Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Will avalanche of attack ads dent The Donald?

Will avalanche of attack ads dent The Donald?

It worked on Newt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4&v=_OEijvTi0NE

We are now beginning to see the first signs of an air war against Donald Trump.

The Club for Growth just released this ad:

Will it work?

It did against Newt in 2011-2012. The airwaves in Iowa and Florida were flooded with ads like this one, which is clearly cut from the same cloth as the anti-Trump ad:

The ads severely damaged Newt.

Will they dent The Donald?

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

The most important issue is immigration, and as long everybody else is scared of the issue, ads like this wolnt stop Trump from winning the nomination.

But

Trump’s making a mistake by not taking Super PAC support. It makes a great sound byte that he isn’t a bought politician, but he’ll need this help to beat Biden or Hillary.

    peg_c in reply to rotten. | September 16, 2015 at 10:00 am

    He shouldn’t take a dime. Furthermore, Newt was his own worst enemy. Also, the political climate, again, is totally different. In 2008, it was all about Hate Bush. 2012 the GOP didn’t know what it was doing and a lot of Republicans stayed home. This election is about many things, but THE hot-button issues, and not because of Trump, are illegal immigration (as well as our devastating open borders) and the ruination of the middle class. We’ve had a moribund economy for 8 years. Newt was not the answer to ANYTHING, for a lot of conservatives. The grassroots are driving this GOP nomination process and we are not affected by the rest of the GOP field behaving like insane Democrats. Really.

    I’m a Cruz person, but like Joe Miller I believe this entire thing is rigged for Bush or a Democrat. The GOP rigged the game specifically to keep Cruz out. Trump demolishes the GOP establishment and is owned by no one. AND he’s making an alliance with Cruz. Not all conservatives despise Trump and many are 100% against the GOP establishment. It’s an interesting time for the party; that’s for sure.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | September 15, 2015 at 9:28 pm

I disagree. I don’t think Trump needs anyone elses money, at least not from any Political Action Committee. If he accepts donations from his supporters he should be fine.

I haven’t owned a TV in about 8 years. Last time I bought a newspaper was 7 years ago. I started getting my news through online sites and blogs such as this one. I have long days most of the week, so the TV isn’t missed. Between my home pc and smartphone, that’s more than enough for my wants and needs.

So… no. As far as I’m concerned, not only are they wasting their money, their plan will backfire and boost Trump’s popularity.

I am still holding a flag for Walker/Cruz, but I do not dislike Trump. He is far more preferable to Sanders, Hillary, Biden, Bush, Christie, Kasich, etc.

    JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to TB. | September 16, 2015 at 12:09 pm

    I’m with TB on this.
    As we always say “If Dems attacked America’s enemies with half the energy they use to attack Repubs, we’d consider them part of the solution.”
    Let’s add: “If the GOP establishment attacked Dems with half the spirit they use to attack conservatives, we’d consider them part of the solution.”

It won’t hurt Trump because the people putting out the ads are distrusted by voters.

    Radegunda in reply to Juba Doobai!. | September 15, 2015 at 10:45 pm

    Do you distrust the quotations from Trump himself?

    Do you find Trump’s promises and his new (ostensible) viewpoints more trustworthy than the records of promise-keeping and acting on consistent principle that some candidates have displayed?

    Trump fans obviously do.

      If I could multiple like your comment, I would

      Which candidates, Radegunda? The only one with conservative principles that I’m hearing is Ted Cruz. HE and the others cannot win. The GOP and RNC will not allow it. Please read Joe Miller’s analysis.

        Radegunda in reply to peg_c. | September 16, 2015 at 11:08 am

        For one, Scott Walker has confronted fierce resistance from the lefty unions in order to keep his promises to the voters of Wisconsin. The other governor candidates have all kept more political promises than Trump has.

        There is no basis whatsoever — NONE — to believe that Donald Trump in office would escape the “politician” curse that Trumpsters imagine has infected every other person who has ever held public office. It’s an irrational belief.

        It’s particularly irrational given how inconsistent Trump’s political views have been over the years, and how recently he has praised politicians and expressed views he now claims to be diametrically opposed to.

    Word.

Club for Growth likes its politicians bought, paid for and kept under control…, Planned Parenthood is not the only organization that trades in gonads.

    Ragspierre in reply to EBL. | September 15, 2015 at 10:25 pm

    You’ve made the cardinal mistake of confusing CFG with T-rump, who HAS made a career of buying and selling politicians.

    The CFG merely contributes to candidates who support small government and free market economics.

    So the opposite of a threat to conservatives.

      Radegunda in reply to Ragspierre. | September 15, 2015 at 10:48 pm

      Trump fans evidently think it’s more honorable to give money to politicians and causes one (supposedly) disagrees with in order to enrich oneself. (Or may that’s only okay when “one” is named Donald Trump.)

        Valerie in reply to Radegunda. | September 16, 2015 at 12:04 pm

        One might observe that they are free-riders. They do not want to pay for anybody’s campaign, and see that as a virtue on Trump’s part.

      Club for Growth used to be more tea party and has gone to running negative attack ads in a primary? So it took out Newt to give us Mitt (how did that work out). Why not run positive ads for the candidates it supports? Attacking Trump is not the way to attack Trump (so far it only increases his poll numbers). Co-op his message and out flank Trump.

      NC Mountain Girl in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 3:13 am

      There is no point in confusing Trunp supporters with the facts. They are starting to remind me of the 16 year old girl who is convinced only she can see all the fine qualities of the town’s bad boy. The more people try to point out that he is a lying, manipulative jerk, the more she digs in her heels.

        The best they’ve got is: “He’s not a politician! We’re sick of politicians!”

        You miss the point just like Rags. I am not a Trump supporter (frankly I like Ben Carson and wished Walker was firing on all cylinders). You will not win attacking Trump supporters (that just alienates them). You win by attracting them to an alternative candidate who is better.

        It is the message that matters and if you like over cooked noodles, Jeb! is your guy (I am not saying you and Rags want Jeb!, I am just saying there is a reason Trump is kicking his butt).

    Radegunda in reply to EBL. | September 15, 2015 at 10:51 pm

    And you like your politicians wealthy enough to fund their own campaigns after buying big favors from other politicians — particularly from politicians they now claim to oppose sincerely.

      CloseTheFed in reply to Radegunda. | September 16, 2015 at 8:38 am

      Yes, I do.

      After all, politicians are using their power as elected officials to give protection. Everyone wishes to be protected. Glad he could afford it. I can’t.

        Radegunda in reply to CloseTheFed. | September 16, 2015 at 12:30 pm

        Ah, so you want a really big, paternalistic government. And a paternalistic government, of course, is one that tells you what to do.

        But there’s no reason to believe that a candidate’s ability to finance his own campaign is proof that he knows best what’s good for us.

        Nor is there any good reason to trust that someone would not use the power of the presidency for the benefit of himself and his friends (rather than campaign donors) when he has a history of seeking to buy favors for himself from politicians.

      It definitely beats being owned by scum. Our Founding Fathers were all self-made men. They would not have countenanced politicians (who they believed should be statesmen and should not be in government for life) selling themselves like street hookers. I’d rather have a president who owns people than one who is owned, if I have to choose. I don’t trust a single “big donor” in our outside our country (remember where most of 0bozo’s campaign financing came from).

        Radegunda in reply to peg_c. | September 16, 2015 at 12:39 pm

        I read a story about Trump giving financial support to Jeb and then trying to get Jeb to do something that favored Trump’s business interests in the state.

        Jeb said no, on principle.

        I’m not a Jeb supporter (primarily because of his immigration views and his weird Latino fixation), but I don’t see the basis for believing that Trump is more honorable and principled.

        Billionaires don’t necessarily get their wealth by being always more honorable than politicians.

Comparing Newt to Trump is comparing apples to oranges due to different circumstances. The level of disgust at the RINO establishment GOP leaders is orders of magnitude different now versus then.

The club for growth ad shows in bold face what all the TV pundits and idiots like Rove and Will and Krauthammer don’t understand. In times past conservative purity was important. Today, build the wall, deport the illegals, bring jobs back and make America Great Again is more important than ANYTHING ELSE.

Since Trump is the only candidate who says he will build the wall, deport the illegals, bring jobs back and make America Great Again, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, including conservative purity tests.

The club for growth are the generals wanting to fight the last war. They fail to recognize just how much tremendous damage Boehner and McConnell and their strategies have done to the GOP brand and the GOP base. They fail to recognize that the conservative base are not as stupid as the African American base of the democrat party. We will not continually excuse the GOP RINO establishment for failing to deliver to the base that gives them power.

We are tired of idiot leaders of our own party like McCain and Graham calling us racist for wanting to enforce our borders, opposing amnesty, and wanting to enforce our laws. We’ve had it with these fools who haven’t figured out that the government shut down before the 2014 elections worked to the GOP ultimate benefit. We are tired of these morons who do things like paying back pay for work not performed to government employees who didn’t work during a government shutdown rather than screwing that oversized overpaid workforce and encouraging 10s of thousands of them to quit.

WE ARE MORE DISGUSTED BY BOEHNER AND MCCONNELL AND MCCAIN AND GRAHAM ET AL THAN WE ARE WITH OBAMA. This is what the GOP RINOs and the GOP talking heads and consultants don’t get.

    Cary in NC in reply to Gary Britt. | September 15, 2015 at 10:36 pm

    Well stated! I whole-heartedly agree with your commentary.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | September 15, 2015 at 11:28 pm

    “…NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, including conservative purity tests.”

    Well I could not disagree more strongly!

    Principles matter. They are really ALL that matters.

    If you hire a Collectivist oligarch to do what you think you want done, you’ve killed our nation.

