisive Beldar, we’ll give him an out; Four years crying in the high-chair, watching every episode of The Mary Tyler Moore Show. So he can worship Ted… Baxter.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:13 pmNarciso, is this the Schindler you mean?
kishnevi (55d84d) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:14 pmhttp://observer.com/2016/08/vladimir-putin-has-already-won-our-election/
hello
testing
new notebook
different email address
papertiger (c2d6da) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:15 pmIf he’s lying, that means he’s not going from The List, but for someone else. Use your psychic gift, and tell us who. What worse-than-Hillary choice will he make, following the instructions of the progressive imp that whispers orders into his ear?
Why would he deliberately cause his supporters to become absolutely enraged with him? What would be his motive? That would be his ticket to a one term Presidency. Political self interest would prevent that if nothing else.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:16 pmYes, the former has enabled volodya at every step, either by supplying military resources or making his case for him with the policies in Libya and syria, which were a subject of today’s speech.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:19 pmYou were already unmoderated. I gave you a two-day vacation. Go ahead, try your old email address.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:21 pmThat Trump would be worse for the country than her?
Quite possibly. Or at least no better. Bad in different ways from her, but still bad.
What motivates me?
This country needs a healthy small government conservatism. We won’t have that if Trump wins.
And I object to narcissistic grifters being elected POTUS. Both Trump and Clinton are precisely that.
kishnevi (55d84d) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:22 pmRight kish, you’re all about idealism as of we forgot 2008, no not maverick he needed to fed to piranha
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:26 pmOh Pat.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:28 pmI know.
My old address is defunct.
I was wondering if the new one would puke me out as an imposter.
Kishnevi, you certainly won’t have it if Hillary wins, so if there is no difference, why spend so much of your time commenting on how horrible you think Trump is?
Y’all are avoiding the question.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:28 pmNo, I actually think there might be something to the idea of voting for Trump on judges. I have said this before. But, it would not be because Trump made some kind of assurance. That’s the part I find absurd. It would be because it is my judgment that he doesn’t care about judges, and therefore might do what the Federalist Society tells him to.
It’s putting any stock in anything the man says that is inexplicable to me.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:28 pmhttp://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/robin_hood_in_reverse_the_clinton_foundation_under_fed_scrutiny.html
DNF (755a85) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:34 pmY’all are avoiding the question.
I answered it quite clearly.
You either have not the intelligence to see that, or the integrity to admit.
I will leave you to decide which is the correct alternative.
Narciso: this election requires voting on principle more than any other.
kishnevi (55d84d) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:37 pmBut she will do what Soros acs and thinkregress wants as for bluntman and chronic, check the magic eightball.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 7:42 pmhttp://video.foxnews.com/v/5082808168001/judge-jeanine-now-we-know-why-hillary-used-private-email/?playlist_id=937116552001#sp=show-clips
That #nevertrump equates hypothetical acts with a demonstrated practice of fraud extortion assassination theft etc. implies moral depravity exceeding that which it postures to oppose.
DNF (7f4f64) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:03 pmBeldar @95:
It is possible to think that if they get through the next 10 or 5 years without, the filibuster of Supreme Court nominees might survive to be used in a case where the opposition has between 40 and 50 votes. But the use of the filibuster here is actually new – there used to be strong tendency nor to oppose Supreme Court nominees, at least without fnding some kind of non-issue-related grounds to oppose the nomination. Nobody really should rely on this.
Anyway, it must be reckoned as dead as far as Republicans stopping a nominee named by a Democratic president in the next presidential term. The Republicans might not even attempt a filibuster in order to preserve the rule, which, for the next dozen years or so will be only of use to the Democrats. Once it’s gone, it’s gonem even with parties reversed, and the Democats know this, which is why they don’t want to formally get rid of it.
I think maybe McConnell wants to keep the rule, or pretend it has value, for the purpose of electing Republican Senators.
All that this will get them, if he persists in believing in the stopping power of a filibuster by the minority parry, is letting Hillary Clinton name her anti-Citiens Union nominee to the Supreme Court instead of settling for Merrick Garland and confirming him in the lame duck session (if Hillary wins and the Republicans lose their majority in the Senate. With 51 Senators, they have the votes to stop it anyway, maybe, but they’ll go through at least two years without filling the vacancy.)
Sammy Finkelman (072cd5) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:04 pmDCSCA,
It sounds like perhaps you have a personal axe to grind with Hugh Hewitt.
Maybe you called his show and feel he didn’t give you enough time to state your case about an issue? That often happens in radio, especially when they come up against hard commercial breaks.
I don’t know why you keep marginalizing him as some kind of Machiavellian character.
Hugh is considered to be a gentleman and a scholar, and even the most ardent left wing voices in media (E.J. Dionne, Joy Reid, for example) have nothing but wonderful things to say about Hugh as a person and as a professional.
You still haven’t provided this alleged evidence that he was rooting for a particular candidate during the primaries. (That’s because none exists.)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:07 pmSo now don’t you think you’re moving the goalposts by inferring that he’s a cheerleader for the right?
Of course, he’s a cheerleader for the right. He admits to it every day.
But that wasn’t the question; the question was you said he was rooting for a particular candidate during the primaries.
Kishnevi, I get that you think both are bad; but one of them is going to be the next president. So given that, and it doesn’t matter to you which one wins, what do you think you are accomplishing by investing so much time attacking Trump. That is the question no one has answered.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:07 pmHigh doesn’t get the fundamental transformation at stake in this election.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:13 pm159. Ridiculous, you haven’t even identified a principle from a list of those you attend that will be given priority.
You are clowning.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:14 pm157. “It’s putting any stock in anything the man says that is inexplicable to me.”
Complete lack of self-awareness, Rico.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:19 pmI don’t know how they stay over macho Grande and not run out of has.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:20 pmHere we are after two terms of Green initiative money laundering to the tune of $120 Billion, most of which is gone, either spent by the DNC, by liberal corporate cronies or lost in their business failures.
And we now find the Clintons have shaken down the world beginning at the very bottom in Haiti to collect and disburse $100 Billion more.
These two alone are among the most infamous lawless villians since Pol Pot, Mao Tse-Tung, Josef Stalin and the like.
What on earth are you people doing with your minds?
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:29 pm@163. On the contrary.
Machiavellian, hardly. That gives him too much credit. More an opportunist. Just another talking-head pundit who got it wrong several times, smiles wryly and continues to get air time for continually getting it wrong. Dionne and Reid aren’t exactly shining endorsements, either. Dionne got it wrong, too. And Reid—- MSNBC’s Saturday morning cartoon.
If you want to be an apologist for him, FBM. But he and Kristol are charter members of the ‘why are you even on my TV screen’ club. As for rooting for a pol, just do the Google search and read his commentary over the past year. You can’t be pushing the dump Trump, brokered convention line for weeks, proclaiming Ted Cruz the ‘front runner’ in mid-June (when he wasn’t) then jump on the Trump train 30 days later post-convention w/o suspecting his motives. Air time, baby. Air time.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:35 pmBeldar an Patterico:
It sounds to me like what you need is a credible promise from the GOP senators, not a credible promise from Trump or anyone else. If McConnell et al. make a credible promise to get rid of the perpetual SCOTUS filibuster, just like the Dems got rid of the perpetual filibuster of Appeals Court judicial nominees, then you both acknowledge the chances of Trump saving the Court rise considerably.
The question becomes how to extract that promise from the GOP senators. I think the answer is simple. Start with one senator who makes the pledge, and lionize him or her. The rest will follow.
The only reason Democrats don’t get rid of it right now is because they don’t even have 50 votes to confirm Garland.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/liberals-supreme-court-filibuster-220806
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-may-abolish-supreme-court-filibusters-114540
Andrew (2d2d15) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:35 pmTrump losing and all the Trumpkins who got him the nomination seeing all their efforts and all their enthusiasm count for nothing in the end will give me great satisfaction. Because we could have had a good person for a President, and the loony right and the loony left gave us the choice of two pieces of feces.
Trump, himself, is too narcissistic for the rejection to mean much to him — he’ll sincerely tell himself that we were not worthy of him — but the White House will have been spared his pollution.
And that’s my scrap to the trolls. Now gnaw, slobber, and growl, and come beg for more.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:38 pm148. You folk do realize that Hillary while Sec. of State, sold for $145 Million 20% of US uranium mine holdings to Putin.
Don’t you really?
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:40 pm172. Don’t worry your azz will feel their pain. If you read you would know that.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:41 pmNope, not true. 20% of current production. Not at all the same as “U.S. uranium mine holdings”. One mine. Already owned by Uranium One, a Canadian corporation, a controlling interest in which was bought by the Russians.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:47 pm172. “he’ll sincerely tell himself that we were not worthy of him — but the White House will have been spared his pollution”
Obama and two Clintons is evidently more fitting. That royal “we” you used is a smear you know.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:47 pmOk, got nk down for pure cuss’ed spite.
My guy didn’t win, so the country can go to hell.
Definitely one of my theories BTW.
I’ll give him credit for being honest though…did not expect THAT.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:50 pm175. Oh, does that make you feel better, to dink a word here or there and avoid the import?
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:51 pmThis guy thinks we got the bastards where we want them, the Borg that is:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/the_great_american_eclipse.html
I think there will be a whole lot of suffering before Art.V comes to pass.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:57 pmDCSCA,
I feel like you and I are discussing a football game, yet you’re telling me what the pitch count is for the middle reliever.
So inquiring minds want to know … did Hugh cut you off when you called his show? Or did he beat you in a 5K run?
What’s the real motive for the character assassination and the goofy accusations?
See now you’re just reduced to saying that his analyses have been off the mark, which is a perfectly reasonable point of view.
But that’s not the debate; the debate is that you keep saying he was cheerleading for a particular candidate during the primaries, yet when people push you to show us the money, all you can do is say that in June, Hugh was suggesting a “dump Trump” strategy for the convention in July.
And Hugh calling Cruz a “front-runner” is no more cheerleading for Cruz than if Cris Collinsworth proclaims that team X looks like a Super Bowl contender. It doesn’t mean that Collinsworth is rooting for that team, yet you seem to suggest it does mean that.
It’s such a non-sequitir. Kind of like when a waitress asks you what you want for dessert, and you reply, “No, I’ve never been to Kansas City.”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/15/2016 @ 8:58 pm(LOL)
“102. I have a serious, sincere question for you nevertrumpers. What in the world motivates you to spend so much time arguing with Trump supporters …
the time of changing minds and being rid of Trump is long past, yet you continue to spend tons of time saying the same old things, he’s a con, a democrat, evil, stupid, and orange, and attacking us that defend him knowing full well you’re just shouting into the wind. — LBascom”
“105. you could actually read Patterico’s posts. You know, the posts? They’re like at the top of the comment threads? There’s a bunch of them going back for months and months and months. — nk”
“114. Ok, just this once. Trump and his Slovenian hooker are low-class gutter trash who should not be allowed within a mile of the White House — nk”
“117. LBascom, it doesn’t strike me as very complicated. The major parties have both put up candidates who are completely unacceptable, — MScott”
“130. Mr. Bascom: I will answer the question you posed.
We think Trump won’t do all those things you cite. — kishnevi”
A good question and 4 non-responsive replies.
The question still remains.
The primaries are over, the conventions are over, and Trump is the Republican candidate and Hillary is the Democrat candidate.
