Patterico's Pontifications

4/17/2016

Jonah Goldberg on Trumpism: Like a “Dye Marker” for the Worst Traits of the Right

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:35 pm



Jonah Goldberg:

It seems pretty obvious to me that the rage I hear from Trump supporters when I say they’re wrong stems from a kind of insecurity or resentment. Simply put, they want to be validated. It’s an awfully similar response to what we hear constantly on college campuses from the delicate little flowers who say they don’t want debate, they want empowerment. It turns out that many of the mental habits we mock and ridicule on the left have ample purchase on the right as well. This revelation, along with several others, has been painful but useful. The Trump candidacy has been a like a dye marker, highlighting traits and inclinations on the right I didn’t appreciate or acknowledge. I’m grateful for the lesson, though I can’t say I’m glad I had to learn it.

Trumpers on Twitter — which is where I encounter most of them — tend to be remarkably similar. They often have an eagle or an American flag for their background image and/or avatar. They use a lot of exclamation points. They can’t spell to save their lives. They have no reasoning powers. They debate like the most annoying leftists, ignoring every good point and pushing total nonsense. They have no conception of grammar, with “your an asshole” being a fairly common phrase (including from Sean Hannity). They are wildly enthusiastic, in a manner that reminds me of these lines from Yeats’s “The Second Coming”:

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Goldberg’s image of a dye marker is about right. I’ve rarely found a trait that so reliably separates the conservatives I like from those I can’t possibly respect. There are exceptions to the rule that Trumpeters are chuckle-headed morons, of course — primarily people willing to overlook all of Trump’s obvious fakery and double-dealing because they unaccountably trust him on some pet issue, like immigration or a dovish foreign policy. But for the most part, Trumpism has done a wonderful job of demonstrating to me who is worth interacting with, and who isn’t.

330 Responses to “Jonah Goldberg on Trumpism: Like a “Dye Marker” for the Worst Traits of the Right”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  2. Slouching toward Cleveland?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  3. Slouching toward Cleveland?

    Other than through the ‘net, I don’t actually know anyone whom I know to be a Trump supporter, but that’s probably because I do most of my discussion of politics online, and I methodically avoid reading or discussing politics (or religion) on social media like Facebook. I’m sure I know some people who, without my knowing it, are Trump supporters, but I really don’t see much upside — given that the Texas primary is long past — in curing my ignorance on that particular score.

    Online, the most tolerable Trump supporters are those who concede that he’s a boorish pig, but argue that he’s the precise kind of boorish pig the GOP needs to win the election. I label these the “At least Trump will make the trains run on time” crowd. Either they never have cared about putting a conservative into the White House, or they’ve already given up on that and they’re willing to settle for a boorish pig who’s always been a northeastern limousine liberal Democrat but now pretends to be a conservative Republican. I’d actually excuse these people from the “Trumpkin” label, because they’re utterly cynical: They see Trump clear-eyed, but where I see bug, they see feature.

    But regarding the true-believer Trumpkins — the ones who are still active marks, meaning they’re still (for now) oblivious to the fact they’re being conned — yeah, I think our host has accurately described their most common and distinctive traits.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  4. I couldn’t agree more. This “dye marker” has be very instructive and yet at the same time depressing. The only silver lining has been the discovery of new voices in conservative media that I either didn’t have the time to listen to, read, or watch before, or never knew existed.

    Sean (221079)

  5. rank snobbery Mr. Goldberg

    the party what nominated weirdo romneycare romney and meghan’s execrable coward daddy is not really in a position to do criticize on people what are choosing to vote for Mr. The Donald

    happyfeet (831175)

  6. ^^^ Before last fall, Roger Simon of PJ Media was a good example of the kind of Trump supporter who originally saw Trump clear-eyed; but Roger has since gone full Trumpkin.

    There are historical parallels for that, too.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  7. Um. You do realize you just proved Patterico’s point, right?

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  8. i spelled everything super good

    happyfeet (831175)

  9. Not Beldar, of course.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  10. happyfeet, you aren’t rebuting the point.

    SPQR (f061b5)

  11. *rebutting*

    happyfeet (831175)

  12. Or refuting.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  13. Seriously, Mr. Feet: you used to post on Protein Wisdom all the time, and I can’t find your posts. Did he scrub you?

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  14. I’ve asked before, but apparently no Trump supporter wants to answer the question, but I’ll ask it again: Trump supporter, exactly what would it take for you to disavow your candidate? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  15. Donald Trump is channeling all the hardships he’s experienced throughout his difficult life in order to inspire average Americans to rise up against the “system” that’s cheating them! And he’s doing all this by self-funding his campaign with your donations! (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  16. as opposed to when williamson said poor white communities in appalachia, should die out, is he on trump’s payroll, because he has been as helpful to cruz’s cause as vicente fox,

    narciso (732bc0)

  17. keep looking Mr. Jester it’s like panning for gold it takes time but it’s worth it

    happyfeet (831175)

  18. Trump supporter, exactly what would it take for you to disavow your candidate? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    you act like the US presidency is something to take super seriously

    it’s not anymore

    that ship has sailed

    happyfeet (831175)

  19. My wife and I run a small rural Midwest cafe. We have been amazed at the wide spread support of “The Donald”. We have the gamut of customers from multiple degrees college graduates to high scool drop outs. The customers break into thirds of Dem., Ind. and GOP. One even held a county office as a Dem. The economy and jobs seem to be the biggest issues with Trump giving them the best answers. The wife and I are probably leaner toward Trump, but we just grab more popcorn and watch the show until the primary season is over. The most interesting thing is the lack of enthusiasm for Bernie or Hillary, as this county normally votes Dem.

    EldonH (e0559f)

  20. Oh, I see: no one there responds to you. That was the issue. And repeated use of “pee stanky” in one thread is not compelling. My mistake.

    Dana, your question is *the* question.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  21. it’s supposed to be hyphenated Mr. Jester

    happyfeet (831175)

  22. The ignorance. It berns.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  23. I think 10% of Trump supporters are crazy and the other 90% are being smeared by inside the Beltway snobs.
    Trump offers blue collar high school educated hardscrabble democrats and republicans a voice. The rough tough sounding type of voice they understand.
    Feel free to bust away at Trump, but don’t casually fall into the NYT or National Review broad smear of all of his supporters. Not everyone has your education, your opportunities… or yeah not your IQ. I mean, my god, they write “your” instead of “you’re”.
    Sure there are idiots spamming the internet, but 10 trolls can make a lot of noise and not speak for anyone except the many voices within their own fevered minds.

    The Trumpisms of “your job was stolen and sent to Mexico and I’ll get it back” are real to the Rust Belt because that is exactly what happened to their last good job. Or “I’ll build a wall and tax remittances to Mexico to pay for it” again resonates with people of the Southwest who are not racist, they are just overwhelmed by unchecked immigration. They have lost construction jobs, their schools are now failing, property values crashed, gangs roam the streets and criminal aliens seem never to be deported.

    Granted, those promises by Trump are probably empty, but Trump articulated what the average person was afraid to say.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  24. Is the Trumpist bashing helping anything?

    MD back in Philly!!! (f9371b)

  25. Eldon H,

    Can you tell us on what those “best answers” from Trump entailed? I’m curious. Also, if you don’t mind me asking, what is drawing you and your wife toward Trump as opposed to Cruz, who has made economic growth his number one priority, with a special emphasis on small businesses?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  26. Let’s dispel with this notion that hatefulfeet is as dumb as he sometimes pretends to be.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  27. steveg,

    I agree that many blue collar jobs have been lost to Americans because of unchecked illegal immigration as well as every corner of public service being impacted as well. I think Cruz and Trump supporters can agree upon that. But, if as you say, Trump’s promises are likely empty and will not come to fruition, why support him? Especially as there is a candidate who has laid out a comprehensive plan to not just tackle the problem of illegal immigration but to actually take steps to reduce the size of government which in turn will positively impact the economy and directly impact the blue collar worker.

    Wouldn’t you rather choose someone who has shown himself to work for the people rather than one who appeals on a surface level but has no nuts and bolts prescription in place to remedy either problem?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  28. @ EldonH (#19): Hi there, and welcome (to the blog if you’re new, to the comments if you’re usually a lurker)! I join Dana (#25) in hoping you’ll share with us the reasons you and your wife are leaning toward Trump, along with any other details that might seem relevant and that you’re willing to share. I’d also be curious, for example, where you and your wife consider yourselves on the conservative/liberal spectrum, and whether y’all are regular voters in past presidential elections.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  29. pikachu is a mad mogwai, but lets face facts, the top men want neither trump nor cruz,

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/14/us/politics/republican-nomination.html?_r=0

    narciso (732bc0)

  30. I like “Your a looser” best.

    Jim (98dd1a)

  31. Dana

    Cruz won the county caucus, but with a very high sleaze factor, as my wife put it. We just have to wait and watch now. (We didn’t support either one at the caucus.)

    EldonH (e0559f)

  32. @ Happyfeet responds to my question: Trump supporter, exactly what would it take for you to disavow your candidate? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    you act like the US presidency is something to take super seriously

    it’s not anymore

    that ship has sailed

    happyfeet (831175) — 4/17/2016 @ 2:14 pm

    Interesting. If you truly believed that, happyfeet, why would you waste so much time and energy denigrating Cruz while “*supporting” Trump?

    Support by omission – sort of like lying by omission.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  33. steveg- What I don’t understand is that even you admit Trump’s promises are empty (especially on immigration when he said there would be no restriction on legal immigration), and yet only because he says things you like that’s all that matters?

    I certainly get the anger, but it seems entirely misplaced. It seems all about the cult of personality instead of reality. We had that with Obama, and that didn’t work out well at all. Even a lot of Obama supporters admit they were duped by him.

    Patrick Henry, the 2nd (ddead1)

  34. Eh, I wanted to add to my comment to steveg @ 28: I agree that many blue collar jobs have been lost to Americans because of unchecked illegal immigration as well as every corner of public service being impacted as well. I think Cruz and Trump supporters can agree upon that. But, if as you say, Trump’s promises are likely empty and will not come to fruition, why support him? Especially as there is a candidate who has laid out a comprehensive plan to not just tackle the problem of illegal immigration but to actually take steps to reduce the size of government which in turn will positively impact the economy and directly impact the blue collar worker.

    Wouldn’t you rather choose someone who has shown himself to work for the people rather than one who appeals on a surface level but has no nuts and bolts prescription in place to remedy either problem?

    Further, what makes you demand so little from your candidate? If you don’t believe he is going to do what he promises, then why do you allow yourself to be lied to like that – and find it perfectly acceptable?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  35. In the fwiw dept.
    The main reason I don’t support Trump is that all one has to go on is what he has said the last 6 months,
    And that is what got us here in the first place.
    Yes, he has said some things no one else was willing to say,
    And I think he has contributed to the process.

    But Cruz is the only one who has demonstrated that he will do what he said he would do once in office, whether people liked it or not.

    MD back in Philly!!! (f9371b)

  36. I do not care what people say,
    If by night or if by day.
    Whether it sounds sweet
    Or like stinky feet
    The words they say
    They have no sway

    Until you have done what you say,
    Please, please, just go away.

    (my daughter was in “Seussical” last weekend…minor roles.

    MD back in Philly!!! (f9371b)

  37. narciso, I agree that there are still a ton of establish GOP figures — elected officials, party leaders up and down the chains, lobbyists, consultants, pundits, the works — who are unreconciled to Cruz as an alternative to Trump.

    One of the “computational journalists” (lefties always make up the best job titles!) at fivethirtyeight.com posted this about the current state of GOP endorsements.

    I think that Silver and that site are drunk on their own fumes when it comes to endorsements; they both overstate and understate their effectiveness. Take this, for example:

    FiveThirtyEight gives 10 points for endorsements from governors, 5 points for endorsements from U.S. senators and 1 point for endorsements from U.S. representatives.

    Okay, the results from that are indeed “data-driven.” But the results they reach from these arbitrary premises are guesswork, not empirical.

    Nevertheless, they’re right that in this cycle at this time, an extraordinary number of public figures — in both parties — are finding it prudent, for whatever reasons, to stay on the sidelines a while longer. It’s a mistake to presume that they’ll stay there until the conventions, though, or that they’ll remain there after.

    The cascade to Cruz will come, I increasingly believe, right after the California primary on June 7th, when it will become clear beyond peradventure that even with any plausible pre-convention deals (e.g., Trump announced Kasich as Veep, Kasich successfully steers his pledged delegates from Ohio to Trump), Trump simply won’t have, or be close to having, a first-ballot majority.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  38. i do truly believe that Dana I truly truly do

    i think we need a change agent a catalyst a disruptive black swan to set things to right

    i don’t think a cold calculating harvardtrash goldy sacky like ted is the answer here

    i think he’s a poser what tries to use his unpopularity among his colleagues as a talisman of anti-establishment bona fides

    at best what Ted brings to the table is too little too late (plus his social con baggage is odious and repellent)

    nopers

    time to throw the cards in the air
    and let the chippy chips fall wherevers

    there’s a reason God sent us Mr. The Donald right now

    and I wanna find out why

    happyfeet (831175)

  39. I think it is anger at what is perceived as betrayal and taking voters for granted, Dana.

    It’s sort of “a pox upon all your houses” approach.

    But you will notice that Trump supporters very seldom respond to questions about specific policy questions from DJT. That’s because he simply voices their upset. And that makes many voters feel good.

    Me, I am worried about the specifics. I hear none of that from DJT.

    Lots of people—including DJT—supported BHO in 2008. Why? To prove to themselves they weren’t racist. It wasn’t about BHO’s policies, or background, or anything at all. It was projection.

    In a way, you see this with the swooning in Canada over Trudeau.

    The sad thing is that many Trump supporters I know are open at how frequently people voted for BHO to make themselves feel good…yet are doing the same thing.

    nk must have a name for the Greek curse of making one emulate one’s enemies.

    It’s sad, regardless.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  40. OMG. Someone can write this about Cruz:

    “…i think he’s a poser what tries to use his unpopularity among his colleagues as a talisman of anti-establishment bona fides…”

    Yet cannot see it applies much more to Candidate Biff Tannen?

    And the continual drumbeat about money while ignoring silly gold plated toilets.

    I tell you, this is some weird neurosis on display. And one that, even if successful, simply gives us 8 years of HRC, and four HRC-selected SCOTUS seats.

    Chaos is great when you don’t have children, or friends and family you care about.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  41. Beldar

    Need a label? Lurker usually, because we run the cafe seven days a week. We started out twelve years ago with eleven employees and now have three. We are in a bedroom community and watched too many lose their high dollar job and now have two part time jobs. I’m a partly disabled marine due to Pres. Johnson. (Never did like his “Great Society” failure.) I taught college level physics and robotics, but that job disappeared. We should be sitting on the porch, collecting our check and playing with our great grand children, but run the cafe every day except holidays.

    EldonH (e0559f)

  42. I think this is where we are at, with many folks.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Tpe-dbPQI

    They will not be happy with the results, I believe.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  43. Let’s do a thought experiment. Let’s presume together, for purposes of argument, that no candidate comes to the Republican National Convention with the 1237 votes in hand to win a first-ballot nomination.

    Q: What would happen if every delegate to the Republican National Convention were legally and effectively pledged to a candidate for the entire vote, no matter how many ballots?

    A: The convention would be deadlocked forever. Period. This is a mathematical certainty: If you don’t have anyone with a majority on the first ballot, and if no one can change his or her vote on any later ballots, no one will ever get a majority.