    Not to go all Godwin on you, but that is the deal Germany made with a guy to promised to “make Germany great again, and damn the principles”.

    But USING the right principles, you get what we all want, and more. We CAN return to freedom. Or, with T-rump, we can just swing the pendulum back to an equally bad place.

      Well, f**k godwin.

      However, comparing trump to hitler just proves that TDS has deepened.

      Pathetic.

        Milwaukee in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 1:33 am

        You missed the point. The comparison isn’t between Hitler and Trump, it is between the American voters and the German voters. The German voters were will to forsake principles for results. Trump is asking us to do the same. He has demonstrated little in the way of principle–His bankruptcies should weigh as heavily against him as Newt’s divorces did against him. “Wicked men do not repay their debts.” Has Trump made any effort to repay people who lost money because of his bankruptcies, or did he blame those who trusted him for being chumps. Don’t be chump, avoid Trump.

          NC Mountain Girl in reply to Milwaukee. | September 16, 2015 at 3:17 am

          Like Newt, Trump is twice divorced and married to a much younger third wife. Indeed, Trumps infidelities were front page news in the Tabloids even before Bill Clinton’s bimbo eruptions.

          CloseTheFed in reply to Milwaukee. | September 16, 2015 at 8:43 am

          My gosh! The unsophistication of those prattling about bankruptcies!!!

          The LEGAL SYSTEM is designed for what he did. As he has pointed out, he deals with sophisticated businessmen: they KNEW the risk and took it. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose!!!

          If you don’t like limited liability and/or bankruptcy for business, then you are advocating eliminating corporations as legal entities, as well as LLCs, LLPs, et cetera.

          Almost every big company, e.g., Coke, IBM, Apple, Norfolk RR, et cetera, uses the protections of limited liability. It’s BEDROCK.

          tobiathan in reply to Milwaukee. | September 16, 2015 at 9:06 am

          Every time i see some rhyme attacking Trump i see immaturity and petulance coming from his opposition. It’s jut juvenile to resist Trump for bankruptcies and divorces and imperfections- or even certain weaknesses- when many of us have had similar or equivalent experiences. At least we know who and what Trump is, where he’s from and what he genuinely thinks [if his public statements are pre-arranged and strategized the execution is impeccable.

          Donald Trump might manipulate people for his gain in business but that IS business.

          He is far too wealthy to need any money or fame from the Presidency.

          He is simply too fallibly human too be a talking head.

          The myth of conservative purism must be dissolved before we, as the AMERICAN RACE, can let go of petty grievances and move forward as a unit towards our natural role as the Shining City on the Hill. I haven’t heard that phrase in far too long. It’s time we conservatives face our own humanity while retaining our hatred of the waste, fraud, overreach, impersonal and dehumanizing effect of large, centralized government and move, together, towards abolishing public employees unions, unchecked immigration, the neglect of our warfighters, the strengthening and freeing of our economy and the decriminalization of whole segments of our population- jails and prisons are NOT an “industry”, they are a social responsibility not to be shirked off on an exploitive profit-based system. And, imho, it is time to treat drug addicts and the mentally ill instead of warehousing them. Decriminalize drugs, let police pursue crime- not addicts; there’s enough theft and violence to keep cops busy. We don’t need any more people in prison for life w/o parole because he had too much POT! Not any violent crime- but pot- got him life. in prison. w/o parole.

          So yeah- enough of playing stupid and allowing a small, exclusive crowd of “career politicians”(?!) to dictate our lives while we fuss amongst ourselves about “who’s more conservative-ist than whom”.

          Word. To your mother. And tell her i said hi 😉

          Ragspierre in reply to Milwaukee. | September 16, 2015 at 9:07 am

          And…like every element of our legal system…the unscrupulous can game the system.

          I do bankruptcies for regular people. You’ll see that there are those who play it like a fiddle, and are back every few years, as soon as the limitations allow.

          Why are the kids who attended “Trump University” calling it a scam?

          Why does the man feel he has to lie constantly to save face? He does, and if you’re not aware, well that’s telling…

          tobiathan in reply to Milwaukee. | September 16, 2015 at 9:16 am

          *sorry about the rant; too much coffeeman this am.

          “You missed the point.”

          No, I didn’t miss the point at all. TDS obscures your ability to read and reason.

          That Rags tries to compare Trump supporters to the german electorate does not mean he didn’t also imply trump was hitleresque.

          It is precisely what he meant.

        Mich in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 9:31 am

        I believe every human has the ability to “go nazi.” (ht. Dorthy Parker) When people advocate doing something that other people understand or experience as having been tried and a bad idea, it isn’t name calling, but trying to inform or remind. Hitler was not seen as being bad for quite a while before WWII. At one time, he enjoyed a good reputation, as did Mussolini.

          Mich in reply to Mich. | September 16, 2015 at 9:32 am

          Sorry, Dorothy Thompson, Harpers mag. August 1941

          Barry in reply to Mich. | September 16, 2015 at 11:48 am

          “I believe every human has the ability to “go nazi.” (ht. Dorthy Parker)”

          I believe TDS has tortured your brain.

          “Hitler was not seen as being bad for quite a while before WWII.”

          Uh huh. Maybe you should try reading some history before posting comments to the internets. Start with Churchill and his warnings about Hitler, starting as early as 1930. The devil hisself enjoys good ratings by someone.

          Ragspierre in reply to Mich. | September 16, 2015 at 12:54 pm

          “It is precisely what he meant.”

          You’re TDS is making you crazy, Barry.

          Barry in reply to Mich. | September 16, 2015 at 1:50 pm

          “…but that is the deal Germany made with a guy to promised to “make Germany great again, and damn the principles”.”

          “Or, with T-rump, we can just swing the pendulum back to an equally bad place.”

          Uh, huh.

          Yes, TDS explains it. Even when comparing trump to hitler, we really aren’t. sheesh.

      I concur with Rags.

      Just as with the morally ad hoc and utilitarian William Godwin, Trump’s in-the-moment opportunistic moral arithmetic has not added up to unity or one. He’s deficit a moral bankroll, to put it into his lingo.

      And, just as with his business dealings Trump is now counting on people’s currency of trust to make his political in-the-moment calculation gain a positive ROI other than zero. He’s rolling the dice and he wants your money to do it with.

      Trump, without a moral backing or a solid character structure in place is all fascia: name recognition, branding, beauty contests. So,…

      The “Greatest Schmo on Earth” was on TV the other night selling his razzle dazzle snake oil self.

      Déjà vu: “I felt this thrill going up my leg!” The thrall phenomenon returns.

      The Enthralled, the Captivated, the Slots, are being played by another empty chair.

        JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to jennifer a johnson. | September 16, 2015 at 12:15 pm

        I like Rags. But I don’t agree with him on this one.
        If GOPe is not willing to stand up for America and they should sit down and die. If they aren’t willing to lift a finger, then of course charlatans like Trump will prosper. As they should.
        Wake up Repub leaders!

          OF COURSE “charlatans like Trump will prosper”! Nobody said otherwise. I understand the draw. I just call on people to use their common sense, and recognize the opportunistic charlatan!

          Governor Walker is a solid Midwestern American who has accomplished more and for a greater number of people than New York’s Progressive Donald Trumpoline.

          JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to JimMtnViewCaUSA. | September 16, 2015 at 4:07 pm

          Trump is a charlatan. We’re going down the same road we Californians already took when we elected Arnold governor instead of taking a shot with Tom McClintock.

          Having said that, Trump is standing up on important issues. Repub “leadership” is sitting on its thumbs on the sidelines. I won’t oppose Trump till someone in the GOPe shows they are willing to take a stand for America.

    tobiathan in reply to Gary Britt. | September 16, 2015 at 8:41 am

    Bingo.

    Anonamom in reply to Gary Britt. | September 16, 2015 at 4:14 pm

    “We are tired of idiot leaders of our own party like McCain and Graham calling us racist for wanting to enforce our borders, opposing amnesty, and wanting to enforce our laws. We’ve had it with these fools who haven’t figured out that the government shut down before the 2014 elections worked to the GOP ultimate benefit. We are tired of these morons who do things like paying back pay for work not performed to government employees who didn’t work during a government shutdown rather than screwing that oversized overpaid workforce and encouraging 10s of thousands of them to quit.

    WE ARE MORE DISGUSTED BY BOEHNER AND MCCONNELL AND MCCAIN AND GRAHAM ET AL THAN WE ARE WITH OBAMA. This is what the GOP RINOs and the GOP talking heads and consultants don’t get.”

    Well put and exactly right, Mr. Britt.

Cool! Y’all gave The First Street Journal Blog of the Day! Большое спасибо!

All these ads are going to do is give Trump yet another bump in the polls because they will be proving his point about “bought” politicians. He will certainly be using these attack ads against them. All he has to say to his devotees is that he has “evolved” on these views that went against the conservative brand.

    Radegunda in reply to mwsomerset. | September 15, 2015 at 10:53 pm

    Is the new standard for political virtue that one must be a billionaire?

    Is buying favors from politicians more virtuous than helping people who support your campaign?

      “…helping people who support your campaign?”

      Otherwise known as people trying to buy influence.

      TDS twists brains into pretzels.

        Radegunda in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 12:44 pm

        You think Trump is more honorable because he’s been on the buying end of trying to buy influence with politicians.

        He tried to buy favors in Florida from Jeb. Jeb said no, on principle.

        I’m not a Jeb fan at all. But the faith in the relative ethical purity of Donald Trump is bizarre.

        Radegunda in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 12:50 pm

        Should all presidential candidates be billionaires, then? Should every political office be reserved for people wealthy enough to finance their own campaigns?