The is NOTHING that you can do to get someone other than Trump as the Repub candidate. So all the flailing at Trump is just wasted and useless. Suppose that all the posts and comments finally convince happyfeet & LBascom & etc. that they are wrong and backed the wrong guy. What difference would that make? You think Trump will be dumped if only happyfeet and a few others switched to hating him?
Trump is still and will remain the Repub candidate, even if all the Patterico and NRO posters and commenters totally agree that it should be someone else.
So what’s the purpose of all the anti-Trump posts and comments? Virtue signalling? There is no possible way for what you want to happen to actually happen, so all your effort is pointless.
fred-2 (ce04f3) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:04 pmI don’t think Trump can win, he doesn’t have the numbers I believe. But he matters because he is bringing out something important which needs to be discussed by people with more intelligence and integrity. He’s an opening salvo.
Think of him as Lexington and Concord, not as Washington crossing the Delaware.
hunson abedeer (80144e) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:08 pmA word here and there is the difference between the truth and a lie. This is a silly thing to lie about because it is so easy to check.
That bothers you? 20% of uranium production, not reserves, already foreign-owned and exported, which can be embargoed with a stroke of any President’s pen at any time?
Where did you think the oil from Keystone was going to go? And where were you when we exported 90% of America’s manufacturing capacity which cannot be brought back by any number of strokes?
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:11 pmNon-responsive to a Trumpkin means “La, la, la, la, you’re not saying what I want you to say so I got my fingers in my ears and can’t hear you”.
And the reason you are surprised at honesty, LBascom, is because you practice none of it yourself.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:14 pm#134 Pinandpuller, I know exactly what a wether is. And I know what weather is. And I know whether one is called for or the other. Which is why “bellweather” conjures up such strange images.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:23 pmI still remember some of the Cruz fan boys arguing a few elections back how the R Party should not have some purity test lest they run away good candidates and lots of voters ….. Yet here those same people do same with Trump Voters and non traditional Candidates. Go figure.
Well, as the saying goes it is not where you stand on issues that define you but where you sit when time for reckoning comes.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:23 pmYeah, those Cruz voters sure are inconsistent. They thought marriage is a between a man and a woman and they still think marriage is between a man and a woman. They thought abortion as a form of birth control is an abomination and they still think abortion as a form of birth control is an abomination. They thought the federal budget and the federal government are bloated leeches which are sucking out the economy of this country and they still think the federal budget and the federal government are bloated leeches which are sucking out the economy of the country.
And … wait for it … they thought that in too many cases there was no difference between the nominal Republican that got elected and his Democrat counterpart and they still think there is no difference between the nominal Republican that got elected in the primary and his Democrat counterpart.
Fickle Cruzers.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:39 pmEvery time I think Trump as a chance, or even that I might be able to hold my nose and vote for him, he does something EVEN STUPIDER than before.
I think it’s on purpose. No one that stupid could hang on to that much money for decades. Barnum’s Second Law.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:47 pmThey thought abortion as a form of birth control is an abomination
Well, I’d go so far as “really pretty sloppy.”
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:48 pm188- I know, huh. Binders full of women? What a maroon!.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:01 pmEthical oil from canada, rather than Russian uranium to the sepah, can’t tell them apart.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:03 pmWhy were allies with the south African regime, because we loved the boer, no they provided strategic mineral reserves.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:07 pmI don’t get it. Does Patterico want Rodham?? This stuff isn’t that tough. IF YOU DON’T BACK TRUMP, you WILL GET RODHAM.
Does Patterico want Rodham, or is Patterico just another hack looking for advert cash???
It’s not a difficult equation. WE get RODHAM or WE GET TRUMP. It’s like a wedding RSVP.
GUS (30b6bd) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:10 pmIf you DO NOT CHOOSE TRUMP. You get RODHAM.
GUS,
What we want is neither. You fools put a gun to everyone’s head with Trump. Don’t expect us to play your game. This is your mistake and we’re going to make you live with it.
(Our mistake was letting you play, something we will be looking at)
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:16 pmIt’s those eyes of Putin’s, I think. You look into them and you know you can trust him. A strong leader, too, I’ve heard.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:16 pmNo, it wasn’t. Miller said the same as every court has ever said about the 2A: that it protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. But Miller said it applied only to those arms that would be useful in militia service. Since there was nothing in the record to indicate whether a sawn-off shotgun is such a weapon, the Court sent the case back to the district court to establish a record on the question. Had that hearing ever been held, it would have found that the weapon is indeed in the protected category, and thus that the district court had been correct in overturning Miller’s conviction.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:20 pmThat is just not true. The Miller court recognised an individual right to keep and bear any weapon that would be of use to a militiaman.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:27 pmNo, it did not.
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008):
“Miller stands only for the proposition that the Second Amendment right, whatever its nature, extends only to certain types of weapons. It is particularly wrongheaded to read Miller for more than what it said, because the case did not even purport to be a thorough examination of the Second Amendment.”
Among the many things that Miller did not do, it did not find an individual right to keep and bear arms, as opposed to a collective right as part of an organized state militia. That was decided by Heller, and only as it applied to the federal government. It was applied to the states two years later in McDonald.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:36 pmI’m sorry to hear that Vox Day is a pr1ck. Years ago, I thought Charles Johnson was an anomaly. I no longer believe that. Not all trolls are commenters.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:38 pmIf you want to say that Congress and state legislatures respected the Second Amendment, regardless of whether the Supreme Court told them they should, you’ll get no argument from me. I believe that observing the Constitution is the responsibility of every lawmaker and they should not pass laws nilly-willy, like for example McCain-Feingold or Obamacare, and throw them to the courts for Constitutional muster.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 10:52 pmI give Day credit for fighting the good fight against the feminization and pornografication of SF. It’s a losing battle — the lesbians took over the editorships of publishing houses in the ’80s and by now trash has become the norm — but I applaud him for trying.
nk (dbc370) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:01 pmYou don’t get to be an icon of American business by lying to people. You don’t get to be a billionaire by breaking contracts.
Your cockeyed attitudes toward Trump shows how effective long term media distortions and demonization can be. It’s like the ghost of Occupy has possessed your spirit.
Going to sprinkle some Holy Water on your blog, and I hope it helps, but I think you need a professional exorcist.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:51 pmMaybe Rafael Cruz? That’s his line of work.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 8/15/2016 @ 11:54 pm@180- There’s nothing to ‘debate’ about HH. The way he presents his opinion ‘analysis’ is cheerleading. They all do it. Point is, these talking head/pundits get it wrong over and over.
So why grant credibility at all? “Because you’re on television, dummy.” — Arthur Jensen to Howard Beale, ‘Network,’ 1976.
It’s about cable news face time. That’s all. You might as well be listening to Donny Deutsch– or Ted Baxter.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:12 amTrump is an icon of American business? God. Help. Us.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:27 amnk, why do you reply to me when you have no information, no facts and nothing new to offer? I posed a question that you don’t have the answer to, so be quiet.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:38 am@184 Millhouse
I don’t know whither you come from but you seem like a city slicker so I didn’t know if you knew whether or not.
Pinandpuller (1adb44) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:50 am@181 fred-2
They think if they can prove that there are 10 righteous men remaining God won’t send the SMOD.
Pinandpuller (1adb44) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:12 am@193 GUS
I’ve always heard that Republicans are the party of voter suppression-this year it was against our own guy.
Pinandpuller (1adb44) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:30 amSo. Many. Trolls.
Patterico does a nice job creating a place for folks to converse, and differ, and learn from each other.
But…
So. Many. Trolls.
Honestly, that is the part that worries me most about a Trump Presidency. We would have President Troll.
What an awful election.
I think the thing that bothers me most are all the people who carried on how they would never vote for Romney, or McCain, who NOW say that we MUST vote for DJT, because the alternative is so awful.
There is a word in the dictionary, near “hypotenuse,” that applies.
Honestly, I think that Rudy G.’s idea about “broken windows” applies to comments section. Heck, there is a character here who has childish pom-poms for DJT who proudly does not vote. If that is the case, the prospect of a HRC presidency can’t be so awful to that person, yes?
I think that some folks here just like to argue, and posture…similar to the odious “virtue signaling” of the Left.
Some of us are worried, but the trolls drown it all out.
Which might be the plan, nation wide?
Simon Jester (eb25bd) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:50 amThe entire NeverTrump movement is nothing but virtue signalling, of the worst kind. These people WANT Hillary to win so they can jab their fellow republicans in the eye with a stick over making the ‘wrong’ choice. Their petty need for self-validation in the face of losing the primaries has them eagerly accepting the destructive Clinton machine into power, so that they can win internet arguments with other conservatives for 8 years. These are the people who demand our loyalty to their clever, reasoned positions which naturally all conservatives should share, but when we break from their wisdom they will happily damage the nation because in that damage, we’ll suffer as well. The neverTrump movement has written itself out of the big tent, no one cares what these people think anymore. The infest the cocktail circuit and the same 250 people having the same conversations with each other have allowed themselves to believe they are something more than bitter remnants of failed political candidates.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:07 amthey got theirs everyone else can suck it
which is so sad
stinkypig gonna do hurt on so so many people
rape so many futures
defile so much
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:24 amno matter what stinkypig does harvardtrash ted gonna live high on the hog on his grimacing sacky’s sweet sweet sacky money and his sweet sweet government piggy pension
high on the hog
so high on that hog he can’t see down below
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:43 am‘Oh, so you just hate alt-rightists because lawyers gotta stick together, even if one is a flaming liberal who’d vote for the biggest and most successful racketeer family in politics.’
“Who would that be? What universe are you living in?”
So you’re saying you don’t see the Clinton family and foundations as essentially a criminal enterprise? In the current year?
Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:34 am“Vox Day is the kid who got pantsed in high school and learned to pose as a tough guy and spit out insults from across an ocean and a continent away.”
At least he didn’t go the traditional route for nerdlingers and become a lawyer.
Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:35 amnk, why do you reply to me when you have no information, no facts and nothing new to offer? I posed a question that you don’t have the answer to, so be quiet.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:38 am
I enjoy calling out trolls (that would be you) as the ridiculous little pieces of s*** they are (that would be you again), for the benefit of other commenters. As far as you’re concerned, I have no interest in telling you anything except to go soak your head, clown.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:42 am216. Here abogado: http://www.infowars.com/burn-down-white-suburbs-sister-of-man-killed-by-milwaukee-police-urges-rioters/
Wilmette and Evanston will burn before 2020.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:52 am210. “Patterico does a nice job creating a place for folks to converse, and [talk past each other, and steadfastly ignore any lessons to be learned].”
FIFY. Try reality on for size.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:56 amRiots usually happen where the police don’t think it worth the trouble to keep them from burning down their own neighborhoods, haven’t you noticed that? Wilmette and Evanston are prime real estate and the blue line will be thick enough.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:03 amCalling out trolls? Is that like a job description? Are you paid to “call out” people? I can only assume that you are about 17 years old, an age where such language and posturing seems ever so important to ones street cred. It iss sad that patterios once useful site is now nothing but a stream of bitter, incoherant rants against a far better man than he, but when he has to rely on people like you do defend his points, that says a great deal about who he is pitching his message at. You and he are welcome to host the “true conservative” movement every year in a local phone booth.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:15 amI’m a bit older than that, but I feel like a nineteen-year old. Maybe Trump could send me one from one of his “modeling agencies”?
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:21 amIt iss sad that patterios once useful site is now nothing but a stream of bitter, incoherant rants against a far better man than he,
Heh! Trump may be a better man than his supporters and prisoners in maximum security, but that’s about it. He is the kind of “person” that improves a place by leaving it, like a dissipating fart.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:30 amStill. Either Hillary or Donald will be sworn in as President.