    Nevertheless, that’s exactly the rule that Trump surrogates are demanding be implemented in Florida. Trump believes his Florida delegates should be handcuffed to him in perpetuity:

    After the third round of voting, the Florida delegates can pick whomever they please.

    Of all the states, Florida’s system is the best for Trump. No other state has such a stringent requirement for so many to support a winner for so long.

    Trump backers, though, want more: perpetual support for Trump.

    Joseph Monteleone, a Trump demonstrator who showed up Saturday, said the entire system is unfair because it essentially makes delegates have more of a say than voters.

    “The people’s vote does not count,” he said. “One delegate is worth 1,000 votes. So my vote, essentially, doesn’t count.”

    That guy won’t be satisfied until he can use his smartphone to personally vote for and against every bill and resolution in the Congress. “Press 1 to declare war on China. Press 2 to declare war on Mexico.”

    Beldar (fa637a)

  44. (Normal text and data rates apply. Trump Cellular imposes a $0.83 surcharge on each vote for processing and handling. Void where prohibited.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  45. Need a label? Lurker usually, because we run the cafe seven days a week. We started out twelve years ago with eleven employees and now have three. We are in a bedroom community and watched too many lose their high dollar job and now have two part time jobs. I’m a partly disabled marine due to Pres. Johnson. (Never did like his “Great Society” failure.) I taught college level physics and robotics, but that job disappeared. We should be sitting on the porch, collecting our check and playing with our great grand children, but run the cafe every day except holidays.

    Hi, Eldon. You seem like a reasonable and hardworking person. My guess is that far more Trump supporters or leaners are people like you, as opposed to the crazies I see on Twitter.

    Like Beldar, I am interested in why you say you lean Trump, and specifically why Trump instead of Cruz. I may learn something from your response. Thanks for de-lurking.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  46. @ EldonH (#42): Wow, thanks for the informative response! I hope you’ll continue not only lurking, but commenting here through the general election! You and your wife doubtless have some interesting perspectives to share, and you express yourself very concisely and well.

    I’ll resist, for now, the impulse to either pepper you with more questions or twist your arm. Good luck

    Beldar (fa637a)

  47. At #14, Dana asked:

    I’ve asked before, but apparently no Trump supporter wants to answer the question, but I’ll ask it again: Trump supporter, exactly what would it take for you to disavow your candidate? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    Dana (0ee61a) — 4/17/2016 @ 2:10 pm

    How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Answer your one question only substitute Ted Cruz for Donald Trump:

    Dana, exactly what would it take for you to disavow Ted Cruz? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    ropelight (1d7e5f)

  48. Oh, ropelight. DJT has been embarrassing the nation for some time by discussing his penis, insulting wives, giving nasty nicknames to people, running dishonest businesses, cheating on wives, and so forth.

    So I suggest you go first. My guess is that you don’t want to do so. Because you know perfectly well that DJT will let you down…and you have committed yourself, no matter what.

    He is laughing at you, you know.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  49. ropelight, what if it’s revealed that Trump donated money to the campaigns of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in recent years?
    Would that elicit you to start asking questions?

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  50. For me to abandon my support of Ted Cruz in this presidential campaign, Cruz would need to reverse himself on a significant number of the most important policy issues that are important to me. For example, suppose Cruz said tomorrow:

    Forget everything I’ve ever said or done or stood for. As of now, I am in favor of high tariffs. I’m in favor of crony capitalism. I’m pro-choice in every respect, including partial-birth abortion, and I want to maintain federal funding for Planned Parenthood. I want to use eminent domain to take condemn private property in order to benefit real estate developers. I’m in favor of Obama-Clinton-style foreign policy, and by the way, I’ve donated money to their campaigns, I voted Democrat most of my life, and I regularly use cash contributions and payoffs and kickbacks to purchase corrupt political influence. I was once fined a million dollars for employing illegal aliens. Plus I’ve mated promiscuously and adulterously throughout my life; I’ve never actually read Two Corinthians; and I think it’s entirely appropriate to refer to women as fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals, because they really look best on their knees, and it doesn’t matter what they say about me as long as I have a young and beautiful piece of ass.

    That would probably shake me up pretty hard.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  51. the fact our duma is feckless is why cruz has little traction,

    https://twitter.com/PoliticalShort/status/721445244424683520

    narciso (732bc0)

  52. I guess that’s actually a mix of policy and character issues.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  53. Ropelight has lost all sense of integrity. And I have more respect for the aphraels of the world than for the ropelights of the world. In case you don’t know how much that means, just do some reading of the Bible. There are some fundamentals in there which are very informative.

    John Hitchcock (cf2219)

  54. Policy proposals which expand and extend rather than restrict the reach of the Federal Government would cost Cruz my support.

    Rick Ballard (787e6d)

  55. #51 Beldar,

    How could any conservative support a candidate who supports those positions and talks that way?! (LOL)
    By the way, looking forward to that future Civil War novel. The dialogue will be cracklin’, I’m sure!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  56. Eldon,

    Given that you have faced a number of setbacks, and are not at a place in your life yet where you have the financial luxury of just relaxing with the grandchildren, what exactly is it that Trump is “offering” you specifically that Cruz isn’t and that causes you to lean toward Cruz?

    If it’s something more than just a “feeling” about the candidate, can you elaborate?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  57. We Are The Trumpions

    He’s paid no dues
    Not one thin dime
    He’s served no sentence
    But committed no crime
    And bad mistakes
    He’s made a few
    He’s had his share of law
    suits filed in court
    But he’s come through

    And he means to go on and on and on and on

    They are the Trumpions – my friends
    And they’ll keep on fighting
    Till the end
    They are the Trumpions
    They are the Trumpions
    No time for Cruz
    Because they are the Trumpions of the World

    He’s taken his bows
    And his curtain calls
    He’s bought him fame and fortune
    And everything that goes with it
    He has the gall
    But he speaks no specifics
    Just platitudes
    He’d consider it a challenge before
    The presidential race
    Says he ain’t gonna lose

    And he blathers on and on and on and on

    They are the Trumpions – my friends
    And they’ll keep on fighting
    Till the end
    They are the Trumpions
    They are the Trumpions
    No time for Cruz
    Because they are the Trumpions of the World

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  58. Sorry Sir but you are too certain of your own clarity of thought and too certain of the lack of same in those with whom you disagree. Allan Bloom was right, the closing of the American mind indeed.

    Mark Johnson (758e29)

  59. How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Answer your one question only substitute Ted Cruz for Donald Trump:

    Dana, exactly what would it take for you to disavow Ted Cruz? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    ropelight,

    This is the big difference between you and me: If Cruz behaved in the same egregious manner that Trump has with regard to women, abortion, growing government, encouraging thuggish behavior, defending an employee who clearly did wrong, I would have already called him out on it, and if warranted, disavowed him. I’m not loyal to the party, nor loyal to any politician. Cruz, like any other candidate, can just as easily fall from grace. But I don’t see anything in his past behavior or current behavior that is similar to what we see in Trump. (However, if it was proven beyond all doubt that Cruz did indeed have the affairs with five different women, that would do it, too. But hey, where’d that story disappear to anyway???)

    With that, if Cruz were to adopt any political policy positions that stray from basic conservatism, endorsing abortion, big government, higher taxes, illegal immigration, climate change, etc, that would do it, too.

    But enough about me. You didn’t answer the question.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  60. ‘the beatings will continue, till morale improves’ mark, haven’t you figured that out yet, the gop senate funded robertscare, moloch’s minions, was aloof with regards to amnesty, abandoned steyn at the senate hearing,

    narciso (732bc0)

  61. Dana – He’s going to build Trump Wall! And punish those that disagree with him. And impose tariffs on imports because free trade. And punish women for abortions. And an eye for an eye. Etc

    JD (6aa855)

  62. but all the good women who don’t do abortion on their little babies will get special treats

    why does everybody always leave out about the special treats

    happyfeet (831175)

  63. It’s worth bearing in mind that quite a lot of the pro-trump twitter accounts are probably literally (and unlike Biden, I know what that word means) mindless bots: Trump’s campaign has been accused, by people knowledgeable on the matter, of creating vast numbers of twitter accounts and running them via bots. I’m not excusing this, far from it, I find it utterly reprehensible, the same way I found Cruz’s “voter scorecard” scandal in Iowa reprehensible.

    As for tariffs, I am closer to Trump than Cruz on that issue, because running a massive trade deficit is a drain on the country. However, I’m only for trade barriers with unlike economies with which we’re running a massive deficit; free trade with similar economies, such as Canada, is quite beneficial due to comparative advantage. The problem, IMHO, is that too many on the right take free trade as a dogma, and like any dogma ever, that’s a very bad idea. Look at the numbers and economic results of free trade under NAFTA with Canada and Mexico, and you’ll see quite different outcomes.

    As for Trump, I do indeed harbor a fear that he is lying and wouldn’t keep his promises (such as on immigration) but, I’d still vote for him over a proven liar like Rubio. (It’d be probably a liar vs. definitely a liar – ugh)

    Out of Trump and Cruz, I prefer Cruz, but I’d support either of them in November.

    Arizona CJ (da673d)

  64. I’m looking through Jonah Goldberg’s resume and he appears to be missing a credential.

    There’s no psychology degree. In fact there’s no doctorate of any sort, even in the newspaper business which he has worked at his entire life.

    That means he’s a self appointed hobby anthropologist practicing group psychology on a political opponent without a licence.
    Let’s face it, group psychology, even when practiced by fully credentialed professionals is little more than politics disguised as science by confidence men with an agenda.

    One thing worth sharing from Goldberg’s wiki, even though holding a journo to a position is like nailing down jello, is his position on the Iraq war.

    he wrote in October 2006 that invading Iraq was a mistake, he called it a “noble” mistake and still maintained that liberal opponents to the war policy wanted America to fail: “In other words, their objection isn’t to war per se; it’s to wars that advance U.S. interests… I must confess, one of the things that made me reluctant to conclude that the Iraq war was a mistake was my distaste for the shabbiness of the arguments on the antiwar side.”

    Goldberg holds the same position Trump does with regard to the Iraq war.

    Maybe he spells it different.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  65. I think Goldberg represents the worst of the GOP. To think you know what is best for the nation is admirable, but when you fail to recognize the will of the voters we end up with losses. Goldberg’s prejudice against Trump has clouded his judgment to the point he ignores current facts. First Trump is the only candidate who can defeat Clinton. Cruz does not have a chance. The opposition research results the MSM are gleefully hiding will doom him, Kasich, you have got to be kidding. Trump supporters, and there are many, will not support another GOPe nominee. The American people want something different. Trump speaks our language and understands our frustration. He is not a politician so he is not lying every time his lips move. The I see it, this is a bloodless revolution by the people. If this does not work maybe we will try it the tried and true way.

    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (d8338d)

  66. The most interesting thing is the lack of enthusiasm for Bernie or Hillary, as this county normally votes Dem.

    That’s a relief.

    Goldberg needs to also analyze those Republicans and certainly any self-described conservative ones who say they’ll be voting for Hillary if their favorite candidate (in most instances perhaps Ted Cruz instead of Trump, but most certainly John Kasich if that’s who they admire) isn’t on the ballot in November.

    Goldberg should also scrutinize those Republicans who in 2008 (if not also 2012) admired the crease of the pants of the person who the current presidential candidates hope to succeed, in spite of that person’s disreputable ultra-liberal background and ignoble life history.

    Mark (16bc93)

  67. Patterico, Beldar, Dana

    I guess I’ll pull a Hillary and say “It just doesn’t matter” who I support. The only say we have is in November. The Iowa caucus is long gone. Cruz sounds like a politician. That’s what I hear in the cafe. Trump has put out ideas about taxes, tariffs, capital gains, etc. that most people haven’t heard before. People are hoping that even part of what he says works. Very simply, It’s like playing the lotto. People are looking for a chance at something different. Most elections, our customers don’t vote. They say nothing will change no matter who wins. That’s why this election seems different.

    Dana, my retirement which was very large, disappeared under Pres. Carter. Never could put the deal together to get back on top. That’s what makes Trump’s story intriguing.

    We will support whoever wins the primary, they are not the candidates we would have picked.

    EldonH (e0559f)

  68. would it have been considered acceptable for santorum, or gingrich, to poach delegates from romney, certainly not, the screams would have been primal,

    narciso (732bc0)

  69. First Trump is the only candidate who can defeat Clinton. Cruz does not have a chance.

    Just so you know, recent polling figures (which are rather widespread and involve a variety of pollsters) refutes that.

    Mark (16bc93)

  70. the elephant in the room, which has been absent in recent conversations,

    http://www.weaselzippers.us/267152-belgian-interior-minister-says-many-muslims-danced-after-terrorist-attacks/

    narciso (732bc0)

  71. the usual rules don’t apply to harvardtrash

    when it was mitt who was the frontrunner poaching delegates was unthinkable

    now that harvardtrash ted is coming in second all of a sudden the rules change

    it’s elitist and corrupt, but reince don’t care

    that’s what they pay him for

    happyfeet (831175)

  72. I understand the rage of the Trumpkins because I feel it too. Our various bureaucracies treat us as if we are one big goopy blob of racist polluters, steamrolling over the heartland and ruining everything in our path.

    So I love Trump’s rage and vulgarity (against the folks I hate too) but he lost any chance at my vote by never switching over to statesman mode and giving a thoughtful speech or a coherent plan — even though he would never follow through with it, like any politician, it would be nice to know he could frame the question and outsmart the DC pros once he’s installed. The Bernie Bro is the cousin to the Trumpkin, but Bernie is using the promise of free stuff instead of the promise of revenge to excite his minions.

    So I’m pretty sure I’m voting for Cruz, which means I think that I will have to register Republican. Hill and the media will no doubt beat them both, but at least Cruz could educate people on an alternative to free government cheese. There is a small awakening happening (see The Chalkening) and Cruz would be the one to spur it along.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  73. I just read through some of the responses. Some of you people get all of your information from Lyin Ted Cruz. Trump has never discussed the size of his unit. If you suggest he has, you, like Calgary Cruz are a liar. Anyone who thinks Ted Cruz can win a general election is delusional. Were people get to vote, he loses. There will be no Democrats voting for Cruz. Few independents will vote for Cruz. Trump supporters and there are many, will not vote for Cruz. That’s just real folks.

    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (d8338d)

  74. #74
    False flag or idiot?

    steveg (fed1c9)

  75. Mr. Ragshaft is stalwart and true

    comment long time

    happyfeet (831175)

  76. #34
    Patrick Henry (great name)

    Thanks for the conversation.
    Personally, I get your take on Cruz and Trump.
    But people are conditioned to expect politicians to lie and over promise and under deliver.
    I think it is a mistake for guys like Jonah to smear rank and file trumpsters. It is elitist bigotry.

    (in my opinion. your mileage may vary if you’re a Cruzter)

    steveg (fed1c9)

  77. Hill and the media will no doubt beat them both

    That assumption, which the conventional-wisdom types have been promoting since well before the emergence of Trump and Cruz, means the country is already lost, kaput, washed up.

    I hate to think the prediction of the likely next president is as accurate today (April 17) as it was before the truly deranged qualities of Hillary became increasingly known to the public. But I don’t trust a large portion of the electorate, not after 2008 and most certainly not after 2012. That’s why all the hand-wringing over the pros and cons of any of the Republican candidates flies right by me at this time.