        Are people of great wealth all, necessarily, more honorable and honest than people of lesser means? Are they less self-interested? Do they have better judgement about what is in the best interest of the American people generally?

        Trump fans would have to answer “yes” to every one of those questions in order to sustain their argument that Trump is more trustworthy than any other candidate or “politician” simply because “he can’t be bought.”

          TDS is twisting your brain into knots.

          Find anything that I have said supporting your pile of BS in the last two comments…

          I’ll wait…

          Nope, didn’t think so.

          You said “Is buying favors from politicians more virtuous than helping people who support your campaign?”

          And I pointed out what an absurd statement it is, as though your “helping people” are not trying to “buying favors”.

          Nothing more, didn’t call trump honorable, conservative, witty, intelligent, good looking, or anything else.

          TDS.

From H44: http://www.hillaryis44.org/2015/09/01/yes-donald-trump-does-destroy-the-gop-because-obama-destroyed-the-dems/

“Trump however is more than just the herald of the death of the Republican Party.

Trump also brings about the redefinition of what a conservative is.

Trump also brings about the redefinition of what a liberal is.

Why should a middle class conservative support the low wage policies of the Chamber of Commerce?

Why should a working class conservative fight to protect the tax deduction privileges of those super-wealthy who live off a corrupt political system and have as their goal a low wage society?

Why should a liberal support a low wage society which hurts the poor and the middle class via illegal immigration amnesty?

Why should a liberal tolerate the totalitarian state speech codes that silence free speech?

Donald Trump represents more than the stilted portrait painted by the Domenechs and Ericksons. Donald Trump himself understands what he has lucked into. Donald Trump has evolved into a movement …”

    Radegunda in reply to betty. | September 15, 2015 at 10:59 pm

    Trump thinks we should censor our speech so as not to offend Muslims.

    The most serious free-speech issue of our time and for the foreseeable future is whether we must submit to Islamic demands regarding what is not permissible to say or draw. Trump has taken the side of sharia restrictions.

    Trump’s favorite use of free speech is throwing gratuitous and boorish insults at people.

      “Trump thinks we should censor our speech so as not to offend Muslims.”

      You’ve been asked before to provide the cite for this, without doing so.

      I only know that he questioned why Pam Geller was purposely trying to piss off the muslims, but I can find nothing suggesting he said she didn’t have the right to do it.

      Until you can prove otherwise, you’re just making shit up.

      And I’m with Geller, do every damn thing you can to piss them off.

        Radegunda in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 11:19 am

        http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/04/trump-blames-geller-for-being-attacked-by-jihadis-what-is-she-doing-drawing-muhammad/

        I didn’t say that Trump said Geller didn’t have a legal right to hold her event. He did, however, think it was morally wrong to “provoke” Muslims — who of course are provoked by many, many things.

        The whole point of Geller’s event was to assert our right to be free from Islamic blasphemy restrictions. Trump thought it was wrong, wrong, wrong.

        He completely missed the point. And his comments in that Breitbart piece reveal a very limited grasp of the deep problem of Islam. His comments are not those of a serious thinker.

          “Trump has taken the side of sharia restrictions.”

          To use Rags favorite wording, that’s a lie.

          He questioned that it was a good idea to purposely piss off the muslims. I disagree myself and think it a good idea.

          trump has made many, many other comments disparaging the muslim religion, as you would know having read the article referenced.

          TDS twists the brain into a pretzel.

          tobiathan in reply to Radegunda. | September 16, 2015 at 12:33 pm

          Trump never said anything about censorship.Not one word. He just said (using HIS right to free speech) that he thought that she was being inartful, petty and acting below the normative standard of a thoughtful person.

          Drawing Mohamed purely to cause trouble is juvenile at the very least.

          At least drawing it in the context of a comic or as part of a greater purpose is fine but asking people to do what she did was no different than muslims burning American flags or Bibles: it’s just provacative and lacking in depth.

          He never said she shouldn’t be allowed to do it.

          Radegunda in reply to Radegunda. | September 16, 2015 at 12:59 pm

          Tobiathan — Trump said she SHOULD NOT have done it because it’s offensive to Muslims and because it provokes Muslims.

          The whole point of Geller’s event was to claim our right to be free from sharia law on “blasphemy.” This was in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and cartoonists having to go into hiding, build panic rooms, change their identity; Geert Wilders needing constant armed guard and a frequent change of location, etc. etc.

          Trump thought it was WRONG to make a bold assertion of our right to be free of sharia restrictions. He should have boldly supported her.

          Trump’s attitude was that if “offended” Muslims attacked Geller, it was her fault.

          That is the attitude of someone who does not understand what is at stake as we confront the multi-front Islamic jihad against the rest of the world.

          You are just making shit up now.

          TDS

      tobiathan in reply to Radegunda. | September 16, 2015 at 9:31 am

      When did he say that we should censor speech to not offend muslims?

      You are obviously a paid troll so called
      journalist working out of your bedroom.

      You site no facts, have no insight, have
      no vision and cannot see the forest through
      the trees.

      You can always tell a troll by how often they
      post the same “anti” drivel.

It also occurs to me that calling Trump “very liberal” just doesn’t matter as much as it might have just a couple of years ago. If the GOP is famous for telling us all the right things on “the issues,” and then after being handed a landslide election to Congress turns around and rubber-stamps everything Obama and the Democrats do, then “the issues” don’t matter much anymore; the GOP has already revealed themselves as “very liberal.”

And this is in addition to FOX News, National Review, and a bunch of other outlets formerly thought of as conservative, outing themselves in the wake of Trump’s candidacy as being in favor of the bloated political class that is the cause of all of this country’s political problems.

TL;DR: The people in the GOP and the media who are badmouthing Trump have no credibility left. We’re tuning them out. Good luck getting us to listen to you about Trump.

    Ragspierre in reply to Aitch748. | September 15, 2015 at 11:33 pm

    “And this is in addition to FOX News, National Review, and a bunch of other outlets formerly thought of as conservative, outing themselves in the wake of Trump’s candidacy as being in favor of the bloated political class that is the cause of all of this country’s political problems.”

    Which is a complete load of bullshit. Jonah Goldberg has been fighting for positions well to the RIGHT of T-rump for years, including building an effective barrier along the border since 2006. Mark Kirkorian knows more about immigration issues than almost anyone alive. It would make Duh Donald’s head spin…!!!

    Where do you get this bullshit?

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Aitch748. | September 16, 2015 at 3:36 am

    Most of the conservative media has been bashing Republicans in the House and Senate for years now. Of course, one has to actually read them to know that.

Club For Growth would be better off saving their pennies and using their money to attack the Democrat nominee instead of trying to play Kingmaker in the GOP.

If Trump fails to get the nomination, his many supporters are going to remember who attacked him. At least Cruz is playing it smart by not going after him.

    Ragspierre in reply to Sanddog. | September 15, 2015 at 11:35 pm

    They oppose T-rump for the same reasons I do: he’s a BIG GOVERNMENT Collectivist.

      In other words, he’s absolutely no different than the vast majority of Republicans holding office in DC today.

      Trump is the result of a party that is destroying itself through decades of lies and elitist attitudes. When they’re campaigning, they talk a good game but once they’re elected, it’s “shut up and let us decide what’s best for you”.

        Ragspierre in reply to Sanddog. | September 16, 2015 at 8:45 am

        But that is NOT what we have in our best candidates for office.

        I’ve heard people say for years that they want a principled conservative to vote for, and now we have some.

        It’s crazy to consider T-rump against these people.

      tobiathan in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 9:42 am

      What basis do you use to make this “big gov’t collectivist” claim?

      I keep reading all this hatred for Trump but nobody has any evidence- just a lot of vitriol and opinion.

    PhillyGuy in reply to Sanddog. | September 16, 2015 at 12:35 pm

    CFG would have better if they hadn’t asked for a $1 million contribution from Trump before they ran the ads.

      Ragspierre in reply to PhillyGuy. | September 16, 2015 at 1:05 pm

      Why? They’ve been very openly criticizing T-rump for his Collectivist positions for years.

      T-rump ASKED them to come to tell him what they suggested and WHO they suggested for “his money”.

      Isn’t it weird to you that so many people who he slimes “asked him for his money”?

      It should be.

        “Isn’t it weird to you that so many people who he slimes “asked him for his money”?”

        Isn’t it weird that so many people that asked for his money and were turned down slime him?

        Once again, the CFG asked for a 1 million dollar donation, in a letter, published, no doubt about it. Real principled organization there, ask for large donations from the very people you say you are against. Sounds a lot like, pay us, and we’ll go light on you.

        TDS, is there any brain it cannot twist?

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 3:08 pm

        “Isn’t it weird that so many people that asked for his money and were turned down slime him?”

        IF you accept his word as gospel. Which is TDS.

        “Once again, the CFG asked for a 1 million dollar donation, in a letter, published, no doubt about it. Real principled organization there, ask for large donations from the very people you say you are against. Sounds a lot like, pay us, and we’ll go light on you.”

        No. It sounds like a response by people who were asked what Mr. Establishment could do to help. CFG isn’t “against” T-rump. They are against SOME of his stated positions. Which are all over the map.

        He asked, they answered.

        “TDS, is there any brain it cannot twist?”

        Mine. Yours? Not so much.

          “IF you accept his word as gospel. Which is TDS.”

          I don’t have to accept his word. The letter exists. I don’t care who “went first”. It’s immaterial. The CFG asked trump for the donation. He turned them down. Those are the facts. They are now going after trump. Fact.

          If they had public condemnation before, then they should not have asked for a donation. Period.

          They are just chamber of commerce hacks supporting unlimited illegal invasion across our border.

          TDS

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 7:34 pm

          They are just chamber of commerce hacks supporting unlimited illegal invasion across our border.