The SCOTUS appointments either one will impact you the rest of your lives and maybe even your children and grandchildren.
cedarhill (69fdd2) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:09 amPaterico should read this competing article at AT:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/lets_assume_trump_is_shrewd_and_disciplined_principled_and_patriotic.html
cedarhill (69fdd2) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:21 amThis is why the only people who consistently comment here are Trump supporters. They admit they are here to troll. Why would anyone who wants a real discussion bother to read pollution day after day after day? I certainly don’t, and never will again.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:26 amNo Gus voted for cruz, as did hoagie and me, and I’m assuming ag80, but you’re examining the beautiful plumage, while we release its a dead parrot, and its staring to stink,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:37 amWhat does what they’re SUPPOSED to do have to do with anything? I believe money should grow on trees.
State AG’s aren’t SUPPOSED to create a totalitarian prosecution of Exxon Mobil for contributing money to climate alarmism skeptics.
I don’t know why we even need a court system. People are supposed to steal, murder etc.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:45 amSo zippy and red queen are restocking the Jaycee and varsity rosters, that’s supported to be illegal, health insurers are falling like nine pins, cities are going up like kindling, solon actually points out the fellow with the football.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:46 amYes, yes, Gerald A, I learned about checks and balances in school, too. Nonetheless, legislators and government executives take an oath to uphold the Constitution too, not only judges. And may I remind you that the Constitution as ratified in 1789 said nothing like what Marshall made up, in dicta, in Marbury v. Madison in 1803? Nope, I am not giving Congress a pass for passing unconstitutional laws, and not Presidents for signing them either.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:53 amA little humor early in the morning, we discarded the first amendment with the federal communication act, the second with Miller and later the dodd bill, the third is up for review.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:55 amAnd we’ve had president troll for eight years, simon, this is why Luna federation is way behind schedule.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:58 amsupporting Mr. Trump is the only way we can beat that pig
ugh i hate the olympics they’re gayer than star trek
meghan’s coward daddy’s running scared
but then he’s pretty used to that you’d suspect
burritos are so damn expensive anymore it makes me so mad
milwaukee ugh it’s becoming like new orleans where when you go you just go to one lil tiny part
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:03 amMencken wasn’t a charming personality either, twain was a misanthrope, Bierce even more so, but they did offer truth.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:05 amBallard has become a tiger best afficionado of minitrue, Stuart rothenberg, exciting, how about this fresh new face, bob shrum.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:09 am#194 Kevin M,
When you admitted you want neither, I think that’s point that some of us have been trying to make.
It doesn’t goddamn matter what you want; we’re going to get one of these two clowns as our next President, so we may as well choose the lesser of two evils.
I’d much rather have Chris Christie as AG than Loretta Lynch or Tom Perez.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:12 amSome people prefer Lynch or Perez to Christie — we call such people liberals. (LOL)
I am a far better man than the Lying Leftist Donald Effing Trump.
Patterico is a better man than me.
Heck, Dana Loesh is a better man than Donald Trump, and she doesn’t even try to be a man.
John Hitchcock (67fe13) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:16 amDana does have her moments, she can also throw people under the bus, like the buddy’s with remarkable ease, because they are unpeople, not fit to speak.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:20 am235… Yes, CS! I suspect brain-eating amoebas are more widespread than thought. These hooligans are actively choosing the form of their Destructor.
Colonel Haiku (d52d85) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:21 amI think of him as P.T. Barnum. And anyone who buys what he is selling as a sucker.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:22 amNope. That is not what I’m saying.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:24 amI don’t blame you. I wonder if this is what Rome felt like when it was overrun by the barbarians.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:25 amI used to be proud of this comment section. I’m not proud of it right now. But, as always, I’m going to let people have their say.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:26 amIf I were looking for “advert cash” this place would be pushing Trump Trump Trumpity Trump all the time, with a cuck and a cuckety cuck thrown in for good measure. That’s where the real money is these days.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:28 amWe have an active looter on three continents, trying to burn the country down, but trump is the problem.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:29 amI’m going to soldier on, keep saying what I think, and keep letting others say what they think. God knows either candidate is going to try their level best to stop that kind of thing in the future when they get in.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:30 amYup. He is. Because he’s a fucking clown and loser and no better than your “red queen.”
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:31 amIn fairness, I’m sure the point of Max’s comment was that conservative commenters who oppose Trump are the trolls. He obviously sees no value or merit to any comments by Trump detractors, which shows he can’t grasp and respond to their viewpoints. It makes him the troll he labels others.
And I think hunson is Christophe.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:32 amBut I don’t care to argue the point any further. It’s not fun for me, and I have better things to do than this endless loop. Maybe if fred-2 comes in and explains to me that I have a binary choice I’ll finally see the light. He just needs to explain it again.
And again.
And again and again and again and again
Good times!
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:33 amhunson, are you Christoph?
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:35 amYou should keep your comment section open but what made this work in the past is that you or the moderators were willing to moderate when debate turned into personal attacks and mudslinging on either side.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:36 amWe’re way past the zero barrier here, on that score.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:42 amPersonally, Patterico, I would love to see the Trump supporters have to face their comments in 2008 and 2012.
There are some shameless hypocrites posting here these days.
And those are just the ones who vote.
But it is true that troll commenters drive out decent ones. Kind of a Gresham’s Law thing.
Simon Jester (eb25bd) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:44 amIt’s at Politico but this article suggests conservatives/Republicans are more ideological than the more pragmatically-inclined liberals/Democrats. Maybe we are more prone to disagreements that can’t be easily resolved.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:49 amReally those who insisted mittens was the only choice and newt was unacceptable because oh I forget why exactly, mostly same give response.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:49 amI am willing to do that, but I need help identifying it because I am very busy at work these days and don’t have the ability to catch it all.
I’m happy to announce that people who engage in personal attacks on people I respect get an automatic two-day vacation from commenting, as soon as I find out about it. Penalties rise with repeated violations. Whining in moderation will cause me to forget you’re there and will probably make the vacation longer.
Two days is not long, so I will hand them out these penalties freely. Feel free to email me with any examples, anyone.
Please note that this is one-sided; I’d rather not see personal attacks on people I don’t respect, but I will treat those differently than attacks on people I do respect. Why? Because I care more about the people I respect than the people I don’t.
If you don’t like it, try earning respect. If you want to whine about it, then you’re probably a Trumper who has learned from The Master that whining about literally everything is the Alpha Male Way To Go.
Commence the whining!
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:52 ameveryone needs to stop doing the personal attacks is the takeaway here
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:54 amI’ll try. You certainly know how to incentivize good behavior.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:58 amIt’s the rare personal attack on the good commenters like (but not limited to) DRJ or MD. With the notable exception of some pretty vile vitriol thrown at Beldar. You’re the bullseye, Patterico.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:00 amSo Romney has a proxy in evan mcmullen, a quixotic act, which will likely fail as most of his ventures have done.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:00 amI also pledge to be an earnest, serious, thoughtful commenter who tries to see other commenters’ points-of-view and engage them fairly.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:01 amI am a willing tattletale, nk. I like this website too much to see it become a LGF comment section.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:04 amMaybe McMullen is about giving people a way to send a message to the GOP, narciso, just as Trump supporters liked Trump because he was willing to speak out and send a message.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:06 amI just flipped through the first 160 or so comments on this thread. The only real personal attacks I saw were on me and calling them “attacks” is overstating it; I’d call it spirited criticism. I don’t mind that, especially directed at me; I write many of the posts and basically put myself out there. Maybe it’s not as bad as I thought, if this thread (or the first 160 comments) are any indication. But please: feel free to alert me to any violations.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:24 am#256: the irony, it burns.
Simon Jester (e68b5b) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:25 amand what message are they so eager to hear exactly,
http://www.seattletimes.com/business/real-estate/ambitious-developers-fast-climb-snagged-by-claims-of-deception/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:26 am102. LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/15/2016 @ 4:48 pm
I think it’s because the Trump supporters are arguing with them, and that what they say is annoying because it is so wrong, and affects other things than just the question of whom to vote for.
The way you have it, everything is strictly utilitarian, and nothng is for its own sake. It’s like waht Whittaker Chambers said the Communist Party had its people doing. They used to say that certain things were “objectively pro-fascist.”
Now there’s another thing you mention. Posts or comments that mention something new about Trump. That isn’t done exactly to affect the election, except in the sense of removing arguments for Trump qua Trump. Whatever you want to vote for, it shouldn’t be based on a misreading of the situation.
For myself, my motivation is from the day Trump announced his plan to build the wall under no uncertain terms, he was my guy, and since, his talk of suspending Muslim immigration until there’s a reliable way to vet, free trade deals that favor foreign interests and corperatists over Americans, all capped off by his glorious anti-PC screw the media style,
So with you, the important thing is sounding tough, regardless of whether that is right or wrong, or what his track record is on that matter, or whether what he says even makes sense.
If Trump said he was going to tax Martians, would you be even more for him? The other candidates are not willing to say that Martians should pay U.S. taxes! (If you think that’s an absurd comparison, that’s not very different from saying that he’s going to force Mexico to pay for the wall. You can think of a few ways he might try, at the possible cost of a trade war and/or closing the U.S. Mexican land border for an indefinite amount of time, and probably hard to do, or at least collect the money, without support from Congress, but he’s not specifying, and it certainly is at least a little bit speculative and not something guaranteed to work.)
I honestly believe out of all the republicans that ran he is the only one that has a chance of preserving our country and culture from the globalist political elite genius’s that are destroying our country along with the whole idea of the nation state.
This is all nonsense. And of all countries, the United States is the furthest thing from a nation state. The Confederacy would have been more of that.
Sammy Finkelman (072cd5) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:30 amWould she cut a deal not to take office? I think she’d avoid doing that. I think she’d go the Nixon route.
Rich (ddc02c) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:04 pm
Sammy Finkelman (072cd5) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:36 amHalf the problem with Trump is not his fault, but rests with the worthless Republican congressional delegation. If instead of being grifters, these state and local delegates were principled conservatives, Trump’s myriad deficiencies would be far less of a problem. Unfortunately, rather than being principled conservatives who would work to keep Trump honest, they promise nothing more than an exacerbation of the problem. Electing Trump, I fear, will be like throwing kerosene on a fire.
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:44 amToo bad the GOP did not heed the silent majority and sold out the tea party. Pre tea party I might have thought differently about a president trump. I do not now, I am enjoying the show. As a country we have survived worse leadership, and he may surprise a lot of people. I am not a Trumpeter, I am anti communist, so I cannot vote for any present day democrat. What Thad Cochran was allowed to do Chris McDaniel soured me on the GOP until country trumps (sorry) party.
gbear (defc54) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:49 amWatergate, here we come?
Investigations into all matters Clinton.
Including Watergate itself.
Q. Did Hillary Rodham, while working for the House Judiciary Committee, fake a transcript of the Nixon tapes to make Nixon look worse? (my idea, based upon the fact that Hiullary Clinton listened to the Nixxon tapes, was not on the list of people who were supposed to, and was once summoned back to Washngton by John Doar, and taht very few ppeople actually heard the tapes, and that the House Judiciary Committee transcripts didn’t sound like normal conversation – and that she’s dishonest.)