    Mark (16bc93)

  78. I agree with steveg and EldonH that Trump supporters have legitimate concerns about where America is headed. I don’t think Trump has the answers but it seems most Trump supporters have given up on their ability to recover and on national politicians helping them recover. Trump may seem like their last real hope, which means they have no hope. (I wonder how many voted for Obama?)

    Whether their grammar or spelling is correct doesn’t bother me. I often make mistakes when I’m posting comments based more on emotion than reason or even when I’m using a tablet. A lot of things can make that happen.

    As for my support for Cruz, i would not have supported him during the first 6 months if he had changed positions on several important issues or if he had floundered in debates. At this point, however, the only thing that would stop me from supporting him is if Cruz agreed to be Trump’s VP or if Cruz picked Trump as his VP.

    DRJ (15874d)

  79. Trump has never discussed the size of his unit. If you suggest he has, you, like Calgary Cruz are a liar.

    I’m…not sure what you’re talking about, or who you’re referring to. But as far as discussing the size of his wee wee-wee, he has. If that’s what you mean. Is it? Do I actually have to prove this?

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  80. Zelsdorf, you may be the only person in America who believes that. Even Trump wants you to believe it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  81. I think 74 is real. He’s also an idolator. He’s also continuing lies. His god, Donald Trump, is a well-known liar. So no, 74 is not worthy of any respect whatsoever.

    John Hitchcock (cf2219)

  82. @ Patricia,

    I understand the rage of the Trumpkins because I feel it too. Our various bureaucracies treat us as if we are one big goopy blob of racist polluters, steamrolling over the heartland and ruining everything in our path.

    I agree. I’ve felt and identified with the same anger and frustration.

    It seems as if thinking people eventually come to a crossroads with their support of Trump. It doesn’t always consistently grow, like you would think it would. After all, it is a presidential candidate one is throwing themselves behind, not a new cereal. But it’s as if a light bulb goes off when one suddenly realizes that there is nothing more past Trump’s angry drama. He just hits the repeat button of the same recycled empty, heated rhetoric.

    After all, after one is elected, one must actually, you know, govern.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  83. I don’t support Trump. He can do that himself… very well.
    But I do get angry if I think someone like Jonah smears Trump supporters

    I am already on the record saying I will vote for Cruz if he is the nominee.
    Cruz will be my guy in the CA primary
    Will vote for Trump if he is national nominee

    A vote held away because Cruz or Trump in not your favored nominee in the General Election is a vote for Hillary and may God have mercy on your soul. Or not. Rendering thy soul unto Ms. Caesar.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  84. Sorry Zelsdorff.
    I did the same thing I’ve deplored in others.

    Back to my glass house to do some repairs

    steveg (fed1c9)

  85. An aye for an aye.

    Pirate Jim (98dd1a)

  86. Trump has never discussed the size of his unit. If you suggest he has, you, like Calgary Cruz are a liar.
    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (d8338d) — 4/17/2016 @ 4:50 pm

    I watched the debate where he did, you ridiculous twerp. F**k you, anyway, who cares what you think. You’re too stupid to find your way to the polling place.

    nk (dbc370)

  87. Dana, you’re right, I didn’t answer your question. I answered Beldar’s questions a few days ago. He didn’t much like my responses, called me names as usual, and took the opportunity to throw in a couple a cheap shots, not nearly so coarse as Hitchcock of course, but he might coulda felt like washing his hands afterward.

    I thought that might get me a pass or at least a little slack. But, apparently that’s not going to happen. So, after a brief preface, here goes:

    Dana, we are different in a few small ways, I don’t assume that Michelle Fields is telling the truth. She obviously lied about being nearly being pulled to the ground. As for accounts of Cruz’s affairs I expect them to resurface during the GOP Convention.

    Additionally, Cruz’s position on a VAT tax leaves me chilled to the bone. What sort of monster that might metastasize into to plague our nation one can only wonder, or look at Europe. But these are beside the gist of your question.

    Truth is there are lots of things Trump could do to sour me on him. But, I admit I’m having trouble coming up with one just now. I have guests and my attention is wandering back and forth. I’ll have another go tomorrow morning.

    ropelight (1d7e5f)

  88. nk must have a name for the Greek curse of making one emulate one’s enemies.

    Not sure I do, but there’s a perfect one for Trumpkins. Malaka.

    nk (dbc370)

  89. We’re about to enter Cruz’ fortnight in the desert. It’s gonna be turrible. When he/we emerge, we’ll be where? Indiana? Ewwww. Kasich may have his strongest organization there, aside from Ohio.

    If ever there were a time to be a NeverFoxer, this would be it. Megyn sold her soul for an interview on her new show and Hannity is a classic useful idiot. Greta? Bolling? Fabulists.

    My fuse may be at its shortest. These reports out of Georgia? Goebbels would be proud. Not one word in them as to how Trump will lose so much as a single 1st ballot vote he won in the primary. Not. One. Yet, by the tone and propaganda, hyped by Drudge, you’d think Cruz had Trump whacked.

    All I want to know, at this point, is who the unbound 1st ballot ~150 delegates are. They are the story. If they go Trump, he wins. It is over. If they don’t go for DJT, he is done. Full stop.

    Of course, this would take real journalism.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  90. well seeing how bankrupt greece is, they are probably too familiar with that term.

    narciso (732bc0)

  91. well megyn rarely covers breaking news anymore, and the whole thing has a touch of taylor swift to it, baltimore, the uk, the events in the kingdom don’t seem to matter, except this death race 2016 contest,

    narciso (732bc0)

  92. plus the saudi royal perverts are threatening to destroy our economy if we don’t do

    exactly

    what

    they

    say

    happyfeet (831175)

  93. an interesting legal question, the fate of that bill, seems to lie on the status of saudi nationals, some were officials, egL fakihi and thumairy, but were not acting in the capacity as govt official, but as private persons, hence the kingdom being held accountable for 9/11, however there appears to be no orders from saudi officials related to the plot,

    narciso (732bc0)

  94. Bing predicts Kasich will win Connecticut and Maryland, squeaking by within the error margin.

    Where do they get this crap? Trump has double digit leads in both states according to Real Clear Politics polls.

    Maybe wishful whistling by the graveyard thinking. Or perhaps they got tired of posting Trumps picture next to projected winner. Just tossed in a Kasich or two for a joke?

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  95. dart throwing, that seems to be their bag, field’s passionaria act seemed forced, the national enquirer piffle was just that,

    narciso (732bc0)

  96. Dana, you will never get an answer.

    He doesn’t have one.

    Simon Jester (e982dc)

  97. ropelight @ 88,

    I guess I missed your response yesterday. If I have time, I’ll scroll through and look. Otherwise, I would appreciate hearing an answer from you tomorrow. It’s an important question, I think, but one I’ve never seen addressed by a Trump supporter.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  98. @ Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (#66), who wrote, “Goldberg’s prejudice against Trump has clouded his judgment to the point he ignores current facts. First Trump is the only candidate who can defeat Clinton.”

    That word — “facts.” You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  99. I observe things like the following polls and, to be honest, when I watch Republicans arguing amongst themselves, it reminds me of midgets in a wrestling match. A match peered over by the lunacy of liberalism (of NBA height), and its adherents, standing on the sidelines.

    Keep in mind that during the final year of the previous presidency — occupied by a Republican — the poll ratings had dropped to the mid-30s and, even worse, had been hovering around there well before 2008.


    [Current President’s] Job Approval

    Approve…..Disapprove

    Gallup (4/14 – 4/16)
    50…..46…..+4

    Rasmussen Reports (4/12 – 4/14)
    49…..51…..-2

    FOX News (4/11 – 4/13)
    49…..47…..+2

    Reuters/Ipsos (4/9 – 4/13)
    48…..48…..Tie

    CBS News
    46…..45…..+1

    The Economist/YouGov (4/8 – 4/11)
    45…..53…..-8

    Associated Press-GfK (3/31 – 4/4)
    50…..50…..Tie

    McClatchy/Marist (3/29 – 3/31)
    50…..46…..+4

    ^ Some of that percentage of “Approve” has to include squishy Republicans or so-called centrists (ie, liberals in the context of 40 or 50-plus years ago), the types who say they’ll be voting for Hillary if her competition in November is Trump or Cruz, less so if it’s Kasich or a Paul Ryan, and who admired the crease of the pants of the Democrat’s candidate in 2008.

    Absolutely pathetic.

    Mark (16bc93)

  100. Re #88 above, which includes:

    Truth is there are lots of things Trump could do to sour me on him. But, I admit I’m having trouble coming up with one just now.”

    Bwah-hah-hah!

    It took me three tries to get this Trumpkin shill to admit that he wouldn’t stand in line to kill innocent children who are family members of terrorists when Trump insisted, at a nationally televised GOP debate, that when he was president, members of the American military would do exactly that whenever he told them to.

    But he can’t remember, right now, any disagreements he has with Trump. I guess that means he hasn’t joined Trump in walking that particular ghastly revelation back.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  101. If Trump were to start focus testing to see what’s palatable with the donor class, adjusting his position to match, like Cruz did in Iowa with the ethanol subsidies (pledging to do nothing to them/allow them to run their full budget busting course) when he ran in to the slight push back.

    How about you? What would Cruz have to do in order to lose your support. Pandering hasn’t been a problem for your sensitivities. Back channel sleaze attacks on Trump’s family hasn’t crossed any line.

    Poaching delegates to circumvent election results hasn’t raised any hackles.

    What will it take for you to drop Cruz?

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  102. narciso @ 91. No doubt about it. The Greeks of 1940 picked up their 1885 Gras and 1903 Mannlichers and wiped out Mussolini’s army. The Greeks of today are looking for a sugar-daddy to give them Euros.

    nk (dbc370)

  103. well then came the civil war, the colonels, the papandreou plague, but you know all this,

    narciso (732bc0)

  104. What will it take for you to drop Cruz?

    If he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue.
    If he talks about the size of his penis in a Presidential debate.
    If he tweets insults about Melania.
    If he calls any woman a fat sow.
    If he says Carly Fiorina has an ugly face.
    If he mouths empty platitudes for the mindless without any substance or conviction behind them.
    And many, many other disgusting things that so far only Trump does.
    In short, if he becomes like Trump.

    nk (dbc370)

  105. These guys won’t drop Trump for any reason. (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  106. BLINDINGLY oblivious: A Trumpkin who accuses Cruz of pandering on ethanol in Iowa.

    While campaigning in Iowa, Trump insisted that he wanted to boost ethanol subsidies. Only in Trump logic is “I’m going to end your subsidies as quickly as we can phase them out” pandering, when “I’m going to give you even more subsidies forever” count as fiscal discipline.

    Chump.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  107. In Trumpkin language, “showing up to vote for delegates” means “poaching delegates from those who didn’t bother to show up soon enough, well-enough organized, in sufficient numbers.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  108. If he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue.
    If he talks about the size of his penis in a Presidential debate.
    If he tweets insults about Melania.
    If he calls any woman a fat sow.
    If he says Carly Fiorina has an ugly face.
    If he mouths empty platitudes for the mindless without any substance or conviction behind them.
    And many, many other disgusting things that so far only Trump does.

    So your vote is contingent upon style rather than substance.

    Interesting/I figured as much

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  109. Where do we have to go to sign up for a smarter class of Trumpkin shills to come comment here at patterico.com? Is there an “advanced shill” class that can send some more challenging people to argue with?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  110. CS, I think that Trump and Hillary could make a joint announcement that Trump really is Hillary’s stalking horse whose only purpose is to throw the election to Hillary, and Trumpadoodles would cheer, “Yay, way to stick it to the GOPe”.

    Which of all the reasons to vote for the empty bag of wind, it’s probably to most nearly sane.

    nk (dbc370)

  111. “I’m going to end your subsidies as quickly as we can phase them out” morphed into “I’m not going to change anything about the legislation funding ethanol. Let it run it’s full course to 2022” after push back from the local getting up in his face isn’t pandering?

    You’re a lying jackalope as usual, Beldar.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  112. Substance? I doan theenk that hword means houat you theenk eet means.

    nk (dbc370)

  113. papertiger unwittingly gave up the game in #110…he admits that Trump’s vulgarity toward women and history of liberalism and contributions to left wing Democrats is nothing more than a matter of “style” rather than substance.
    That’s so awesome.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  114. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton hold big leads in Maryland two weeks before the state’s presidential primary election, according to a new NBC 4/Marist poll released Tuesday night.

    Take that in the neck, Bing.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  115. Papertiger unwittingly blah blah blah.

    Manure. Horse feathers.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  116. Two weeks is a long time. Does Trump’s memory go past two days? For sure, his game plan does not.

    nk (dbc370)

  117. A lawsuit against Trump involving beauty contestants. (He settled.) It hits all the low points of modern politics.

    No wonder the Enquirer ran that Cruz story. The best defense is a good offense.

    DRJ (15874d)

  118. papertiger, your loyalty to The Mr Donald is plain awesomeness.
    But I bet there are some 13 year old girls who would stop buying Justin Bieber’s music if he publicly started calling a female celebrity “ugly” or a “fat cow,” or if he said she was “bleeding from her wherever.”

    But not you. You’ll still continue to buy The Mr Donald’s recordings, concert t-shirts, and ephemera, and I bet you’ll even buy a raffle ticket for the chance to have lunch with him!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  119. Heh.

    DRJ (15874d)

  120. Good news for you guys. All you need to do is find Donald Trump sucking up to the Goldman Sac’s banker class, or the Seimen’s windmill division, and I’ll change my vote forthwith.

    Gotta catch me before June 7 though.

    Hurry.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  121. Any Rosie O’Donnell fans in the audience?

    Never cared for her myself, even in the Gina Davis vehicle “A League of Their Own”, where she was the comic relief.
    She never struck me as comical. Just loud and brash.

    Oink.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  122. Los Angeles Times survey found 73 percent of those [Californians] enrolled in the American Independent Party chose it by mistake
    The conservative party has 472,000 members in the state of California
    Many said they thought they were registering as an independent
    Kaley Cuoco, Patrick Schwarzenegger and Sugar Ray Leonard are among those who admit they registered incorrectly
    The party was founded in 1967 by segregationist George Wallace

    They’re in the right ball park fr Hollywood.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  123. Carrie Prejean, anyone? Carrie? Miss California? Is that really you?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  124. Using his standards, Wall Street owns Donald Trump.

    DRJ (15874d)

  125. Re #122: Join me in celebrating a Trumpkin’s promised redemption!

    The condition precedent of this Trumpkin: “All you need to do is find Donald Trump sucking up to the Goldman Sac’s banker class … and I’ll change my vote forthwith.”

    In full satisfaction of said condition precedent, I present this link:

    Goldman Sachs once gave Ted Cruz’s campaign a $1.43 million loan. His campaign also got a loan of less than $500,000 from Citibank. According to Donald Trump, in a claim that has been repeated roughly a billion times, that means THEY OWN HIM. Even though, as far as I can tell, all or part of these loans have been repaid.

    As I reported yesterday, at various times Donald Trump has had hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from Citibank and Goldman, some of which have been repaid, some of which were discharged in bankruptcy when Trump’s Altantic City casino went belly up. By Trump’s own standard, Citibank and Goldman own him, too.

    Sucker.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  126. @Rosie, get better fast. I’m starting to miss you!

    When you boil it down calling Rosie a disgusting pig, when she has heart disease, is a motivation for her to lose weight and get healthy.