          TDS
          ____________________________

          Yes. Another symptom of your malady. You are far gone.

Maybe we should run a “REAL” conservative – like Todd Akin

Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and head of a union before he ran for office – look how that turned out

    Ragspierre in reply to VENTURA. | September 15, 2015 at 11:43 pm

    Maybe you should have the brains to understand that Reagan was Reagan for DECADES before he became POTUS.

    He WAS one of the conservatives in America at the time, and other conservatives knew him and they knew him.

    You need to read T-rump’s comments on market economics, which are as Collectivist as Obama’s, both men loving the fascist economics of the Collective.

      VENTURA in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 1:10 am

      Maybe you should have the brains to spell Trump correctly –
      or is T-rump your juvenile attempt at being witty?

        Milwaukee in reply to VENTURA. | September 16, 2015 at 1:39 am

        Maybe T-rump is referring to his ass like followers, or that the Donald is an ass and doesn’t care how boorish he is: He is rich and will do whatever he damn will feels like doing. “T-rump” is more polite that ‘that ass and his ass like followers’. Don’t be a chump, don’t support T-rump.

        He is not in favor of small government, he is in favor of government he can manipulate for his own benefit.

    Milwaukee in reply to VENTURA. | September 16, 2015 at 1:46 am

    “Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and head of a union before he ran for office – look how that turned out”

    “was” is the “to be” verb for past tense. Ronald Reagan had enough smarts to figure out the Democrats had things messed up. He was president of the screen actors guild during the 50’s. Some of those people were called before the Committee on UnAmerican Activities. Not a single person accused of being a communist was falsely accused. Not a one. Was Joe McCarthy rude and overbearing sure. But they were communists. Reagan took over a seriously messed up economy and straightened things out. Russian officials knew he was not to be messed with when he fired all the air traffic controllers. Reagan was a man of integrity. Trump can not make that claim.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to VENTURA. | September 16, 2015 at 3:28 am

    You are in dire need of a history lesson.

    Reagan’s conversion came years before he ran for Governor of California. In the interim he campaigned for other conservatives. At no small cost to himself, let me add, as he was still making his living as an actor and corporate spokesperson at the time. Trump’s record is one of supporting more Democrats than Republicans over the years. There has also always been a possible pay off in it for Trump.

    Reagan also liked to note that none of his political positions had changed: The Democrat party had changed. On the other hand, all of Trump’s expressed conservative political principles are of recent vintage.

      You and others keep saying how Reagan was conservative long before becoming Governor of California. This is simply inaccurate. Reagan as governor of California raised taxes and repealed all of California’s anti abortion laws. Reagan evolved and became the greatest president but he was hardly pure conservative as a Governor.

        He also thought we no longer needed to be manufacturers, we could just be servants service people.

        Reagan is the best R president since Eisenhower. Far from perfect however. I could list many reasons why.

          Disagree. Reagan was by far the greatest president of the 20th Century and so far far better than any president of the 21st Century.

          What imperfections he had wore mostly making deals with democrats in congress where the congress didn’t have to perform their end of the deal until the future, and of course the congress always reneged on their promises. Doing amnesty and failing to secure the border first was his biggest mistake.

          What makes him the greatest president besides his economic recovery was his resolve in the face of monopoly left wing national media to build up the military, not agree to the leftists push for saving the USSR through a nuclear freeze and pushing for detante in a manner that resulted in the defeat of the USSR without having fired a single bullet. People not born in the 50s have no conception of what the threat of nuclear annihilation from the USSR was and how things were coming to a head thanks to the inept loser policies of Obama’s forerunner Carter.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 7:37 pm

          “Disagree. Reagan was by far the greatest president of the 20th Century and so far far better than any president of the 21st Century.”

          Not sure what you are disagreeing with, since I said he was the best since Dwight D. By far is a large measure. By far since Dwight, OK.

          Plenty of fault to be found.

          Let us start with my #1 Ronald Reagan issue: He did nothing when Iran murdered 241 American servicemen and 58 French servicemen. Well, he did pull us out of Lebanon. That’s it.

          I’ve plenty more if you care to load up.

MouseTheLuckyDog | September 16, 2015 at 2:17 am

Billy Kristol is talking about leaving the Republican party and running a third party candidate. http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/14/media/bill-kristol-donald-trump/

Kind of stupid given all the kerfufel placed on “the pledge”. All I can say is that if he leaves he should stay, he shouldn’t come back.

So it begins, the splitting of the party. I thought it would be the other way around. With Trump leaving.

    Trump is running a hostile takeover of the Republican Party. Kristol is indicating that Trump is succeeding. Does Kristol think the Republican primary voters give a hang if he takes his toys home? Quitting is what Trump wants from these guys.

MouseTheLuckyDog | September 16, 2015 at 2:20 am

How many pictures of HW and W with the Clintons are there?
Is Jeb in any of them?

Summing up Trumpians’ reaction to this ad. One on the hand, they cry “We don’t care that Trump isn’t conservative! We don’t care about conservative principles anymore! We want bigger government and more taxes and fewer civil liberties! Because only Trump can MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

But on the other hand, their blind unthinking knee-jerk response to any Trump-skeptics is still to shout “RINO!!!” at them as though that ends the argument.

I’m not seeing a lot of intellectual rigor here.

    tobiathan in reply to Amy in FL. | September 16, 2015 at 11:50 am

    Are you sure you’d know intellectual rigor if it bit yo on the nose?

    “I’m not seeing a lot of intellectual rigor here.”

    I suspect you were looking in a mirror when you wrote that. I mean, you don’t really think your anti trump diatribes approach an “intellectual” basis do you?

    TDS

    I wouldn’t be talking about intellectual rigor when your entire summation is wholly and entirely inaccurate and omits mention of the central theme of why people support Trump.

Jebbie gave Clinton some award. Yep he’s anti establishment. High energy too. Illegals commit crime in acts of love. Gee what a strong leader. Si senor. Uh huh.

    Ragspierre in reply to LisaGinNZ. | September 16, 2015 at 9:44 am

    You ARE aware that nobody on this thread supports Jeb!, right?

    I, for one, have said he’s toast in this election. So why are you on about him?

      “I, for one, have said he’s toast in this election.”

      But you give no credit to the toaster.

      Radegunda in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 11:33 am

      “No Jeb!” is the reflexive response of Trumpsters when they can’t refute a criticism of their idol

        ““No Jeb!” is the reflexive response of Trumpsters when they can’t refute a criticism of their idol”

        Says the jeb! idol.

        Point out where you spent any time or energy pointing out the jeb! faults.

        TDS twist your brain

          Radegunda in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 1:12 pm

          Thanks for making my point.

          Trump fans reflexively resort to the ridiculous charge that any critic of Trump must be a Jeb fan — even though there are numerous other candidates in the field, and even though I have NOWHERE stated or implied any support of Jeb.

          In fact, on this very thread I state my opposition to Jeb.

          I do, however, note the fact that Jeb declined to do a political favor for Trump after Trump gave Jeb a big campaign donation – by way of illustrating the lunacy of the belief that Trump is necessarily more pure and honorable than every “politician.”

          Radegunda in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 1:16 pm

          Barry, you seem to misunderstand what the word “idol” means. Your term “jeb idol” makes no sense even in a strictly grammatical way.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 2:39 pm

          Thanks for the grammar lesson.

          Jeb! idol.

          TDS

It is very important to swear allegiance to an amateur politician in one (but not his very first) political campaign 6+ months before the first vote is counted. I learned this when President Guiliani won the GOP nomination by acclimation in 2008.

Will they dent The Donald?

No.

Trump isn’t running on his own strengths so much as the Republican Party’s recent history of failure. No attack on Trump can make that history of failure go away.

Does the obvious failure of establishment GOPism mean that Trump is the only candidate worth supporting? In principle, no. Any other candidate could step up and express a willingness to throw a wrench into the GOP’s program of abject surrender to the Progressive program. We’re still waiting for one of them to do so. The opportunity is there, but nobody else—not even those trying to run as non-establishment political outsiders—seems willing to do so, at least so far as the big target is concerned. Walker and Cruz, at least, make some of the right noises, but only against the smaller targets, and that isn’t enough.

Outside of the context of this particular election Trump would not be considered a good candidate. But in 2016, we want a candidate to show three things:

1. A consciousness of just what the existential threats to the Great American Experiment are, and ideas about how they might be addressed;

2. That he means it; that there’s a chance that he might actually try to come through on his solutions, if elected;

3. An ability to deliver the goods.

Trump isn’t a terribly strong candidate so far as (2) is concerned—he is, after all, a politician (not a professional one, but a politician nonetheless), and politicians lie. And he would more than likely fail on (3), Washington institutional inertia being the force of nature that it is. But on (1), he’s the only candidate we have. Nobody else is seriously in the running. The field is open, but I don’t see anybody else looming on the horizon who’s likely to jump in at the deep end of the pool, where it really counts—in that respect, the establishment GOP is stone dead.

… All of which means that attacking Trump on (2) or (3) is inconsequential, and will remain so until a candidate willing to challenge him on (1) appears.

    Ragspierre in reply to tom swift. | September 16, 2015 at 8:54 am

    1. A consciousness of just what the existential threats to the Great American Experiment are, and ideas about how they might be addressed;

    Bullshit!

    He IS a threat to the “Great American Experiment”. His solutions are BIG GOVERNMENT and MORE BIG GOVERNMENT. He is an ANTI-conservative thinker…to the extent he’s a thinker.

    He’s ANOTHER narcissist who firmly believes he’s the smartest man in any room he’s in, when he’s actually a boob WRT a catalog of subjects, including economics.