Q. Did Bill Clinton have advance knowledge of the Watergate break-in? (not an impossibility)
Why did the Republican spy, Tom Gregory, (hired by the Robert F. Bennett who later became Senator from Utah and was defeated by the Tea Party in 2010) who had infiltrated the McGovern campaign headquarters, and who somehow never managed to plant a bug, causing Liddy to plan a break-in, quit the night before the scheduled break-in to the Democratic National Committee and the McGovern campaign headquarters? Yes, he was going to break-in and bug both places.
Was he a double agent, or caught and turned? If so, who knew?
Sammy Finkelman (072cd5) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:53 amWhat makes you think that?
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:57 amPatterico 263,
I agree that most of the criticisms now are about you. They’ve run most of the rest of us away and you are all they have left to attack. And it is an attack or — at least — mudslinging designed to hurt you so readers won’t take your opinions seriously.
You can describe this comment (and many others like it) as “spirited criticism” but do you honestly believe it is intended to change your mind or other people’s opinions? If not, then why is it not an attack or mudslinging?
Having said that, I accept you think this fair debate at your website. It is at places like Ace and Twitter, and it can be here, too. Times change; standards change, and I’m not such a prude that I can’t live with it. But it seems like there is far more “spirited” than reasoned “criticism.”
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:58 amNot for Supreme Court nominations.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:59 amSo I’m out after all.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:03 ammaybe you should examine the speech, as a rhetorical exercise,
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-terrorism-speech-227025
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:03 amMore than that, its very name betrays its fundamental illegitimacy. From its very beginning it was recognised as an act of piracy, a minority holding up the majority.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:07 amBesides which, he’s the one who invented the Democrats’ policy of partisan filibusters of Supreme Court nominations.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:08 amIf you stay, DRJ, I promise to refer to Melania Trump only as “lady” or by her name, with the appropriate pronoun or honorific, and not in any other way.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:11 amUm, yes, it quite obviously is possible. Even by Blackstone’s definition, Andorrans are born with a “natural loyalty” to both the Bishop of Urgell and the president of France.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:11 amIt’s true for Greeks born in America. One Greek citizen grandparent. They even have an army service obligation. One kid I know of, spoke only a few words of Greek, overstayed in Greece (over six months) and got drafted. “How did you understand the orders, Vassili?” “I watched the other soldiers. If they went left, I went left. If they went right, I went right.”
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:18 am“Since the beginning, we looked to Utah as the bellweather state that could determine the success or failure of this movement.”
– Evan McMillim e-mail.
This is not true. And pathetic. It sounds like he’s going too limit his efforts mostly to Utah.
As Utah goes, so goes the nation? As Maine goes, so goes Vermont, maybe, but not this.
Sammy Finkelman (072cd5) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:30 am“So I’m out after all.”
DRJ,
That would confirm Simon Jester’s observation regarding the application of Gresham’s Law to comments. As we watch the scope of the damage done by Trump and his disaffected minority play out over the next twelve weeks the veracity of Gresham’s Law wrt impact on the electorate is going to be starkly obvious.
Rick Ballard (d51940) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:46 amThis has been primarily been by Never Trumpers from what I’ve seen. Some of them frankly aren’t behaving like adults.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:53 amlet’s not point fingers let’s just move forward in a united way to where we beat that pig
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:54 amNo, happyfeet, I will not work to beat Trump. That would be going too far. Judy Baar-Topinka, may she rest in peace, would be sad. I will simply deny him and denounce him.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:28 am“But I don’t care to argue the point any further. It’s not fun for me, and I have better things to do than this endless loop. Maybe if fred-2 comes in and explains to me that I have a binary choice I’ll finally see the light. He just needs to explain it again.”
– Patterico
This is the true poison: the tedium of moronic repetition delivered as blazing insight. Coming here to see the same “binary choice” argument delivered over and over and over and over and over again is extremely demoralizing – not because the argument is insightful or pragmatic or accurate (it’s not), but because it is repeated with such certitude and swagger that it serves only to convince me of the death of discourse.
And people are actually *relieved* by it! That’s the awful, pathetic, demoralizing thing about it: that so many people are *relieved* to finally give up and embrace their own loss of agency. Just load up that needle full of “wasted vote” logic and shoot it straight up their arms, then stumble around drooling and feeling anesthetized to their own concessions for a couple hours. When the high wears off, back to the pages of this blog to shoot up again.
How many spirits have been broken by this election? How many proud, intelligent people have finally given up, and accepted their role as cogs, the only purpose of which is to distribute electoral deadweight in one of two directions? Wasted vote logic is their drug, and they’re addicted to it, and like most addicts they will bristle when confronted with the fact that their addiction is a problem.
Leviticus (efada1) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:28 amthis isn’t even about drugs it’s about the future
it hurts my feelings when people say they wanna do stinkypig on me
i had a dream my life would be so different from this stinky hell i’m living
so different now from what it seemed
that pig has killed the dream i dreamed
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:40 amwhat claptrap is that leviticus,
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438994/thought-control-2016
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:42 amEvery time I think I have myself convinced that I will never vote for Trump, I read happy’s “(I just want to) beat that pig,” and I find myself wavering. Sometimes reductionist logic is the best logic.
And, yeah, what’s up with the cost of burritos?
ThOR (c9324e) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:46 amthere used to be strong tendency nor to oppose Supreme Court nominees, at least without finding some kind of non-issue-related grounds to oppose the nomination. Nobody really should rely on this
Tell this to President Tyler, who had 2 vacant seats and send up countless names (some of them several times) but couldn’t get the Senate to act until late in his term.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:48 amThese people WANT Hillary to win so they can jab their fellow republicans in the eye with a stick over making the ‘wrong’ choice.
No, we want Trump to lose. And badly. See the difference?
We’d be happier if it was the Libertarian who did it. We be ecstatic if a major league Republican ran a write in campaign and won. A number of Democrats I know way they’d prefer Romney to Hillary. So would EVERYONE in the 40% in the middle and half the GOP would pick nearly any Republican over Trump.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:53 amIt doesn’t goddamn matter what you want; we’re going to get one of these two clowns as our next President, so we may as well choose the lesser of two evils.
I refuse. This time around BOTH of them are so evil that voting for one of them is evil in itself.
Don’t be evil.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:54 amNo, happyfeet, I will not work to beat Trump. That would be going too far. Judy Baar-To***ka, may she rest in peace, would be sad. I will simply deny him and denounce him and possibly write something nasty across his name on the ballot.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:55 amOr draw something nasty, like his friend Perez Hilton likes to do to people he doesn’t like.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:56 amwith a cuck and a cuckety cuck thrown in for good measure.
They seem to have lightened up on that since the Pence pick.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:57 amif Mr. Trump beats Mr. Cruz for the nomination, and he does it fair and square, then I think for sure I’ll support him if it’s the only way to stop Hillary
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:57 amIf you wonder about the asterisks in that lady’s name, it’s because a combination of letters that spell the color of Trump’s politics (and possibly of his undies) will put you in moderation.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:58 ammore illegal exercise, but what difference does it make,
https://twitter.com/CounterJihadUS/status/765424041503039488
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:00 amSo Romney has a proxy in evan mcmullen
I really wish that Romney would stop with the surrogates and run himself. It would change the race remarkably.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:01 amSo none of you aichmophobes shave with a straight razor? Any of you still use a double-edge safety razor?
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:01 amthere used to be strong tendency nor to oppose Supreme Court nominees, at least without finding some kind of non-issue-related grounds to oppose the nomination. Nobody really should rely on this
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:48 am
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:05 amFrom its very beginning it was recognised as an act of piracy, a minority holding up the majority.
But it was tolerated as, back in the day, it was thought that a law that had significant adamant opposition maybe shouldn’t be imposed on a free people. Luckily, we’ve gotten over that.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:07 amSome of them frankly aren’t behaving like adults.
Says the supporter of Mr Tantrum.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:09 amNo, she didn’t.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:11 amshe wasn’t the only one, turbo tim and gates, also went along,
the filibuster is a tool, like anyother used for good and ill,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:13 amSee if I can explain this in a way that makes sense…
I won’t vote for a candidate3 who scores over “7” on the Evil-meter.
Trump is an “8” and Clinton is a “9”. It is true that Clinton is worse. BUt voting for Trump is still voting for evil.
My BEST vote is neither. That way I am saying, and hopefully a lot of other people are saying “No matte who wins, I didn’t vote for them.”
Ideally, most people would be able to resist the moronic idea that you have to vote for the “lesser” evil and instead of 130 million votes being cast, it will be 80 million and whoever wins will be politically crippled, shifting power to Congress.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:17 amMore to the point, she didn’t sell anything. None of those mine shares belonged to the USA.
The most that she could possibly have sold was her vote, one of nine needed, to approve the Russian investment in the Canadian company. Not to the Russians, but to shareholders who wanted to sell to the Russians. There’s no evidence that she did sell that vote, though of course it would have been completely in character for her to have done so. But that makes one wonder whether the Russians also bought the other eight votes they needed, and if so where’s the evidence? Were those donors even shareholders at the time of the investment? Why would they have even thought, before she even became SecState, that her vote would be needed, or that it would need to be bought? And it’s not even as if she could unilaterally veto the investment; the president could have approved it even if she’d voted against it. It’s far more likely that the whole thing is a fantasy.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:21 am“Ideally, most people would be able to resist the moronic idea that you have to vote for the “lesser” evil and instead of 130 million votes being cast, it will be 80 million and whoever wins will be politically crippled, shifting power to Congress.”
– Kevin M
Ideally, people would realize that simply voting for the candidate they most prefer, without reference to party affiliation, would be the surest way to break the hold of the two-party system and slow the race to the bottom. I’m not holding my breath.
Leviticus (efada1) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:25 am188 Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/15/2016 @ 9:47 pm
“A fool and his money is soon parted?”
I don’t think Trump is stupid enough to beleieve what he says, or at least to believe he has a good reason to believe it.
I think he just doesn’t care about whether something he says is true, and he also thinks so long as an attack was made by someone, and didn’t get immediately squashed, it’s something for him to use.
He thinks it doesn’t matter. He thinks other people have no means of distinguishing truth from falsehood. And I think he likes standing alone – being the only person in politics to say something.
Someone today on the radio had a nickname for Donald Trump, the way Trump has nicknames for otgher people, he said. He called him the “backtrack candidate” because whatever he says, he always takes things back.
I think it was maybe Sid Rosenberg of WABC’s Bernie and Sid Show except that he was on earlier in the morning, substituting for somebody else on the Imus show.
When Donald Trump misjudges the acceptability of something he said, and finds it just does not get accepted, he takes it back. It takes him sometimes up to a day or so to determine that something he said won’t fly.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:28 amlets put it this way, when has there been a true statement, that has come out of biden, obama, hillary, warren, or kerry, so I’m not misunderstood,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:32 amIt didn’t explicitly find that, because it wasn’t at issue. It was taken for granted, as it had been in every previous decision that dealt with the amendment.
“This holding is not only consistent with, but positively suggests, that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms (though only arms that “have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”). Had the Court believed that the Second Amendment protects only those serving in the militia, it would have been odd to examine the character of the weapon rather than simply note that the two crooks were not militiamen.”
Not really true. McDonald was a foregone conclusion, a mere formality. The doctrine of incorporation was already firmly established, and there was no credible argument for excluding the 2A from it.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:33 amSome of you guys here said you thought Trump was a “Hillary! shill” during the primaries. I didn’t buy it and still don’t because he’s too much the narcissist to shill for anyone but himself. But someone here said, also during the primaries, that the media will follow him around and build him up until he wins the nomination then they’d turn on him and bury him. Whoever you are (I really forget which one of you guys predicted it) my hat’s off , you called it.
Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:34 am@224- cedarhill, that is indeed a great article I wish all the nevertrumpers would read it, especially Patterico.
Incidentally, Cruzsupporter, if you are still interested, the second to last paragraph of that piece reveals my second theory regarding the question I asked above. Stubborn pride. I actually think that the largest slice of nevertrumpers motivation to continue the anti-Trump campaign, even though in the long run it goes more against the very principles they rationalise are their motivation. They have so much of their perceived credibility and ego wrapped up in their position, it is almost impossible to consider the idea they may be mistaken, or worse, that there is wisdom and game superior to theirs coming from someone they have long and loudly proclaimed stupid.
The last of my theories is the nevertrumper is a Moby piling on because they are actually Hillary supporters and would be doing the same regardless the R nominee. The long time regulars here would be better able to identify these better than I, they would be the ones with no history of championing conservative causes in the past.
Anyway, I challenge all you Trump bashers to open your minds and at least read the article. Some of you may even be able to climb from your despair and see a little hope. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/lets_assume_trump_is_shrewd_and_disciplined_principled_and_patriotic.html
You can thank cedarhill later…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:35 amHe isn’t an icon of American business to actual businessmen. Only to ignorant fools who fall for his self-promotion. And he got to be a millionaire by inheriting his father’s money. He’s spent the time since dissipating that inheritance, not building on it. He’s worth less now than he would have been had he simply put his inheritance in an index fund and spent the last few decades on a beach.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:37 am@207 Pinanpuller, us city slickers have us these thingies we call “dictionaries”. “Diction” means words, you see, and “-ary” means a place where something can be found, so a “dictionary” is a place where words live. And when we’re in the outhouse, not having Sears catalogs, we study these dictionary thingies, even at night on account of we got these candles that work on the electric.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:41 amSee, Simon Jester has one too.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:42 am306. Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:21 am
No, she could have sold inside information and expertise.
Not even about the deal, once it was proposed, but about what kind a deal might work, where others wouldn’t invest because the prospect of making a profit looked too uncertain because it depended on government action.
It could be it’s all being explained wrong.
i.e., she didn’t sell her vote. She didn’t sell not creating trouble.
Maybe what she sold was inside information on possible profitable investments, that would become profitable only if the U.S. government gave its OK, plus advice on what to say to help get government approval.
The relevance of the fact that she had a vote, is that that meant that she had up to date inside information. If there had been a problem, maybe the investors could and would have bailed out.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:44 am#217. Infowars?! Really? Why don’t you just quote stormfront and be done with it? A story that appears nowhere but infowars (or gatewaypundit, or conservativetreehouse) is no better than one that appears nowhere at all.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:45 amYes, Lee Brown just relieved himself of the opinion that he’s proud of how the police prevented the Crown Heights pogrom from spreading to other neighborhoods. The POS also denies that he ordered the police to let the rioters “vent their rage”. But multiple witnesses heard it directly from the policemen themselves, wo apologised for not being allowed to do anything unless they saw a person being beaten.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:49 amNor should anyone.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:52 amAnd you think Trump is going to give the AG spot to the man who threw his mechuten in prison?!
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:54 amwhereas when the times, abc, the herald, all conspire to deceive where does one go,
https://sharylattkisson.com/clinton-lead-over-trump-shrinks-to-margin-of-error-bloomberg-poll/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:54 amRev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:34 am
Something like that is believed to have hapepned in several U.S. presidential elections. I think they said that about what happened to Dukakis and John McCain.
Here is Accuracy in Media in 2008:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/more-dirt-on-mccain/
here’s something recent from 538 about the media destroying Dukakis:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/film-how-to-destroy-a-presidential-candidate/
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:56 am318. The Daily News said yesterday that the Girgente Report was leaked early to the press. I thought governor Mario Cuomo was keeping it under wraps until it was released on July 20, 1993.
How early?
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:01 amand the Daily News lies for a living, exception is when it doesn’t know it’s lying, which is rare,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:05 amThe media certainly followed him around, but it’s not true they built him up.
Trump played the media, getting tons of air time by saying things in a nonPC way that was guaranteed to create outrage amongst the PC worshipping elite. I lost track during the primaries how many times this “building up” resulted in sage predictions that THIS would be the outrage that would sink him.
History revisionism, not just for progressives anymore…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:06 amknowing how 2/3 of the media take is wrong, either out of ignorance or malice, I take a great many of these reports with a grain of salt.
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:09 am309. narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:32 am
Well, today, or was it yesterday, Biden said, that Donald Trump had encouraged a cyber- attack But he hadn’t. It was cyber-espionage, and there’s a difference. A cyber-attack damages something. Cyber-espionage just finds out what’s in a computer.
But you see, that’s sticking a little bit close to the truth. Maybe some of the things he says aren’t true, but they are focus-group tested
Biden’s claim that Donald Trump is the least prepared candidate may be going a bit too far – how much did Wendell Wilkie know? – and what about somebody who knows wrong things, like McGovern or Dukakis, but Biden’s claim that Donald Trump isn’t interested in learning is what’s been cooming out of people close to him or from conservative commentators in weeks past. (Maybe it’s that he isn’t interested in being right.)
Trump says wild things, that even if, strictly speaking, they could be defended, he doesn’t have that in mind. He said Obama created ISIS and he didn’t mean by killing or the people above Baghdadi, and if meant supplying weapons, didn’t caution, by relying on a country like Qatar to vet who was getting some weapons or training. He meant the Russian claim of doing it on purpose. then accepted the out he was give, which was wrong, because the withdraswal of troops did not create </b? ISIS, but made possible their seizure of territory in Iraq in 2014. ISIS was created in Syria.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:22 amso the answer is no, biden has been wrong on so many things, the alaskan pipeline, the contras, the partition of iraq, that what we’ve got defacto, he overruled petraeus on the counterinsurgency strategy, choosing to make afghanistan, an open air drone gallery,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:25 am324. I just want to know if that “fact” is wrong. And if wasss leaked, how much in advance? An hour?
I think it was maybe embargoed, which is not the same thing as being “leaked.”
News organizations sometimes get advance texts of speeches etc. on condition that they don’t write about it, or tell anyone else, until the moment of release.
The idea is that they’ll be able to come up with an article, within a hour or so, and certainly have it ready by the next day.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:25 amThe Daily News lies for Clinton, not so much for anyone else. I can see why the Clinton people might want to get the idea across that the Girgente Report was available before its official release.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:28 amsammy who gives a farthing, the truth is it revealed the criminal negligence of brown and dinkins, the former still was promoted regardless,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:28 amI don’t have a clue which polls are right. I do think that Trump will outperform his average poll level in the last week before the election by several points.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:41 am@ LBascom (#312): I read the DeLong article. It’s crap.
It starts with the premise that what we see of Trump isn’t the real Trump, that instead there’s a secret, far-sighted, utterly pragmatic businessman who’s deliberately continuing to split his own party because he has a secret plan to beat the Dems which doesn’t require a unified GOP. It becomes even less realistic from there:
Suppose, suppose, suppose. He ought instead have written, “Pretend, pretend, pretend,” because that’s what he’s doing. There no credible evidence to support any of these suppositions. Just how self-deluded does one have to be to characterize Trump as “disciplined” or “principled”? Note that in the same essay, Mr. DeLong excuses Trump’s utter lack of principle as being a necessity in the business world — an utter falsehood of the sort propagated by Hollywood and the Bernie Sanders crowd, all of whom think Trump, the caricature of a successful businessman, is instead the personification thereof?
This is the same fantasy projection that Trumpkin shills — and yes, Mr. DeLong has now become one, in spades! — have been peddling for more than a year. It’s even less believable now that we’ve seen Trump throughout the primaries and well into the post-convention general election, in which he shoots off at least one toe every other day and grabs the national spotlight away from every Hillary embarrassment.
DeLong is also living in a fantasy world when it comes to the electoral college and Trump’s prospects there. He points to these as the key states that will secure Trump’s victory: “OH, PA, WI, and MI.” The RCP average for those states as of this moment shows Clinton leading in every one of those state by, respectively, 2.6%, 9.2%, 9.4%, and 6.6%. Mr. DeLong offers nothing but wishes to explain how Trump can make up those margins.
I’m disinclined to join in these delusions, notwithstanding my decades-old revulsion when it comes to Bill & Hillary Clinton. I also have a decades-old revulsion when it comes to Donald Trump.
So rather than persuade me, your link, Mr. Bascom, has instead confirmed all of my prior views about how much self-deception it would require for me to begin to rationalize a vote for Trump. Lie to yourself if you want, I can’t stop you. Lie to me and the other readers here if you want; they’ll believe you or not if they choose. But you can’t make me lie to myself enough to believe anything you, or Mr. DeLong, writes in favor of Donald Trump.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:41 amThe last time I alerted you to violations, papier mache tigre got a 2 day vacation.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:46 amYou see the non-availability of the Girgente Report would explain why Vincent Foster was sent (by having it printed out) the e-mail message that I sent to president@whitehouse.gov on July 19, routed overnight through Rochester so that it arrived on July 20, because it started off with and mentioned Crown Heights.
I think they were collecting any possible news about what was in that report, because Mario Cuomo wasn’t telling them a thing, and because some persons close to Bill Clinton’s campaign had been involved in the events of Augsust 19-22, 1991. Bill Lynch. And Al Sharpton (who was given an audience with Janet Reno on July 21. Officially he was there to demand an investigation of the car accident, which actually did need investigation, only the other way. There were people with experience in insurance fraud who know how to create auto accidents involving innocent motorists.)
I said that Janet Reno should not cover up the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum like she did that of Don Aronow. And segued on to other things, mainly that he should not fire the FBI Diretor, and warned of the consequences if he did. Reporters knew more than what they wrote – just look at today’s (July 19, 1993 that is) Wall Street Journal editorial (It was entitled “Who Is Vincent Foster – it did contain hints of more) and if he was fired they would be would be released from their pledges of confidentiality and would be free to write what they knew about Waco and the FBI Director could talk especially about how he was kept from the scene in Waco and his water cannon plan was rejected in favor of tear gas.
But the FBI Director had already been fired the previous day. (I didn’t know that much, but I knew they were hesitant to fire him and wanted him to agree to resign. That’s why I put that in the e-mail. Foster may have been the biggest worrier.)
I was told later by Carol Moore via email that there were signs that Vincent Foster had been involved in pushing the tear gas plan, although I never got the details. (the CS tear gas ignited the April 19 fire, you see, and I am more than 99% sure that that was planned.)
And then news came that William Sessions had called a press conference for Thursday, July 22.
My theory is: Vincent Foster panicked and decided to try to get the Saudi Ambassador to give him one of those briefcases full of cash he kept in his residence, so he could pay for lawyers. He tried to blackmail him but forgot about diplomatic immunity.
Then the Saudi Ambassador had to rush over to Bill Clinton and explain it. And they didn’t know what was bothering Vincent Foster for approximately a week.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:53 am333. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan are states that have not been carried by a Republican for some time. George W. Bush didn’t carry them.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:55 am331. narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 11:28 am
Actuallyu, it was very carefully written.
The Girgente Report was divided into 2 parts.. One part the Crwon Heighst riot or pogrom and the other part the trial of lemrick nelson.
It was clear to me that a witness for Lemrick Nelson had committed perjury, but the report didot day that. In many way, it was very, very, carefully written. By lawyers.