    It’s not an attack out of a mean spirited. More like concern trolling someone who needs an intervention.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  127. DRJ, we were simul-googling in real time. That’s cool.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  128. Yeah, you’re helping yourself there, papertiger. There’s lots more room left on that limb, boy. Climb on out there.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  129. Highlighting the relevant bits that Beldar seems willfully blinded to:

    Goldman Sachs once gave Ted Cruz’s campaign a $1.43 million loan. His Ted Cruz’s campaign also got a loan of less than $500,000 from Citibank.
    We see who wants Ted Cruz for president. Follow the money.

    Which one of these international banking concerns financed Donald Trump’s campaign?

    Which one? Which? huh?

    Don’t look at your happyfeet. Answer the farking question.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  130. The Cruz campaign – home of the situational ethicist. So cosy.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  131. tories are much the same on either shore,

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/17/nhs-and-schools-will-face-billions-in-cuts-if-britain-votes-to-l/

    portillo and redwood were the exceptions, then, as duncan smith and gove are now

    narciso (732bc0)

  132. In the time of chimpanzees I was a monkey
    Butane in my veins and I’m out to cut the junkie
    With the plastic eyeballs, spray-paint the vegetables
    Dog food skulls with the beefcake pantyhose
    Kill the headlights and put it in neutral
    Stock car flaming with the loser in the cruise control
    Baby’s in Reno with the vitamin D
    Got a couple of couches, sleep on the love-seat
    Someone came in saying I’m insane to complain
    About a shotgun wedding and a stain on my shirt
    Don’t believe everything that you breathe
    You get a parking violation and a maggot on your sleeve
    So shave your face with some mace in the dark
    Saving all your food stamps and burning down the trailer park
    Yo, cut it

    Soy un Trumpadero
    I’m a Trumpkin baby, so why don’t you ignore me?
    (Not worth your time)
    Soy un Trumpadero
    I’m a Trumkin baby, so why don’t you ignore me?

    nk (dbc370)

  133. Cruz borrowed against stock he and his wife owned that was held in their Goldman Sachs account, and then they loaned the money to Cruz’s Senate campaign. Cruz borrowed against his own stock instead of selling his stock.

    DRJ (15874d)

  134. I guess that that Trumpkin’s breaking his promise. Let’s see, he posted his pledge (#122) at 4/17/2016 @ 7:18 pm, he disavowed at (#133) at 4/17/2016 @ 7:55 pm.

    You’re going to have to get that time down below a half hour if you want to become an elite-level Trumpkin shill.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  135. However, Cruz repays his debts instead of discharging them in bankruptcy, so it’s probably true that Goldman Sachs would rather do business with the Cruzes instead of the Trumps.

    DRJ (15874d)

  136. papertiger,

    I love how you worship at the altar of a billionaire who has two ex-wives, four bankruptcies, and is currently being sued in civil court for fraud, but you’re freaking out because Ted Cruz’s wife who has two graduate degrees in business/economics is working for Goldman Sachs.
    She should have accepted that lucrative offer to work the drive-thru at McDonald’s.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  137. Paul Ryan’s first job was flipping burgers at Mickey D’s. True fact.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  138. Mine was selling popcorn at the Dawson County Fair & Rodeo.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  139. Shepherd. Thirty lambs, all day, every day, all summer; drove ambled them to market when school started.

    nk (dbc370)

  140. Goldman Sachs?
    The Golden Arches?

    I’ll leave it to you guys to connect the dots!
    (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  141. Oy, vey. We saw this coming, didn’t we? While the GOP worries about convention chaos, Trump pushes for ‘showbiz’ feel:

    … Compounding the challenges facing organizers are the expectations of Donald Trump, who asserted in an interview that he should have at least partial control over programming, stagecraft and other issues by virtue of his front-runner status — even if he does not have the delegates to secure the nomination beforehand.

    Trump blasted the GOP’s last convention, in Tampa four years ago, as “the single most boring convention I’ve ever seen.” The billionaire real estate mogul and reality-television star said it was imperative that this year’s gathering have a “showbiz” quality — and he cast doubt on the ability of the Republican National Committee, which oversees the convention, to deliver.

    “It’s very important to put some showbiz into a convention, otherwise people are going to fall asleep,” Trump said in a 45-minute interview here last week in his Trump Tower office. “We don’t have the people who know how to put showbiz into a convention.”

    This is aggressive and bullying PR designed to seize control of the figurative and literal spotlight at the convention, and I expect the RNC will attempt to deflect it or, if no compromise materializes, then to ignore such blather. If and when Trump gets to a clear 1237 committed votes for the first-ballot, then at that point, he ought to get to run the convention, including all the marketing and optics. He can turn it into the WWE if he’s the nominee. I suspect he’d end up closer to “circus” than “showbiz,” but at that point he can put the chairs anywhere on the Titanic’s deck that he wants, and the orchestra will keep playing until the GOP slips beneath the waves in November.

    Until he’s wrapped up the nomination, though, he ought get exactly the same voice as the Cruz and (sigh) Kasich campaigns.

    And if it’s an open convention, the one thing it won’t be is boring, I guarantee you. It will be the biggest sustained media event since the Florida recount and Bush v. Gore — with smartphones and the ‘net.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  142. “I’m going to end your subsidies as quickly as we can phase them out” morphed into “I’m not going to change anything about the legislation funding ethanol. Let it run it’s full course to 2022″ after push back from the local getting up in his face isn’t pandering?

    You’re a lying jackalope as usual, Beldar.

    Let’s have some fun, papertiger, you ignorant jackass. (Hey, you get the respect you deserve, and when you address Beldar that way, you deserve none.)

    WHEN did Cruz call for a phase out?

    Report back to me, son.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  143. How much were you paid, nk? Per lamb or per hour? Me, I’m trying to remember: The popcorn gig was for consecutive nights, Thursday-Saturday, and I think I got paid $5 for both nights, for working about 5pm to midnight; plus I got all the popcorn I could eat. I was rich, although I had to take it easy on the popcorn on the second night because I’d overdone it so much on the first.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  144. I’ve been called worse than a jackalope, but that’s a new one, so I’ll let that part go. There was a “Welcome to Texas” postcard, featuring a photo of a jackalope, that was tacked up to the wall at the BBQ joint where my family ate on Sunday afternoons, “Jimmy’s Doghouse.” My big brother and sister had me going for years with “Billy Jack, look out the car window, you just missed the jackalope!” Maybe that’s why I grew up with enough skepticism to resist a fraud like Trump, I dunno.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. papertiger, serious question.

    Do facts matter to you at ALL?

    If I can show you that Cruz’s position favoring a phase out came WAAAAAYYY before the exchange with the local you are talking about, would you apologize to Beldar? apologize to me for polluting my site with a lie? admit you are wrong? Show contrition in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER?

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  146. My first job was selling popcorn at the local movie theater. I don’t remember what it paid but it seemed like a lot if money. We weren’t allowed to eat any of the concession food.

    DRJ (15874d)

  147. Did you get to watch the films for free, DRJ? 😀 And was it an indoor or outdoor theater?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  148. papertiger can’t talk right now because his mouth is full.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  149. Hard to say what my first job was. Does running an adding machine for hours on end for slave wages for my dad count? I think so, since I did it willingly. I think I got something like a buck an hour. Maybe $1.50. I was probably 12, so this was around 1980. I think my first real job outside the home was as a sacker at Minyard’s near TCU in the summertime. You wear long polyester pants and a long-sleeved shirt with a clip-on tie in 105-degree heat. During the five-minute breaks I would stand at the water fountain the entire break and gulp down as much water as possible.

    I learned that people with Jaguars were far more reliable for a tip than people with Cadillacs or Mercedes.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  150. DRJ – Was any candy more delicious than Sno-Caps at a movie theater? Why they didn’t taste all that great if I bought them from a store remains one of life’s great mysteries to me.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  151. Everything I know about Cruz and ethanol, I learned at patterico.com. You should take our host up on his offer, #150. It won’t put him to much effort, he has these facts (with copious links) at hand, I assure you.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  152. My first job about 14 was cleaning house. The mistress of the home had me iron her clean bedsheets before I put them on the bed. It they weren’t put on to her liking, I had to redo it all. It was a minimum wage job through a youth job agency.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  153. I remember my father buying me a black cherry soda* after we had collected the money for the lambs, Beldar. They were our lambs. My father would buy them just weaned for me and my younger brother to fatten up.

    *Mixed from syrup and bubbly water right in front of me, by a one-armed man.

    nk (dbc370)

  154. nk,

    By chance had that one-armed man been accused of killing the wife of a physician?

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  155. The time period is right but that’s about all, CS.

    nk (dbc370)

  156. The answer, papertiger, is that Cruz has supported a phase-out since March 2014.

    I explained this in two posts here and here. In those posts, I ripped apart lazy, prideful, pigheaded bloggers Jazz Shaw and Noah Rothman for repeating lobbyist-inspired bullshit. Neither ever corrected their posts, despite my putting the facts directly in their faces — and I totally lost respect for both as a result.

    Kind of like I have lost respect for you, papertiger.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  157. These are very intriguing answers being volunteered, re first jobs! Dana, I can imagine the warm sheets; nk, wouldn’t you know that taste if it could somehow be recreated? 😀

    Beldar (fa637a)

  158. Around the age of 14 I earned money to buy a violin by cleaning the office of a travel agent who was one of my dad’s clients. They paid me the princely sum of $25 a week to clean the place on the weekend, which took 2-3 hours. All toilets scrubbed, all trash taken out, entire place vacuumed, dusting, etc. etc. I thought it was a great job.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  159. Oh yeah, Beldar. And it’s hard to be pushing 60 in Chicago and have those memories. Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCRdtGYY3Js Except for the skirt (only the old men still wore them) that’s what it was like. The song too. You’ll like the lute and clarinet, Patterico.

    nk (dbc370)

  160. Now I’m waxing reflective, thinking back to other compensated jobs (pre-college): I also had a short-term (one week, evenings) job as a carnival worker — or actually, a subcontractor to a carnival worker, specifically the fun-house operator, who paid me to do his job so he could go get drunk and chase girls). Did some house and commercial building painting. Did some part-time weed chopping, landscaping, and tree watering, but never in the mid-day sun. Unpacked, assembled, sold, delivered, and installed TVs, white goods, and home furnishings for my dad’s store. Tutored younger kids (English & trumpet). The pinnacle of my high school jobs was as a DJ/newsreader/ad copywriter at the local country-western AM radio station, for which purpose I got to go to Dallas on a weekday to take a test for my radiotelephone operator’s license (with broadcast endorsement), third class.

    Every one of those jobs had something to commend it, in addition to the money.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  161. The best was when I was the night operator for Montgomery Ward’s (known to locals as Monkey Ward’s) at Hulen Mall. I got to be the one who said:

    “Attention Montgomery Ward shoppers. The time is now 9:00 [I think it closed at 9. Maybe it was 8? I can’t remember.] and our store is now closed. THANK YOU for shopping at Montgomery Ward’s.”

    I think there was a 15 minute warning too.

    I think my manager had a quasi-crush on me. I was supposed to file during down time but never did (I was in high school and would actually sort of doze off), and she never really got mad at me over it.

    My favorite call was the guy who asked me for the department that sold “mirz” — but that’s another story.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  162. Compare our jobs as teenagers to that of Ted Cruz:

    As a teenager, growing up in Houston, he earned money by delivering speeches on Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig Von Von Mises, expounding on free-market principles at Rotary and Kiwanis clubs.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  163. “Thank you for calling Montgomery Ward’s, how can I direct your call?”

    “Yeah, get me the place where they sell mirz!”

    “I’m sorry, did you say mirz?”

    “Yeah, you know, mirz!”

    “I’m sorry, I don’t know what you mean by ‘mirz.'”

    “You know! Glass mirz!”

    “Ohhhh. You want Housewares. I’ll connect you.”

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  164. Very charming, nk — I always figured Greeks had invented the music video! Thanks!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  165. As a teenager, growing up in Houston, he earned money by delivering speeches on Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig Von Mises, expounding on free-market principles at Rotary and Kiwanis clubs.

    I never heard of Mises until maybe three years ago. Hayek I knew for The Road to Serfdom but that was it.

    The fact that Cruz was giving speeches about him puts me in awe of him a little, and also makes me feel a kinship with him. He’s like a wayyy smarter version of me in a lot of ways.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  166. Is that you in the middle, nk? 😀

    Beldar (fa637a)

  167. Yes, Beldar. Almost 60 years ago. Those are my grandparents. My grandfather left Chicago in 1912 to go fight in the Balkan wars and stayed there, but five of his children came back and had their children and grandchildren here.

    My own daughter just turned fourteen and she’s been to Shanghai, Beijing, the Great Barrier Reef, Paris, London, Dublin and Madrid, not to mention Waikiki and Cabo San Lucas; in addition to Greece every summer since she was born. Who knows where my grandchildren, God willing, will be?

    nk (dbc370)

  168. That is awesome, nk. I am unsurprised but thoroughly tickled.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  169. It is almost like a committee of partisan Democrats sat down and designed a GOP candidate.

    Boorish, rich, self-centered, sexist, provincial, loud, simplistic, ignorant, incurious, bombastic and politically anti-correct. The Ted Knight of candidates. Then sent him forth, like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  170. #88 & 99, Dana, I have 2 answers for you in response to your request at #14:

    I’ve asked before, but apparently no Trump supporter wants to answer the question, but I’ll ask it again: Trump supporter, exactly what would it take for you to disavow your candidate? What is the threshold for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors?

    Dana (0ee61a) — 4/17/2016 @ 2:10 pm

    There are lots of things Trump could do to prevent me from continuing to support him. For example, if he announced his conversion to Islam, started yelling Allahu Akbar!, and cutting off heads. Or if he was found, reptile in hand, quaking with fervor, frothing at the mouth, and rolling around on the floor of some seedy snake church in the Appalachians. Or, appeared in those annoying Mesothelioma commercials. Or, proposed a new Federal Department of Real Estate Development Assistance. Stuff like that would do it. And, letting the media and/or the GOPe lead him around by the nose, or accepting Michelle Fields’ lies as gospel truth when the clear video evidence proves she’s nothing but another lying presstitute.

    You probably won’t like my answers any more than Beldar did, and if you need to call me names go ahead. I’m used to it.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  171. mondays are better with Mr. Trump

    marginally anyways

    happyfeet (831175)

  172. Here’s a very good video on anti-Trumpism. Language warning.

    https://youtu.be/erwf4jre98Q

    Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6)

  173. Oh, ropelight…

    “…Or, appeared in those annoying Mesothelioma commercials…..”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    How you can support such a person? Truly? But the question yields its own answer.

    Simon Jester (5925f3)

  174. As opposed to the gems the top men have sold is for two cycles.

    narciso (742ca9)

  175. 88. …Dana, we are different in a few small ways, I don’t assume that Michelle Fields is telling the truth. She obviously lied about being nearly being pulled to the ground. As for accounts of Cruz’s affairs I expect them to resurface during the GOP Convention.

    ropelight (1d7e5f) — 4/17/2016 @ 5:38 pm

    Yes, ropelight, you and Dana are different. Dana hasn’t sold her soul to support a political candidate. I see you’ve had to change your tune about what constitutes Michelle Fields supposedly “obviously lied” about. In the past you were toeing the line with this Trump campaign’s Trumptardian lie.

    https://patterico.com/2016/04/10/trump-losing-delegates-in-state-after-state-through-incompetence/#comment-1871729

    52. #41, PH-2, accusations of battery ring exceedingly hollow when the so-called ‘victim’ blatently lies about being pulled to the ground when the video tape shows no such thing ever happened.

    ropelight (0adb4e) — 4/11/2016 @ 9:20 am

    It isn’t that anyone immediately assumed Michelle Fields was telling the truth. It’s that you, true to form, believe anything the Trump campaign tells you. Or worse, you don’t care if it’s a lie.