    The parallels should be apparent and disturbing.

      tobiathan in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 10:07 am

      Why do you think Trump wants so much big government? How did you come to this conclusion? Honestly, at times you sound like a “Hope’n’Changer” franticly and emotionally attacking conservative philosophy. I hate to say that b/c i know you post here a great deal, but i just don’t get this panicky tone about Trump.

        Ragspierre in reply to tobiathan. | September 16, 2015 at 10:34 am

        I read his stuff and listen to his words, that’s how I know T-rump is a BIG GOVERNMENT Collectivist.

        I also look at his conduct during his entire life. He’s a crony capitalist of the worst type. He LOVES the fascist economic model, as does Barracula.

        His formula for government reform is “hiring better managers”, which is to say, substituting HIS idea of “brights” in place of the ones running BIG GOVERNMENT now, not the reform conservatives support of REDUCING government, especially at the Federal level.

        T-rump openly talks about trade wars, and ONLY BIG GOVERNMENT does that. And the middle class is the primary casualty when we allow BIG GOVERNMENT to limit our freedom to make our own decisions. Every. Time.

          tobiathan in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 11:47 am

          When/where/in what context has he expressed a desire to support big government for it’s own sake?

          You seem to be operating on a great deal of assumption.

          It does not necessarily take a “big” government to fight a trade war so much as it does an EFFECTIVE one.

          I think, imho, that the businessman in TD will despise waste, fraud and redundancy.

          The only branch of gov’t i see him expanding is the military.

          And, frankly, i think a great many people simply want to throw the fox into the henhouse so to speak.

          I don’t care so much what he does as long as it is a complete departure from the status quo- which is obviously best-suited to the well-being of the politocrats.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 11:59 am

          “It does not necessarily take a “big” government to fight a trade war so much as it does an EFFECTIVE one.”

          Cite to an example. ONLY BIG GOVERNMENT engages in trade wars. Show us something that contradicts that statement.

          Your delusions are not evidence that anything I gave you is incorrect.

      tobiathan in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 11:39 am

      Has it occurred to you that everyone KNOWS he’s a boob, including him?

      Part of becoming a billionaire is knowing your own limitations and being pragmatic enough to hire people who aren’t boobs (huh huh…i said “boobs”!) to advise him in subjects upon which he is not an expert?

      An old adage says that “you know you’re pushing the right buttons when your opponent(s) start behaving erratically and attacking you most viciously”?

      I don’t trust Trump to cook my eggs in the morning, but i DO trust him to know which chef specializes in SouthWestern Omelets.

      Capiche?

        Ragspierre in reply to tobiathan. | September 16, 2015 at 12:07 pm

        Is there ANYTHING you can point to from T-rump that shows he knows he’s a boob?

        Quite the contrary, when he’s been SHOWN to be a boob, he simply attacks the person who’s revealed his cluelessness.

        He could MORE easily…and credibly…admitted the obvious; he don’t know jack-spit about a LOT of things, hasn’t bothered himself to LEARN, and was simply unprepared.

        That would have been what an honest man…who knew he was a boob…would do. And it would have inured to his benefit.

          tobiathan in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 12:56 pm

          Ragspierre-

          “Your delusions are not evidence that anything I gave you is incorrect.”

          Despite the fact that i don’t often comment i have been wit LI for many years and have always had respect for your opinions even when i disagreed.

          But with that^^^ kind of chickensh!t you lost me.

          It kind of makes me sad to see you get so personal, so hysterical, so droll and common as to resort to this kind of talk.

          You’d better take a deep breathe and look in mirror and ask yourself who the “delusional” one actually is.

          Funny thing is, i haven’t really decided if i like Trump or not- but if you keep up like this you’re sure to win him lots of converts.

          clafoutis in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 1:04 pm

          Perfectly expressed, but ABOUT YOURSELF, ‘dear’ . . .

          ” . . . when he’s been SHOWN to be a boob, he simply attacks the person who’s revealed his cluelessness.

          He could MORE easily…and credibly…admitted the obvious; he don’t know jack-spit about a LOT of things, hasn’t bothered himself to LEARN, and was simply unprepared.

          That would have been what an honest man…who knew he was a boob…would do. And it would have inured to his benefit. . . “

          Anonamom in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 4:23 pm

          Ragspierre-

          “Your delusions are not evidence that anything I gave you is incorrect.”

          Despite the fact that i don’t often comment i have been wit LI for many years and have always had respect for your opinions even when i disagreed.

          But with that^^^ kind of chickensh!t you lost me.

          It kind of makes me sad to see you get so personal, so hysterical, so droll and common as to resort to this kind of talk.

          You’d better take a deep breathe and look in mirror and ask yourself who the “delusional” one actually is.

          Funny thing is, i haven’t really decided if i like Trump or not- but if you keep up like this you’re sure to win him lots of converts.”

          Spot on.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 4:36 pm

          Or, “We got nutin’ to counter you wid, so we’re calling you names and jumping to the other side in spite”.

          Gotcha.

          IF you have an argument, MAKE IT.

The Reason for Trump is the fact that Conservatives put their hopes and trust in the GOP through several election cycles to stop Obama.

However, Conservatives found the GOP despises Conservatives so much the GOP would sponsor Democrats rather than Tea Party candidates.

When a Conservative like Cruz is elected, the GOP marginalizes and derides him or her.

The reason for supporting Trump is the fact that there is NO SECOND Party, but a Uniparty in DC doing the will of big money donors and foreign interests like the MO Bro-hood and Iran.

The Uniparty does not care about US solvency, US security, or US citizens jobs. The Uniparty only cares about money and power…and grand socialist schemes like Climate Change/Carbon tax, Obamacare, Common Core, cheap labor/mass immigration, etc.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | September 16, 2015 at 7:06 am

    Here’s a list of GOP actions against conservatives/conservatism:

    • Did the GOP secure the border with control of the White House and Congress? NO.
    • Did the GOP balance the budget with control of the White House and Congress? NO.
    • Who gave us the TSA? The GOP
    • Who gave us the Patriot Act? The GOP
    • Who expanded Medicare to include prescription drug coverage? The GOP
    • Who created the precursor of “Common Core” in “Race To the Top”? The GOP
    • Who played the race card in Mississippi to re-elect Thad Cochran? The GOP
    • Who paid Democrats to vote in the Mississippi primary? The GOP
    • Who refused to support Ken Cuccinnelli in Virginia? The GOP
    • Who supported Charlie Crist? The GOP
    • Who supported Arlen Spector? The GOP
    • Who supported Bob Bennett? The GOP
    • Who worked against Marco Rubio? The GOP
    • Who worked against Rand Paul? The GOP
    • Who worked against Ted Cruz? The GOP
    • Who worked against Mike Lee? The GOP
    • Who worked against Jim DeMint? The GOP
    • Who worked against Ronald Reagan? The GOP
    • Who said “I think we are going to crush [the Tea Party] everywhere.”? The GOP (McConnell)

    This list is not complete – there is much, much more.

    For example, Planned Parenthood and the Iran Deal.

      Snorkdoodle Whizbang in reply to Uncle Samuel. | September 16, 2015 at 8:50 am

      And just how is this a defense of Trump and his positions? ‘GOP Establishment Bad’ does not defend his stand on illegal immigration (which is pretty good) nor does it address his stated views of single payer healthcare, tax increases, punitive tariffs, his weak stand on personal property rights, his embracing of big government, or that he thinks his federal judge sister who is a big time pro-abortion lib would be the type of supreme court appointee he thinks would be just spiffy.

      I think its great that he’s a ‘border hawk’ and is strong on immigration – but that’s not the only thing. One has to question what his stances and policies on other important issues are. We are obligated to question these things… not just about Trump, but ALL of the candidates. This is why we have primaries and elections, not coronations.

        All of you are jumping the gun. He announced he is going to release his white paper on Tax policy in 3 weeks or so. Then comes his replacement for Obamacare (he has clearly said it is not single payer), then Military/Foreign policy. Looks to me like he has just broadly outlined themes which people are pouncing on without seeing the details. They could be dead wrong and they don’t know it yet.

        I think he’s doing a good thing as an outsider. Here’s what I can glean from listening to him closely on the campaign trail – tough immigration policy, lower overall taxes, simpler tax code, portable health insurance across state lines, lower overall spending with a re-allocation to military, strong Israeli policy (he’s been very vocal about this for years, Ivanka converted to Judaism as his son-in law is Jewish), tough on terrorism, and free but fair trade. All within the “I can’t be bought and Make America Great” themes.

        So I await the details on many of these so I can dig in deeper into his candidacy. I understand the anti-Trump angst but of you are parroting policy perceptions rather than reality. Patience. You will have a chance to attack the substance if you don’t like it.

        Sorry. I ain’t suspending critical thought while T-rump and his PROFESSIONAL consultants cobble together something to chump the Trumpians.

        On tax, Duh Donald has already come out in favor of a fair tax, a flat tax, tinkering witda tax, and raising the tax on people he demonizes for the boobs.

        He’s for EVERYTHING! As usual…!!!

        But YOU want everyone to accept his “paper” on this or that!

        Too flucking ironic…

          PhillyGuy in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 12:07 pm

          I see so he is hiring professional people to help him? What a novel concept!

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 12:19 pm

          He…Mr. Outsider and Novel Thinker…is hiring consultants.

          Just like any candidate. Which is my point. He’s just another pol. And he’s going to present positions he thinks will bait the boobs. Because that’s what he does. He reads what people want, and he plays the part.

          Example: position on defunding Planned Abortionhood. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, I’ll be happy to help you.

        Trump fans operate on faith. The first article of their creed is: “Trump is not a politician, and therefore he’ll be the opposite of everything we hate in politicians.”