And the Clinton people had things to fear from it.
They came out all right.
Another thing I am convinced of, is that Yankel Rosenbaum was stabbed a second time in the hospital. And the newspaper Newsday knew it. I read Charles Hynes’s reponse in teh Jewish Press, which revealed a few thjings i didn’t know.
Like the excuse for the inability to obtain the pictures of Yankel Rosenbaum’s back takwn by the Newsday photographer after he was stabbed on the street.
I would suspect it would show only one stab wound at that time. the ambulance attendants are/were lying about there being two.
There was no medical negligence. In fact what was reported was practically a medical impossibility
He was stabbed again a second time in the hospital.
That’s why he suddenly bled to death a long time after being stabbed, and after Mayor David Dinkins had seen him.
Someone went into Kings County Hospital and finished him off.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:04 pmBut someone here said, also during the primaries, that the media will follow him around and build him up until he wins the nomination then they’d turn on him and bury him.
I don’t know if I’m the someone, but I am one who constantly said that. There were two parts to my reasoning:
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:07 pm1. That Trump would be the only one Hillary had a chance against, because of her astronomical negatives; and
2. If it were not Trump, it would be Cruz, and they were in mortal fear of Cruz. Remember a video Patterico posted of Robert Reich, with a chart, telling the Left why Cruz was worse than Trump? Like that. To the Left, even if Trump wins, he’s a consolation prize because he’s not Cruz.
88. kishnevi (10c258) — 8/15/2016 @ 3:12 pm
the criminal violations are more serious, and there are different investigators. Bill and Hillary probably still consider themselves safe, but actually theer’s a risk, and they ahve Obama warning tgaht the election may be closer tahn anticipated.
Emailgate only concerned the setting up of the server. Foundationgate, concerns the contents of the emails and what she did.
There were violations of the federal Records Act, but it wa shard to establiosh reposonsbility. Hillary avoided a prolem with lying by not giving an interview until everybody else had testified or spoken to the FBI. Many of her aides said (in other inquiries) that they ddin’t remember details. Or, in a few cases, they didn’t remember what it was they knew before they became lawyers for Hillary Clinton. They could only be asked what they knew before.
Yes, Emailgate did deal wioith issue about content: Sending classified information over a non-classified system and out of the State Department. But the problem with classified information was something she had genuinely overlooked, and was mostly trivial. Two or three messages marked classified and sent on an unclassified system, and discussion of things that were secret in the wrong place – which would also have happened if she’d been using an unclassified state.gov sddress, too.
Now Congress has noticed something. The FBI didn’t investigate whether she lied to Congress – said they never got a referrral – but that would also be a criminal violation. they’ll now investigate her for lying to Congress.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:16 pmyour kind of guy, also bill weld, who was us atty back in the whitey bulger days,
http://www.guns.com/2016/08/16/gov-rauner-signs-new-law-expanding-illinois-gun-prohibitions/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=57b317b104d301309d248b8c&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:32 pmBut there’s no evidence that she sold anything at all in this instance. Some shareholders in a Candian company give the Clinton Foundation money during her election campaign. Two years later, she’s SecState, and votes to approve the Russians buying the company, but we have no idea whether the aforementioned donors were still shareholders.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:36 pmHe didn’t do that either. He just asked the Russians to release some information if they had it. To let us in on the secrets that they had already learned.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:39 pmIt depends on how easy no contact/no stalking orders are to get in other states.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:39 pm@ Hoagie: I’m too lazy to check, but off the top of my head I can think of at least a half-dozen regular commenters here who observed, a full year ago, that the media was giving Trump billions in free coverage during the primaries, but that they would indeed turn decidedly against Trump — as they would against any GOP candidate — when and if he ever secured the nomination. In fact, you yourself probably made those points, or something close, at one time or another.
Trump is still getting massive amounts of TV, cable & radio airtime, and print column inches, and giga-terabytes of internet bandwidth, though. What’s changed is that before the GOP primaries were decided, huge chunks of that coverage were mostly just flowing-through whatever Trump was dishing out that particular day. The smart Dem flacks were perfectly willing to put their knives away and just use a trowel to serve up the Trumpkins; they were as eager as Trump’s shills like Hannity or Ingraham to do that, while Trump could still have been beaten in the primary. Now, all the Trump coverage is relentlessly negative throughout the MSM. They’re being as unfair to Trump as they were to Romney or McCain or Dubya. He just gives them so much more to work with, though, daily. And that’s another thing that many of the commenters here predicted as long ago as this time last year.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:45 pmHe’s “getting away” with hiding his tax returns, in the sense that the Trumpkins continue to swallow his BS excuses for that. Even a weak excuse would be better than the daily own-goals he’s scoring for Hillary now, though. Trump’s best Electoral College chance would be if he’d gone on a six-month deep sea fishing trip off the Falkland Islands or Diego Garcia immediately after the GOP convention — with no satellite phone to access Twitter, either!
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:48 pmBeldar, I was just pondering how “on-the-nose” this blog is with the observations of the commenters. And yes, you are correct in that the media is giving Trump the same amount of negative coverage they gave Romney and would give any Republican candidate. I was arguing that point with a good friend who is for Trump. He said they’re stalking him and I told him the aren’t doing any more to Trump than they would to Cruz it’s just that Trump gives them so much more to work with. We all realize the media and TV people are all in the tank for whoever is the democrat and it matters not who the Republican is.
Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 8/16/2016 @ 12:52 pmonly if one looks at every comment with a jaundiced eye, and there are many parties, who clearly are effected by what trump is proposing, yet seem not to care about red queen’s wrecking ball,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:02 pm#344 Beldar,
Your point that Trump gives the MSM sharks so much more to work with is an excellent point.
It’s why it’s important for more conservatives to subscribe to William F. Buckley’s “Let’s nominate the most conservative guy who is electable” rule of thumb.
Trump was never electable in a general election.
By the same token, there’s a lot of our friends on the right who mock electability as a consideration for determining a nominee. They think electability is a euphenism for “selling out.”
I just sit here and contemplate how a young, nice-looking energetic Marco Rubio would mop the floor with Hillary in the debates. He’d speak about his immigrant parents working as a bartender and a maid at Motel 6, and contrast that with the woman who already spent 8 years living in the White House and who is currently worth a quarter billion dollars.
What a juxtaposition.
That’s electability.
The Gang of 8 is tiddlywinks compared to the circus that The Donald is bringing to the national conversation.
Our country is so screwed.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:12 pmI do begrudge that the MSM is having so much more malicious fun swarming over Trump than they did trying to demonize Mittens or McCain. It’s more like 2000, when they were able to make such hay with the caricature of Dubya as the Texas Cowboy who was rougher & tougher — and dumber — than his Yalie dad.
Dubya, though, was able to go on SNL even on the brink of the election and tease himself about being misunderestimated. Dubya had thick skin, and the knock against him was mostly false. (He had better grades & test scores than Gore, for instance, who managed to flunk out of Vanderbilt Divinity School). Trump has thin skin, and he is a caricature himself. He’s the kind of “rich man” that a hobo imagines, the kind of “business success” that someone who’s never met a payroll believes in, the kind of public servant who believes to his core that government exists to perpetuate crony capitalism. So I don’t think we’ll see him on SNL again before November. But hey — I’ve been wrong before.
I keep reading Trumpkin commenters this week saying, “At this point Dukakis was __ points ahead of Bush-41 yada yada, Trump is going to turn this around!” But at this point in 1988, voting wasn’t starting in a mere six weeks — and that’s the relevant time-frame.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:17 pmUm, why? Who on earth could have profited by his death? To whom do you imagine he was a threat? He had no connection to anything going on in the USA. He was only in Crown Heights in the first place by an unlikely coincidence. His research topic was Poland in the interwar period. Why would anyone feel a need to shut him up?
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:17 pmIf Trump is the most Conservative person electable, then the entire Moderate Wing of the GOP is TOO CONSERVATIVE to be elected. Because they’re more Conservative than he is.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:19 pmI think of him as P.T. Barnum. And anyone who buys what he is selling as a sucker.
P.T. Barnum actually ran for public office. As a Democrat. And a Republican.
And won.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:24 pm@ CS (#348): Even Jim Gilmore would be beating Hillary in the polls now.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:24 pmThose who support “the most conservative electable” are living within The Abilene Paradox without even knowing it, with the results being totally unexpected.
I choose to live outside the Abilene Paradox.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:30 pm350. I think anything was possible – such an occurrence – following up an initial assault with the death blow at the hospital – might be more likely today, i.e. thugs who did the initial stabbing can now tweet, IG, snap etc. to their peeps who are on hospital grounds. Granted, in 1991 you would need someone with a cellphone at the crime scene and then a cellphone or desk phone in the hospital to convey the order.
Chicago (or Cook County, in this case) needs to have the NY attitude with its existing gun laws – in NYC if you pee on the street with a gun on your person you serve the hard time for the gun. In Chicago, the gun charge is plead away and you pay or do community service for the alley watering.
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:36 pmIn the same way that I acknowledge and, within limits, admire Don Quixote, I enjoyed watching the Fox News panel quiz newly-announced independent candidate Evan McMullin the other day. He has a future in electoral politics, although it won’t be as the winner of the 2016 presidential election.
His single best moment, though, and the one which I found most thought-provoking, was when the panel pressed him to explain how he thought he could win. (He’d been explaining why Trump can’t, but Hillary certainly can and likely will if nothing changes the equation.)
He didn’t even try to pretend that he personally has a path to the White House. But he argued that if somehow both Hillary and Trump can be held short of the required 270 electoral votes, then the election goes to the House, per the Twelfth Amendment:
This started me pondering. Of course neither McMullin, nor Gary Johnson, nor Jill Stein, nor any other third-party candidate can win 270 votes outright. But if one or more of them could pick off even a couple of smallish states — McMullin perhaps in Utah, Stein perhaps in the Bernie-friendliest states like WA & VT, Johnson in Colorado or NM — and if Trump and Hillary split the rest, then the House would decide. And it’s this year’s House, not the incoming Congress. (So long as they act before January 20; see the 20th Amendment.) The GOP controls more House delegations by state right now.
Would the current U.S. House of Representatives give Trump the presidency, despite his failure to win 270 electoral votes? Or might it turn to another well-known public figure, one amenable to and known by the House GOP members, one widely respected on both sides of the aisle, one who’s been previously vetted by a national election, but not one who’s been previously rejected at the top of the ticket?
I don’t think this is a very plausible scenario. But I’m going to hang on to it as long as I can, if only to help me sleep better for just a few nights.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:42 pmI’m guessing you won’t like that scenario, narciso. 😉
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:43 pmMr. Trump will beat the pig
i’ve foreseen this in my analysis of the data
so where do we go from there i wonder
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:54 pm“Or might it turn to another well-known public figure, one amenable to and known by the House GOP members”
That doesn’t match up with the 12 amendment you quoted: “and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President,”
Sounds like they would have to choose one of those that were on the presidential ballet, not a party primary ballet.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:56 pmI don’t doubt the stupid party’s skill at self flagelation,
http://zogbyanalytics.com/news/756-clinton-and-trump-in-statistical-tie-trump-has-closed-the-gap-among-older-millennials
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:58 pmMr. Trump is a driver he’s a winner
things are gonna change i can fill it
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:59 pmBut why would they want to. Nobody set out to kill him. Nobody wanted him dead. It was a crime of opportunity. He was just there. He just happened to have gone out for a haircut at the wrong moment, barely a minute before the call came to stay inside, and they saw a Jew and went for him. So why would anyone be interested in making sure he was dead?