    So, one of first of the Trump campaign’s lies was that Michelle Fields had claimed she was pulled to the ground. You mindlessly parroted it. Then when that became untenable, because she had never claimed any such thing, now you’re mindlessly insisting she’s “obviously” lying about be nearly pulled to the ground.

    Actually, no that isn’t obvious. There’s really only one obvious, irrefutable, blatant lie left. That was the Trump campaign’s lie that nothing had happened and Fields was making the whole thing up. Lewandowski started that lie when he tweeted out that Michelle Fields was delusional and categorically declared he had never touched her. It was clear from the video evidence from the start that was a lie. A blatant, obvious lie. But Trumpkins like you will believe Trump before you’ll believe your own lying eyes.

    Which goes to show that Trump’s major skill is as a con man.

    Now even the FL state attorney who did not exonerate Lewandowski has stated on the record that it is beyond a reasonable doubt that Lewandowski did intentionally grab Fields. Which means his action did meet the statutory elements of misdemeanor battery.

    Admit it. You don’t care about the Truth. You’ve already proven you’re willing to lie for Trump. You won’t even acknowledge that it is now beyond a reasonable doubt; Lewandowski lied when he said he never touched Fields, and Trump and his campaign lied on his behalf when they said nothing happened. Clearly, something did. The state attorney confirms it. Did they apologize for smearing Fields? Did they have Lewandowski apologize for grabbing her? No. They just came up with a new lie.

    As have you ropelight. What’s obvious is that you’re willing to unapologetically lie on Trump’s behalf.

    Steve57 (225587)

  176. ropelight,

    While the new Trump tattoos on your arm are permanent, that doesn’t mean you can’t go into the privacy of the voting booth and vote for Cruz.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  177. Trump supporters like his inconsistecies:

    As for the imbroglios over Mr. Trump’s comments about women and his shifting views on abortion and foreign policy, which have driven up his negative ratings in national polls, they are generally seen here as a plus. They reinforce his outsider status.

    “He talks before he thinks,” Mr. Foster says, “so he doesn’t have time to think up something and lie to you.”

    In January, a poll said 20% of Trump’s supporters are Democrats. Mr. Foster may be one of them. Will the Democratic Trump supporters support the GOP nominee if it isn’t Trump? Of course not. They aren’t Republicans and won’t vote for Republicans. They only vote for Trump because they think he isn’t a politician, let alone a Republican.

    I’d like to see a poll that asks how many Trump voters’ second choice is Hillary or Bernie. I bet it’s 20% or more.

    DRJ (15874d)

  178. Nk, that’s an amazing photo. Are your forebears Greek Orthodox? For what it is worth the only meaningful Greek phrase I know is agami su rei malaka (phrasing?). The malaka I am familiar with, the rest, not so much. Probably not words for church.

    First real job: alternating between washing dishes at a driving range kitchen and collecting range balls (driving an armoured cart with a “hopper” collecting thing on the front, IIRC) for the princely sum of about $2 an hour.

    Occasionally went out into the bush beyond the fence and range to find lost range balls.

    All kinds of fun.

    JP (bd5dd9)

  179. Pretty pathetic, ropelight.

    JD (6aa855)

  180. you act like the US presidency is something to take super seriously
    it’s not anymore
    that ship has sailed
    happyfeet (831175) — 4/17/2016 @ 2:14 pm

    I for one cannot wait to see a yuuuge flashing TRUMP sign erected over the White Hut …

    G6loq (3a2647)

  181. Cruz (and his current supporters) all wanted these dye marked votes, now these dye marked voters are all idiots deserving contempt.

    LOL.

    This article does not speak to how ugly the Trump supporters are but how condescending many Republicans are of many of the voters they need to win elections

    Want to know why the Tea Party was looked down upon and rejected by the RINO Establishment …. look in the mirror. Same situational ethics in place.

    Rodney King's Spirit (db6706)

  182. Will papertiger acknowledge his error?

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  183. 36. MD back in Philly!!! (f9371b) — 4/17/2016 @ 2:42 pm

    In the fwiw dept.
    The main reason I don’t support Trump is that all one has to go on is what he has said the last 6 months…

    There’s actually more to go on, but everything before last June (that’s 9 months) he started running is being ignored by most of his supporters.

    Yes, he has said some things no one else was willing to say,

    With good reason, but not everybody realizes that. His votes come disproportionately from people who don’t realize that.

    But Cruz is the only one who has demonstrated that he will do what he said he would do once in office, whether people liked it or not.

    I don’t think that’s true. For instance, he casually talks about abolishing the IRS. Casually.

    Here’s how he didn’t answer the two questions he was asked by a Jewish weekly in New York (one of few news organizations whom he deigned to allow to ask him questions.)

    http://5tjt.com/cruz-control/

    My question was different from the usual run-of-the-mill perfunctory inquiry. I asked Mr. Cruz how he as president would communicate to the UN and the European Union that the so-called two-state solution was no longer a viable plan that can achieve an agreement between the parties.

    And that is one of the great things about the Cruz platform. The others, including Trump and Kasich, are still locked into the dead-end two-state solution ideas, which are just not workable. But Cruz did not go further in his comments than he usually does on the matter. All he said is what he has said in the past, and that is that no outside party—whether the U.S., the UN, or the Europeans—should be imposing any kind of peace formula on the parties. It was a stock item, an off-the-shelf answer, as were his answers to the few other questions that were asked.

    Unlike the other two media people present, I managed to get in another question even though his staff was trying to move him out of the room. My question was how he was going to ultimately gain the support of Trump’s people when he is vilifying and denigrating Trump to an extreme. He didn’t answer that question—I’m still wondering what the answer is to that. Instead he launched into the soliloquy about how only one campaign has “defeated Donald repeatedly,” and that is his campaign.

    The answer to that question obviously is: Cruz has no plan to win the suppport of Trump supporters. He’s just trying to win the nomination. If he doesn’t win the nomination, he can’t win the election, so he’ll worry about that later. A 20% chance of winning the election is better than a 0% chance, so he’ll do what it takes to win the nomination, regardless of how that would affect his probability of winning the general election. If another Republican won the presidency, why would he rejoice?? It’ll only mean he can’t run in 2020.

    Sammy Finkelman (366297)

  184. Very Greek, JP.

    There’s a humorous story about the primary purpose of a golf course being to provide a living for groundskeepers through the resale of lost golf balls.

    nk (dbc370)

  185. “If you’re still wondering what led to Trump, we have the worst political class – propped up by the worst pop culture — in the history of America. No wonder so much of the rest of America is an a “burn DC to the ground” mood this year.”

    – Ed Driscoll

    Colonel Haiku (dab36f)

  186. My first job was filming city council meetings (and other community events) for a community-access cable station. It paid minimum wage, but as part of the deal I got to learn video editing tech.

    aphrael (056faa)

  187. It also meant that I had the keys and alarm code for city hall in my suburban town, when I was 17, because sometimes after editing stuff I’d be the last guy to lock up at night.

    aphrael (056faa)

  188. Rodney King’s Spirit,

    You guys like to throw darts at the Time magazine cut-out photo of Karl Rove which you have pinned to the wall in your basement, but your hero The Mr Donald actually has ties to the Democrat establishment with his contributions to Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, and Hillary. For some reason, that doesn’t seem to bother you. Whereas on the other hand, Ted Cruz has become a bit of an outcast in GOP circles for brazenly calling Mitch McConnell a “liar” on the Senate floor.

    It’s an interesting contrast.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  189. John Hitchcock, at 54: I am honored. Thank you.

    aphrael (056faa)

  190. Want to know why the Tea Party was looked down upon and rejected by the RINO Establishment

    That idiocy (ie, all the ideological squishiness) has to extend to much of the populace based on opinion polls. Look at how many Americans a few years ago blamed the Republicans — not the Democrats, not the horror in the White House — for the Congressional sequester and how many of them now give negatives ratings to the Tea Party. In turn, many of those same Americans give more positive ratings to the current “goddamn America” president than to the previous one.

    I look at the way Europe is socially, politically reeling due to all the growing problems caused by immigration nurtured by political correctness, running alongside Islamic-fueled terrorism. But look at the way the electorate there has voted for many decades, often giving a thousand benefits of the doubt to either outright leftists or lukewarm liberals, or — while holding their noses — allowing RINO-type squishes to enter the scene, to be in charge of nations like the UK and Germany.

    We have met the enemy (or fool) and it is us.

    Mark (16bc93)

  191. > Whereas on the other hand, Ted Cruz has become a bit of an outcast in GOP circles for brazenly calling Mitch McConnell a “liar” on the Senate floor.

    Calling someone a liar on the Senate floor is a breach of Senate decorum, so it’s hardly surprising that doing so would reduce some people’s respect for Sen. Cruz. Nor is it surprising that doing so would increase respect for him amongst those who think that Senate decorum is a farce or is the tool the good-old-boys club uses to thwart the will of the people and promote self-interest over good government.

    My view is that it was *rude*, at the very least; and I place a high value on politeness. That won’t keep me from voting for Sen. Cruz, though, if it looks like he’s the most likely not-Trump to win San Francisco.

    aphrael (056faa)

  192. Cruz (and his current supporters) all wanted these dye marked votes, now these dye marked voters are all idiots deserving contempt.

    Cruz did want those votes and probably still does, but they don’t want him. Now it’s the establishment and moderate voters who will have to support Cruz if they want to stop Trump and Hillary. We’ll see if they do or if now they are the ones who want to burn it all down.

    DRJ (15874d)

  193. #197 aphrael,

    The point I was making is not about whether or not Cruz calling McConnell a liar was rude or a breach of decorum. Rather, it has to do with the fact that these Trump Fan Boys keep saying that Ted Cruz is actually a puppet of the GOP “establishment.”

    In fact, Cruz calling McConnell a liar on the floor of the Senate should make Cruz more of a ‘hero’ in the eyes of Trump Fan Boys who allegedly oppose the GOP “establishment.”
    But again, their guy The Mr Donald contributed money to the hierarchy of the Democrat establishment.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  194. 188.Will papertiger acknowledge his error?

    At Richard Simmons’ wedding

    JP (bd5dd9)

  195. Hardware store after school and on Saturday. $1.65 then $1.90/hr.
    Included bathroom Sat. AM and unloading a shipment of Sakrete on the hottest day in August.

    MD back in Philly!!! (f9371b)

  196. worked at southeast bank, processing checks, shortly before it went under,

    narciso (732bc0)

  197. The left has its pseudo-intellectuals; the right has its anti-intellectuals. The anti-intellectual right has deep roots in the Republican Party, as witnessed by the remarkable persistence of anti-Darwinism. At the other end of the spectrum, such antipathy was evident in Buckley’s Boston telephone directory comment. It was evident here in these comments with the apparent competition to see who could score highest on the Charles Murray “Bubble” test. Even the conservative, intellectual elite wants no part of being the intellectual elite.

    What always struck me about the Buckley comment is that although Buckley may have preferred the first 400 names in the Boston telephone directory to run the country, those 400 people would never choose Buckley to lead the nation. The lesson? We flatter ourselves to think that we are one of them. This is not a two-way street. In our increasingly classist world, Ted Cruz has lost the evangelical vote because they hear the Harvard in his voice and know he is one of them.

    This is by no means something new. When Goldwater ran for president he had the lenses removed from his dorky black rimmed glasses so he could wear them all the time, to better project a misleading declasse image.

    ThOR (a52560)

  198. This means David Brooks is the “dye marker” for all the best traits of the right.

    Jcurtis (c6356b)

  199. Ted Cruz has only lost the superficial so-called evangelical vote. Robert George is as much an evangelical, in the classic sense of the word, as anyone.

    MD back in Philly (f9371b)

  200. Will papertiger acknowledge his error?

    Patterico (86c8ed) — 4/18/2016 @ 7:22 am

    But for the most part, Trumpism has done a wonderful job of demonstrating to me who is worth interacting with, and who isn’t.

    I must be in the “good” column.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  201. #181, Steve, you’re fast and loose with the accusations. You call me a liar repeatedly. Others do too, but a difference of opinion isn’t a lie, and attempting to define reasonable differences as lies is the mark someone with an agenda.

    Michelle Fields lied about the March 8th incident. Here’s her account in her own words: (emphasis added)

    I wasn’t called upon to ask a question during the televised press conference, but afterwards Trump wandered around, stopping at every reporter to take their questions. When he approached me, I asked him about his view on an aspect of affirmative action.

    Trump acknowledged the question, but before he could answer I was jolted backwards. Someone had grabbed me tightly by the arm and yanked me down.I almost fell to the ground, but was able to maintain my balance. Nonetheless, I was shaken.

    The Washington Post’s Ben Terris immediately remarked that it was Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, who aggressively tried to pull me to the ground. I quickly turned around and saw Lewandowski and Trump exiting the building together. No apology. No explanation for why he did this.

    Even if Trump was done taking questions, Lewandowski would be out of line. Campaign managers aren’t supposed to try to forcefully throw reporters to the ground, no matter the circumstance. But what made this especially jarring is that there was no hint Trump was done taking questions. No one was pushing him to get away. He seemed to have been happily answering queries from my fellow reporters just a moment before.

    Many people have been asking me on Twitter and in emails what exactly happened Tuesday night. I hope this article answers those questions and I can get back to reporting the news, not being a part of it.

    That’s how Michelle Fields told her story on March 10th, two days after the incident.

    Now, here’s what the Florida State Attorney’s office for Palm Beach found: (emphasis added)

    The facts and circumstances surrounding this case are as follows:

    On March 8, 2016, news reporter Michelle Fields was covering a campaign event in the ballroom at the Trump International Golf Club in Jupiter, Florida. Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, had just given a speech/press conference. Afterwards, he left the podium and was moving towards the ballroom exit. He had a number of Secret Service agents attempting to maintain space between himself and the public. The video recording shows secret service agents clearing the pathway ahead of Mr. Trump. Specifically, it appears that Ms. Fields was directed to the back of the room along with other media/journalists. After initially complying with the directive, however, Ms. Fields returned to the pathway area and walked directly alongside Mr. Trump, attempting to ask questions of him. It appears, based on the freeze frames from the video recording and an independent photograph taken by a Washington Post photographer, that Ms. Fields brushed or touched Mr. Trump’s arm at which time Mr. Lewandowski, Mr. Trump’s campaign manager, reached forward and grabbed Ms. Fields’ arm, pulling her away from Mr. Trump. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Lewandowski continued toward the exit at the back of the room.

    After reviewing the video recording, there is no reasonable doubt that Mr. Lewandowski pulled Ms. Fields back as she was attempting to interview Mr. Trump.

    According to an affidavit submitted by Barton Brown, former FBI agent, when tasked with the protection of a political candidate, Secret Service agents will create something referred to as a “protective bubble.” This “protective bubble” is created to prevent unauthorized individuals from getting too close to the person, regardless of whether or not they are members of the press. More importantly, under these circumstances, it is not uncommon that a candidate’s inner circle staff members, known to the agents, are given apparent authority to assist in clearing a safe pathway, sharing some responsibility for the safety and well-being of the candidate when agents are otherwise occupied and the “protective bubble” is compromised.

    The State has a responsibility to review cases submitted by law enforcement and determine whether or not there is a good faith basis to proceed. First, in reviewing the video recording, Mr. Trump appears to react to Ms. Fields by pulling his arm back and away from her. This reaction could have reasonably led Mr. Lewandowski, following behind the two and from his vantage point, to legitimately believe that Ms. Fields was making unwanted physical contact with Mr. Trump, which caused Mr. Lewandowski to react by pulling her away. Second, as Mr. Trump’s campaign manager, Mr. Lewandowski may have had apparent authority to assist in the protection of the candidate, specifically to maintain the “protective bubble” around the candidate. It should be noted, however, that one agent was positioned directly behind Ms. Fields and appeared to show no concern over her actions. Mr. Lewandowski could have called this agent’s attention to her actions before taking action himself, if he considered her a threat. In addition, soon after the incident, Mr. Lewandowski publicly denied ever touching Ms. Fields in any way.

    While these factors might weigh against the claim that his actions were justified in defense of Mr. Trump, they do not outweigh the reasonable hypothesis of innocence based on the real time facts and circumstances recorded on the video.

    Law enforcement arrests are based upon probable cause. State prosecution relies upon a good faith basis that sufficient evidence exists to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. This includes rebuttal of any apparent defenses. While the facts support the allegation that Mr. Lewandowski did grab Ms. Fields arm against her will, Mr. Lewandowski has a reasonable hypothesis of innocence. There is insufficient evidence to rebut these defenses. Therefore, although probable cause exists, the state will No File this case.

    Sincerely,

    Adrienne Ellis, Chief Assistant State Attorney

    So, Steve, here’s a partial list of the lies Michelle Field told which were rebutted by photographic evidence:

    Trump was on his way out, not wandering around.

    Trump didn’t approach her, she approached him after being directed to the back of the room.

    Trump didn’t acknowledge her question, he pulled away from her grasp.

    She wasn’t jolted backwards, she was taken by the arm and steered away.

    She wasn’t yanked down. Nor was she shaken. Corey Lewandowski didn’t aggressivily try to pull her down.

    Campaign managers do have a responsibility and the authority to protect candidates (for the presidency, no less).

    No one tried to forcefully throw her to the ground.

    Trump had delivered his speech and had already taken questions from the press, he was on his way out out with a protective bubble around him and Secret Service agents in front clearing the path.

    Members of the press had been directed to the back of the room to allow Trump to exit without being peppered with more questions. Fields left her designated area and placed herself to intercept Trump on his way out. She grabbed him and when he recoiled his campaign manager took Fields by the arm and directed her out of the way.

    It was such a minor incident that Lewandowski didn’t even connect the actual event to the wild-eyed battery claims Fields manufactured from cheesecloth.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  202. Liar 1 acknowledged Patterico’s question and refused to answer it.

    Liar 2 berated someone for rightfully calling him a liar, then proceeded to lie.

    Par for the course.

    John Hitchcock (29bd19)

  203. Rope light, are you really that dishonest? The claims you say were rebutted by the video are in fact _not_ rebutted. They are her subjective impressions of the contact Lewandowski in fact admitted to, after lying about.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  204. R.I.P. Doris Roberts

    Icy (4f33a9)

  205. poor pitiful michelle is still trying to milk milk milk this nothingburger like it was a moo cow

    guess what she’s a victim of dark shadowy forces

    Fields suggested that Palm Beach County District Attorney Dave Aronberg’s decision not to prosecute Lewandowski after police charged and arrested him was unethical and motivated by personal concerns.

    This is because Aronberg and his wife, Lynn, a former Miami Dolphins cheerleader who owns a public relations firm, have been frequent visitors to Trump’s private club, Mar-a-Lago, and that Lynn Aronberg has posted numerous photos of herself posing with Donald and Melania Trump on her Facebook page and company website.

    “If my wife was trying to monetize her relationship with Donald Trump,” Fields told Stelter, “I would recuse myself from the situation and the case.”

    god bless america she’s the most abjectly wretched lil thing to hit florida since casey anthony

    i’m a light a candle for her

    wait no I think i’m a do my diffuser thingy

    happyfeet (831175)

  206. lol this is too funny

    “I think the prosecutor’s decision…the way they handled this entire situation…was very unprofessional,” Fields said.

    oh my goodness if she were less self-aware she’d be even less self-aware than she is now

    happyfeet (831175)

  207. We need to nominate Donald Trump because his campaign manager says he didn’t almost push a female journalist to the ground as the videotape shows that he almost did push her to the ground. This proves she’s a liar, and it totally impugns Ted Cruz, as well as Heidi Cruz, who only has two graduate degrees in business/economics as opposed to the zero graduate degrees held by Donald Trump, Ivana Trump, Marla Maples, and Melania Trump collectively.
    Even though Donald Trump contributed lots of money to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuckie Schumer, and Hillary, he’s only a tool of the Democrat establishment—not the Republican establishment.
    Now, we all know that Ted Cruz is a tool of the Republican establishment because Ted Cruz stood on the Senate floor and called the titular head of the Republican establishment (Mitch McConnell) a liar.

    Donald Trump will do a sit-down interview with Chris Matthews, but not Megyn Kelly, and that’s because Ben Carson is psychotic and not a real Christian and Marco Rubio is only 5’10”!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  208. This isn’t the first time attention seeking presstistute Michelle Fields has made accusations of brutality. It’s her MO.

    During the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations she was working for the Daily Caller and accused the New York Police of beating her with batons.

    Michelle Fields plays the injured little woman when it suits her ambitions. Like just before she has a book coming out.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  209. i’m a lil teacup short and stout oops i lost my home state had to drop out

    my political future gone in a rout a gang of eight stoled all my clout

    happyfeet (831175)

  210. Comment #214 is an example of a Trumpkin venting an ugly emotion, which he thinks will persuade people to join him in hating his target, but which in fact will persuade people in whom there’s any remaining doubt that said Trumpkin is a nasty, twisted piece of work.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  211. There just seems to be common denominator of anger toward women by Trump and his fan boys.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  212. Comment #212 is the truth about how Michelle Fields behaves when she wants publicity. She accused the NY Police of beating her with batons and she accused Corey Lewinandowski of trying to yank her down.

    She’s a liar, straight up, and the video tapes prove it.

    She’s got a book coming out and wants to get the sales campaign kicked off with a nice juicy publicity stunt that ties her book to the upcoming election. Michelle Fields is a cheap lying scumbag, and a nasty, twisted piece of work who doesn’t give a damn who she smears as long as it puts money in her pocket and her face on TV. She’s the Tawana Brawley of Rodao Drive.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  213. More cowbell! Dial it up to 11!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  214. This isn’t the first time attention seeking presstistute Michelle Fields has made accusations of brutality. It’s her MO.

    During the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations she was working for the Daily Caller and accused the New York Police of beating her with batons.

    Michelle Fields plays the injured little woman when it suits her ambitions. Like just before she has a book coming out.
    ropelight (c5103d) — 4/18/2016 @ 6:23 pm

    PLEASE, ropelight, take this opportunity to prove your point.

    Here is a link to Brian Lamb’s interview w/Fields after the OWS incident.

    Here is a link to its transcript.

    Now, since you seem to believe you’ve caught “presstitute” Fields in a lie, cite where the video contradicts her description of the events as she relates them to Lamb.

    I’m confident you can do this, ropelight, because I know you have more integrity than to just cut-and-paste schtuff you’ve read from Trump-humpers all over the internet.

    Don’t let us down, ropie.

    L.N. Smithee (b84cf6)

  215. hohum, the budlight bowl, is boring,

    http://observer.com/2016/04/uncovering-the-hidden-truths-of-911/

    narciso (732bc0)

  216. Just another day in the life of political correctness.

    I bet Miss Manners has a page covering this.

    Here’s exclusive video showing a Cruz supporter helping Michelle Fields back to her feet.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  217. Here’s the view from another angle of Lewandowski dragging Fields down by her ankle.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  218. arenberg, actually went to law school with ted cruz, the plot sickens, this blair witch project has gotten very silly,

    narciso (732bc0)

  219. Rope light, the video proves that Lewandowski did not actually succeed in pulling her down to the ground. It does not prove it did not feel to her that he tried.

    Why is this fact too difficult for you to understand.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  220. Sure thing Smithee, right after you cite where in the video Lewendowski yanks Fields down.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  221. The name “Michelle Fields” has almost become like a dog whistle for some of these Trump sycophants.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  222. Because the video doesn’t show much of any movement down at all SPQR.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  223. Here’s a toast to the host of those who love the vastness of the sky.

    And Dr. William {Bill} Gray.

    RIP

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  224. moving on, is a left thing,

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-trump-aide-lobbied-for-1409744144007222.html

    this was around the time, lanny davis and mark siegel were handling the pakistani junta,

    narciso (732bc0)

  225. #226, SPQR, honest people don’t file criminal complaints based on how they feel rather than based on what actually happened. There are laws against that sort of thing.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  226. It’s the anger at women which will ultimately be Donnie’s downfall in November, if he has the misfortune of being our nominee.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  227. At least Heidi Cruz has two graduate degrees. Donnie has zero.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  228. “down” “downward” — “Trumpkin” “dumbass”, what’s the difference?

    How do you get down from an elephant”
    You don’t get down from an elephant, you get down from a duck.
    How do you get down from a duck?
    With a stepladder.

    nk (dbc370)

  229. as the world is on fire, these are the things we concern ourselves with,

    http://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/helmut-kohl-solution-to-refugee-crisis-does-not-lie-in-europe/

    narciso (732bc0)

  230. Ropelight, your dishonest misrepresentation is getting very old. The criminal charge was for the battery. Which Lewandowski has admitted.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  231. SPQR, you know very well the State Attorney declined to prosecute. The dishonesty is yours entirely, and your omission of that key fact proves it.

    ropelight (c5103d)

  232. Sam Kinison for President! {YouTube)

    /profanity warning

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  233. ropelight, I’m glad you’ve dropped all pretenses whatsoever to having any remaining shred of integrity left. It’s very educational.

    232. honest people don’t file criminal complaints based on how they feel rather than based on what actually happened. There are laws against that sort of thing.

    ropelight (c5103d) — 4/18/2016 @ 7:13 pm

    Based on this standard, you’ve just admitted Fields is an honest person. She filed a criminal complaint with the Jupiter PD base upon what actually happened. The Jupiter PD looked at the physical and video evidence and it supported her version of what actually happened. Therefore, the Jupiter PD brought charges against Lewandowski. And even when the the attorney announced he was not going to prosecute, he admitted that what actually happened was that Lewandowsky had in fact committed misdemeanor battery.

    When the state attorney was running through the timeline of events at his press conference he had to admit that Lewandowski did intentionally grab Field’s arm; that there is no reasonable doubt that he grabbed her arm and pulled her back (2:00-2:23 on the video).

    The offense of battery occurs when a person:
    1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
    2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.

    That’s it; that all that matters. You set a standard for what an honest person. Fields filed a criminal complaint and according to the Jupiter PD and the state attorney there is no reasonable doubt. Her version of events comports with the actual facts.

    Does that stop you from lying about her, ropelight? No, like your messiah you double down on the lies. And you start dredging up and throwing around all sorts of irrelevancies like a monkey in a zoo exhibit flinging its own feces.

    And of course insults such as “presstitute.” I had know idea Michelle Fields even existed until Trump, Lewandowski, and his soulless supporters started smearing her and lying about her. I still don’t know anything about her because you’ve discredited yourself so thoroughly that the last thing I’m going to do is take anything you say for truth.

    But it is amusing that you hurl insults such as synonyms for prostitute at her that you’ve amply demonstrated are more accurately applied to you.

    Steve57 (225587)

  234. 238. SPQR, you know very well the State Attorney declined to prosecute. The dishonesty is yours entirely, and your omission of that key fact proves it.

    ropelight (c5103d) — 4/18/2016 @ 8:27 pm

    You are a shameless liar, ropelight. The fact the state attorney will not prosecute Lewandowski does not change the fact that the state attorney said there is no reasonable doubt that Lewandowski committed acts that under Florida law fit the statutory definition of misdemeanor battery to a T.

    That is the key fact. It is irrelevant that the state attorney decided not to prosecute the crime. When he detailed the facts for the press he made it clear that all the essential elements of the crime were present.

    Those are the facts. And the facts are what you have to lie about, ropelight. And lying about the facts is no longer a problem for you, as you’ve been happily doing so for months now.

    Steve57 (225587)

  235. Hmmm. The depth of my trust for this man is measured now in microns, but I am frankly surprised to read him saying this:

    Trump’s continuing struggles prompted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to tell a Kentucky television station over the weekend that “I’m increasingly optimistic that there may be a second ballot.”

    Republican Party rules require a candidate to win at least 1,237 of the 2,472 delegates at a national convention. Some members of the Republican National Committee, who are scheduled to meet this week in Florida, have proposed changing how the party nominates a candidate before the convention convenes. But McConnell told WHAS-TV that he prefers the current rules.

    “This notion that there’s some group of people in Washington who can handpick somebody and deliver it is not true,” he said. “If there were such a group, I’d probably be a part of it. But there isn’t a group.”

    That sounds like a crack in the glacier to me.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  236. Sure thing Smithee, right after you cite where in the video Lewendowski yanks Fields down.

    ropelight (c5103d) — 4/18/2016 @ 7:06 pm

    Just as I expected.

    How did I know you would chicken out?

    L.N. Smithee (d3752a)

  237. I don’t think there is any sense in which I could be called a “Trump supporter”. But there would never be Cruz without Trump. Remember that the party people were giving all the money to Jeb Bush. Trump is a plausible and scary alternative who is forcing the Republican Party to see that they cannot continue to nominate Dole-McCain-Romney types, lose the election, cash the checks, and continue to give the Dems 80% of what they ask for instead of 100%.

    If Trump gets it he may lose to Hillary; but I fail to see any advantage Cruz has in that regard. (The head-to-head polling at this early date is worthless, almost none of the electorate has heard of Cruz and the media will get to define him to the LIV crowd.) I cannot imagine any Party stalwart willing to sit out against Hillary just because the nominee is Trump; they are ferocious in their attempts to give us all that impression, as a tactic in the nominations, but if they actually did sit out the general election against Hillary, then they deserve every bad name that the Trump supporters give them.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  238. Smithee, how did I know you couldn’t walk the walk? You talk big but when push comes to shove you’re AWOL. Just as I expected.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  239. ropelight, really? You referencing others “talk[ing] big” is hilarious.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  240. Well, now, SPQR, for a two-bit four flusher you talk big enough to try to pass of a decision of the Florida State Attorney for Palm Beach not to prosecute Corey Lewendowski as proof he committed battery on poor little attention whore Michelle Fields. Shame on you.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  241. My response to SPQR is in moderation because I called Michelle Fields a poor little attention wh*re.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  242. Mr. Ropelight, given your behavior in this comments section, what are you, precisely?

    I think you just post to argue. You certainly make inaccurate comments, then when called on it, change the goalposts.

    I wonder if you are not suffering from a degree of projection.

    Simon Jester (c9c313)

  243. To be much more direct, sir, you clearly post what you do for attention. And you aren’t being paid.

    Ergo.