      Ragspierre in reply to Uncle Samuel. | September 16, 2015 at 9:26 am

      Unc, you’re a very confused feller. I understand how you can believe in your 9/11 truther BS after reading your stuff.

      That last post was a great example. You conflate things really awfully. But you are a good example of a Trumpian.

        ” I understand how you can believe in your 9/11 truther BS after reading your stuff.”

        I know who was responsible for 9/11 and it was not just “bin laden”. And nothing has been done other than kill some of the puppets. No 9/11 truther involved.

        “You conflate things really awfully.”
        So, refute the items listed.

        I know, TDS. That makes the R party just puuurfect.

          Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 1:22 pm

          I have no truck with hte “R party”. I am NOT a Republican. I AM a Conservative.

          And “the GOP” is not individual people. IS it…???

          Unc can’t differentiate the conduct of people from an entire party, with MANY people who violently disagree with the conduct of given people, and have fought them for years.

          This is “thinking”…like that of Britt…that comes from rage. It leads to craziness instead of clarity.

          “Anything is better…” No. It. Is. NOT.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 2:53 pm

          “And “the GOP” is not individual people. IS it…???”

          Got a point there Rags?

          As a party, they have betrayed actual conservatives. Every.Single.Time.

          There are a few individuals going against the party.

          “‘Unc can’t differentiate the conduct of people from an entire party, with MANY people who violently disagree with the conduct of given people, and have fought them for years.”

          But, as a party, the list is fairly accurate. Having a few, a handful, of opposing R’s is not enough, as can be shown by this list. Cruz was marginalized by his own party. Anyone bucking the “party line” will be. They will outright oppose anyone not following the party line. This includes people supposedly conservative who would rather see Hillary win than Trump. See Billy Kristol. Where do you stand?

          I’m not a republican. I never have been. RR wasn’t conservative enough to suit me even though I voted for him.

          I voted for one democrat back in 1972, congresscritter, family friend, a very conservative southern democrat, and a fine man. It was still a mistake and never repeated.

          Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 3:28 pm

          “As a party, they have betrayed actual conservatives. Every.Single.Time.”

          But that’s CRAZY, Barry!

          Cruz RAN under the GOP, and the GOP elected the man!

          A FACTION of the GOP in Texas fought him, of course. Duh.

          He SERVES as a Republican in the Senate. There ARE individuals who fight him, of course. They are NOT “the party”, are they? Just as those who support him are NOT the “party”.

          Jeeeeeeebus…

          Barry in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 7:46 pm

          “But that’s CRAZY, Barry!”

          Precisely what do you find crazy? We both know the R party has sold conservatism out.

          If you really think that Cruz is supported by the R party, you really do have your head in the sand. If it were not for trump, cruz would have been battered over and over by the party. He has taken the heat away.

Well, no wonder the Trump supporters ignored my questions on another thread – they’re all in here. So, I’ll repost my question and see if I get more than crickets this time:

How odd it is that both liberal and conservative news agencies, blogs, etc., are all citing the quote from the Paul Solotaroff interview wherein Trump implies Fiorina is too ugly to be electable, but are totally ignoring a far worse quote.

From the same interview as this childish dig at a competitor’s physical appearance (which was also a lie because no objective observer of Fiorina would think she’s ugly) there was another, far more revealing quote:

“After I [interviewer Solotaroff] met Ivanka [daughter of Trump] and praised her to her father, he said, “Yeah, she’s really something, and what a beauty, that one. If I weren’t happily married and, ya know, her father . . . ”

I had asked for any LI Trump supporters, especially females, to address this quote, defend it, denounce it, whatever, and there were zero responses. So, I’ll ask again.

Would a Trump supporter deign to address this quote? Is it appropriate for any father to talk about his daughter this way – implying he’d pursue her sexually if she wasn’t his daughter and he weren’t married? Are Trump supporters unbothered by this, for itself, but also for what it reveals about Trump’s character and judgement? Do Trump supporters simply accept this? Women Trump supporters, you OK with this?

    Trump supporters would probably say it just shows he’s above “political correctness,” which they (and Trump) confuse with manners and decency.

    A Trump supporter attempted to demonstrate Trump’s good character by noting how well his children turned out (which of course is at least as much to their mother’s credit — particularly the mother that Donald dumped for a younger woman).

    Trump himself, however, doesn’t seem so much proud of Ivanka’s character as he is pleased that she’s hot.

    I don’t know Henry. Maybe we just don’t get ourselves all worked up over an un-provable and unlikely true assertion on your part.

    Let’s start with the source, rolling stone magazine. Real paragon of reporting. They recently had an excellent, fact based, true report of rape on a Virginia college campus. So, why wouldn’t we get upset when the venerated rolling stone magazine reports some derogatory trump comment?

    Then, your analysis. Perhaps he is an old lecher that wants to sleep with his daughter. Or maybe your just taking a quote out of context whereby trump tries to pay an offhand comment to his daughter on her beauty. Perhaps poorly, but it doesn’t prove your assertion.

    Maybe that is why no one but you is getting all offended.

    TDS just twist the brain of otherwise intelligent people.

      Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | September 16, 2015 at 12:36 pm

      TDS CERTAINLY DOES twist the brain of otherwise intelligent people.

      NOBODY his challenged the quoted portion Hawkins cites.

      Except you. By innuendo. Because you gotta defend that TDS.

        “NOBODY his challenged the quoted portion Hawkins cites.”

        That is because almost nobody has commented, as Henry pointed out. You are the only exception, but you don’t count 🙂

        “Except you. By innuendo. Because you gotta defend that TDS.”

        What I said “Or maybe your just taking a quote out of context whereby trump tries to pay an offhand comment to his daughter on her beauty. Perhaps poorly, but it doesn’t prove your assertion.”

        I do not, will not, never have read rolling stone. What I do know, is they are a corrupt lying sack of shit organization that makes up whatever they want. I do not believe, in spite of TDS, that you will argue other wise. But, I’ll wait and see if you do.

        I did not say this quote was inaccurate. I do not know if it is accurate or not. I do not see the full context in henry’s comment.

        And I am pretty sure, given the reporting from other sources, that Trump, for all his faults, has no sexual interest in his daughter. If you, or Henry, would like to make the case otherwise, feel free. I don’t believe you can.

        Yes, TDS. It clouds the brains of otherwise brilliant people.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 3:34 pm

        To my knowledge, T-rump has not challenged the quote.

        Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 5:44 pm

        What is it about Trump that gets you all unhinged? NOBODY has challenged this quote? Do you actually believe everything you read or see on TV, especially in a magazine like Rolling Stone that is currently being sued by a UVA administrator and students for defamation because they published an entirely false story?

        I was recalled to active duty after 9/11, and I remember laughing out loud at TV reports about the circumstances of Jessica Lynch’s capture and recovery. Speaking of which, I give you Jason Blair, a suitable heir to the Newspaper of Walter Durante. You know, the Old Grey Red Army Camp Follower.

        Remember Eason Jordan’s laughable mea culpa in his Op-Ed in the NYT back in 2002? It was about CNN and “The News We Kept To Ourselves” or something like that. He tried to play victim, saying that CNN was forced to print Saddam Hussein’s propaganda unedited to protect their local Iraqi reporters. Other news outlets avoided that particular conundrum by not having a bureau in Iraq and therefore no local employees to be held hostage by. But the obvious truth was that Eason Jordan willingly prostituted CNN just get the byline “This is CNN, Baghdad.”

        Consequently I haven’t had a TV for 10 years. Now I only ever see CNN if I’m in an airport departure lounge. If I watch it, I still think, “That was interesting. I wonder if any of it was true.”

        Oh, yeah, later at Davos Eason Jordan claimed that the US military was deliberately targeting journalists. Even Barney Frank, who was attending, had to stick up for the US military and demanded evidence. Of course Jordan had none. It was just the kind of baseless smear that goes over well with his target audience, which in that case was in personal attendance.

        After all the lies the media has told about me (as part of one of the groups the press likes to lie about) I don’t believe anything I read unless I can verify it. Which is why when I comment here and elsewhere I often (but not always, simply because it’s tedious) caveat my statements with “If these reports turn out to be true.” If it’s about something within my field I can usually tell you why it’s BS. So I don’t automatically assume it it’s outside my field it’s true, as do so many people. My default is that it isn’t.

        And I’m not a Trump supporter. He doesn’t drive me nuts, but I don’t support him. I do fault him for not having someone with a camera recording the interview on his own behalf. I’d never give an interview unless I had someone else in the room recording it.

          Ragspierre in reply to Arminius. | September 16, 2015 at 5:57 pm

          You ARE aware that T-rump lied twice in response to the reports quoting him on Fiorina, right?

          These quotes were part of the same story, and near as I can tell, T-rump has not even addressed them, much less repudiated them.

          Is that typical behavior?

          “And I am pretty sure, given the reporting from other sources, that Trump, for all his faults, has no sexual interest in his daughter. If you, or Henry, would like to make the case otherwise, feel free. I don’t believe you can.”

          I think we can presume you’re not going there. My conclusion, it is one comment, reported by rolling stone, that means nothing, and you know it.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Arminius. | September 17, 2015 at 1:22 pm

          And yet, another quote from the same interview is played and believed by all – the Carly is ugly quote. That’s my point. Why is one all over the TV and the other ignored?

          As I expected, Trump supporter response is to wave the offending quote off or go ad hminem against me – merely an exact quoting messenger. I could think of no defense of Trump – and neither can Trump’s supporters here at LI.

Here’s a thought question or two–

1. think of the last time you heard T-rump talk about his love and reverence for the Constitution, WITHOUT looking it up.

He spent 75 minutes in Dallas (according to witnesses) talking about the wonders of himself. Did he even mention the Constitution in his remarks?