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:03 pmI don’t trust the polls, especially now ‘cuz admitting you support Trump can get you denied service, chased out of public spaces, or beat up. Even if you do, seems the polls have pretty much evened up again.
In any case, I think the debates will be a deciding factor in who gets elected. I’m pretty sure they were the stake through the heart for Romney last time, so I’m not going to get to excited about predicting the election until then.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:07 pm#353 Beldar,
I imagine Jim Gilmore might actually have a shot at beating Hillary.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:08 pmHe’s actually an impressive guy.
Too bad he lacks the pizazz necessary to make waves in this Kim Kardashian Instagram universe we now live in.
No, it’s next year’s House. Next year’s congress comes in on 3-Jan, and its first item of business is to watch Biden count the votes, and to vote if there’s no winner.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:10 pmThey have to choose from the top three, so if Stein comes in third they’re likely to choose Trump.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:12 pmThe “presidential ballet” is irrelevant. They have to choose from the top three vote-getters in the electoral college. #3 could be someone who wasn’t on any ballot.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:13 pm@ LBascom (#359): I stand corrected. Thank you. Yes, the House would have to choose among the top three candidates who had received electoral votes. In my improbable scenario, the third could be any of the independent or third-party candidates who’d received the most electoral votes. There’s no way the House would turn to Johnson or McMullin, much less to Stein.
So narciso, you needn’t worry. And consequently, neither can I get more sleep. Alas.
@ Milhouse (#365): I stand corrected again! The meeting of electors is December 19th, but you’re right, it will be the 116th Congress, seated on January 3, 2017, that does the counting of electoral votes in joint session on January 6, 2017.
So the balance of state delegations to the House who are controlled by the GOP might indeed shift. But it would have to shift a very long way indeed, given that by my count (and I’m willing to be corrected here too, please!), there are 33 state delegations to the U.S. House currently controlled by the GOP, compared to only 17 controlled by the Dems (CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OR, RI & VT).
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:24 pmPerhaps Trump should begin funding Jill Stein’s campaign.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:26 pmperhaps that’s an unhelpful suggestion ever think of that
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:28 pmJohn McLaughlin dies.
“Bye-bye!”
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:30 pmi hate that for him
he was a good picklehead
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:31 pmnow the motor voter and early voting was a step instituted by clinton, on advice of mr, cloward, to distort the election cycle, to prevent a reoccurrence of 2008, demography and mind arson has done the rest,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 2:32 pm“Perhaps Trump should begin funding Jill Stein’s campaign.”
– Beldar
He can’t even competently fund his own campaign, much less Stein’s.
Leviticus (efada1) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:16 pmIndeed. I recently did the calculation for 2001, to find out what would have happened had Cheney not moved to Wyoming, and the Texas electors had to vote for only one of the GOP candidates. I found that the House state delegations had a solid Republican majority, so all the TX electors could have voted for Cheney for VP and some other Republican for president, and let the House elect Bush.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:20 pmbut they are real networks right
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/disgusting-cnn-liars-selectively-edit-sylville-smiths-sisters-threats-burn-suburbs/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:29 pmClinton’s current lead in the RCP head to head is 6.7, in the three way with Johnson, it’s 6.2, in the four way with Stein included, it’s 6.2. The media are playing with Trump like they played with Akin.
Rick Ballard (a0c96c) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:33 pmThe time when you were proud of your comments section was when you represented some larger slice of conservative opinion. Now that you have decided to take a giant crap on the majority of conservatives, by stating loud and clear that not only is their choice of candidate illegitimate but that you will actively sabotage their election efforts as a way of spiting them, then yeah, suddenly people don’t have a lot of good will for you. You could note your objections and stay quiet and let the GOP try its best to win on the merits, but you’re too petty for that. You’re done and dusted as a conservative commentator. When this is all over, either Trump will win and you’ll have proven yourself to have awful political judgement and no loyalty to the right-side cause or Trump will lose, and you will find yourself (and the others like you) on the receiving end of a great deal of well earned hostility for your attempts at sabotaging the GOP candidate. There is no pathway here that get’s you anything but scorn and irrelevance because you no longer represent anything but your own bruised ego.
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:43 pm@ hatefulfeet, who wrote (#370), re my suggestion (#369) that Trump begin funding Jill Stein’s campaign:
If the election is thrown to the House because Stein or someone else keeps both Hillary and Trump from reaching 270 electoral votes, then Trump will win.
So third-party candidates, if any, who can pick off electoral votes from Hillary hurt her a great deal. Those who pick off electoral votes from Trump, by contrast, still leave him with the possibility of winning in the House.
My suggestion was, therefore, helpful to your favored candidate. I admit that such is out of character for me. You obviously didn’t understand what I wrote. I’ll leave it to you and others to decide whether that’s in or out of character for you.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:44 pmThere is not one damn thing that is conservative about Trump, psychologically, socially, fiscally, spiritually, at all. And Stormfront is not one whit conservative and not one whit part of a majority of anything and not one whit a moral organization.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:46 pmRe the rant in #378 above, which asserts that Trump is the choice of “the majority of conservatives,” I submit to you that statement is unproven, unprovable, and incredibly unlikely, given Trump’s own disdain for people who consider themselves to be conservatives. You can assert, with a factual basis, that Trump won a plurality of the votes and delegates in the GOP primary while it was still contested, prompting the remaining candidates to drop out before all the primary results were in; and you can assert that he therefore won, and received, the GOP nomination. The rest of what you wrote is hogwash.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:48 pmUm, how do you know it happened? Becuase Jim Hoft said so?
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:49 pmI will suggest, Mr. Black, that if you believe your own hogwash, you should lead the parade away from commenting on this blog. Starting now.
Don’t let the door hit you on your way out. Just my opinion, FWIW.
Beldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:49 pmAs a Christian Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
As a Social Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
As a Fiscal Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
As a Small Government Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
As a Free Market Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
As a Constitutional Conservative, I cannot vote for Trump.
Because he stands in opposition to all my principles.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:50 pm“The time when you were proud of your comments section was when you represented some larger slice of conservative opinion.”
– Patterico
The time when Patterico was proud of his comments section was when it discussed ideas. But then the place was overrun by a bunch of moronic Trumpkins, lacking in ideas but adamant about making noise.
And here we sit.
Leviticus (efada1) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:54 pmi’ll lock arms with every last one of you to keep that pig from stenching all up in it
you have my word
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:03 pmMr Black, your comment is horse manure. When Trump loses, to the most beatable Democrat candidate since James Cox, all will know it was the result of Trump’s clown show campaign.
SPQR (5c592f) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:22 pmoh my goodness pls to shop your biliously threadbare narrative elsewheres
i can’t even
the pig is almost upon us
YOU SHALL NOT PASS, stupid disgusting herpes-ridden clotty-headed stinkpig
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:34 pmI’ve looked at clowns from both sides now
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:46 pmYorick and Bozo, and still somehow
It’s Trump’s delusions I recall
I really don’t know clowns at all
who is yorick, I know red queen, bluntman, and mcguffin, but who’s the dead guy,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/fbi-defends-clinton-handling-classified-material/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 4:48 pminteresting lil indie film paramount picked up Mr. narciso
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:08 pmA fellow of infinite jest, narciso.
— I’ll take clowns for $100, Alex.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:33 pm— This person voted for a clown for President in 2016.
— Who is any Trump supporter?
— Correct! You’re still up.
the rhodes road show has a sequel,
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/wapo-writer-discovered-on-ploughshares-payroll/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 5:43 pmThe Benedict Arnolds here seem to think they have a parade waiting for them on the other side of this election. The left will always despise you and the right will remember you sabotaged them. Who do you imagine is in your corner after this treachery?
Mr Black (7c41e5) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:17 pmcharles sykes has poor timing,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/nine-one-what-1471370647
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:26 pmWe don’t need nobody to pat us on the head and tell us “Attaboy!”, Trumpsucker. That s***’s for Beta males. Like you.
As for being Benedict Arnolds, the Trump campaign is not our country and we never swore fealty to it. It’s not anybody’s country. It’s an infection in the American political system. We are part of the antibodies.
So go Google some images of Donald Trump and “amuse” yourself.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:26 pmMr Black, the real conservatives are not enthusiast Trump supporters. Some reluctantly have decided to support him but for reasons of expediency not because Trump is conservative . No one I respect among conservatives calls me a “Benedict Arnold”.
If I found _you_ in my corner, I would fumigate it.
SPQR (5c592f) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:29 pmI think I would give that person a vacation had he directed the comment at someone else I respect. My feeling is: directed at me, I can take it. Sure, I think it’s rude, but I can live with it.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:34 pmAnd so, granted, there is a double standard at work: I’m allowing people to take shots at me that I would not allow them to take at others. This should not be read as license to be a jerk, but it just feels right that people should be able to train their rhetorical guns on me in a way I would not tolerate if directed at others.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:36 pmI point out plowshares and the gitmo detainee release, including the ccr enablers, because this will be what there will be more of,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:47 pmunder red queen, now the entire political establishment, has shown it will fight to hold on to the status quo, so they attempting to demotivate using all manner of subterfuge,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:49 pmSo, to be clear:
Someone who says: “Do you realize how silly you sound?” to me is not really observing the standards to which this comment section should aspire. You’re just alienating people with that tone.
But I’m not going to moderate people for saying something like that to me. I’ll use it as an opportunity to practice patience and different ways of interacting with people. To the extent I have time.
But talk like that to, say, DRJ, or Leviticus, or Simon Jester, or any of a good number of other people . . . and I’ll happily stick you in moderation for as long as I need to.
Patterico (bcf524) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:53 pmThe news of his death was announced in a post on the show’s Facebook page.
“Earlier this morning, a beloved friend and mentor, Dr. John McLaughlin, passed away peacefully at the age of 89. As a former jesuit priest, teacher, pundit and news host, John touched many lives,” the post read.
“For 34 years, TheMcLaughlin Group informed millions of Americans,” the statement continued. “Now he has said bye bye for the last time, to rejoin his beloved dog, Oliver, in heaven. He will always be remembered.”
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:56 pmhe did make political commentary somewhat entertaining, it ended up as real as wrestling, sometime after carvey’s parodies,
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/16/state-department-sought-land-deal-with-nigerian-firm-tied-to-clinton-foundation.html
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 6:58 pm@384- yeah, those true conservatives you’ve been voting for sure have been conserving the crap out of things, haven’t they?
The world’s on fire, the country in ruins, the population in a soft civil war and headed for a hot civil war, the debt and unfunded liabilities about to destroy the economy, we’re being literally invaded by foreigners about to be granted amnesty, the middle class disappearing, healthcare is about to collapse, we got abortion on demand, gay marriage, women given combat rolls in the military, illegitimate births running about 65%, divorce the norm, the education system creating self absorbed idiots, an infrastructure crumbling, over taxation, and men using the ladies room.
But Trump!! He’s to blame! He’ll do America wrong!! We gotta keep on electing “conservatives”!!
Riiiight…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:01 pmthe focus seems a bit off, and the solicitude for minitrue opinions, is out of character,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:05 pmDebt and unfunded liabilities
Trump plans to outspend Obama
Healthcare about to collapse
Trump said he would have the Federal Government pay for all Health Insurance
Divorce the norm
How many did Trump have? And why?
Self-absorbed idiots
Like Trump and the Trump Idolators
Over-taxation
Trump said he supports taxing the job producers even higher
Infrastructure crumbling
The roads are as good as or better than 1991. I know. I drove OTR in 1991 and I drive OTR today.
Men using the ladies room
Trump yelled at North Carolina because they put a stop to it, and he didn’t like that.
Illegitimate births
Trump picked his most recent trophy wife because she was one hot piece of @ss.
Abortion on demand
Trump said he supports abortion on demand and supports partial-birth abortion, with no limits.
The middle class disappearing
Trump’s 4 bankruptcies caused many middle-class businessmen to lose their businesses.
You’re not very good at making cogent arguments, are you?
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:11 pmYou worked very hard to miss my point Hitchcock.
Conservatives have conserved nothing, with the exception of maybe 2nd amendment rights. They DO nothing, except blame everything on everyone but themselves, so as to keep the donations flowing. While going along to get along with everything the democrats do.
So go ahead, demonize Trump and help out Hillary. I qwould expect nothing else from the “conservative” club. It’s who you are, it’s what you do.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:27 pmAnd there we have it, folks. LBascom thinks Republicans == Conservatives, when they do nothing of the sort. That makes LBascom a fool.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:29 pmThese hi brow lawyers are the death of all of us. Lol. So uber alles.
Rodney King's Spirit (d28741) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:39 pmBig Trumpa-a-loola
He mah Daddy
Big Trump-a-loola
Make everything dandy
Big Trump-a-loola
He my Daddy-O, my Daddy-O, my Daddy-O
Do I have the Trumpkin anthem right, LBascom?
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:45 pmLet’s see, Nixon the conservative gave us the EPA and an impeachment, Reagan the conservative gave us amnesty, no fault divorce, and Iran-Contra, H Bush the conservative gave us the beginnings of the middle east wars, higher taxes, and the vision of a new world order(globalism), W Bush the compassionate conservative gave us the never ending middle east wars, the DHS, No Child Left Behind, Medicare D, expanded spying on American citizens, exploding debt, and the housing bubble that resulted in a massive recession, McCain the conservative gave us McCain-Feingold, and Romney the conservative was the architect of Obama care.
But by all means, let’s reject Trump in favor of Hillary because he’s had two divorces and isn’t conservative enough.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:46 pmthey all drape themselves in conservatism, flake pretended to be the tea party champion how did that turn out, kinzinger accepted their support, but when the petal hit the metal, most bailed,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:47 pmWho you calling hi brow, RKS? I shop at Dollar Tree.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:47 pmYeah right nk, you’re the one filled with spite because the anointed one was rejected.
Cry me a river sad boy.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:49 pmTrump said he would have the Federal Government pay for all Health Insurance
I don’t think he said that.
Trump said he supports taxing the job producers even higher
He has proposed tax cuts.
Trump’s 4 bankruptcies caused many middle-class businessmen to lose their businesses.
Really? Who were some of them?
Aside from the questionable factuality of that, this is the kind of argument lefties make, since it implies he went bankrupt on purpose somehow. In fact lots of lefties make that argument about Trump. Elizabeth Warren made it. It’s not the kind of argument supporters of free enterprise make.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:11 pm
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:49 pmsince it implies he went bankrupt on purpose somehow
The alternative, more realistic, being he is a lousy businessman.
Who doesn’t care if smaller businesses get screwed.
kishnevi (98ea1b) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:01 pmLBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 7:46 pm
H Bush the conservative gave us the beginnings of the middle east wars
Allowing Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait would not be a conservative policy in any sense. Calling it “the beginnings of Middle East wars” is nonsensical. Saddam Hussein began that war.
But by all means, let’s reject Trump in favor of Hillary because he’s had two divorces and isn’t conservative enough.
We’ve had one fiscal conservative President since WWII. Cruz would be a second one, which is one of several reasons he is far preferable to Trump. He actually knows what he’s talking about is another one.
But overall your point is well taken: We’ve had Republican Presidents that were not very conservative.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:04 pmThat again implies he somehow deliberately made business decisions that he knew would lead to bankruptcy. I don’t know whether he cared but when he went bankrupt he really had no choice.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:07 pmTrumpkins cannot see past their comfort zone. Or, to paraphrase Reagan’s Secretary of Agriculture, comfortable shoes, warm bathrooms, and full bellies.
And they’re not the only ones. In my day, the noisy students in college were asking for sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll. Now they’re asking for safe zones.
Has the government been putting something in the water, I wonder.
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:07 pmI should also mention not one of those conservative presidents, not Reagan with a landslide mandate, nor W the compassionate with both houses of congress, shrunk the government by so much as a red hair, or balanced a budget even once.
Bishkek, Trump has had hundreds of businesses, four declaring bankruptcy four times ain’t doing to bad. And it’s not like they broke him, they were just restructured. Calling him a lousy businessman is ridiculous.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:12 pmBishkek? No you infernal machine! kishnevi!
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:15 pm1 2 many 4’s…
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:16 pmwell the amnesty promise was in the 1980 platform, no fault divorce was a regrettable mistake in his term as governor, and iran contra was born out of frustration with fighting an unconventional war, we do recall the firestorm incurred for his modest reductions in the rate of govt programs, it was characterized as part of the reason for midterm losses,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:20 pmThe Bushes are not Conservative.
McCain is not Conservative.
And JFK was more Conservative on some issues than Nixon.
Someone even deigns to think of McCain as a Conservative doesn’t even know what the word means.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:32 pmHow many years did Reagan have a Republican House of Representatives?
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:34 pmHow many years did Reagan have a Republican Senate?
Answer truthfully.
420. I thought that was Nixon’s and Ford’s Sec. Of Ag Earl Butz, you forgot to mention it was a response to the singer and fellow private it passenger’s Pay Boone’s question of “what it would take to get blacks back to the Party of Lincoln”.
urbanleftbehind (847a06) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:43 pmthe house was a coalition with the boll weevils, the senate was six years,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNfBo8biMiE
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:44 pmFine. Did you vote for either Bush or McCain?
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:52 pmNo I don’t know what the word means. They all claim to be conservative. Go ahead, explain just what makes one a conservative?
http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/2013/10/ten-conservative-principles.html
“Being neither a religion nor an ideology, the body of opinion termed conservatism possesses no Holy Writ and no Das Kapital to provide dogmata. So far as it is possible to determine what conservatives believe, the first principles of the conservative persuasion are derived from what leading conservative writers and public men have professed during the past two centuries. After some introductory remarks on this general theme, I will proceed to list ten such conservative principles.
Perhaps it would be well, most of the time, to use this word “conservative” as an adjective chiefly. For there exists no Model Conservative, and conservatism is the negation of ideology: it is a state of mind, a type of character, a way of looking at the civil social order.
The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such. The conservative movement or body of opinion can accommodate a considerable diversity of views on a good many subjects, there being no Test Act or Thirty-Nine Articles of the conservative creed.”
Gee, I guess it’s an “attitude”.
LBascom (0b9b35) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:53 pmYou’re right, ulb. Butz was Ford’s Sec. of Ag. when he made that remark. Actually, the unbowdlerized version in Wikipedia is less offensive than the “cleaned up” one Pat Boone repeated and the media picked up. What man doesn’t want that?
nk (dbc370) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:55 pmAnd when Lipinski the elder became the only northern Dem to support aid to the contra, Chicago got the Orange Line, my personal favorite for accessible eye candy.
urbanleftbehind (847a06) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:56 pmI held my nose for both Bushes.
I had to use vice grips to hold my nose for Dole.
I didn’t vote for McCain but voted for Palin. Had Palin not been on the ticket, I wouldn’t have voted at all on that line.
I said it a year ago, and it’s as true today: I will never vote for Trump. Ever. You should have listened then.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 8:57 pmyes, and we know the (redacted) she put up with for speaking truth to power, so don’t tell me if one is polite and earnest the message will be clearer, because that’s so much (redacted)
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:10 pmbtw, milhouse, is this your card,
https://twitter.com/anacabrera/status/765637730214809600
after sanford, don’t doubt me how willing they are to alter the photographic and auditory record,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:14 pmThe next time Trump is honest will be the first time Trump is honest.
John Hitchcock (47390e) — 8/16/2016 @ 9:44 pm@403
“Issue One. Cremation… or burial, at sea? Freddy the ‘beatle’ Barnes…”
“Uh…”
“WRONG! The answer is, cryogenics!
“Bye-bye!”
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/16/2016 @ 10:13 pmThat doesn’t explain amnesty. He signed that.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/17/2016 @ 8:22 amMilhouse (5a188d) — 8/16/2016 @ 3:20 pm
I think they would have risked the vice-presidency, rather than the presidency.
But the situation at the time was that the Senate was evenly divided, and Gore would have provided the 51st vote for Lieberman, so this does describe a possibe scenario.
Sammy Finkelman (44f942) — 8/17/2016 @ 12:00 pmBeldar (fa637a) — 8/16/2016 @ 1:42 pm
No, it’s the incoming House, althoogh in 1801 and 1825, it was the old one, because the terms of members of Congress now begin midday on January 3, and the ballots are counted after that.
But it’s the outgoing vice president in the choice the Senate makes (voting individually) between only the top two candidates for Vice President. It’s between the top three for president, but only the top two for Vice President.
One scenario is the House deadlocked, at least for a time, and Tim Kaine sworn in as Vice president, and Hillary acting unofficially as president.
But to get to that point, Hillary Clinton has to be kept under 270 Electoral votes, probably by at least half a dozen or so because some Electors will be prevailed upon to make things easy if she;’s that close.
It does no good for McMullin to carry a few Republican states (it doesn’t hurt anything either) but somebody has to carry a significant number of blue states. If it’s any large number, that person, and not McMillan, will be the third candidate the House may choose from.
I suggested a variety of candidates in competition with each other, but not in the same states, could greatly increase the third party vote, because whoever made it into the House would likely become president, so long as the Democrats did not have significantly more than a majority of the House. (Because the House votes by delegation, with each state delegation getting one vote, and states can be divided, and 26 states are needed – which is 52% right by itself, if all people voted by party membership, approximately 57% of the House would hae to be of one party to decide the issue. The number of key individuals, who could make someone president by switching votes, would be rather small, though.)
I even said maybe somebody could run a slate of Electors in California pledged to Jerry Brown, over Jerry Brown’s objections. Trump might be abandoned by Republican voters in California if the polls showed him way down. I’m not sure anybody else running third party could beat Hillary in California.
Of course, then Jerry Brown might become the next president, if someone else took a few more states away from Hillary. It’s hard to think of anybody else besides the two major party nominees topping 55.
Who is this person? Paul Ryan? But he has to get around 65 to 100 electoral votes. I think if it got thrown into a House of Represenatives with a slight Republican majority, it might be easy to stop Trump, even if on the first few ballots all but a half a dozen House Republican members voted for Trump.
Anyway, the bottom line is a candidate does not have to be on all 50 state ballots, and having several people be the possibility for the third person, is the best option because you need to keep the top candidate from getting 270.
Sammy Finkelman (44f942) — 8/17/2016 @ 12:32 pmHey, how come my comment 430 is awaiting moderation? It’s clean and everything!
LBascom (66034d) — 8/17/2016 @ 1:19 pmHewitt used to be a smart, principled guy. He’s made an irredeemable fool of himself.
ocean (38f70a) — 8/17/2016 @ 3:06 pmThanks for the unmoderation!
LBascom (66034d) — 8/17/2016 @ 6:38 pm