    Simon Jester (c9c313)

  244. Jester, what are you talking about? Comments are not behavior. I’m me, I’ve been commenting here for over 10 years. Look at my track record if you want to know who I am.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  245. Ropelight USED TO BE honorable. Until the lying dirtbag Trump came along. Then ropelight went full dishonorable. There is no lie ropelight won’t repeat if it benefits his god Donald Trump. And just like the Perrys of the world, spews out hateful rhetoric while demanding everyone else be civil toward him.

    It is so easy for ropelight to lie now, he actually gets a Beevis and Butthead laugh out of it. And has lost all respect he once had from many Conservative and Libertarian commenters here. Heck, he even went so low as to accuse DRJ of voting for Obama! In my book, that’s unforgivable.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  246. Hitchcock, show me where I accused DRJ of voting for Obama. That doesn’t square with my memories, I recall asking if she did but that’s not an accusation. If I did it, I’ll deal with it, but if you’r lying, I’ll put the onus where it belongs.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  247. It’s true that ropelight asked me if I had voted for Obama, but he did it in a “Do you still beat your wife?” way.

    DRJ (15874d)

  248. Exactly, DRJ, which makes his query accusatory in application. Thus, I spoke accurately.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  249. So, Hitchcock, you’re not man enough to admit you’re a liar. Live with it.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  250. Oh, I have been looking at your comments. So has everyone else.

    You just like to fight. And you do lie. Often.

    Which is kind of amusing.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  251. Jester, you say I lie (often), point out a lie.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  252. Mr. ropelight is stalwart and true he has a very good sense of the state of play in this election season and he goes the extra mile for to share his thinkings and insights

    happyfeet (831175)

  253. ropelight demands we point out the lie. Any lie.

    We have, numerous times. What is worse than your lying, ropelight, is that you have adopted the Stalinist definition of truth. Whatever advances your political cause is the “truth” no matter how many falsehoods and fabrications it relies on. Whatever is detrimental to your political cause is a “lie” no matter how many witnesses and how much video, audio, or physical evidence contradicts you.

    Then you baseless call those victims, witnesses, and anyone who produces evidence against you “liars.”

    So your unhinged devotion to Trump has made you into something worse than a liar, ropelight. A liar is at ashamed when caught, which means a liar still has respect for the truth. You’ve become a progressive leftist in that you are openly contemptuous of the truth when it gets in the way and a more useful lie is available.

    238. SPQR, you know very well the State Attorney declined to prosecute. The dishonesty is yours entirely, and your omission of that key fact proves it.

    ropelight (c5103d) — 4/18/2016 @ 8:27 pm

    This is precisely what a progressive leftist would say. This is precisely what Hillary!’s progressive leftist supporters will say when, as is increasingly likely, Loretta Lynch refuses to prosecute Hillary! for obvious and well documented felonies.

    All you progressive leftists agree on this, ropelight; the facts don’t matter. The only thing that matters is that your candidate, and your candidate’s campaign, can avoid the taint of prosecution. And it’s guaranteed that you’ll be defending him and his administration the same way you’re defending him now. The Obama/Clinton defense. He can’t be doing anything wrong because he’s not being prosecuted.

    Thanks to progressive leftists like you ropelight it may very well not matter if we have an R or a D in the WH in January 2017. Either way we’ll get Obama’s third term. This is what you’ve helped the progressive left reduce us to. The point of electing a president is to elect the lawless, unaccountable authoritarian who’ll use the imperial pen and phone to protect and provide special favors to his or her constituency and go after and punish their constituency’s enemies. If it’s Trump you’ll be cheering him on. But if it’s Hillary! abusing her authority exactly as Trump would have, you’ll whine.

    Steve57 (225587)

  254. So, Steve, you can’t point out a lie, but that doesn’t stop you from dishonestly spewing idiot invective. Typical.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  255. Steve – I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that they are lying in support of a progressive leftist.

    JD (2e3880)

  256. It’s been over an hour since Jester accused me of lying. I asked for an example and he hasn’t provided one yet. Steve chimed in with a bullsh*t screed, one full of dishonest accusations that was completely devoid of substance. JD stuck his snout into the mix without offering anything but mindless snark and so here I sit watching TV and waiting for one of my honorable detractors (they are all honorable men) to point out a lie on my part.

    Crickets are chirping and my signature Marinara Sauce is approaching completion. Pardon me if I don’t take stupid jerks seriously.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  257. I recall very clearly when I gave up on ropelight as a human being.

    Recall, if you will, the GOP Debate from Detroit on March 3, 2016, on Fox News. Back then, I was engaged in a days-long multi-thread series of relatively polite questions in which I was trying to extract from Trumpkin shills — especially ropelight — an admission that Trump regularly did things and took positions that should make Trumpkins ashamed of him. I was testing the hypothesis that you can’t shame the shameless.

    Accordingly, on the open thread here at patterico.com on this debate, I said this, at comments #25 & 26, during the Rubio/Trump exchange about Trump’s huge hands:

    This is what America needs: A president who feels compelled to reassure the world that he “guarantee[s] there’s no problem” with the size of his penis.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 6:11 pm

    And:

    But hey, ropelight’s not ashamed yet! You can’t shame the shameless.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 6:12 pm

    But fairly early on in the debate, there was <a href="this exchange:

    BAIER: Mr. Trump, just yesterday, almost 100 foreign policy experts signed on to an open letter refusing to support you, saying your embracing expansive use of torture is inexcusable. General Michael Hayden, former CIA director, NSA director, and other experts have said that when you asked the U.S. military to carry out some of your campaign promises, specifically targeting terrorists’ families, and also the use of interrogation methods more extreme than waterboarding, the military will refuse because they’ve been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders.

    So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders?

    TRUMP: They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me. Believe me.

    BAIER: But they’re illegal.

    TRUMP: Let me just tell you, you look at the Middle East. They’re chopping off heads. They’re chopping off the heads of Christians and anybody else that happens to be in the way. They’re drowning people in steel cages. And he — now we’re talking about waterboarding.

    This really started with Ted, a question was asked of Ted last — two debates ago about waterboarding. And Ted was, you know, having a hard time with that question, to be totally honest with you. They then came to me, what do you think of waterboarding? I said it’s fine. And if we want to go stronger, I’d go stronger, too, because, frankly…

    (APPLAUSE)

    … that’s the way I feel. Can you imagine — can you imagine these people, these animals over in the Middle East, that chop off heads, sitting around talking and seeing that we’re having a hard problem with waterboarding? We should go for waterboarding and we should go tougher than waterboarding. That’s my opinion.

    BAIER: But targeting terrorists’ families?

    (APPLAUSE)

    TRUMP: And — and — and — I’m a leader. I’m a leader. I’ve always been a leader. I’ve never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership is all about.

    BAIER: Even targeting terrorists’ families?

    TRUMP: Well, look, you know, when a family flies into the World Trade Center, a man flies into the World Trade Center, and his family gets sent back to where they were going — and I think most of you know where they went — and, by the way, it wasn’t Iraq — but they went back to a certain territory, they knew what was happening. The wife knew exactly what was happening.

    They left two days early, with respect to the World Trade Center, and they went back to where they went, and they watched their husband on television flying into the World Trade Center, flying into the Pentagon, and probably trying to fly into the White House, except we had some very, very brave souls on that third plane. All right?

    (APPLAUSE)

    BAIER: Senator Cruz, you were mentioned.

    TRUMP: I have no problem with it.

    I think I posted the first comment directly in reaction to the above quote from Trump on targeting and murdering families of terrorists, at comment #75:

    ropelight, will you volunteer to kill some children of terrorist parents for Trump, when the military refuses?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 6:53 pm

    Let’s look at the resulting exchange, shall we? Here’s how ropelight started his defense of Trump — with a ghastly attempt at a joke, in comment #82:

    No, Beldar, I don’t kill women and children, but I will give you a hefty discount price for shooting all the terrorists in GITMO.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:01 pm

    At least I think it was a joke. I don’t know, perhaps ropelight really does want to execute the Guantanamo detainees without interrogation or trial; in the eyes of the law, such would be murder, but that wasn’t the argument I was interested in having with ropelight, because I didn’t want to play along with his dishonest shift of focus away from the unquestionably innocent, including children, about whom Baier had asked Trump. So I responded immediately, in comment #83:

    So who’s going to kill the children for Mr. Trump, ropelight, if the military won’t and you won’t?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:04 pm

    ropelight responded in comment #85:

    The Palestinians don’t seem to have any qualms about using their own children as suicide bombers. Maybe you can enlist them is your children’s crusade.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:08 pm

    This is more spectacular intellectual dishonesty, but even more illogical: ropelight has accused me — and presumably the rest of the civilized world who reacted in horror at Trump’s threats — of being on a “children’s crusade” by opposing the deliberate revenge-murder of children by the American government, but then he suggests that I enlist Palestinian child-killers in it.

    I replied, in comments #86 & 87:

    There’s a terrible scene, an absolutely true-to-life one, near the beginning IIRC of the fabulous movie “American Sniper,” in which sniper Chris Kyle has to kill a child who’s been wired up with explosives by terrorists, because the alternative is to let the child and Kyle’s fellow Americans be killed when the terrorists detonated the bombs strapped to the child.

    I wept when I watched that, I’m not ashamed to say. Big ole tears down both cheeks, big heaving noisy sobs. I was far from the only one in the theater doing that.

    Your guy wants to kill children for revenge. Still proud of him?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:09 pm

    And:

    The terrorists who kill children are monsters. So’s Trump, apparently. Are you?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:09 pm

    At comment #93, ropelight tried to change the subject without answering:

    Cruz and Rubio are exposing themselves as unworthy of the office they currently hold, much less the one they seek. Rather than rise to the occasion they wallow in the gutter. Shameful performance.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:17 pm

    So at comment #102, I repeated my question:

    Who’s going to kill the children for Trump, ropelight? You want to talk about being down in the gutter. That’s depraved.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:20 pm

    ropelight continued to refuse to answer, so I pressed again, at comment #139:

    ropelight, do you think Trump favors lethal injection for children under 10? Or is he just going to go straight Old Testament eye-for-an-eye and behead them?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:53 pm

    ropelight continued to refuse to answer, instead writing, at comment #146:

    Trump won this debate, Curz came in 2nd.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:55 pm

    So again I asked, at comment #155:

    Was it his promise to kill children that makes you think Trump won tonight, ropelight?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 8:00 pm

    This prompted a nasty whine, at comment #172:

    Beldar, pestering me with your insane nonsense about killing children is sick. You embarrass yourself, I’ve expressed respect for you on several occasions, but your obsessive taunting marks you out as an obnoxious bully.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 8:11 pm

    At this point Hoagie fussed at me, comment #177, by saying, “Et tu Beldar? Don’t forget all the murdered puppies. That’ll change their minds! Calling a person pro-baby killing always does.” Hoagie must not have heard Trump clearly in the exchange quoted above between Baier and Trump, because in it, Trump is unquestionably “pro-baby killing.”

    So I replied to them both, at comment #184:

    Hoagie, I didn’t hallucinate Trump saying he wants to kill terrorists families.

    And I’m not hallucinating ropelight either.

    Okay, ropelight, would be be more fair for us to talk penis size for a while?

    This is the consequence of supporting a monster: People conclude that you are also a monster.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 8:25 pm

    ropelight replied, at comment #194:

    Beldar, look in the mirror – that’s your enemy looking back at you. Might also be a good idea to lay off the sauce and get out more. Maybe even get a chick.

    ropelight (4bcc7f) — 3/3/2016 @ 8:30 pm

    I replied, at comment #202:

    My enemy — and America’s — was center-stage at the debate tonight, ropelight.

    He’s in favor of murdering children, and you’re in favor of him. Why is it bullying to repeat that? You can stop it in a moment, just by being a human being instead of a Trump robot. Admit that your man is a monster.

    Then if you want to vote for him anyway, we can all take things in that context.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 8:33 pm

    More from ropelight, at comment #297:

    Give it up Hoagie, save yourself. Even though you support Cruz, the mad dogs here will go after you every bit as viciously as they attack me and the Tiger if you keep trying to make them see that hatred has blinded them to the obvious reality that most Republican and Conservative voters prefer Donald Trump.

    It’s called democracy and they know better. They’re willing to twist Trump’s words (go after the families of terrorists) into baby killing. Saddam’s sons were grown men, so were Osama bin Ladin’s son grown men. Did the Trump haters ever give it a minute’s thought that these family members were themselves either terrorists or supported terrorists? No, they went straight for the lowest, dirtiest, blood libel they could conger up and then repeatedly tried to smear me with it. Beldar was the worst.

    So, avoid my fate and hold your powder till after March 15th when the fat lady sings.

    ropelight (6354c4) — 3/4/2016 @ 7:17 am

    Beyond this, ropelight wouldn’t respond directly to me for a while, but others were also expressing horror at his embrace of child-killing, which prompted ropelight to post this, at comment #309:

    You tell me JD, if a terrorist is willing to die in order to kill others, how can you stop him other than retaliating against someone he doesn’t want to be responsible for harming.

    ropelight (6354c4) — 3/4/2016 @ 7:38 am

    Friends and neighbors, if you have any doubt whether all of this, ropelight was still 100% on board with the baby-killing, comment #309 removes that doubt.

    In comment #344, DRJ reminded Hoagie that Trump’s position in the debate wasn’t even new (link by DRJ):

    Hoagie,

    Trump was interviewed on Fox & Friends in early December 2015. He said the way to stop terrorists was to “take out” the terrorists and their families, because terrorists care about their families’ lives.

    Trump has never taken that back, to my knowledge, and that’s the source of the questions last night about ordering illegal military actions. It is illegal for our military to target non-combatant civilians, at home or abroad.

    DRJ (15874d) — 3/4/2016 @ 8:29 am

    So here’s what I concluded, about ropelight, from this incident, in comment #373, which began this way:

    @ ropelight (#294): Saddam Hussein’s sons were themselves adults who were legitimate targets based on their adult actions. That is such a typical example of your extreme and deliberate dishonesty, making that sort of comparison!

    This is why I have now concluded that you aren’t just a crazy sucker, but a deeply dishonest co-conspirator with Trump’s frauds. This is why I have zero respect for you; this is why I actively dislike you; this is why I wish you’d go somewhere else with your poisonous lies, because I’m very tired of reading them.

    You’re also more dangerous than most of the suckers who are supporting and actively campaigning for Donald Trump, because you’re fairly clever with your lies and your distortions. You actually usually manage complete sentences, which of course is beyond the ability of your hero. So as long as you keep telling these lies, I’ll keep calling you out. Fish, barrel, bang. If I can do it in a way that makes you personally uncomfortable, then terrific: That’s a secondary goal, maybe it will somehow penetrate your stubborn craziness. But my primary goal is to make sure that anyone who reads your lies also has multiple corrections close at hand, and that they be as vivid as I can make them. Your hurt feelings are the very least of my concerns.

    And there we stand today.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  258. Postscript: Trump immediately had to walk back his promise to make American military personnel murder innocent children. But ropelight has never walked back, or apologized for, his support of Trump’s original pro-baby-killing position.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  259. terrorists are no good

    yeah i’m looking at you, saudi royal pervert

    happyfeet (831175)

  260. I thought Trump was referring to the ROE’s which don’t allow the drones or bombers to take the shot if children and/or women are present no matter how high value the target, but I may have placed my own lens over that.
    I also thought when Trump was discussing waterboarding, he didn’t think it was illegal and I also know that there are a lot of ways to get things like waterboarding outsourced via the CIA
    so it was not an issue with me.

    I also wonder when we let lawyers describe what is legal for the US to do in war, to the point where our guys die because it’s “illegal” to deliver artillery to help pinned down American soldiers.
    The next President needs to roll that nonsense back.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  261. Yeah, that’s the thing with Mr. Ropelight. Very much like Trump, he just moves on. He has been called on his dishonesty over and over again.

    His goal, I think, is this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

    So Beldar did us all a nice service. But he cannot get that time back.

    The goal of folks like Mr. Ropelight—and this includes Mr. Trump, is to lie, exaggerate, insult, move on to more lies, exaggerations, and insults. It’s a feature.

    Just keep in mind this: if Trump ever bothered to act Presidential (refrained from talking about his penis, came up with real policy plans, didn’t backtrack on prior statements, and take responsibility for his prior actions like Trump University)…well, he would be a real contender. All he has to do is take the high road, once.

    As it stands, I honestly believe he is a shill from HRC. And if he did happen to win, he would simply bring his own, um, veering approach to consistency and honesty to our government as he has brought to business.

    To repeat: what if he acted Presidential? Either he cannot help himself, or chooses not to act like a potential world leader.

    I think we all know the answer. Me, I would love to see some one on debates between Cruz and Trump. But you notice whenever Trump talks a lot, he loses support. Interesting, isn’t it?

    He is just a place holder for anger.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  262. steveg, re-read the question Baier asked. It wasn’t about drones. It wasn’t about collateral damage and rules of engagement. Cruz has spoken frequently, consistently, and appropriately about lifting Obama’s ridiculously overbroad ROEs. That’s not what this is about.

    It was about the U.S. government, through its military, specifically targeting, for murder, innocent family members of terrorists as a means of deterring terrorism.

    Trump came out foursquare in favor of murdering children. He retreated; ropelight hasn’t. I don’t think Trump’s retreat is sincere, but we don’t have to wonder about ropelight, since he’s never backed down from this.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  263. I read an article in Real Clear Politics that says Cruz could win 1/2 the delegates in PA even if Cruz comes in a distant third.
    That is a credit to Cruz’ ground game, but at some point Cruz is going to have to win a majority of the popular votes somewhere because the electoral college is primarily winner take all except a couple of states.
    So these types of “wins” don’t make me feel all that good about how Cruz will do in a general election

    steveg (fed1c9)

  264. Jester, it’s now 2 hours since you accused me of lying. Yet, even in the face of a direct challenge to point out a lie you haven’t made good on your claim. Asshole!

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  265. Beldar, if you can’t get a chick, maybe you should get a dog to kick.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  266. Hey, shitbird, Beldar has repeatedly pointed out your lies. JD has repeatedly pointed out your lies. Jester has repeatedly pointed out your lies. I have repeatedly pointed out your lies. CS has repeatedly pointed out your lies. You are the asshole here and your shit stinks to high heaven.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  267. You’re not necessarily a liar, ropelight. You could be someone who honestly thinks that “down” and “downward but I kept my balance” mean the same thing. Eat more foods with the B Vitamins, particularly B1, B6 and B12.

    nk (dbc370)

  268. Sorry if I was unclear, I was describing how I layered my own thoughts over Trumps.
    Easy to do, but as you noted that was not Trumps immediate answer, nor ropelights.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  269. Hey, sh!tbird, Beldar has repeatedly pointed out your lies. JD has repeatedly pointed out your lies. Jester has repeatedly pointed out your lies. I have repeatedly pointed out your lies. CS has repeatedly pointed out your lies. You are the asshole here and your sh!t stinks to high heaven.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  270. Beldar:

    ropelight, do you think Trump favors lethal injection for children under 10? Or is he just going to go straight Old Testament eye-for-an-eye and behead them?

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/3/2016 @ 7:53 pm

    We know the answer to that now: “Trump’s favorite Bible verse is ‘eye for an eye.

    DRJ (15874d)

  271. stay away from kelp it hardly has any b vitamins at all

    happyfeet (831175)

  272. Beldar, if you can’t get a chick, maybe you should get a dog to kick.
    ropelight (f7b9c9) — 4/19/2016 @ 4:18 pm

    I see you never graduated 6th grade. Quit Beavis and Buttheading your way through life, receptacle for used feminine hygiene products.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  273. Where’s my lie? I’m waiting.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  274. No, you’re acting like Perry: refuse to see all the citations over time proving a point, then demanding those citations which, if given, you will continue to ignore.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  275. Well, first of all when you said that Trump is qualified to be President. The Constitution is clear that the President must be a person.

    nk (dbc370)

  276. Another way you’re acting like Perry: sidling up beside blatant liar Papier Mache Tiger all tagteam like. Papier Mache Tiger is PIATOR to your Perry.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  277. Second, when you keep saying that Michelle Fields said that Lewandowki pulled her down and you go on and on and on and video, video, video about it, when what she said was that the Slobovian pulled her downward but she managed to keep her balance.

    nk (dbc370)

  278. Politico 2/20/2016:

    Trump started spending big in January

    The real-estate mogul loaned his campaign an extra $5 million and it spent $11.5 million.

    ropelight 2/26/2016:

    48.Trump is on FOX and he’s on fire. He’s winning big time, not spending a dime.

    ropelight (24b805) — 2/26/2016 @ 11:10 am

    We all make mistakes. I’ve certainly made plenty. The point is to admit it and not let it turn into a lie.

    DRJ (15874d)

  279. Well, those are all dollars. It didn’t say anything about whether he spent dimes or not.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  280. So an adult male supposedly grabbed an attractive young woman in high heels, who happened to be accosting a presidential candidate, by the lower left arm hard enough to leave her marked with bruises attempting to yank her down but because of divine intervention she was somehow able to retain her balance while never showing the slightest discomfort on video tape of the incident.

    Well, nk, I’ll agree there’s a lie somewhere but it sure looks like Michelle Fields is the liar, and the tapes prove it.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  281. DRJ, so that’s it? My reputation as a liar is based on the distinction of Trump spending money he loaned to his campaign as opposed to money out of his own pocket? Ya got me!

    Get out the cast iron cauldron on the fire and fill it with oil. I’m a goner.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  282. nk, I’m not sure that B-vitamins can save ropelight, especially after Beldar’s prosecution. Ouch!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  283. Yeah, that’s a big fat lie of such overarching proportions that it overcomes over 10 years of commenting here. It only goes to show the depths of intellectual integrity demanded by Cruz supporters which is the yardstick they willingly apply to themselves.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  284. She was not accosting him. You just lied again. You cannot help yourself. You are nothing but a blatant liar.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  285. Beldar has his head up his ass. I never agreed to kill women and children, quite the opposite. I am however willing to kill terrorists and I offered a discount price to perform the necessary procedures. It’s me patriotic duty.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  286. Trump is on FOX and he’s on fire. He’s winning big time, not spending a dime.

    ropelight (24b805) — 2/26/2016 @ 11:10 am

    “not spending a dime”

    loaned his campaign an extra $5 million and it spent $11.5 million.

    spending money

    That was what DRJ pointed out. Now, let’s see how a liar retorts.

    My reputation as a liar is based on the distinction of Trump spending money he loaned to his campaign as opposed to money out of his own pocket?

    Yep, the liar retorts by lying about what the claim was.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  287. Beldar has his head up his ass. I never agreed to kill women and children, quite the opposite. I am however willing to kill terrorists and I offered a discount price to perform the necessary procedures. It’s me patriotic duty.
    ropelight (f7b9c9) — 4/19/2016 @ 5:04 pm

    And yet another lie. Trump was all-in for murdering children. The liar refused to condemn it.

    John Hitchcock (d901fa)

  288. ropelight, it would be one thing if you would be honest and stand up and admit the occasions when Trump is caught lying or being a vulgar jerk. But you’re the self-righteous Dad at the youth soccer game who yells, “My little Donnie didn’t commit a foul!” when it’s obvious to everyone that your little Donnie did commit a foul.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  289. ropelight:

    286.DRJ, so that’s it? My reputation as a liar is based on the distinction of Trump spending money he loaned to his campaign as opposed to money out of his own pocket? Ya got me!

    I didn’t make a distinction between money donated to Trump and money donated by Trump, but apparently you are. If so, then it seems you think “not spending a dime” means not spending other people’s money, but it’s different to spend your own.

    I don’t think you really made that distinction. I think you actually believed tat Trump wasn’t spending any money. Nevertheless: Through 2/29/2016, Donald J. Trump had accepted and reported donations from others totaling $9,434,462. Trump donated over $24M to his campaign, and he had spent all but $1.1M.

    DRJ (15874d)

  290. Again with the psychopathic fantasies in which he is — what, deputized by President Trump? — paid by his country to murder prisoners in captivity without even a summary court martial. Just like the SS troops did to American soldiers at Malmedy.

    Not “Sad!”

    Sick.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  291. DRJ, hasn’t Trump repeatedly bragged about self-funding he own campaign? Isn’t that one of his talking points? My reference to his being on FOX NEWS and not paying for air time obviously isn’t a claim that he’s not funding his own candidacy. He was on TV making a strong case for his nomination and didn’t have to buy commercial time to do it.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  292. Actually, I am enjoying ropelight’s silliness. He really does act like Trump.

    I’m not saying that he has small hands, though.

    Seriously, this is exactly what I have been talking about: no interest in policy. No interest in the high road. Just anger and vulgarity.

    And folks are right: the troll’s goal is to get other people to waste time chasing down all the bizarre statements the troll has made. Except folks have already done that. Multiple times.

    Now, I know that there are Trump supporters who aren’t like this. But they must be awfully proud of such antics. Why, this kind of behavior might even get them to consider changing their minds!

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  293. Beldar, once you were a man of honor, or at least I took you to be one, but no more, you’ve lost your soul and I’ve lost all respect for you.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  294. Jester, I’m still waiting for you to point out one of my lies. It’s been over 3 hours now.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  295. ropelight, you constantly move the goalposts. Someone could ask you “What’s two plus two?” and you would respond, “I never said I wanted my eggs cooked over-easy.”

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  296. You just don’t get it, Mr. Ropelight. You want me to spend time writing what all of us have been reading for some time. No reason.

    You are just playing a nasty game, and supporting a nasty person. So be at peace. You support a person who clearly reflects your own troubled psyche. Enjoy it.

    But don’t think for a femtosecond you are fooling anyone at all. Not even yourself.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  297. ropelight,

    What do you hope to accomplish when you post continual defenses of Trump in spite of evidence that disproves the claims? Do you ever stop and consider that? Or is it that you’re all in now and there’s no backing down, no matter what?

    I just cannot imagine feeling bound in loyalty to an individual who wants to become the president yet has given me more than several reasons (at the least) to doubt his veracity and have the evidence validate those doubts.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  298. So, Jester, you call me a liar and for over 3 hours you can’t produce a single lie. That’s bad enough, but now you whine that my demand you back up your accusation is too burdensome and unfair gamesmanship on my part. So, who’s the liar now?

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  299. Well, you are, Mr. Ropelight. Multiple times. And you certainly seem angry about it.

    I wonder why?

    Honestly, can you not see that I am doing precisely what you have been doing for weeks now?

    Truly?

    I don’t mean to laugh at you. But c’mon. Go get a beer and watch some television.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  300. Dana, please note that my comments here tonight don’t involve a defense of Trump. I’m defending myself against the outrageous accusations of being a liar. For over 3 hours now it’s been clear that my attackers can’t lay a single lie at my feet.

    Again, any defense of Trump has been tangential to a defense of myself.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  301. Jester, you’re a two-faced liar.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  302. LOL. Really, dude. Listen to yourself.

    Performance art is one thing. But I think you have taken the Method too far.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  303. Seriously, go do something that makes you happy. Visit friends. Have a drink. A nice meal. Whatever works.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  304. Smarmy jerk!

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  305. In all seriousness, Mr. Ropelight, you seem overwrought.

    My favorite drink is a Manhattan.

    What’s yours?

    I will drink your favorite, and you can drink mine.

    You need to relax. And that isn’t smarmy. It’s truthful. Unless you just like to fight.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  306. ropelight, you lie like a Persian rug. Except nobody wants you in their living room for the next ten years.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  307. Jester, you call me a liar, then refuse to back it up, now you want to make nice. No thanks.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  308. It’s pretty dishonorable to quote your words back at you, ropelight. I’d debate it with you further, but I need to get back on the sauce and find a chick.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  309. Beldar, at least you and I can have a virtual drink. Fair enough?

    This guy is just silly.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  310. Talk to Jester, he knows a thing or two about intoxicatin’ liquors. As for a chick, you’re on your own.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  311. Simon, I’ll gladly exchange this virtual toast with you. I don’t have the ingredients for a Manhattan (although they’re good! I’m just too lazy), so mine will be a Glenlivet, straight up with a splash. Sláinte!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  312. ropelight, come on, man, you’re retired down there in Florida. You should be relaxed and enjoying yourself. You can catch up on all that reading that you never had the time for during your career. Play a little golf. Drink a Manhattan, as recommended by Simon. Watch some old films on Turner Classic Movies.
    But instead, you’re carrying water for an unscrupulous, vulgar, jerk billionaire who would flatten you like a pancake if you stood between him and one of his projects. You’ve been caught in so many lies, yet you brush them off with silly explanations, and then spike the football and declare that you haven’t been exposed as a liar during the past 15 minutes.
    (Facepalm.)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  313. Man… if someone who used to visit this site fairly often had just returned after a 6 to 8 month innernets vacation, I can only imagine the shock and confusion that would ensue. Lines have been drawn, apoplectic (in some cases) insults exchanged, blood oaths sworn on the graves of beloved ancestors… oh… wait… it is primary season.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  314. You liquorheads might want to squeeze a few sour grapes into your cups. Early NY returns have Trump at 73.8% of the GOP vote, Kasich at 15.2%, and Cruz at 12%.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  315. Hillary/Huma 2016!

    nk (dbc370)

  316. Shocker, ropelight.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  317. Beldar, I’m fond of Morangie.

    But the important thing, obviously, is to enjoy life.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  318. Simon: That’s another good one! I visited both of those distilleries, and many more, in a whisky driving tour of Scotland in 1981.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  319. (I was young and foolish when I was young and foolish, but I already enjoyed good whisky.)

    Beldar (fa637a)

  320. ropelight, in every primary you always get excited about the early returns, ten minutes after the polls have closed. You’re the guy watching the first round game of March Madness who exclaims, “Middle Eastern South Dakota Tech is leading Duke, 4-2, after one minute!!!!!!”

    If you followed politics, you would know that early returns are not very scientific. It really depends on which precincts have been counted at that time. That’s not to say that Donnie New York won’t win New York with his New York Values Campaign. But I bet he won’t win with the 73.8% you were just doing backflips over.

    Have a Manhattain. Or at least a Coors Light! (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  321. Megyn Kelly is hinting that both Cruz and Kasich have sharply changed the focus of their remarks. After the commercial she’s likely to flesh out her observations. She could be onto something or just planting a teaser to hold the audience. Well’ll see.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  322. She also noticed that Trump too had altered his approach. Trump gave a disciplined acceptance speech and referred to his opponents using their respective titles rather than employing his usual colorful epithets.

    ropelight (f7b9c9)

  323. “Breaking news with ropelight.”
    Awesome.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2067 secs.