2. we know he CANNOT do much of what he promises to do. Is it OK with you that he chumps people who actually believe him?

3. When was the last time you heard Ted Cruz talk about the Constitution? The last time he was able to get through the media spit-storm around the little yellow god, T-rump?

4. Who is more apt to reform government? A Ted Cruz, who has demonstrated where his passions stand, or Duh Donald, who SAID his idea of reform is getting smarter people (just what a Collectivist would say, because that’s who he IS).

Is Donald Trump really the super-awesome business executive armed with the leadership, management and talent-spotting skills up the wazoo that he so often claims? Or is he someone who overlooks intelligence, thoughtfulness, leadership skills, guts, commitment to principle, capacity to work with others, knowledge of markets, policy and laws, and relevant job experience in potential hires and who, as you might expect of such a person, is actually a much more mediocre businessman than he lets on?
http://journal.ijreview.com/2015/09/247749-donald-trump-is-a-mediocre-businessman-and-his-record-proves-it/

Steve Green (an actual conservative) calls that piece a “must read”.

T-rump is a demonstrable economics boob, and a BIG GOVERNMENT Collectivist.

This will only make Trump stronger.

Trump represents the best way most Republicans see to get their most important issue addressed- immigration. Does Club for Growth support reduced immigration?

The bulk of the Republican base, hopefully, sees the party leadership as out of touch and in desperate need of replacement. The one issue Trumps took and forced onto the stage immigration resonates with the base and it is the one issue over which the leadership betrayed the base for 30 years.

I agree with Ann Coulter. This is the only issue that matters this election cycle. If we lose this one, all others are lost anyway. Look at the results of the last 4 or 5 elections, the native middle class has voted majority conservative, but been outvoted by recent non-native citizens voting with the liberals. When Clinton openly tried to bring in 1 million new voters for the 1996 election, the immigration ruse was out in the open but it was ignored.

Remember the big promise on immigration (this 1965 bill will not change the ethnic make-up of the United States.) If the leadership gets their way, immigration continues and amnesty happens, the middle-class will continue to have decreasing wages and will disappear. We choose for our grand kids in this next election.

    Ragspierre in reply to justaguy. | September 16, 2015 at 10:25 am

    “I agree with Ann Coulter.”

    While I value Miss (see the NOT PC?) as a polemicist, if you look at her batting average for supporting good conservatives for POTUS, you’ll have to rethink that.

    “If the leadership gets their way, immigration continues and amnesty happens, the middle-class will continue to have decreasing wages and will disappear. We choose for our grand kids in this next election.”

    We ALLLLLL agree that “the leadership” should NOT get their way.

    But the Trumpian plan reads as a BIG GOVERNMENT manifesto, and a blue-print for damaging the middle class.

    It ALSO omits T-rump’s “touch back” amnesty, and NOBODY here can tell me what that entails in REAL terms.

    We DO know that T-rump’s brag/claim/promise about exporting all illegals in two years is impossible. So he’s he trying to chump?

      justaguy in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 10:40 am

      Ragspierre,

      You miss my point entirely. I don’t care about AC’s track record or the Republican leadership’s for that matter. I care about AC’s argument that now with amnesty, immigration is all that matters.

      AC basically says that the one big issue and all that matters should be immigration, because if we lose it now, we will lose all the others by being out-voted. Argue with that premise and I’ll listen.

      If Trump will get my one issue right, I’ll worry about the second-order issues later. Maybe by then we will have a leadership that listens to the base instead of trying to find a win to get the nomination without the base???

      It is unfortunate that this cycle we have a great set of candidates that aren’t going to matter. The base feels so betrayed, they don’t care. Who else in the 17 has a decent record on immigration… maybe Cruz, but not really.

      Trump’s plan is more than deporting in two years. Immigration is easy, if there is the will. If employers face large fines with a reward for turning them in and an immunity if they use a clean E-verify, do you think there will be jobs for the illegals? Without jobs, will they stay? Self-deport is easy. Easier if Trump takes on courts over food stamps and such–something he is audacious enough to do.

        Ragspierre in reply to justaguy. | September 16, 2015 at 10:57 am

        As you know, I am a proponent of taking away all means of obtaining a living by illegal aliens, including government assistance.

        Read T-rump’s crappy plan. The shortest shrift is given eVerify or something like it. A single sentence.

        Read the rest. It’s all BIG GOVERNMENT, including inferentially a whole NEW agency to handle “impounding remittances”, which won’t work in any event, and isn’t even defined. You’ll also find a lot of social engineering and pandering to the usual minorities. Check and see.

Dr. Sowell, who IS a conservative thinker…

“In a country with more than 300 million people, it is remarkable how obsessed the media have become with just one — Donald Trump. What is even more remarkable is that, after six years of repeated disasters, both domestically and internationally, under a glib egomaniac in the White House, so many potential voters are turning to another glib egomaniac to be his successor.”

T-rump is a BIG GOVERNMENT guy. If America makes the mistake of putting him in the oval office, it may be our last one.

    I wonder if Trump will attack Dr. Thomas Sowell like he attacked George Will?

    George Will has made similar comments about Humpty-Trumpty.

    Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 6:34 pm

    Not all glib egomaniacs are created equal. As you noted above, Trump is a mediocre businessman. Which would be a yuuuge step up from a community organizer. At least even a mediocre businessman understands the profit motive.

    Profit, as Thomas Sowell knows so well, is evidence that you provided a good or service that made someone else happy.

    I’m a businessman. I am well aware that what I’m selling doesn’t have to make me happy. What I’m selling has to make someone else happy. This sets me, and Trump, apart from Obama the community organizer and the professional political class. They want what they want, then they force it down my throat and tell me I’ll learn to like it. Like Obamacare.

    Trump and Obama are both clowns. But when Trump beclowns himself he does it deliberately and turns a profit. When Obama beclowns himself it’s by accident and he’s too stupid to figure it out. Which is the difference between being foolish and being a fool. Trump is foolish, sometimes deliberately. But a fool is someone who doesn’t know he’s a fool.

    Maybe Fiorina then. I’m just jaded, and I am more and more convinced that the last thing we want for the job is a professional. Which is why I can’t start hyperventilating over the prospect of Trump.

    Milton Friedman said words to the effect that a system of government that depends on always getting the right people in order to do the right thing is doomed. What you need is a system that makes it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.

    Maybe Trump is just enough of a businessman and showman to give the people what they want for a change. The “principled conservative” professionals have run the GOP into the ground doing the opposite.

      Ragspierre in reply to Arminius. | September 16, 2015 at 7:14 pm

      That’s an interesting take, but I’ll take a few exceptions…

      First, there’s an entrepreneurial business person competing in a more-or-less competitive market. But then there is a crony capitalist business person NOT competing for custom, but for favor. Solyndra didn’t give jack-spit for value to consumers. They WERE nominally in “business”.

      T-rump does compete…nominally…in a very restricted market that cronyism gave him access to. My understanding that his “fabulous” hotels are actually rather poorly rated except for a couple.

      Second, I disagree entirely with your assessment of Obama’s intelligence. While I DO think he’s a moron WRT reality in any number of fields, he’s very effective. He couldn’t give a rat’s posterior about making stupid, ill-informed comments. I point you to an observation about Soviet propaganda: it wasn’t intended to sell an obvious lie. It WAS intended to so assault people’s observation of reality that they would eventually just give up looking for truth. Obama does it exactly the same way, which is why he appears often to just be trolling us. He is. He has been since day one…or before…and it is very wearing.

        Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 12:34 am

        Working backward, the point of Soviet propaganda, indeed all propaganda, was/is to make everyone complicit in what everyone knew was a lie. The more outrageous and unbelievable the lie the better. Then get everyone to not only repeat it, but elaborate on it in praise of the dictator. It atomizes society as no one if they can trust anyone. And an atomized society, the individual alone against the state, is easier to control.

        People will continue to look for the truth. I recommend the book MiG Pilot by Victor Belenko. Back in the ’70s Soviet Air Force political commissars used to show films of the Great Depression as if that represented then modern American life. But the men would pick up on clues that shown through the lies. Such as, if America was so impoverished what were all those cars doing on the street? Even during the Great Depression more Americans owned goods Soviet citizens could only dream of. Which is why Belenko decided to defect with his Foxbat to Hokkaido. The propagandists inadvertently revealed the truth.

        But he had the means to defect all by himself. All he had to do was shut up. Other Russians would have to build some sort of network, and who do you trust when everyone is not only repeating the lies but embellishing on them as if their lives depended on it. Which it does. It’s an effort to convince their masters of their loyalty to the state and party. Think of the North Koreans crying and wailing in grief when Kim Chong il died. State security was watching. People did disappear if they failed to grieve with enough enthusiasm.

        I agree with you about Obama in that he doesn’t care about about making stupid, ignorant statements. A Harvard professor whose name escapes me published a pamphlet on “The Value of Bulls***. The difference between a liar and a bulls***er is that a liar knows and in a way respects that their is something called the truth. A bulls***er doesn’t care, because the point of bulls*** is to say something about yourself. Like Obama at his coronation speech in 2008 when he said that was the moment when the seas stopped their rise and the earth began to heal. But we’ll have to disagree about his intelligence as I have a low opinion of it. The only reason this mediocrity is effective in DC is that he’s dealing with jellyfish.

        Finally I’m glad I mentioned Fiorina because from what I could hear of the debate as I was running errands she knocked ’em out of the park. I thought Trump had some moments but on the other hand not enough to overcome the times he just came across as an @$$.

I recall Winston Churchill being far from the perfect ideal man of his time.

Yet he is one of the most inspirational leaders in history.

Excuses or results. Never both.

