Trump: A Fraudster, An Authoritarian, a Liar, and a Despot in Waiting
A few links about the looming disaster for our Republic that is Donald Trump:
Here’s a part of the political calendar that nobody in the Republican Party seems to have noticed: This spring, just as the GOP nomination battle enters its final phase, frontrunner Donald Trump could be forced to take time out for some unwanted personal business: He’s due to take the witness stand in a federal courtroom in San Diego, where he is being accused of running a financial fraud.
In court filings last Friday, lawyers for both sides in a long-running civil lawsuit over the now defunct Trump University named Trump on their witness lists. That makes it all but certain that the reality-show star and international businessman will be forced to be grilled under oath over allegations in the lawsuit that he engaged in deceptive trade practices and scammed thousands of students who enrolled in his “university” courses in response to promises he would make them rich in the real estate market.
Read it all. Or, if you’re a Donald Trump fan, ignore it all.
Candidate Trump represents something that goes far beyond pedestrian fears of damage to the Republican brand or the loss of Senate and House seats. He is the embodiment of the authoritarian temptation that has imperiled liberty since the days of the Roman Republic.
At every stage of the campaign, he has thumbed his nose at democratic norms. Start with his admiration for Vladimir Putin. Instead of position papers, Trump offers the voters fact-free assertions about the Mexicans paying for a wall and the Chinese knuckling to his superior negotiating ability.
Never in modern history has a serious presidential candidate displayed such contempt for responsibilities that come with the Oval Office and custody of the nuclear codes.
His ignorance of the nuclear triad and his claim that he gets his foreign policy expertise from watching TV talk shows symbolizes something larger — an ego that makes Napoleon seem self-effacing.
Equally alarming is the brazenness of Trump’s lies. He insists that he never called for a 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports — and still clings to that denial even after the New York Times released a tape of him saying just that.
A liar? Who cares?
And, in a piece that Trump-haters like me find delicious from beginning to end, Matt Walsh:
Dear Donald Trump Fan,
I’m going to tell you the truth, friend.
You say you want the truth. You say you want someone who speaks boldly and brashly and bluntly and “tells it like it is” and so on. According to exit polls in South Carolina, voters who want a president who “tells it like it is” are an essential demographic for Trump, just as they’re an essential demographic for Judge Judy and Dr. Phil. You say you want abrupt and matter-of-fact honesty, and you want it so much, you’ll make a man president for it regardless of whether he defies every principle and value you claim to hold.
Personally, I think you’re lying, and I’m going to test my theory.
. . . .
By your logic, then, you should be filled with an immense and irresistible affection for me when I call Donald Trump a crooked, underhanded con artist and you a reckless, ignorant dupe. You should fall madly in love with me when I accuse Donald Trump of being a spoiled, overgrown brat and you of being a cultish groupie enamored with fame. You should well up with pride and salute me as I mention that Donald Trump is a stuffed, soiled diaper sagging in the pants of American politics and you’re the poor, pitiful sap trying to elect it president. You don’t have to agree, but man, isn’t it refreshing that I’m willing to tell you what’s on my mind?
. . . .
I’m just telling it like it is here, friend. I’m telling you what’s on my mind. I’m being completely and painfully honest with you. I don’t believe your anger. I think you want a spectacle, not a solution. A celebrity, not a statesman. A circus performer, not a leader. I think you want to be entertained. I think you’re not taking this seriously enough. I think you’re intellectually lazy so you’ve accepted authoritarianism as a stand-in for strength. I think you’re following the trend of the day. I think you’re wrapped up in media hype.
In other words, I think your anger, if it exists, is misplaced. You should be angry at yourself, because if this country falls finally and irrevocably into despotism, it’ll be your fault. You’ll have chosen it. You’ll have elected it and applauded it. That, my friend, is what makes me angry.
Me too. I have been saying this for a while.
I don’t expect to change any hearts of minds with this. I’m saying, as clearly as I possibly can: America, you’re fucking this up. Do not tell me I didn’t tell you so. I did. Quite clearly.
That’s right. When it goes to hell, it will be your fault.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:43 pmDoes anyone have any clue who the protester is that Donald Trump says he wanted to punch?
I’d like to interview that guy.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:46 pm“America, you’re fucking this up. Do not tell me I didn’t tell you so.”
Not the first time, Patterico.
AZ Bob (d6a3a9) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:48 pm“Make America great again” is sounding more and more like “hope and change” to me. Those who won’t learn from the past. . . .
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:50 pmBetween this clown car show and the nonsense going on over on the Democrat side, is this the end of the two-party system as we know it? Are we going to finally adopt the European model of three, four, or even five parties and the forming of coalitions? I want noting to do with about half of the current GOP.
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:52 pmI used to think that “low information voters” was a leftist dog-whistle, condescending to Republicans. I was wrong about that. We are dangerously close to nominating a used car salesman as the standard-bearer for the GOP in the race for POTUS. This is a messed-up situation. I just answered a phone poll (not a push poll, a real poll) and after all the questions I was left supporting Kasich, of all people. Jesus.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/23/2016 @ 9:53 pmshirley, where was shapiro, when obama urged ‘hit them twice as hard’ and counseling revenge, I know the journolist demands much, I’m guessing it was a some lives matter exponent,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:00 pm,
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:01 pmAmerica will put Trump into power. They don’t care about lies from politicians. This isn’t an informed voter’s election. It’s a populist election. Trump will probably be like Teddy Roosevelt, the first Republican Progressive. The question is if he’ll have a Taft actually running things from behind his bully pulpit.
Dejectedhead (6f18ea) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:03 pmthat’s a reasonable parallel, one of tr’s descendants, a mr, malloch even defended him in the daily caller, and he was a tory academic type,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:05 pmThis isn’t an informed voter’s election. It’s a populist election.
It’s the culmination of a generation of reality TV watchers.
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:07 pmTo Trump’s credit, he may flip all the blue states too. He’s not religious and soft on social issues, which is really all that any Democrat cares about. He’s only got one strong promise to keep…border security and immigration control. He could probably win over Millennials in one fell swoop if he promises to legalize Marijuana.
Dejectedhead (6f18ea) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:09 pmHoping this is a signal that Patterico is done attacking Rubio, and will focus on the real problem: Trump.
Amerigo Chattin (bbfc4b) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:11 pmThe problem is deeper than that JVW. Breakdown in education, general comfort in everyone’s lives, plus all the media slant. Maybe this is just a problem with affluence. Why should people care?
Dejectedhead (6f18ea) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:11 pmI appreciate that Cruz has tried to live up to Reagan’s 11th Commandment, but with both Trump and Rubio calling him a liar and worse, I think it’s time the gloves come off.
If anyone could eviscerate Trump, it is Cruz. And now’s the time.
The country needs to be schooled about what an alpha male really is (it’s not a whiny, thin-skinned blowhard). Cruz would be doing not only himself, but the nation, a big favor.
ThOR (a52560) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:12 pmI just wish that someone in the “liberal” media would challenge Trump on his lies. “Someone told me” blah blah. Umemployment is 40 or 50% or whatever insane claim he is making.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:13 pmTo Trump’s credit, he may flip all the blue states too. He’s not religious and soft on social issues, which is really all that any Democrat cares about. He’s only got one strong promise to keep…border security and immigration control. He could probably win over Millennials in one fell swoop if he promises to legalize Marijuana.
Let’s face it, he’ll be raked over the coals by the Hollywood-academic-media cabal, branded a racist/sexist/homophobe and declared unfit for polite company. They will crucify him, he’ll fight back in his crude and oafish manner, and the young kids will vote Dem by the same 2:1 margin that they went for Obama in 2008. They won’t miss out on the opportunity to vote for the first Girl President or for Santa Claus with the free college and birth control.
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:14 pm#17.
Been tried. It doesn’t stick. He’s already proven he can say whatever he wants and people will applaud. If it’s Trump vs Clinton, he’ll mop up. She has zero young appeal as proven by the primary polls.
Dejectedhead (6f18ea) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:18 pmI’m sticking with Cruz so long as he’s got a shot, and he’s still second in the national polls.
If Cruz flames out before the Arizona primary (March 22nd, but I’ll be mailing mine in so around March 16th for me)? Unless Carson improves a lot (IMHO, he does not have a shot right now) I’d have to choose between Kasich and Trump, and Kasich is looking to me like he doesn’t have a shot at the monment, so… that would leave me voting for Trump.
I humbly beg Cruz to not flame out.
Arizona CJ (da673d) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:21 pmAfter Obama, farking up doesn’t hold as much fear as you might think.
Or better yet, you should redefine your expletives to match the new reality.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:24 pmBeen tried. It doesn’t stick. He’s already proven he can say whatever he wants and people will applaud.
We’ll see. There are going to be countless opportunities of him to stick his foot right in his loud mouth between now and November. I don’t think he’ll pass them up.
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:32 pmRomney did better with the youth vote than McCain did, by the way. He lost it by roughly a 3:2 margin in 2012 whereas McCain lost it by a 2:1 margin four years earlier. I think, though, that the 2016 GOP candidate has to hold it closer to an even split because old people inexplicably seem to like voting for Hillary! Clinton.
JVW (9e3c77) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:35 pmI am old enough to have been suckered by Perot. I won’t let Trump sucker me this time.
Random Numbers (b62152) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:43 pmIt’s not just the possibility he’ll put his foot in his mouth. I think his shtick will grow old and some supporters will jump off the bandwagon. It is for this reason that I think badgering Trump really is the correct strategy: keep his histrionics front and center and it will come to appear that histrionics is all he’s good for.
ThOR (a52560) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:43 pmYou’re new here. I have been attacking Trump forever.
Patterico (ed63ab) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:45 pmBut if Rubio supporters keep bringing him up, and telling me not to criticize him, then I have another great post I can do about him repeating the same canned line 8 times in a row recently.
Hectoring me is not usually a good way to get me to do what you want.
Patterico (ed63ab) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:50 pmThOR,
I think our electorate likes the histrionics.
People have a dark aspect to their natures, and it comes out when they feel downtrodden. It’s come out in this election. We are facing a mob.
Patterico (ed63ab) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:52 pmNo Nevada caucus coverage tonight? Darn, I was looking forward to it.
School Marm (f96753) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:57 pmHey, your the one who got me convinced that the people of Iowa would do the right thing – and they did. You were right. I’m grateful to the people of Iowa and to you. Now I’m waiting for the rest of the country to come around. I just worry that coming around is still a couple of years off.
I’m angry too, though not angry enough to join the Trump mob. I feel their anger.
ThOR (a52560) — 2/23/2016 @ 11:14 pmI claim bull***. In that I’ve been harping on Trump University for months. I commented on the fact a plaintiff won an anti-SLAPP suit against Trump just in the latter part of last year.
I can’t prove it.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/23/2016 @ 11:14 pmI know I commented on this earlier.
http://blogs.findlaw.com/ninth_circuit/2013/04/donald-trump-gets-slappd-by-9th-kozinski-wants-to-stop-slapping.html
For some reason, I can’t find a trace.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/23/2016 @ 11:27 pmI have a modest question for you. The “wisdom”, such as it is, on the street seems to be that Cruz is toast. If that is the case then what might be your teeth clenched choice against Clinton or Sanders, or more likely Biden or Bloomberg when the choice appears to be merely how and how soon the US will be a historical curiosity.
{o.o}
JDow (0f58e8) — 2/23/2016 @ 11:43 pmEvidence for The Unpopular Mr. Lincoln (http://www.civilwar.org/hallowed-ground-magazine/unpopular-mr-lincoln.html)
“The illustrious Honest Old Abe has continued during the last week to make a fool of himself and to mortify and shame the intelligent people of this great nation. His speeches have demonstrated the fact that although originally a Herculean rail splitter and more lately a whimsical story teller and side splitter, he is no more capable of becoming a statesman, nay, even a moderate one, than the braying ass can become a noble lion. People now marvel how it came to pass that Mr. Lincoln should have been selected as the representative man of any party. His weak, wishy-washy, namby-pamby efforts, imbecile in matter, disgusting in manner, have made us the laughing stock of the whole world. The European powers will despise us because we have no better material out of which to make a President. The truth is, Lincoln is only a moderate lawyer and in the larger cities of the Union could pass for no more than a facetious pettifogger. Take him from his vocation and he loses even these small characteristics and indulges in simple twaddle which would disgrace a well bred school boy.”
Angry letters piled up on Lincoln’s desk and spilled onto the floor. William O. Stoddard, the secretary in charge of reading Lincoln’s mail, wrote:
“[Dictator] is what the Opposition press and orators of all sizes are calling him. Witness, also, the litter on the floor and the heaped-up wastebaskets. There is no telling how many editors and how many other penmen within these past few days have undertaken to assure him that this is a war for the Union only, and that they never gave him any authority to run it as an Abolition war. They never, never told him that he might set the n**roes free, and, now that he has done so, or futilely pretended to do so, he is a more unconstitutional tyrant and a more odious dictator than ever he was before. They tell him, however, that his …. venomous blow at the sacred liberty of white men to own black men is mere brutum fulmen [empty threat], and a dead letter and a poison which will not work. They tell him many other things, and, among them, they tell him that the army will fight no more, and that the hosts of the Union will indignantly disband rather than be sacrificed upon the bloody altar of fanatical Abolitionism.”
Vanity Fair observed, “By the advice of weak men, who should straddle through life in petticoats instead of disgracing such manly garments as pantaloons and coats, the President-elect disguises himself after the manner of heroes in two-shilling novels, and rides secretly, in the deep night, from Harrisburg to Washington.” The Brooklyn Eagle, in a column titled “Mr. Lincoln’s Flight by Moonlight Alone,” suggested the president deserved “the deepest disgrace that the crushing indignation of a whole people can inflict.” The New York Tribune joked darkly, “Mr. Lincoln may live a hundred years without having so good a chance to die.”
The Anti-Lincoln Tradition (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0004.103/–anti-lincoln-tradition?rgn=main;view=fulltext)
Editor Marcus M. Pomeroy on Abraham Lincoln: “But the fungus from the corrupt womb of bigotry and fanaticism”—indeed a “worse tyrant and more inhuman butcher than has existed since the days of Nero.” “The man who votes for Lincoln now is a traitor and murderer…. And if he is elected to misgovern for another four years, we trust some bold hand will pierce his heart with dagger point for the public good.”
The Times of London viewed Lincoln’s re-election in November 1864 as “an avowed step towards the foundation of a military despotism.” The United States, it said, had “entered on that transition stage, so well known to the students of history, through which Republics pass on their way from democracy to tyranny.”
Last but not least…General George B. McClellan on Abraham Lincoln: “Idiot”, “Nothing more than a well-meaning baboon”, the “Original Gorilla”, and “Ever unworthy of … his high position.”
Calm down, prosecutor. You’re acting snidely and over the top as other thwarted eminent men thought wise did more than a century ago. Trump won Nevada. Do you now want to join in fasting with Glenn Beck to save the Union?
Daniel Porter (29ab41) — 2/23/2016 @ 11:44 pmTrump wins again! Crud and punk tied for second. Trump wins!
trump for president (505407) — 2/24/2016 @ 12:11 amRe:
Mr. Lincoln was the first president to tear a big hunk out of the Constitution, which we never got back. As also happened under FDR, what is successfully imposed for a few years comes to be accepted as the new normal. Is that what you’re looking forward to? This “American Putin” thing is growing legs fast.
Luke Stywalker (a31c17) — 2/24/2016 @ 12:35 amAnd Trump’s opponents have to open up just like Matt Walsh. None of this hoping to be eaten last. El Duce, the Kingfisher, Nero and the rest of their lot did not respect cowards. It’s not like you want to be second fool in the clown car anyway. Your best move will be to retreat to the Senate and hope like hell he doesn’t disband it.
Perhaps the best move would be for Cruz and Rubio to flip a coin and the loser endorses the other, stating clearly that Trump is a clear and present danger to the nation.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/24/2016 @ 1:02 amApparently, it can happen here. There are people who are cheering it on.
https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/
Kevin M (25bbee) — 2/24/2016 @ 1:13 amIf Trump is the nominee there are two things I wonder about; (1) how it will affect the downstream races, and (2) does it finally force the Dems and GOP to work together as a congress to pass veto proof legislation? the “dreaded establishment” for both parties will not sit idly by and may be forced to find common cause.
voiceofreason (494009) — 2/24/2016 @ 1:37 amWho will run with Trump as the VP? As for SCOTUS picks, meet Justice Omarosa………….
Guess that was three things not two. Good practice for reality math in the Trump era.
voiceofreason (494009) — 2/24/2016 @ 1:38 amCongratulations.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:57 amHillary no good I like Mr. Trump better than her I hope he delivers her quite a thrashing I really do
happyfeet (8e2eaf) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:43 amThe trump funk continues.
mg (31009b) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:01 amSmall solace, but if Trump is felony convicted of fraud he’ll be ineligible for the office. There is a God, perhaps he’s paying attention in this matter.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:05 amI read Walsh’s article earlier and hoped that Patterico would quote and link on his blog. Encapsulates my thoughts exactly and will be uppermost on my mind come the general election.
We have met the enemy and he is us. -W. Kelly
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:10 amWhat is reliably curious to me is how people, some in evidence here, can just continue to ignore the feedback reality returns them.
Sure Cruz is the only candidate, among a very few from the start, I would like to have dinner with, the rest vacuous and insidious.
We really needed him as SC Justice and his running for Chief Exec was a necessary resort only because Conservatism in America has such a weak bench precisely because most of you tear our people apart from vanity alone.
Being on your team is an ‘effing shame.
DNF (755a85) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:26 amRubio the establishment robot, Cruz the nasty serial liar and nothing sticks to the smear merchant Trump. If and when valid criticisms are made that give pause to his supporters, it will be too late.
I’ll take my ham sandwich, dark mood and go back on the ledge to ponder the hard ground below.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:42 amAs has been said many times before, Obama wasn’t so much the problem as a public willing to elect him, twice even.
I think with Trump many may be thinking, “Sure he is a despot, but he’s our despot!”
One thing about revolution is that once it gets going, you really don’t know what turns it will take and who ends up on top. Even non-violent revolution is political war, and I have read where most battle plans get quickly tossed out of the window once the battle starts.
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:03 amSo when wack a doodle Obola was running he was a good man but Trump is not?
Well, maybe some folks here have learned something in the last 8 years. Both are bad dudes.
Fact is you can judge lots about people based on their politics, their demeanor and where they “grew up.”
Both Obola and Trump are a disgrace (in so far as POTUS stuff) for moderately different reasons.
Rodney King's Spirit (3adc86) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:10 amDems and Obama pushed the class warfare for their own benefit,
Now it is coming back to bite them and the rest of us.
People who have been told that they are oppressed are no longer accepting the handouts being given, and those who have been going to “knife fights” and have been confronted with guns (as our President has instructed) are tired of it and don’t want to take it anymore.
Not a pretty picture. Sow to the wind, reap the whirlwind.
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:11 amAndrew Klavan attributes Trump’s success to the sheer fact he is absolutely unapologetic. All the other candidates have displayed a perceived inferiority or inherent weakness in contrast. I suspect this to be true. This election cycle is the story not of the respective candidates but of the contorted mindset of their constituency. Nothing short of pictures of Trump with a dead hooker will sway the inertia of the shortsighted mob.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:17 amSo sad to see our side fall to the same cult of personality that elected Obama.
Patrick Henry, the 2nd (ddead1) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:19 amIt is stunning that the initial promise of the fielded republican candidates will be the nomination of, by any reasonable measure or definition, a democrat. A perfect storm of group madness encouraged by a unscrupulous media and delusional electorate. The apparent selfishness of the remaining challengers to not quit or join forces in response is further proof we are collectively committed to immanentizing the eschaton.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:35 amMore of a disaster than the Bushes,or Obama? Please. $19 trillion debt and counting, pointless endless war galore, PC nonsense, our jails,schools and ERs overrun with illegals, underemployment and wages depressed.
Trump will disappoint; they all do. He may even fail. But the body politic needs defibrillator paddles applied forthwith or we’re done.
Bugg (db3a97) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:36 amTrump of the 14th rule *is getting tiresome, the problem is the amalgam of dissafected blue collar , some evangelicals, some independents
* sound of thunder analogy is intended.
narciso (121377) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:39 amTrump is obviously a narcissist so the cult comments are appropriate, and blind spots like this are what concerns conservatives about Trump supporters.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:41 ampieter:
It sounds great when people say things like “Why don’t Cruz and Rubio join forces?” but let’s consider it logically. I don’t see how they can do that.
Assume that Cruz drops out. It might actually help him long-term to do that, because it would immediately rebut his reputation as a bomb-thrower who is not a team player. But Cruz is leading the polls in Texas. If he drops out, Rubio won’t win Texas. Trump will, and that will probably give him enough delegates to create an insurmountable lead. So Cruz can’t drop out before the SEC/early March primaries or he will be giving Trump the nomination.
So let’s assume Rubio drops out. Same problem, because if Cruz can’t stop Trump in the SEC primary, Rubio has the advantage in many of the primaries scheduled in or after late March. Rubio can’t drop out in favor of Cruz until he knows the result of the early March primaries.
Finally, how could they “team up”? There won’t be a line on any ballot for Cruz+Rubio, and there can’t be. The only option is for one of them to drop out, and I’ve already explained why that doesn’t make sense.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:49 amTrump takes his official media narrative characterization as Satan on July 21st
Mr Wizard (c31051) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:51 amI’m not going to address Kasich and Carson dropping out, because their share of the electorate is so small it wouldn’t make a difference.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:51 amI’m done.
I’ll be voting for Cruz here in Texas next week, but I’m done. I’ve had it with the Trump fans/cultists. When Trump wins the nomination I’ll vote for the Libertarian out of protest, and no Trump worshipers that isn’t a capitulation for the Democrat, it’s standing on principle. Like many of you who continue to tell me that Cruz would make an amazing President but you can’t vote for him and instead support Trump because being a Conservative means standing up for the Constitution and in your eyes Cruz isn’t eligible. So, Trump is the only game in town. It’s like that. I’m standing up for the Constitution because Trump isn’t a Conservative and will gut this country one deal at a time. And I ain’t the only one.
Deal with it.
Sean (221079) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:52 amThen you should be a Cruz supporter.
Sean (221079) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:55 amHey, just like Hillary! Maybe they can both be indicted at the same time, tried at the same time, and convicted at the same time. Maybe they can both claim they’re already doing “community service” so that should be their sentence.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:57 amBasically prisoner’s dilemma.
narciso (121377) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:57 amOnly 118 delegates have been pledged so far. 79 to Trump, 16 to Cruz, 15 to Rubio, and eight to who cares. 595 will be at play in the SEC primary next week. That’s a massive call and raise and a time to see who folds and who agrees to split the pot.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:59 amI think Trump’s litigation is a civil lawsuit over Trump University, but it’s still serious and involves fraud.
This election is more and more like the Nixon-Ford years, only this time the general election debate questions to both candidates may include “Will you promise not to pardon yourself?”
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:02 amI am a Cruz voter But Rubio is far worse than Trump imo
jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:02 amNo, he won’t. The constitution says who’s ineligible, and it doesn’t say anyting about felonies.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:04 am62.Only 118 delegates have been pledged so far. 79 to Trump, 16 to Cruz, 15 to Rubio, and eight to who cares. 595 will be at play in the SEC primary next week. That’s a massive call and raise and a time to see who folds and who agrees to split the pot.
worth repeating
jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:06 ampieter:
This is a thought-provoking comment, but Republicans have been conditioned to be timid — to do nothing and say nothing — for years.
This is what happens when you constantly tell your leaders to be careful what they say and who they say it to/about. It’s also a cautionary tale about what happens when you quit believing in the First Amendment and the importance of saying things, even hurtful or inflammatory things.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:07 amNobody is worse than Trump. If Cruz is out by the time it gets to NY, I’m voting Rubio, or whoever is still standing against Trump. If Trump gets the nomination I vote Libertarian, or Barry Goldwater’s ghost, or whichever independent runs (but not Bloomberg).
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:09 amSimple: drop out and strongly urge your supporters to vote for the other one.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:10 amI credit Donald Trump for changing the debate, and I credit his supporters for seeing the value in that.
Now it’s time for them to man up and accept that the freedom to criticize goes both ways and some of the criticism is accurate.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:11 amMilhouse:
That is simple, but it won’t work. Because of the Gang of 8, even Ted Cruz couldn’t get enough Texans to vote for Rubio so he would beat Trump. Immigration is a big issue in Texas, and amnesty is about as popular as abortion.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:12 am“Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.”
The Trumpsters don’t care if their guy isn’t what he claims – they just want to win just as the Obamacrats did. The establishment may prefer Rubio but despite their bluster they’ll suck up to Trump in a heartbeat to keep the favor factory he’s been part of for decades open and thriving. Cruz needs to wake up and recognize the flaws in his campaign strategy, including his desire to fight Trump last isn’t working. Until Cruz starts showing how Trump’s big talk will actually hurt the everyday Americans and country he claims he’ll make great again Trump will keep riding the media provided limousine of hope and hate to his eventual coronation.
The question for Cruz is: If not you, who – if not now, when?
crazy (cde091) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:15 amPhenomenal tagline for a business card by the way.
As someone related on [rapidly dilapidating] Twitter, a Trump – Sanders/Hillary race may not be the one Americans want, but it will be the one they deserve.
JP (bd5dd9) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:16 amWe may see that at the Thursday night debate in Houston, crazy. Telemundo says it will address Latino issues, which explains why Cruz told O’Reilly he would allow 12 million illegal immigrants to be deported.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:21 amTrump’s ultimate defense in the Trump University case is, I think, that he had nothing to do with Trump University – that he just sold his trademark, which is legal, although that in itself should be fraud.
But he may have done some more.
Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:22 amThere are people who think – a logical fallacy – that political incorrectness or edginess = truth.
It may take a few egregious examples to shock people out of that.
Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:25 amYeah, there’s nothing wrong with Rubio as far as I’m concerned. I’d be proud to vote for him against Hillary or Trump. But I’m essentially a single issue voter.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:25 amHowever, I wonder if Cruz’s recent lackluster debate performances are primarily due to the grueling nature of campaigning. It’s hard to be mentally prepared for a debate after going to 4-5 campaign events a day, endlessly talking to and meeting with donors and supporters, consulting with campaign personnel, and doing the various things that have to be done — including putting out the inevitable fires. That has to be incredibly draining but it all has to be done if you are running an insurgent campaign.
With Bush gone, Rubio doesn’t have as many people attacking him as Cruz. Rubio especially hasn’t been a big target for Trump, which is why I wonder if Trump may pick Rubio as his VP.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:27 amWhat issue, nk?
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:28 amTexas is next week? And Florida is March 15? Are they winner take all? If not, if the delegates are apportioned, after March 15 will be time enough to decide whether to join forces.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:34 amPro-life, of course, DRJ.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:35 amDRJ, I suspect you’re right about the upcoming debate but the problem with saving the battle for the debates allows the media and the master of petty insults to control the message. Cruz should do this on the stump and in the media before the debates IMHO. Then be ready for the feces flinging Trump will bring to the debate.
crazy (cde091) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:39 amIt just occurred to me that this may be why Clinton hasn’t been indicted yet. Maybe they’re waiting to see if Trump’s testimony will result in something they can turn into a criminal charge, so they can announce both indictments on the same day, for “balance”. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:42 amBut if Rubio makes a deal with Trump, then he is dead to me too.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:42 amCruz and Rubio are both fine with me. If I have to choose between them I choose Cruz, but I’d be OK with Rubio too. Even Kasich would be enough to keep me from preferring a Democrat.
Milhouse (87c499) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:44 amI didn’t know that, nk. How strange that I didn’t since we’ve “known” each other so long. That issue matters to me, too, but it’s not my only issue.
I think the primaries between March 1-14 award delegates on a proportional basis if no candidate receives over 50% of the vote. On and after March 15, delegates are awarded based on winner-take-all.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:46 amThis is all so disheartening. We had all these younger-ish candidates who speak, rather than talk. And they speak aspirationally—and in detail about policies, and how policies will affect the lives of Americans. None of them emanates from a monied or connected family.
Jindal, Walker, Cruz, Rubio, and Christie (who actually looks a number years younger than 53). We were hoping maybe Governor Martinez or Governor Sandoval might dip their toe in the water. And we fantasized that a new Republican Administration might nominate John Bolton to be Secretary of State or NSA. Wow. What a fantasy.
Now, Donald J. Trump and His Mouth are ahead in the race, and the rest of the field looks like the Three Stooges, bumping into each other and slipping, as they each try to squeeze thru a doorway at the same time. What a nightmare.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:46 amDejectedhead (6f18ea) — 2/23/2016 @ 10:03 pm
The question is if he’ll have a Taft actually running things from behind his bully pulpit.
Rudolph Giuliani may think he’s going to be that person. Taft didn’t run things anyway, what are you talking about? He was just simply Theodore Rossevelt’s choice as his successor. Taft had been Governor of the Phillipines and Secretary of War. In those days, imitating maybe the early days of the republic, they went for a Cabinet membership and executive positions as the best qualification. This also was the case with Herbert Hoover in 1928, and Eisenhower thought actually that a Cabinet position would help Nixon.
Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:48 amIt is a shame for Americans, but most of them will still be young in 4 years and much wiser from this experience.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:48 am@nk No winner take all primaries until March 15. Both Florida and Ohio are winner take all.
Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:49 amI don’t know what Trump can be expected to say on the stand that he was not already “grilled on” in his deposition. There is the protective order which keeps the deposition from being made public but if he confessed to something criminal I don’t think it would keep it out of the hands of law enforcement. If they’re like Northern Illinois practice, the purpose of protective orders is to protect trade secrets, not hide criminal culpability.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:50 amNobody is worse than Trump. If Cruz is out by the time it gets to NY, I’m voting Rubio, or whoever is still standing against Trump. If Trump gets the nomination I vote Libertarian, or Barry Goldwater’s ghost, or whichever independent runs (but not Bloomberg).
Millhouse
Trump is a buck stops here guy. He will be more worried about his reputation if his health hold out.
Rubio is spineless and will do what the machine asks of him
I wont vote for Rubio
I will only vote for Cruz and if Cruz in NOT in the general election then I take the day off from the polls. I will not vote for someone I cannot stand with.
jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:53 am67.62.Only 118 delegates have been pledged so far. 79 to Trump, 16 to Cruz, 15 to Rubio, and eight to who cares. 595 will be at play in the SEC primary next week
jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:54 amYou’re right about the failed republican bench, Cruz Supporter. The problem is they didn’t believe Trump was a serious contender and they didn’t believe republican voters would be desperate or foolish enough to fall for an Obama-style campaign of hope and hate. It’s not too late, but the candidate who would expose the Trump fraud as Patterico has been admirably doing has to be willing to risk it all. Trump stole their issues like Clinton used to do and built an army of angry supporters as Obama did. That’s a formidable obstacle that can only be tackled head on.
crazy (cde091) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:04 amThat Matt Walsh piece is the culmination of everything I’ve wanted to say (and, more importantly, tell people) about Trump since last summer. I don’t smoke, but needed a cigarette afterward. I’m making that my new pinned tweet later today.
I’ve been a news junkie since my single digits. Long before the advent of the Fox News Channel I recognized the news media was biased to the left (my epiphany was the persecution of Dr. Eric Foretich, which I explain here). I’ve always made an effort to gather my own facts beyond the headlines, and discovered FNC and talk radio to be the source of the untold side of the story. When I’ve been away from FNC and/or alternate sources of info for too long, I find myself buying into false, deceptive narratives designed to slander the right-of-center. But now, I can’t even trust those sources anymore.
When Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin chuckled their fool heads off at when Trump gave out Lindsey Graham’s cell number and insulted the service of John McCain, I was flabbergasted — I felt like I was in Alice In Wonderland. When Andrea Tantaros told Rich Lowry that Trump was the people’s choice because “We want a nationalist,” I felt like I was in Invasion Of The Body Snatchers. We’re presently approaching the moment when I feel like I’m in David Cronenberg’s B-movie Shivers.
L.N. Smithee (178aa6) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:08 amIt may be frustrating, but the Trump phenomenon is not something new. People for the past 75 years have pretty much always gone for the person who seems most charismatic, and not based on an honest assessment of the candidate’s positions and vision of the future. (Kennedy over Nixon, Reagan over Carter & Mondale, Clinton over Bush I and Dole, Bush II over Gore & Kerry, Obama over HRClinton, McCain & Romney) Its all about the cult of personality, and, thus the inability to change the cultists’ minds, and as the years go by, most people care less and less about the details that we do. Thus the lack of outrage over all the Obama scandals and why Clinton survived as a popular president even after the Lewinski matter.
If conservatism is to be given another shot, we will need to find someone who is more charismatic then anyone else running. I prefer Cruz, but have to admit neither he nor Rubio have the personality to pull this off. Unfortunately I don’t see anyone currently on the national stage that could.
My prediction is that Trump will easily win in November, whether we like it or not.
Amazed_476 (5b5799) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:26 amI’m not a Trump supporter. If the GOPe had not tried to screw their voters over so bad in the last 4 years, Trump wouldn’t be a factor.
SGT Ted (9480f7) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:33 amTrue, that.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:34 amL.N. Smithee,
For the past several years, we’ve listened to Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, Ingraham, Gallagher, and Savage pounding their fist on the table on which their radio microphone sits, screaming that everyone under the sun is a RINO!, and insisting that our next GOP nominee must be authentically conservative. And everytime Obama or Keith Olbermann or Chris Matthews has said or done something incivil or nasty against someone they disagree in the political sphere, those specific radio talkers reacted in outrage.
But as you point out, Limbaugh and Levin didn’t call out Trump for his nasty remark about John McCain being a POW, or about Trump’s mockery of the disabled person, or about his nasty attacks on Megyn Kelly. Not to mention the fact that Trump’s not an authentic conservative. But I’ve never heard any of these tough-talkers refer to Trump as a RINO! Sean Hannity has been shaking his pom-poms for The Donald, yet he’ll sit there with a straight face and say, “Well, techncially I haven’t endorsed anyone.” As if that disclaimer rescues his credibility.
Limbaugh and Levin avoid interviewing people they disagree with. In fact, Limbaugh rarely has guests on his show. Levin allows people to call him, ‘The Great One.’ Hannity gets bored listening to someone else talk, so he normally begins talking over them after about 25 seconds.
I like to listen to Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, and Hugh Hewitt. They don’t get into the screaming matches and hysteria. And they all seek out people they disagree with, and have a conversation with them for an hour. There’s a guy in NYC named John Batchelor who’s on limited stations throughout the country, but you can stream him live. He’s on at night. I’ve learned so much from his conversations, especially the conversations he has with historians and authors. He has conversations with people rather than at them.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:34 amhttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/republican_delegate_count.html
bald01 (f38852) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:40 amWhat hypocrisy! Practice what you preach.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:47 amThat’s because they didn’t have to call out Trump for those things, almost every other Republican did. There was time that the job of discrediting a Republican candidate was let up to the democrat opposition. Not any more. Now Republicans are crawling all over each other to show the world what a buffoon Trump is. In stead of pointing out how a commie like Sanders is all in for a failed system and how applying full blown socialism here won’t work the Republicans bash Trump. Rather than pound into the heads of the electorate what a thief and liar Hillary! is ad that she and her rapist hubby are worth hundreds of millions and are part of the 1% and in bed with Wall Street the Republicans b!tch about Trump going bankrupt four times.
And Megyn Kelly is old enough to take care of herself. She is woman hear her roar!
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:50 amLevin has been very critical of Trump. Limbaugh less so, but he clearly prefers Cruz. I don’t listen to Hannity much.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:58 amLooks to me like Trump will win the Republican primary. I assume a lot of you guys will not be voting next November. Not that your vote matters, it doesn’t. But it is amusing to observe the democrats would vote the Hitler ticket if there was a (D) after his name but so many Republicans are just such purists they can only vote for____________(insert name) or else nobody who could beat Hillary!. That’s why they win elections. That’s why we lose them.
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:00 amI think we would all have liked it if Romney had done to Candy Crowley what Trump did to Megyn. Ne c’est pas? But then, one reason I like Mitt Romney is that he is not that kind of person. It’s a conundrum.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:04 amhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3XriXDtfqCg
Blabbermout!
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:06 amOh yeah, Republicans are *such* purists. That’s why they’re flocking in droves to a candidate who historically stands on the opposite side of every issue in the party platform.
Good one.
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:07 amMark Levin has recently become critical of Trump. But all last summer, he generally sat on his hands. You don’t have to take my word for it, there’s audio tape of him. Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal wrote a blistering column a few days ago saying it’s all good that Limbaugh and Levin have begun picking up the baton for Cruz now that his back is against the wall, but where the hell were Limbaugh and Levin were several months ago when Trump was unleashing his nastiness?
Some people are reluctant to admit when a foul is a foul when it’s committed by a player on their favorite football team. Even when the instant replay is right there.
In order to facililtate a civil society, we need to call out bad behavior regardless of which jersey the offender is wearing. And Trump’s crass behavior aside, there’s very little RINO! criticism directed toward Trump by Hannity, Ingraham, Savage, Gallagher, Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter. Mark Levin has begun doing that, but what took him so long? We didn’t have to wait to see which way the wind was blowing to “know” that Trump had been a registered Democrat and publicly espoused a lot of liberal views. We knew that before he declared his candidacy.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:14 amYeah, I’m not sure about this “we”. Bruce Rauner and Rahm Emanuel are a “we” where I’m at, and I suspect Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi are a “we” in Washington, and they’re weeing on we’uns.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:15 amYou do realize I was talking about the anti-Trump crowd, don’t you Leviticus? Or does the constant Trump-bashing allude you even on a post entitled: Trump: A Fraudster, An Authoritarian, a Liar, and a Despot in Waiting
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:21 amI don’t know why it would have made a difference if talk radio hosts were pro-Cruz or anti-Trump last summer. Levin was unambiguously anti-Trump prior to Iowa. Limbaugh more or less endorsed Cruz before Iowa. Beck has been anti-Trump for months. The Trumpers have this odd personal bond with Trump, which is why pointing out specific things about him has zero effect.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:31 amMost here would vote for Rubio, Cruz, Walker, Perry, Jindal, Christie, Jeb, and maybe Paul, Kasich, Carson and Fiorina. Meanwhile, Trump supporters would generally vote for … Trump. Just who are the purists?
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:37 am“You do realize I was talking about the anti-Trump crowd, don’t you Leviticus?”
– Hoagie
Yeah, I do. I’m objecting to your conflation of the anti-Trump crowd with “Republicans,” who by all evidence appear dead set on nominating a fascist jack-o-lantern as their standard bearer.
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:40 amBecause like Mark steyn, he wanted certain issues raised, instead of what would have been a medici coronation.
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:46 amIt ain’t over yet but the handwriting is on the wall. Trump is the likely GOP nominee (he won Hispanics and he won evangelicals in Nevada [better than 2 to 1 over Cruz]). He’s set for a landslide in the SEC primaries.
For all those who supported other candidates, the time is coming to put your disappointment and your petty animosities aside, grow up, and do what’s best for the country. Hold your mud, wait for Super Tuesday if you must and then get started preparing yourself to get your head right.
If Trump is the GOP’s nominee he’s going to need your vote. Withhold it if you like the last 7 years under Obama’s rule, or come out and support Hillary’s opponent. It’s the right thing to do.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:50 amWe’re presently approaching the moment when I feel like I’m in David Cronenberg’s B-movie Shivers.
L.N. Smithee (178aa6) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:08 am
We should be thankful it’s not “Scanners”!
Colonel Haiku (993483) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:53 amWelcome to Bizarro-World, gang.
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:53 amAg80/JD 2016 (sorry JD, Ag80 just got his foot in the door first).
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:54 amDan Calabrese (2/24/16) at Canada Free Press has a question:
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:28 am“Republicans,” who by all evidence appear dead set on nominating a fascist jack-o-lantern as their standard bearer.
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:40 am
Your perspective always seems to be at odds…
MD in Philly (at the moment not in Philly) (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:37 am2/3rds of republicans, (at least) do not want Trump,
the Repubs as a whole are dead set trying to maintain their status quo as Dem light,
and it’s not working
and something else is going to happen
we just don’t know what it is yet.
MD in Philly – so what do the 2/3 of Republicans who don’t want Trump do if Trump shows up in Cleveland with 1238 delegates?
It may not yet be time to make that plan. But the time to make that plan seems likely to come soon.
aphrael (3f0569) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:42 amThe jailhouse choice. “Be my punk or Bubba’s over there.” How about: “Neither. Stick it in your ear, Trump f***boy.”
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:48 am“Less crooked than Hillary.” Is that your best pitch, ropelight?
I’m not even sure that the premise is correct, but we’re talking small degrees.
The man is scum. Yes, there is other scum out there, but your man is scum, ropelight. I may cast a vote against his opponent, but I’ll never pretend that Donald Trump is anything other than scum.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:49 amRopelight – I think that there’s a good likelihood that many Republicans will conclude that Clinton would be objectively less bad a President than Trump would be, just as I think there’s a good likelihood that many Democrats will conclude that Kasich or Rubio would be objectively less bad than Clinton would be.
This election looks like it’s going to be an election in which the voters of country is asked to decide which of two widely loathed figures are less loathsome to them. :{
aphrael (3f0569) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:51 amrope, the primary reason I would not vote for Trump and thus enable Clinton…is mere principle. Either ticket is a vote for pro-amnesty, pro-healthcare mandate, pro-planned parenthood, pro-cronyism, status quo big government deficits, utilization of the bureaucracy to punish opponents, etc.
A vote for Trump is an wilful abdication and complicity in advocacy of a cult that degrades this republic. There are no good Germans after a certain point.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:53 amWay to go, ropelight. I especially like the “set aside your petty animosities” part.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:04 amI think I posted a similar comment last night but I live in a very conservative area and several people I know plan to vote for Hillary if Trump is the nominee. It shocked me when I first heard them say it. I tried to reason with them. I don’t anymore. There are too many of them and the more Trump talks …
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:06 amIn other words, Trump followers should be glad if people plan to stay home. It could be worse.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:07 amGreat question. Michael Smerconish said on air the other day that we have reached a point where party bosses in smoky back rooms would make much better choices than this silly primary and caucus system.
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:07 amDRJ, it is rather insane for a supposed conservative republican to even remotely consider voting for Clinton. At least back in the day we had options, Perot. Good times, good times.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:09 amThese are not insane people. These are people who know the GOP Congress will do whatever Trump wants, and what Trump wants will not be good.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:13 amLeviticus, “fascist jack-o-lantern” is eloquent. Is that original?
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:16 amDRJ, hmmmm interesting rationalization. I suppose these folks also don’t own any mirrors. I do not enjoy the power of intellect or judgment to presuppose her restrained evil is somehow preferable to his enabled.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:17 amIt is, carlitos – the jack-o-lantern part, anyway (I’m certainly not the first person to call Trump a fascist).
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:25 amfrom the US Constitution, Article II, Section 1:
1. A natural born citizen
2. 35 years old
3. 14 year resident within the US
Interesting enough, a felony is not a disqualifying factor. Perhaps the Founding Fathers figured if the electoral college is not smart enough to vote wisely, then it does not really matter what the rules are. Today the People, effectively, elect the president; the burden of wisdom now falls on us.
The Democrats have failed completely and the Republicans are about a third of the way there. That leaves so few…
I guess we’ll have to turn it in Texas.
I’ll bring the beer.
Pons Asinorum (49e2e8) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:27 amSo, let me get this straight: A century and a half ago, many intelligent people thought Abraham Lincoln was a shallow, whiny, unqualified tyrant who would ruin the nation and its standing in the world, but turned out to be a legendary statesman and one of the most respected leaders of all time. Ergo, we ought not “snidely” dismiss Donald Trump as a shallow, whiny, unqualified tyrant.
Yeah, that’s pretty much what we’ve come to expect from Trump-humpers.
Usually, though, they keep it limited to saying “Reagan was a Democrat once, too, you know!” and/or “Reagan was an entertainer and he was a great President!” They are careful to ignore the fact that unlike Trump, Reagan proved his mettle as a leader through his two terms as Governor of California before daring to call himself Oval Office material, which some want you to believe isn’t any more significant than being really good at building golf courses, high-rise apartments, or casinos (what’s left of them). It’s truly a sign of a failing educational apparatus when people are so easily swayed to the idea that notable (but not nearly remarkable) success in business is the only qualification necessary to be Commander-in-Chief of a great nation.
The parting shot at Glenn Beck was a nice touch. At least Beck takes his faith in the Almighty more seriously than the self-described evangelicals who admit voting for a man who doesn’t see the need to pray for forgiveness.
L.N. Smithee (e725d8) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:30 amThe best — nearly the only — evidence we have about how Trump might act as a president, as a public servant and holder of public office, is the way he’s acted as the head of the Trump Empire.
That’s the one he’s taken through bankruptcy four times. He’s an awful businessman.
The best — and nearly the only — evidence we have about what Trump would do, as president, on specific policy issues is what he’s done on his signature issue, immigration. On it, he’s campaigned constantly and viciously and dishonestly and inconsistently, but always with vigor and volume. But when it came time to put forth specifics, he let Jeff Sessions ghost write his plan.
When he wanted to seem like someone who might make a good Supreme Court nomination to replace Scalia, he got someone to feed him a couple of names (besides his sister, who along with the judges in his four bankruptcies are likely the only federal judges he could name). I will tell you, frankly, that they’re pretty good choices (Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit and Bill Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit) — just like Jeff Sessions’ immigration plan is pretty good.
Sometimes he manages to delegate competently and then to not interfere with the competent people to whom he’s delegates. Sometimes.
But he doesn’t do that consistently enough to actually make a success out of his businesses. To the contrary, he overrides his advisors and does stupid things like leveraging an undercapitalized and risky casino empire to the hilt, so that when the first rough patch hits, it tumbles his entire corporate empire into bankruptcy (again).
The only reason that he went to Jeff Sessions for his immigration plan, or to whomever fed him Sykes’ & Pryor’s names as potential SCOTUS nominees, is because he knows he has to pull off an act of appearing to be genuinely conservative.
But that need ends on election day if he wins. What will he do then? Whose advice will he take then, if anyones?
No one knows or can know. He doesn’t know.
Trump supporters are Thelma & Louise right now, screaming with joy as they stomp the accelerator.
But there’s a cliff, and although that movie ended before Thelma & Louise suffered the consequences of driving over it, we can’t just yell “Cut!” and leave the theater if we’re stuck with this bozo for a full four-year term.
I think the odds are at least 50/50 that Trump would end up being impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors even by a GOP Congress before the end of his first year in office. And that may actually be the best-case scenario if he gets the nomination and were somehow (ha!) the beat the Clinton Machine.
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:33 amHi Leviticus – hope that all is well with you. I like it!
carlitos (c24ed5) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:35 amThe best — nearly the only — evidence we have about how Trump might act as a president, as a public servant and holder of public office, is the way he’s acted as the head of the Trump Empire.
That’s the one he’s taken through bankruptcy four times. He’s an awful businessman.
The best — and nearly the only — evidence we have about what Trump would do, as president, on specific policy issues is what he’s done on his signature issue, immigration. On it, he’s campaigned constantly and viciously and dishonestly and inconsistently, but always with vigor and volume. But when it came time to put forth specifics, he let Jeff Sessions ghost write his plan.
When he wanted to seem like someone who might make a good Supreme Court nomination to replace Scalia, he got someone to feed him a couple of names (besides his sister, who along with the judges in his four bankruptcies are likely the only federal judges he could name). I will tell you, frankly, that they’re pretty good choices (Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit and Bill Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit) — just like Jeff Sessions’ immigration plan is pretty good.
Sometimes he manages to delegate competently and then to not interfere with the competent people to whom he’s delegates. Sometimes.
But he doesn’t do that consistently enough to actually make a success out of his businesses. To the contrary, he overrides his advisors and does stupid things like leveraging an undercapitalized and risky casino empire to the hilt, so that when the first rough patch hits, it tumbles his entire corporate empire into bankruptcy (again).
The only reason that he went to Jeff Sessions for his immigration plan, or to whomever fed him Sykes’ & Pryor’s names as potential SCOTUS nominees, is because he knows he has to pull off an act of appearing to be genuinely conservative.
But that need ends on election day if he wins. What will he do then? Whose advice will he take then, if anyones?
No one knows or can know. He doesn’t know.
Trump supporters are Thelma & Louise right now, screaming with joy as they stomp the accelerator.
But there’s a cliff, and although that movie ended before Thelma & Louise suffered the consequences of driving over it, we can’t just yell “Cut!” and leave the theater if we’re stuck with this bozo for a full four-year term.
I think the odds are at least 50/50 that Trump would end up being impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors even by a GOP Congress before the end of his first year in office. And that may actually be the best-case scenario if he gets the nomination and were somehow (ha!) the beat the Clinton Machine.
(PS: At the time he was nominated by the fledgling Republican Party, Abraham Lincoln had plenty of detractors, but he was also the most sought-after and successful trial and appellate lawyer in Illinois (and a few surrounding states), which is why he was the lawyer of choice for the booming new railroad industry.
Lincoln had been a poor shopkeeper, though, and unlike Trump, he didn’t use the bankruptcy courts to walk away from his trade debts. It took him years, but he repaid all his creditors in full.
Comparing Trump to Lincoln in a positive fashion is impossible for anyone who knows anything important about either man.)
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:37 amPons, you’re right. Not sure where that understanding came from…darn voices, they either beckon me to poop on a salad bar or post nonsense comments.*
*case in point
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:44 amGood point.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:55 am#141: Haha, Pieter, I do that all the time (uh, the latter, not the former). Words that I live by:
Pons Asinorum (49e2e8) — 2/24/2016 @ 12:40 pmAnyone so foolish as to vote for Hillary because Cruz or Rubio couldn’t get enough support to win the GOP nomination is cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Hillary’s list of disqualifying factors is long and conclusive., From attacking the women he husband abused, from trading cattlebellies, to Whitewater, Casa Grande, to Travelgate, to the strange death of Vince Foster, to Filegate, etc, etc.
While SECSTATE Hillary left Americans to die in Benghazi without even attempting to send help, then lied to the parents about a video tape as the caskets were being unloaded. Then covered it up. She kept highly sensitive intelligence on her homebrew server, in violation of the law, and where our nation’s enemies could hack it (for a price). A Hillary presidency would be worse than Obama’s presidency.
For a conservative to be so angry as to stay home is silly, petty, and self-defeating. To actually vote for Hillary is stabbing Uncle Sam in the back.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:06 pmPieter:
I waited to respond because I wanted to think about what you said. I don’t think it’s fair to assume other people are insincere, stupid, or hypocritical.
I think they aren’t as concerned about things like who a President selects to be Supreme Court Justice or whether the Roe v Wade or Obergefell cases are overturned. Instead, maybe they are concerned about uncertainty. Maybe they believe they have a better idea what Hillary will do as President than what Trump will do. They may be right.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:17 pmAfter all, isn’t this election supposed to be about the future, not the past? If the past is what matters, why doesn’t Trump’s liberal past disqualify him?
DRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:19 pmDRJ, you raise a good point about Trump’s liberal past.
All these sanctimonious talk show hosts who for years have been hammering John Boehner and Mitch McConnell for being a RINO have extended a “Get out of Jail” card to Trump.
At least Boehner and McConnell weren’t registered Democrats in 2008. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:31 pmRopelight, if the lying bastard Leftist Democrat Donald Trump gets the nomination, he’s going to need one HELL of a lot more votes than the fscker’s gonna get. And Patterico has made it very clear that you and the liar papertiger are cultists.
If Trump is nominated, he will lose. And like Beldar said, I’ll blame Trump — and YOU.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 2:47 pmHitchcock, Trump has defied conventional wisdom again and again. He’s a proven winner and I believe he’ll win the presidency if he gets the GOP nod.
Patterico is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. I’m no cultist, never have been, am not one now, and don’t expect to become a cultist. (Although I suspect you’re a bible thumping cultist.)
I Support Donald Trump for the presidency and have supported him here for months while jerks (like you) have called me dirty names, called my intelligence and my integrity into question, and in general behaved like the worst sort of unhinged Democrat thug.
As for you concluding sentence – are you threatening me?
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:19 pmThat’s no defense. That is the heart of the fraud. Trump starred in all sorts of promotional material saying he was intimately involved in Trump “University.” That if you took real estate courses from Trump “University” you’d be learning his real estate secrets. You would be learning his methods. And not only was the curriculum based upon his personal secrets, but that he had hand selected the instructors.
None of it was true.
So if his ultimate defense is that he had nothing to do with Trump University, that’s a pretty poor defense. He’s agreeing with the plaintiffs who are suing him.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:27 pmropelight, this is the type of M.O. that Matt Walsh wrote about. You Trump People like to throw around insults, and then when someone fires back, you start crying that someone is violating decent standards by engaging in name calling. Didn’t Harry Truman say something about the temperature in the kitchen?
You just inferred that Hitchcock is “a Bible-thumping cultist,” and that he has behaved like an “unhinged Democrat thug,” then you accused him of calling you names.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:28 pmThere’s a lack of a lot of things among TrumpLand, and lack of irony is certainly one of them.
The Roman Empire called us cultists, too. Son worshippers. Little Christ childs. That’s how Christians, the term, came about. It was a Roman era insult against us. And yes, I belong to the cult that says the Bible is the inerrant word of the Almighty Creator.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:45 pmWhat happens if Trump is nominated and he wins?
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:50 pmHe won’t win. Too many people are wise enough not to vote for him. He is as diseased as Obama.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 3:53 pmropelight, Trump has defrauded a lot of people by playing on his celebrity.
Trump “University” was just one of the scams he’s been involved with. Another concerned fictitious Trump properties. He let other developers use his name (for a hefty license fee, of course). Just like with Trump “University” the only role he played in those scams was that he advertised the properties. The developments had his name on them. And for some reason people are so enamored with Donald Trump they were willing to pay a premium to buy a condo or a townhouse or whatever with his name on it.
But they were rip-offs. Donald Trump would put his name on promotional materials where he’d say things like, “This is my best development yet.” But they weren’t his properties. And the builders would take hefty down payments, sometimes people’s life savings, and say they spent all the money on construction and then the developments would declare bankruptcy.
The builders and Trump made out like the bandits that they are. Apparently this was somehow legal. So were the methods used by and taught by Trump “University.” Yes, they actually did teach people some things. What they taught was old, outdated, ethically suspect, and in fact some of those shady techniques they taught or now illegal practices in many states.
One of their “techniques” they taught the students was to target people in foreclosure. Because those people would be desperate, and therefore easier to take advantage of.
Trump “University” was no slouch at taking advantage of their students. They’d convince their students to have their credit card companies raise their debt limits. Supposedly that was so they could see what kind of distressed properties those students could afford. In fact, that was so they could see what kind of courses they could pressure their students to buy. Their “Gold Elite” course was supposed to be a year long personal mentoring program interspersed with classes. That cost $30,000.
The personal “mentoring” involved a real estate agent taking these students to open houses that they could have seen themselves for free, or an “educational” field trip to Home Depot.
Trump has absolutely zero remorse about ripping people off. He made $5M dollars out of the $40M that Trump “University” raked in. If he didn’t know it was a fraud and a rip-off during the 5 years it existed before it finally went out of business with a D- rating from the BBB (Trump’s lawyers are still lying about that, saying it had an A+ rating) he sure knows it now. And he could care less. I don’t know how many millions he made by helping to defraud people in real estate.
But of course it’s impossible that he didn’t know these ventures were scams. One California judge said it was a rip-off in the same vein as the Madoff scam. Personally I think it was more like the Clinton’s whitewater scam. No wonder Trump and the Clintons are such good friends. But how can Trump not know he was lying when he claimed personal involvement in these things when the contracts were written in such a way that he not only didn’t have any direct involvement, but that lack of involvement is the only thing that shields him from personal liability?
Donald Trump is no one to put any faith in. He’s not even that great of a businessman. Mostly he just succeeded in holding on to some of daddy’s money.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:00 pmIf Trump wins you’ll be begging Congress to stop him.
crazy (cde091) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:00 pmIn looking at the percentages that Kasich and Carson pulled last night in Arizona, I was very much reminded of the late, great Texas football coach Darrell K. Royal’s great quip about then-perennial Southwest Conference doormat Texas Christian University in November 1961, after the Horned Frogs, a 24-point underdog, cost the ‘Horns their first chance at a national title by winning 6-0 on a trick play. Royal was quoted afterwards as saying the TCU team was like “a bunch of cockroaches”:
TCU fans have never forgotten or forgiven, I think, but they’ve certainly gotten some revenge since then.
Superficial criticisms of Ted Cruz — “He has a long nose, he looks scary, he talks too much like he’s speaking to the Supreme Court,” etc. — remind me of another DKR quote, this one about a recently signed running back:
And finally (for now), regarding the current state of the GOP race and Cruz’ chances in it, I’m reminded of this DKR gem:
Beldar (fa637a) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:08 pmaphrael,
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:16 pmIf Trump gets to Cleveland with enough votes for nomination, we’ll see what happens then.
4 way general election:
Clinton
Sanders as an independent, taking 48% of the Dem vote with him,
Trump
Cruz as independent, taking 54% of the Republican vote with him.
DRJ, my faith in the politicos expired some time ago…their ability to read the tea leaves or take a coherent stand on principle is proved wanting in nearly every instance to prove otherwise. The future is inherently uncertain, such is why we look backward to wonder if we are true to course (hence my support for Cruz).
Trump and Clinton are cut from the same ethical cloth. Both deserve the jaundiced eye of practiced cynicism. Both are demonstrably unworthy of the office, there is no lesser of two evils in this matter.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:23 pmThose who say they wouldn’t vote for Trump even if he’s running against Hillary remind me of those who said they’d never vote for Romney because he’s a Morman.
There you have it – The Stupid Party in action. Designated losers, and proud of it.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:27 pmrope, did you really equate unease with Mormonism and inability to politically support unprincipled, criminal narcissists? That is quite a stretch. Don’t hurt yourself with that contorted reasoning.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:31 pmrope, apparently it is no longer the stupid party but in actuality the hypocrisy party. Evangelicals voted in large numbers for a pro-choice, serial philanderer, abject liar, faux Christian that eats his little cracker and drinks his little wine, admitting to all he has no reason to ask for divine forgiveness.
The problem really isn’t Trump, it’s you and your ilk.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:39 pm157 … Cruz as independent, taking 54% …
Didn’t Cruz sign a pledge to support the party nominee?
James B. Shearer (0f56fb) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:55 pmRope, I meant to add that the vast majority of the party espoused concern about Romney as the father of what we would eventually call Obamacare. He is a Yankee republican, which on the spectrum makes him barely palatable. Sure his religious beliefs are pretty kooky, but nobody questioned his family values and steadfast principled nature.
Nice hair, too.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:55 pmexcept romney let gruber design his health care plan, and future riverkiller gina mccarthy design the carbon capture program,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:57 pmnarciso, yep…all deal breakers.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 4:59 pmand on his staff he hired the author of the jones memo, the apologia for dr. evil’s scuttling the maverick campaign and kevin madden who had a smaller part, when it came down to the ninth inning, he did little but plaintive arfs, all the while the IRS and OSHA was kneecapping the tea party,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:02 pmWhen Trump wins the nomination, and loses to whoever, I will blame …. His cultish supporters and the MFM for saddling us with him. Thanks for nominating a trashy Democrat.
JD (34f761) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:11 pmrope, what with last few comments got me thinking…if ever we screwed up as a party, we should have done everything possible to elect Romney. We had four years of Obama example to make a choice between two unpleasant but radically different truths. But we didn’t, for reasons now unclear. That fact is something worth thoughtful pause and appropriate personal regret.
Perhaps we couldn’t imagine things getting worse with the present administration. But they did and now some folks want to tell us Trump is the answer. I’m afraid to ask the true nature of the question as some would have it. Death cult gibberish, no doubt.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:11 pmSeeing as I endorsed Mia Love, a Mormon, and refused to vote for Flip Flopney, it wasn’t his Mormonism that prevented me from voting for him. So, Ropelight is pushing yet another false narrative.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:17 pmwhy didn’t they pieter, we know what obama had been lecturing, organizing for 20 years, and conversely why should we believe their protestations now,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:18 pmnarciso, please rephrase the question…not sure I fully understand.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:20 pmthey didn’t think obama wasn’t a ‘clear and present danger’ then their judgement is suspect, making trump out to be lex luthor, or norman osborn, seems overwrought,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:24 pmSo, Hitchcock, this isn’t your first transgression. Given a choice between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, you couldn’t bring yourself to vote for Romney?
Are you proud of your decision? Would you do the same thing again?
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:29 pmYou should set aside your petty differences and name-calling, ropelight.
JD (34f761) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:33 pmYes, I am proud of my decision and yes, I would do it again. And if Trump is the nominee, I will not ever vote for him. Neither will my Iraq vet daughter. Neither will my police officer son-in-law. And that’s 3 non-votes in bellwether Ohio.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:33 pmMost Americans are low information voters, make their decisions at crunch time and unless directly oppressed are unlikely to push back the status quo.
Sure we knew Obama wad a radical Alinskite communist wellbeing on destroying this republic. But that’s us, not normal people.
BRB, gotta pick up my daughter from work.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:34 pmI’ll do my best JD.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:36 pmstrikingly neither the journal or the times brought this up,
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/02/24/spanish-police-raid-islamic-state-cell-in-north-africa-arrest-former-guantanamo-prisoner/
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 5:38 pmYou know, all this unpleasantness could have been avoided if the constitutional restrictions preventing all but natural born citizens from contending for the presidency had been acknowledged and respected.
Both Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, both US Senators, are fine men and outstanding Americans, but both are ineligible for the presidency. Of course, many commenters here and elsewhere disagree on that point. They want so much to see their favorite candidate win they ignore the reasons behind the constitutional restriction and argue in Cruz’s case his Canadian birth and Cuban father qualify him as a natural born citizen.
In Rubio’s case the fact both his parents were legal residents, not citizens, at the time of his US birth means he’s not a natural born citizen either and is thus ineligible.
Facing the facts could have prevented a great deal of uglyness. But the mention of ineligibility here was enough to start the hysterical dogs barking and disturbing the peace.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:00 pmropelight there are good arguments, that is not one of them, the waving of the butterfly wings,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:02 pmin this last link, noted by no major broadsheet, that I can tell, was one of the elements in yesterday’s victory,
Make that:
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:03 pmSince Cruz was born to an American mother, he’s a natural-born citizen of the USA. That’s the law. To continue arguing otherwise is to ignore the actual law. I know it’s useless to argue the point with Birthers because they don’t actually care what the law says. They’re making it up as they go along.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:09 pmnarciso, add my voice to those who wish you’d make an effort to make yourself clear. Your increasingly cryptic comments are difficult if not impossible to decipher. I’d like to know what you’re thinking, I really would, but your method of delivery is so self-centered I skip them for want of time and inclination to engage in extracting meaning from apparent gibberish.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:09 pmI know it’s useless to argue the point with Birthers because they don’t actually care what the law says. They’re making it up as they go along.
It’s part of the same mentality which Trump himself recognizes: “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:15 pmnarcisco is very easy to follow.
Birthers suck.
JD (0fb5ae) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:16 pmthere are real issues of national sovereignty, the loss of economic freedom, the rise of islamism, don’t waste out time with gnats like that foolishness,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:17 pmNo, John, it’s not the law. The law of the land says only a natural born citizen is eligible for the presidency. Those who point out Cruz is ineligible are following the constitution you ignore.
There is nothing natural about the son of a Cuban father born in Canada claiming to be a natural born US citizen. Cruz doesn’t qualify.
It ain’t rocket science.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:18 pmTHE MOTHER WAS A US CITIZEN WHEN HE WAS BORN.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:21 pmIs that clear enough for you? It’s already spelled out. He’s a natural born citizen of the US because he was born to a US citizen. Your birtherism runs contrary to the law.
John – he won’t listen. He has gone all nativist.
JD (0fb5ae) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:22 pmI think I posted a similar comment last night but I live in a very conservative area and several people I know plan to vote for Hillary if Trump is the nominee. It shocked me when I first heard them say it.
I can see a variety of staunch conservatives saying they’ll vote for either a third-party candidate (who’d be an independent rightist—and who so far doesn’t exist on the upcoming ballot in November) or stay home on election day. But to say they’ll instead vote for the dishonest, deceptive, incompetent, inherently leftwing Hillary? No, something about that doesn’t compute.
Several weeks ago I raised the issue of Peggy Noonan-ism, where at least a few Republicans back in 2008 (if not in 2012) looked at the Democrat candidate, admired the cut of his jib and smile on his face, and voted accordingly. Some of the people with that condition were taken in solely by the superficial—or a misplaced sense of guilt due to the sins of the past. But some of them were also ideologically squishy enough to give the benefit of the doubt when it wasn’t justified.
We’re facing that same mess all over again, in which both sides of the aisle are doing their version of Noonan. The motley cast this time around is the wife with the bad cough and married to the creep, the guy with the strange hair and un-tethered philosophy, and the guy with the non-charismatic face/voice.
Mark (6c93d5) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:22 pmEt tu, JD?
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:22 pm182… That’s the law. To continue arguing otherwise is to ignore the actual law. …
Laws don’t override Constitutional provisions. The provision isn’t totally clear so maybe Cruz is qualified but he is certainly near the line being drawn even if he isn’t on the wrong side of it.
James B. Shearer (0f56fb) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:23 pmI agree with JD. Birthers suck. Big-time.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:23 pmropelight,
I can see you stating that your understanding of the Constitution and its wording and its meaning states that Cruz and Rubio are not eligible to be president,
but I do not accept your formulation that you are right, everybody else is wrong, and everybody else is ignoring the Constitution
you have been getting less and less of an audience every time you make your claim in the manner that you do
MD in Philly (at the moment not in Philly) (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:23 pmRope – your birtherism is nonsense. Period full stop.
JD (0fb5ae) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:23 pmJames – that is like saying someone is sort of pregnant. They are, or they are not.
JD (0fb5ae) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:25 pmMy daughter is pregnant. She’s planning on terminating her pregnancy sometime toward the end of March. At which point, a stork will drop off a baby girl at her house.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:28 pmMD, it’s not up for a vote. It’s a constitutional issue, and trying to sweep it under the rug won’t work. It must be addressed in the daylight without jerks pointing fingers and shouting Birther instead of facing up to a valid constitutional restriction.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:29 pmMy favorite line from Tropic Thunder, “no one goes full nativist”.
I can’t throw stones, unfortunately, I’m a birther also. The difference being what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If it didn’t matter a lick with Obama, I see no reason to be terribly concerned now. So it goes.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:30 pmfor whom does the bell toll, it tolls for thee,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3463018/Cutting-influx-migrants-question-survival-Europe-warns-Austria-blasts-EU-failing-tackle-crisis.html?
this the underlying reality,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:31 pmJohn, very funny. Droll, but funny. Congrats, grandpa.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:32 pmThat Mexican name, Cruz, bothers me more than the Canadian birth. Can we really trust a guy named Cruz to deport other guys named Cruz? To Vera Cruz? Or even Santa Cruz? And if he does, will I be able to bid on their ’57 Chevy lowriders at the government auction?
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:35 pmnk, channeling your inner Trump supporter? Good control of flow, nuanced without being too much…B+.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:37 pmropelight,
exhibit A as to why you are infuriating.
no one said it wasn’t a Constitutional issue, no one said it was up for a vote,
and no one frickin’ said to sweep it under a beep-de-beep rug!!
You routinely quote an isolated passage, claim it means what you say it means contrary to the logical arguments of others, and act as if you8 are the only one being intellectually honest.
Phooey, I say.
MD in Philly (at the moment not in Philly) (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:38 pmIt’ll be her second. Hopefully, it will be a mite less exciting than the first.
https://truthbeforedishonor.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/welcome-joshua/
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:38 pmcongrats john, one can have an appreciation of most of the candidates strength and weaknesses, but when you’re echoing monthes old village voice screeds by lucian truscott, I know I didn’t know he was still kicking,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:43 pmJohn, quite a harrowing story…beautiful kid, though. Like you said, hopefully this birth will be relatively boring. Good luck and God bless to you and your family.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:45 pmThe Anti-constitutionalists can’t deny the words of our Founders, so they dumb down the definitions of the words themselves. Up is down, left is right, Canadians are Americans.
Today, Cruz supporters would have us believe someone born in Canada is a natural born American citizen. Moreover, they’d have us believe the Cuban father of that native born Canadian did not bestow Cuban citizenship along with his name on his infant son. That son waited till he was running for high office in the US to renounce his Canadian citizenship.
Now, we have the absurd argument that Canadian is a natural born citizen of the USA. Preposterous on its face.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:45 pmrope, with all that troubles this republic and the deplorable front runners likely to assume the presidency…if no one cared about Obama’s eligibility, why are you falling on your sword over a matter dismissed 8 years ago by your fellow American?
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:51 pmRopelight wants to completely ignore the American mother of said child to lyingly call me anti-constitutionalist. Ropelight, is thus, an arse.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:52 pmJohn, in all fairness I could preach the brother gospel as to why stoplight is entirely correct…but I won’t, the issue was tabled 8 years ago, and in the grand scheme of things it is immaterial at this particular time. Perhaps later after we save the republic and restore sense to the body politic.
If rope believes being right will make a difference in light of everything…well, someone has to tilt windmills.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 6:59 pmBirther, not brother…freakin’ kindle.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:00 pmRopelight, not stoplight….arrrgh.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:01 pmMD, I mentioned a vote because @194 you mentioned I’d been been getting less and less of an audience… It’s not such a long reach.
Additionally, it’s not just me who can read the constitution and understand the considerations our Founders had about the pernicious impact foreign influence could have on our republic, and how we could guard against it. You understand, yet you allow the goading urgency of contingent circumstance to overrule your better judgment. It’s why I infuriate you – you know I’m right.
And, plenty of people are trying to sweep it under the rug. Plenty of ’em.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:03 pmrope, let it go. Most do not agree with your understanding, it is a futile waste of time pressing this constitutional point in this forum. As a matter of fact, plan on my ignoring you whenever you bring up this matter. Says the guy who agrees with you.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:08 pm#208, I dunno if I am an idiot but natural born means from the egg and sperm of a US Citizen. Not where they are born. If they had wished it to say born on US soil then that is what would have been written.
That means a child adopted by US Parents who was born in Mexico to 100% Mexican DNA can not be POTUS.
Also means a 50/100% US DNA child adopted by Canadian Parents can be POTUS.
But hey …
Rodney King's Spirit (3adc86) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:08 pmRopelight still ignoring the American Mother, transferring her US citizenship onto her child at birth, in order to claim everyone “knows” he’s right. When he’s wrong.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:09 pmWinston Churchill had an American mother but that didn’t make him a US President. He became Prime Minister of the country he was born in -> England.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:09 pmis this their final answer:
http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/24/ill-take-hillary-clinton-over-donald-trump/
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:10 pmI vote we change topic from birtherism. I am a recovering addict…still find bits of tinfoil in my hair.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:11 pmProjection, much???
Lots of people can read the Constitution, and do, and see things differently.
You quote that passage, and claim that it means “x”, where “x” is that there are (at least) 3 types of US citizens,
I don’t see the flow of logic for that,
A whole lot of people don’t see the flow of logic for that,
And I am not saying this for you,
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:13 pmIn fact I am not sure how many people, even new visitors, haven’t been through this already.
I had an American mother and an American father and was born in Ohio. I wonder why I’ve never been a US President? Maybe for the same reason Churchill was never a US President? We never ran for that office so we couldn’t be voted in? What a nonsensical argument. Hundreds of millions of US citizens were never President. The point is irrelevant. And absurd on its face.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:14 pmHillary Clinton was born in Chicago. And we’re all going to wish we were born in Canada by this time next year.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:17 pmEgads. Everything you want to know about birtherism, which again I still quietly ascribe;
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:18 pmare you sure it’s not remulak, those very natural responses of hers
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:19 pm1) Winston Churchill’s mother renounced her U.S. citizenship for a Ladyship; 2) what was the law of a married woman’s citizenship at the time; and 3) what John said at 222 — Winston Churchill chose to go hunting on his daddy’s political preserve.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:21 pmDon’t go slandering Chicago, CS. Hillary was born in Park Ridge.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:22 pmnarciso, folks are already in the weeds about imaginary concerns. Like being halfway through a major war and wondering what color to paint the house when it’s all over. Asinine article. Most of is could give two sh!ts about how this will effect the party or conservatism.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:24 pmthat’s certainly where they found her pod,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:24 pmit’s characteristic of the same circular firing squad we saw in the previous primaries, nichols is a fairly sharp fellow, but he’s gone pearshaped, hillary is like fraulein kirshner, I know her worse half is still around, but that is her potential damage to the body politik
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:27 pmHere’s the background:
In Hamilton’s draft constitution Article 9, section 1 provided
Then on 7/25/1787 John Jay wrote to George Washington, presiding officer Constitutional Convention: (emphasis added)
Initially, the Committee of Detail proposed only that the President must be a citizen, as well as a resident for 21 years. Later, after receiving Jay’s letter the Committee of Eleven changed “citizen” to “natural born citizen”, and reduced the residency requirement to 14 years. No record of explanation survives as to the definition of natural born citizen. The Convention accepted the change without further recorded debate.
I’ve argued that there are 3 classes of US citizen. naturalized citizens, born citizens, and natural born citizens. The difference between born citizens and natural born citizens are that in the latter case both parents are US citizens at the time of birth and subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
Cruz doesn’t qualify, and neither does Rubio.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:33 pmrope, let it go for God’s sake. You need to be banned or medicated…pick one.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:35 pmYes, that is what you have argued,
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:38 pmNumerous times.
Those that would distract themselves with the trivial during times of great turmoil are either idiots or fools. -Pieter Nosworthy, 2016, just now
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:41 pmSo, one could have been born in the US of two US parents, move to and live in the USSR for 30 years, come back to the US, live here for 14 years,
And be assumed to be more loyal than someone born to a US citizen who grew up here?
That doesn’t make sense, IMO.
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:42 pmI’m stopping.
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:43 pmG’nite
And we have argued there are only 2 classes of citizen: Natural born and naturalized. And since your definition does not appear in the Constitution, you cannot logically claim we’re anti-constitutionalists. You can hyperventilatingly argue that, but you cannot logically argue that. I am a Constitutionalist. And I’m a hard-line Cruz supporter. And Cruz is natural born, due to his mother being a citizen.
John Hitchcock (8f8466) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:45 pmA summary of Trump’s fraudulent “University” and the lawsuits it produced.
But this isn’t the only fraudulent business venture of Trump’s.
All that is going to come up and more if GOP voters are stupid enough to saddle us with Trump as the nominee. Is there anything Trump hasn’t lied about? His sworn testimony just weeks before the November election should be a treasure trove of material for the Democrats.
If he doesn’t plead the Fifth to avoid incriminating himself.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:48 pm#235, MD, no, not assumed to be loyal, but qualified to run for the presidency according to the constitution. Sleep well.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:49 pmWho likes waffles? Stupid question, I realize…just trying to find which of us are freaks of nature and can’t survive the gluten. There is an unspoken list of those not allowed to pass on their genes…progressives, birthers, lawyers, folks who work for AT&T.
Where is happyfeet when you really need him…
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:49 pmRead my comment at #231. The Founders made the distinction between born citizens and natural born citizens.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:51 pmSteve, tip of the ice berg, eh? Fraud, cronyism, the mob, more donations to democrats than charity…yep, just what the country needs.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:56 pm196James – that is like saying someone is sort of pregnant. They are, or they are not.
No, it is like saying someone is sort of drunk. Legally you are either drunk or you are not but you can be close to the line. The provision in question also draws a line (unfortunately a somewhat fuzzy line) and Cruz is close to it.
James B. Shearer (0f56fb) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:57 pmeverything in moderation, how did we ever make it through the day without this toxic gauntlet, of foodstuffs, some people are truly allergic, but as they say first world problems,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 7:59 pmnarciso, true. Oh so birther true.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:01 pm235That doesn’t make sense, IMO.
It often makes sense to prefer a simple rule which is sometimes wrong to a complicated rule which tries to be always right.
James B. Shearer (0f56fb) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:04 pmConservatives may start defecting to Rubio.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/431857/conservative-leaders-hedge-support-cruz
Key quote:
It seems that Trumpers have this personal bond with Trump. That as much as anything explains his success.
As I mentioned on another thread, I’ll be voting for Rubio in the VA primary if it looks like he has pulled ahead of Cruz here.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:05 pmperhaps but I don’t trust courts in new york, or california, they are liable to give the chair for jay walking, and absolve murderers,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:06 pmthere is a fantasy element to all these discussions,
http://theweek.com/articles/608043/president-trump-ruin-americas-foreign-policy–save
w had few options, considering the subterfuge with the oil for food program, the opacity of the inspections program, the misunderstanding of the real salafi crusade in iraq
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:09 pmGerald, I get what you’re saying and certainly understand…not sure I agree, yet. Trump needs to be handed sufficient losses to derail his nomination. My problem is trusting the polls to make an educated tactical voting decision. I’m a good mushroom and will stick with my first choice regardless in this primary season.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:12 pmA vote for Rubio is a vote for amnesty. Straight up.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:18 pmA vote for Trump is a vote for Trump. That’s worse.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:23 pmropelight, a vote for Trump is a vote for a guy who donated money to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. And speaking of Pelosi, I guess we’ll just have to vote for Trump to find out what’s in him, huh?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:25 pmWorse? A guy who wants to secure the border is worse than a guy who wants to reward illegals for flaunting our national sovereignty? Help me Rhonda.
ropelight (64e701) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:31 pmrope, a vote for Trump is a vote for amnesty. Remember him saying the “good ones” can immediately come back for their green cards (citizenship).
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:32 pmropelight, if Trump is so concerned about border security, why did he donate to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in recent years?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:34 pmrope, last I checked all the candidates are committed to securing the borders. Cruz was saying as much in 2012-13 during his Senate bid…same time Trump was hosting DREAMers in his office and financially supporting amnesty advocates.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:36 pmTrump has defrauded a lot of people who were silly enough to trust his word. He knows exactly how to play people to make the sale.
Steve57 (a5da00) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:43 pmAll pontificating aside,
MD not exactly in Philly (deca84) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:45 pmCurrent discussion and punditry is engineered somewhat to inform,
But also to influence.
As far as predicting the future,
I think the next few weeks will tell a lot,
I doubt if Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich can go on if they don’t win their own state,
At present it looks good for Cruz winning Texas, not as good for R and K in their respective states.
We will see.
MD, the time for making the anti-Trump argument that will give his current and potential supporters real reason to reconsider is now. No idea what it will be or the messenger, but time is running short. May God have mercy on all our souls if it doesn’t happen.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:50 pmwell I don’t see how it happens, some of those on the right side, saw how romney walloped newt and santorum, and aren’t going to be the same establishment guff, to be charitable, others won’t buy the argument at all, because there have been too many broken promises, on trade, on immigration, poorly defended rationales of our interventions abroad,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 8:55 pmIf I we’re a well funded PAC, I’d be making outrageous accusations of serial adultery, mob ties, defrauding the average American (his university), tax evasion, owned by wall street to the tune of half a billion dollars, lies about his actual worth which Forbes says is around 700M, belief in the “wonderful” partial birth planned parenthood, lying about giving a darn about veterans unless useful as a photo op…
Say it often and long enough, folks will believe. It’s worked for him when used against his challengers.
pieter (ec44a2) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:05 pmOur reptilian plutocrats do not agree with the American public about the importation of cheap labor and the export of well-paying jobs, that’s a fact. Trump is not the man to oppose them, though. He’s one of them.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:05 pmactually he has spent very little on this staple of modern campaigns, the attack ads, which are a subsidy to the networks, which are working against you in the first place,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:12 pmBuzzfeed is reporting that we should wait ’til the general election for the audio soundbites from Trump’s past numerous appearances on The Howard Stern Show to come out. Apparently, if you thought he’s said some inappropriate things about Megyn Kelly, that’s small potatoes.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:40 pmwell it’s howard stern, no one comes off well there, but it’s a sad staple of what the late 20th century was like,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:48 pmThe 20th Century closed out with the Presidency of Bill Clinton. Monica Lewinski was not the only one who got a taste of things to come.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:58 pmnarciso, Stern still has his show. It’s been on podcast. They can say more ‘stuff’ than you could on terrestrial radio.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/24/2016 @ 9:58 pmwell I’m speaking of his heyday, before he went to sirius, stern, oprah, donahue, springer, just setting fire to brain cells, painfully,
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:07 pmin retrospect, hagel was the lesser evil,
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/270638-gop-defense-secretary-overruled-chairman-of-joint-staff-on-gitmo-transfer
narciso (732bc0) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:13 pmHe came to Chicago on FM for a short time and went up against another sicko who calls himself Mancow. They put each other out of business in Chicago pretty quickly. We’re not that kind of audience. Mancow is back on WLUP now but I don’t think he’ll last very long.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:18 pmStern not Carter.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2016 @ 10:20 pmRubio/black boots/2016
mg (31009b) — 2/25/2016 @ 1:14 amTrump just received a boat load of voters after the stupid Mfer mittens opened his lame pie hole about taxes. People like Romany are a disgrace to conservatives. Shut the heck up you overeducated dolt. Someone should tie you to the top of your wagon and drive you to death valley.
mg (31009b) — 2/25/2016 @ 1:50 amHow to spot a narcissist… http://blog.dilbert.com/post/139910704581/how-to-spot-a-narcissist-trump-persuasion-series
Colonel Haiku (df68ea) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:16 amI don’t totally trust Rubio on the issue of illegals, but as Steve, CS and pieter pointed out Trump has not exactly been consistent on that either. Trusting whatever Trump last said on anything is mind bogglingly stupid – a point that his enraptured fan boys can’t seem to figure out.
Further, as important as the border is, it’s not my number one issue. Judges are. On that issue there’s no question who is better between Rubio and Trump.
In fact if Trump does get elected (unlikely given all the stuff Democrats are putting together on him as well as stuff which may come out in the court case etc.) and actually does try to deport all the illegals (of which I am very skeptical) liberals will immediately spring into action and start filing lawsuits with friendly judges. So judges are connected to that issue (and just about everything else these days).
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:26 amSo Scott Adams went Trump. I guess his lawn service cut his grass too short or something. I left this comment there:
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:35 amNice strawman you knocked down there, Mr. Adams. Most people don’t dislike Trump because he likes himself. They dislike him because he is a lifelong Democrat who is appealing to mouth-breathers with hatred of Mexicans and Muslims. Because he switched his positions on abortion, the Second Amendment, and States’ rights just for this election. Because he is so foul-mouthed, vague and incoherent as to appear demented. Because he is a philandering sleazeball. And because he wears a dead badger on his head.
Hate to tell you guys but the only thing that can stop Trump from getting the nomination is if he quits or he dies. I do hope when he wins you will direct as much biting hatred and nasty vitriol toward Hillary! and her dumbass followers as you managed to drum up for Trump and his. I’m sure ropelight et al could use a break (and a little time to gloat). Carrying on your Trump derangement syndrome after the primary will only help the commies on the left and further alienate pro-Trump Republicans, which apparently is your goal since you rarely get a person to change side by calling him or his candidate an authoritarian ,liar and a despot and other names.
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:38 amI am an Independent who is voting for Rubio
Victoria (45bcb3) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:42 amYou really believe that an American who does not want indiscriminate and uncontrolled immigration of Mexicans and moslems is a mouth-breathing hater don’t you nk? So you are for bringing in as many future democrats as possible and as any future terrorist as we can? Are you sure you’re not for Hillary!?
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:43 amRoss Perot said “If you hate, I don’t want you”. One of the greatest statements made by a politician running for office. Same thing with me, Trump and Trumpeteers. I won’t be in their camp and I don’t want them in mine.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:45 amYou could have added that he’s a congenital liar – although you obviously implied it. Many of us who can’t stand that trait in another person don’t suddenly see it as a virtue in the Donald.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:45 am#276, Gerald, illegal immigration is a key issue in Trump’s appeal and is largely responsible for lifting him above the other candidates. Justice Scalia’s strange death occurred well after Trump had established a leading position.
You were viciously attacking Trump well before Scalia died, and pushing Cruz hard. Now somehow Rubio is your man and you claim he’d be better picking judges than Trump. On the basis of what? Your rabid hatred of Trump? Rubio’s leadership in the Gang of 8’s amnesty bill? Maybe Rubio would appoint John McCain, or Chuck Schumer to SCOTUS.
If you think Rubio can be trusted at all, you’ve got your account in the wrong bank. I supported Rubio when he ran against Charlie Crist for the Senate. Rubio came to Naples VFW and spoke against illegal immigration, then when he got to Washington DC, Rubio completely reversed his position, ignored the voters who put him in high office, and became the front man for the Gang of 8’s amnesty legislation.
The truth is that your recent appreciation for Rubio results from the declining performance of Cruz, you changed horses, and the underlying foundation of your political passion is pure hatred for Donald Trump. That and nothing more.
Here’s a few facts on Trump’s Nevada win: (note his support from Hispanics)
Final Nevada results:
ropelight (1ec750) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:50 amTrump said his out of control radical Leftist sister would make a great Supreme Court justice. And Trump is a piece of fecal matter out of control radical Lying Leftist who will not appoint a single justice to the Right of Souter. Regardless of what Trump’s Idolators believe.
John Hitchcock (0997d2) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:58 amRoss Perot was a phuking idiot. Neither you nor Ross is God so neither you nor Ross can know what lies in a mans heart. For you too call a person a hater because he disagrees with you on immigration is the same as some snowflake calling you a racist because you’re white. You people are real quick at name calling and labeling anyone who disagrees with you but real short on answers on how to control immigration.
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:58 amTrump is Tashlan.
John Hitchcock (0997d2) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:05 amImmigration is in the hands of the same reptilian stock-portfolio holders who gave our manufacturing capability to Communist China, and Trump is not the man to oppose them. All he is doing is making scapegoats of Mexicans and Muslims. Tapping deep into the sewer of fear and prejudice.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:11 amropelight (1ec750) — 2/25/2016 @ 6:50 am
The fact that Trump’s appeal is based on illegal immigration does not refute the point I made, which is that he can’t be taken at his word, and that his supporters can’t figure that out. In fact it’s totally consistent with it.
As I said I don’t totally trust Rubio on immigration either.
I say that Rubio would appoint better judges on the basis of Trump being a liberal on the social issues, and having said his sister, the federal judge who made an egregious ruling striking down a partial birth abortion bill, would make a great SCOTUS justice, and Rubio is clearly a conservative on social issues. Those are all REAL things.
I have not switched to Rubio. Cruz is still my choice but I consider Rubio an acceptable alternative. I’m going to vote for whoever has the better chance to win the VA primary based on polls. So far there don’t seem to be many polls on the VA primary and the latest one is inconclusive, so as it stands right now I’ll be voting for Cruz on Monday. But if a new poll comes out before Tuesday showing Rubio clearly has pulled ahead of Cruz then I’ll vote for him.
The underlying foundation of my political passion is conservatism. I also want people who strike me as personally ethical and moral. Clearly some of Trump’s supporters have some rather intense animus toward literally anyone who is opposing Trump judging by various Trumpers posting here.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:11 amBut I agree that we should take it easy on ropelight and papertiger. Would you make fun of me because of my gimpy leg and bad eye?
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:12 am#283 ropelight,
So you say Rubio might appoint Chuck Schumer to the Supreme Court? (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:19 amThat’s cute, but is that the same Chuck Schumer whom Donald Trump has donated thousands of dollars to? I suppose since Trump was already donating to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, he didn’t want Chuckie’s feelings to be hurt, huh? Because The Donald doesn’t like to hurt people’s feelings. He’s a greaattt guy.
I can’t figure out what this is supposed to mean: Justice Scalia’s strange death occurred well after Trump had established a leading position.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:27 amI’ll just say, let’s see what happens in Texas and after.
MD in Philly (at the moment not in Philly) (deca84) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:28 amSpeaking of the strange death of Justice Scalia, here’s an excerpt from the WaPo’s article by Amy Brittain and Sari Horwitz 2/24/16: (emphasis added)
ropelight (1ec750) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:41 amThere are Americans of Mexican ancestry and there are Mexicans over-running our border… the same applies to the Irish, Guatemala, China, Cuba, etc. No issues with ancestry, no hatred involved. I take issue with people who have come here illegally, either overstayed visas or crossed using subterfuge. There is a difference.
Colonel Haiku (df68ea) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:44 amCruz supporters think the way you do, Haiku. Trump supporters don’t.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:47 amTrump has succeeded in undermining Cruz by calling him an untrustworthy liar. Like a fellow schoolyard bully, Rubio was happy to join in that effort. It probably cost Cruz South Carolina and it definitely stopped his momentum from Iowa. It’s not accurate, but that’s politics.
I hope Cruz returns to being the adult in the room, instead of the target of bullies, by talking tonight about the issues and what he would do as President. His opponents won’t do that because, frankly, they can’t. Will some of them build a wall? Yes, but that’s the only specific some of them can recite. They don’t know what they think, let alone what they would do, about a range of other issues that also matter.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 7:59 amGreat Big Wall 2016!
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:13 amDRJ (15874d) — 2/24/2016 @ 11:06 am
Then maybe Bloomberg could carry Texas, or if not Texas, Missuri, Louisiana and North Carolina, not to mention California. (In some states he would displace the Democrat and in other states the Republican.) A third party race might also switch who wins some blue and red states.
The only thing is, Bloomberg is not too likely to run in Hillary is the nominee, unless she’s badly weakened by scandal but unstoppable at the same time, since he’s actually content with Hillary. And he thinks the issues are fiscal conservatism and social liberalism. And he’s polling at about 16% now, although that is the sort of thing that can change, and has changed when there was some other strong third party candidate.
I truly would prefer actually some other candidate as the third party candidate.
The earliest deadline is that of Texas(May 9) – not South Dakota – and signatures can only come from registered voters who did not vote in either the Democratic or Republican presidential primaries.
And amount to a full 1% of votes cast for president in the 2012 presidential election.
Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:14 amCurz has himself to blame, he ran a dirty tricks campaign and Trump threw it in his face. That’s hard cheese, but politics ain’t beanbag.
ropelight (1ec750) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:17 amSo now not only do you know what’s in a mans heart but what’s in his mind too? Trump supporters see the Republican party allowing immigrants, both legal and illegal, into this country at an astounding, un-assimilateable rate. Yes, I know un-assimilateable is not a word, but it works.
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:25 amIt’s okay, Hoagie! You’re a Cruz supporter, remember?
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:29 amPresident Trump will build the wall, because building is what he does. (By the way, I predict his first building project will be a White House ballroom. First things first!) Trump might use eminent domain to build all of it, but I suspect he will only build part of it. Then he will claim the border is secure so everyone still here should be naturalized, and we can live happily ever after.
Since the border is secure, we won’t need to worry about immigration anymore and he can turn to what really matters — doing what his advisers in DC and NY tell him needs to be done. No wonder the GOPe has given up. They won!
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:36 amTrump promises to build a White House ballroom. He says he will pay for it. It’s a small price to pay for the riches he’s going to make.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:38 amFunny that the thing Trump has always wanted — a ballroom — is easily found online, but there’s no mention of him wanting a wall until he started running for President. As I said above, first things first.
Now I’m through with Trump. Good luck to him and I don’t hope he fails, but I do hope he won’t get too rich on the taxpayers’ dime. Instead, it’s a futile hope but I hope he figures out that this job is not about him.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:41 amI’m convinced Rubio is running for VP. Let’s see how much he criticizes Trump tonight and in the coming weeks. If he holds his fire, the fix is in.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:43 amAs for Trump’s supporters, I believe you see in him someone who feels and acknowledges your pain. It is real pain. Obama and, to a degree, Bush 43 oversaw economies that have devastated many families, but especially the Trump supporters. It is not surprising you want a candidate who seems to feel your pain.
I hope Trump really does care because restoring people to the middle class will make America great again. I don’t think he means it and he will only enrich himself and his cronies. I hope I’m wrong.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:53 amThe reason I know President Cruz would help you is that he believes in Constitutional principles that, when we follow them, result in prosperity and real/equal opportunities. It is what the Founders envisioned and it’s what results when we follow those principles. But no one studies them anymore so no one realizes that they work, let alone why.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:55 amGreat Big Ass Wall 2016!
Leviticus (efada1) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:13 am
FIFY
Colonel Haiku (df68ea) — 2/25/2016 @ 8:58 amUnassimilable.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2016 @ 9:03 amThank you, nk.
Rev. Hoagie™® (f4eb27) — 2/25/2016 @ 9:16 am306.The reason I know President Cruz would help you is that he believes in Constitutional principles that, when we follow them, result in prosperity and real/equal opportunities. It is what the Founders envisioned and it’s what results when we follow those principles. But no one studies them anymore so no one realizes that they work, let alone why.
The Constitution was written when the US was short of labor so the free market valued ordinary workers highly. Today the problem is many people suspect with good reason that their market value is low and declining. The main cause is not bad policy but instead technological change which is increasingly making human labor uneconomical. How does society function when production no longer needs labor and capital but just capital alone?
James B. Shearer (0f56fb) — 2/25/2016 @ 10:08 pmCruz hasn’t pulled a single dirty trick. You just keep putting your faith in Trump, a liar and a fraudster.
Trump has exactly the same attitude toward you as he does toward the people he ripped off in his fake “university” and with those fraudulent real estate deals.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431915/donald-trump-worth-tax-returns-mitt-romney
Trump lies about everything, ropelight. Did you miss the part in tonight’s debate where he couldn’t say how he’s going to make Mexico pay for any border walls? Because he won’t be able to do it. Mexico is going to give Trump the finger. They’re not going to give up the billions in remittances from workers in the US, which is a bigger part of their economy than tourism or their oil industry. In fact, I believe remittances are a bigger part of their economy than both combined considering the slump in oil prices.
So, if Mexico isn’t going to pay for it, and they’re not, who will? The Democrats?
Dream on. Also, Trump isn’t as rich as he claims. He lies about that, too, so that people will think he’s a great businessman. He’s not.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431915/donald-trump-worth-tax-returns-mitt-romney
Trump claims he’s worth $10 billion. When a NYT reporter checked on that, he found Trump isn’t even worth $1 billion. Trump does what he always does. He filed a malicious, frivolous lawsuit and then dragged it out by refusing to comply with discovery.
So the judges in the case called Trump a liar, and said the NYT reporter was the credible one in this case.
As the court noted, citing a Forbes article about him:
In case you’re unfamiliar with the term, prevaricate is just a four syllable word for lie.
Oh, and Trump testified under oath that he considered his “brand” part of his net worth. The court laughed that out of court. Even Trump’s own accountants were forced to admit that Trump’s “brand,” his reputation, is not part of anyone’s net worth according to generally accepted accounting practices.
By generally accepted, the court and Trump’s own accountants meant ethical accounting practices. So the court also called Trump unethical for claiming such nonsense anyway.
Now, you show me where and when a court has found Cruz to be a liar and unethical, as courts have found Trump. Then you might have a point.
But until then Trump has a wall to sell you along the Mexican border. It will go nicely with that bridge he has to sell you, and those fake real estate classes, and properties on those fake developments, etc.
The list goes on.
Steve57 (b12073) — 2/25/2016 @ 10:48 pmIt should give Trump supporters pause that when Trump accuses people of lying about him, of defaming him, and sues them then Trump loses in court.
It isn’t just this O’Brien case. Recently Trump lost a YUUUGE case in Kali. One of the Trump “University” students that Trump ripped off sued him for damages due to his fraud. So Trump countersued and accused the woman of defamation. And the judge ruled for the plaintiff. In fact the judge ruled that Trump was guilty of violating Kali’s anti-SLAPP statutes. That his countersuit was not only frivolous but malicious. Trump was simply trying to shut his victim up. So the judge ruled that Trump had to pay nearly $1 million of the plaintiff’s legal fees.
And now Trump is claiming Cruz is lying about him, of defaming him. Does anybody want to bet that Trump won’t sue Cruz? Because he doesn’t want a court to rule, AGAIN, that it’s the other way around. In fact, Trump is the liar.
There’s a pattern here. Trump has a track record, and you’ll find out all about it during the general election if GOP primary voters are stupid enough to make Trump the nominee.
Steve57 (b12073) — 2/25/2016 @ 10:59 pmMy guess was wrong. Rubio came out fighting. He is very good at one-liners. He should try Twitter.
DRJ (15874d) — 2/25/2016 @ 11:52 pmThanks for taking the time to respond, Steve. But, you missed my point, I intended to point to Cruz’s dirty campaign tricks. His taking advantage of Ben Carson’s visit home to Florida to push the incorrect notion Carson was dropping out of the race, the report card on past on voter participation with the threat of exposure to neighbors, and his phony photo shop of Rubio shaking hands with Obama.
Cruz already has a reputation of divisive interpersonal relations among peers in Congress and when you add his campaign dirty tricks they reinforce the narrative. That’s why Cruz is loosing ground and falling behind Rubio.
ropelight (4ea934) — 2/27/2016 @ 8:23 pmPeople who actually believe Trump will get Mexico to pay for a wall belong on the special ed bus. There’s no other way to put it. But I get the feeling some of his supporters aren’t totally sure he’ll do that but just like him saying that he will.
Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 2/27/2016 @ 8:35 pm