    Ragspierre in reply to TB. | September 16, 2015 at 11:36 am

    Wow. The bullshit is being slung deep and wide here!

    Like Reagan, Churchill WAS Churchill for DECADES before he came to leadership in England, and he paid a high price for his PRINCIPLES.

    He was never a crony capitalist oligarch who lived by corruption, like T-rump. He WAS a man consigned to the wilderness for years because he would not sell his views to chump the people who held delusions about war and peace.

    Radegunda in reply to TB. | September 16, 2015 at 11:36 am

    Churchill was a serious thinker on politics and history. He wrote serious books that are still widely read today.

    To say that Churchill was not perfect and ideal is far from a ringing endorsement of Donald Trump.

    Barry in reply to TB. | September 16, 2015 at 12:44 pm

    Trump ain’t no Churchill, not even a Goldwater. Not even close. (my favorites all time, no others even close)

    Trump is a character of his own. He is, as a politician, a creation of the republican party. They created him by lying in every campaign about what they would do as public servants. They lie every day about what they are doing.

    There is only one party, the ruling party, with two factions. And they both lie to keep their boodle.

    Trump is the bullet aimed squarely at the heart of the R party. For this I am appreciative.

    Trump signed the pledge. But the R elite hacks that have been lying to you are now talking about their own 3rd party. Can’t lose our boodle…

    The big R donor class and entrenched will support hillbilly herself before trump. Guaranteed. Jeb! or Hillary. Makes no real difference to them.

My predictions for tonight.

The long knives will be out for Trump tonight but he will tell you how he is going to make America so great again. He’s going to build a beautiful wall with a large door in it. And he cherishes women more than anyone else. Hewitt will play Name That Terrorist Leader or a similar version of that once again. Perhaps more War on Women crap. Carly and Rand will try to whack him. Carly is going to re-direct any comments about her leadership at HP. Rand is going to get angry for no reason. Ben will crack a couple of good jokes in his quiet, self-effacing way, maybe Jeb will do the debate in Spanish, Walker and Cruz will wait 40 minutes to be called on. Huckabee will interrupt to try to re-direct the topic to religious liberty. Christie will have an argument with no one in particular and tell you how great NJ is. Pataki, Gilmore, Santorum and Graham hope that someone buys them dinner after their “debate.”

And the media will spin how Jeb! made a comeback tonight. Cheers!

    Ragspierre in reply to PhillyGuy. | September 16, 2015 at 11:52 am

    Here’s a much better prediction…

    T-rump will be asked questions he should be able to answer, and will vamp in his usual bullshitting ways.

    Tomorrow, he’ll go on TV shows and bitch and moan and blow snot bubbles about how he was treated, regardless of what he says immediately after the “debate” (that IS NOT a debate).

    This is just predicated on past behavior. Which is very consistent with ALLLLL T-rumpian behavior over his life-time.

Bernie Sanders

@BernieSanders

I’ve got a message for corporate America: if you want us to buy your products, you better start producing them here in the United States.
6:02 PM – 15 Sep 2015

Which is T-rump’s position.

For some illustration of just how stupid that is…

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/09/bernie-sanders-autarkist.php

There’s not much to take seriously in Donald Trump’s oh-so-strange presidential campaign, but he made an important comment during the first Republican presidential debate about the pathetic state of campaign finance laws.

“I will tell you that our system is broken,” he said during the debate. “I give to many people. I give to everybody, when they call I give, and you know what? When I need something from them, two years, three years later, I call, they are there for me.”

Since that first debate in Cleveland on Aug. 6, Mr. Trump — a self-funded billionaire who boasts of his refusal to accept any money from super PACs — has said he “loves the idea of campaign finance reform” and has said of the current system, “It’s a shame. It’s a disgrace.”
http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/editorial-hillary-and-the-donald-together-at-last-on-campaign/article_450acbb9-597a-5210-9e7b-6b6079e073bb.html

Hmmmm… Where was the last time someone tried to limit political speech in America?

Oh, YEAH! McAnus-Feingold.

But oligarchs will not be limited by any law, because laws are for the little people.

As a little person, I will fight that to the death.

Trumps effectiveness comes from the simple fact he has personally played in and with the “system” and knows how it works from the inside out. Why he knows as many politicians as he does business people. Becoming President isn’t then an achievement to obtain something he already has. Obviously it must be a game as those who are the elected wind up finding themselves as power brokers of the self-serving ilk. How else can you explain the past months in D.C. after having the GOP win a majority in both houses? I do not care for Trumps style, but he is fearless and it seems he has nothing monetarily nor egotistically to lose that he already hasn’t put on the line his entire career. He is a seasoned warrior and knows how to pick his troops for success. The issues he is addressing are bringing a voice to an agenda Americans having been hammering on the GOP to step up to plate for over the last 25 years. If in one term of four years if he were to pull back just 75% of every Obama executive action made and to disempower the overreach of EPA, IRS and then some, to re-invest in our military at home an overseas, to protect our borders and put in place a budget reflecting these areas, you have to ask the question if he were to be elected,” Would we be any worse off after four years with The Donald, than what we have had with Obama after eight?” Righting the ship means changing course. It might not be the perfect course but outside of Ted Cruz, that ship needs to yaw away from where it’s heading. It is bold to do the thing which is not the “norm”, but that is exactly why we are a Republic. Something both parties has lost track of. It’s time to take back what has been taken.

    Ragspierre in reply to Another Voice. | September 16, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    “Trumps effectiveness comes from the simple fact he has personally played in and with the “system” and knows how it works from the inside out. Trumps effectiveness comes from the simple fact he has personally played in and with the “system” and knows how it works from the inside out.”

    Yes. He IS the “establishment”. Right down to his toe-nails.

      Another Voice in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 4:34 pm

      Yes. My Point Made. Perhaps this is where we need to be right now. Not Anti-establishment, but Inside-Establishment. The “new Boston Tea Party” of politics for the 21st century that has been festering for 25+ years. Someone who knows the rules of the inside game like all the unwritten House rules that Pelosi, Obama, Clinton, Reid, Holder and the like play by. Trump says he will take them on and will play to win. What can they say to insult him or scandalize him with what hasn’t been said about him before? If you can trust his sincerity that he wants to do what he says, and he does have a track record of accomplishments compared to all other prior sitting presidents, than it’s believing he more than any politician knows better the art of the deal. He is doing exactly what we wanted from Mitt Romney and what we got was a milk toast of the new version! Again, what do we have to lose? Been there, done that, not going back.

Let’s look at the incredible power of the fully operational “Mr. Art Of The Deal”…

“I guarantee you that those four prisoners are back in our country before I ever take office.”

“They will be back before I ever take office because they know that’s what has to happen … and if they don’t know, I am telling them right now.”

http://www.christianpost.com/news/cruz-trump-slam-obama-for-neglecting-american-hostages-in-iran-deal-144921/

Depending on how well-remembered that “guarantee” is, that is one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said, strategically speaking.

My first impression when I heard that “guarantee”? “How much would THAT cost us for him to make good? Because he just gave Iran a knife and put it to his own throat.”

Mr. “Art Of The Deal” told our adversaries all they have to do is hang on to hostages until after he’s inaugurated, and he starts his administration looking like a weak chump.

What would he have to offer them to get the hostages released PRIOR to his inauguration?

Second point…

IF as he says, the Iranian deal is the worst deal of all deals EVAH, WHY did he jump up and say he’d “honor” it, instead of tearing it up as Cruz said?

    “What would he have to offer them to get the hostages released PRIOR to his inauguration?”

    You know the answer. Why make it so painful?

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 16, 2015 at 7:49 pm

    No, Barry. One of my many failings is I can’t read your mind.

    If I were a shot-caller in Iran, there would be nothing T-rump could offer me, but it would be fun playing with his stupid self if he made overtures, and recording the exchanges for future use.

    He put his cod-sack in there hands, and they know an advantage when one is handed them.

      “One of my many failings is I can’t read your mind.”

      Not asking you to read my mind, I asked you to read yours.

      Fear. Fear of the unknown. The same reason they released the hostages when Reagan arrived on the scene. Fear.

      They soon lost there fear of Reagan of course.

      The best strategy is to make sure the Iranians fear you, think your “crazy” enough to take drastic action. It really is that simple. But only if your perceived to be crazy enough. Something I think you and I can agree upon. You do think Trump is crazy.

        Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | September 17, 2015 at 7:04 am

        Crazy? No.

        I would not be afraid of T-rump if I were Iranian. There would be no down-side to testing him beyond inauguration day, since only afterwards would he be capable of doing anything, and there would be time to play him off by making a diplomatic move if it became apparent he was preparing to act.

        No, I would not be even slightly afraid of Duh Donald.

Trump makes his own rules, the club for growth is fighting the last war against a new and stronger power.

Mr. Trump, Has his own style. He is so hated by the MsM & the Political Elitist. That they are out to get him squashed, whatever it takes. They are scared that their ” K,” St. gang of criminal are going to get caught in all of the corruption that so many are involved in committing against the Citizens of America. It is actually too early in the campaign to pick a serious front runner.

https://reason.com/blog/2015/09/15/trump-as-political-pick-up-artist-the-do

Interesting take. See if you observe this behavior tonight.

    I’d stay away from reading looney people. Self styled psychoanalysts in particular. You reckon he has a license to practice that particular dreck?

      Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | September 17, 2015 at 7:08 am

      There’s nothing slightly psychoanalytic about that piece. It just notes a given behavior that people use on each other (a technique), and applies it to instances of T-rump’s interaction with people.

Will the Establishment air war take Trump out?

We shall see, but Trump is already a worldwide known quantity & Newt, not so much in 2012 or now.

Seems the harder the Establishment tries to tear him down, the more they fail to make a dent.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend