Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Donald Trump 2011 – Helping those who were against the Tea Party

Donald Trump 2011 – Helping those who were against the Tea Party

“He wasn’t there when we needed him, and he helped those who were against us.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8rD1Je5uRo

While looking though the history of Tea Party posts at Legal Insurrection, I saw this post from April 2011, Sound the Trumpet:

There’s not much I can add to Mark Levin’s explanation of why Donald Trump does not represent the conservative or Tea Party movements.  He wasn’t there when we needed him, and he helped those who were against us.

That was at a time Trump was considering running for President in the 2012 cycle. I made the point then, as I do now, that Trump is not a conservative or a smaller-government individual liberty person. He’s a big government nationalist.

My point with any big government person, be it Trump, Obama or Hillary, is that once you give them the power, it’s hard to get it back and you lose control over your own lives. You end up putting your faith that they will not abuse that power. If that’s what you want, so be it.

The link in the quote is to a post at The Right Scoop, which had an embedded audio, Levin Rips Donald Trump to Shreds:

Levin points out many things about Trump that show he is no conservative, but a few of the glaring ones are the fact that he support Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio twice, as well as calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush, accusing him of lying to get us in the war. Oh yeah, and he supported Universal Health Care in America, the Canadian style.

And there’s more. This is a must listen.

TRS kindly provided the audio clip, which I’ve uploaded to YouTube.

Listen, carefully. It’s not anything you haven’t heard recently, but keep in mind this was contemporaneous criticism 5 years ago.

[Featured Image: Donald Trump April 2011, Las Vegas]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

legacyrepublican | March 7, 2016 at 11:38 am

Maybe more will start listening to Rags warnings after hearing this.

I will vote for Trump over Hillary. But, I would rather it be a vote for Cruz instead.

    You haven’t listened to Rag’s warnings if you vote for Trump.

      #NEVERTRUMP

        Ah the Cruz disinformation campaign.

        Cruz’s campaign chief is an ex CIA officer and like Curz himself is very big on lies and disinformation in all forms of media.

        #neverTrump is just a phonied up variation of the Trump won’t win in general so vote for Cruz in primary lies and bullshit.

        Just like the lies the cooked up against Ben Carson in Iowa. Lies and disinformation that is what Cruz knows best. Look at how well he tries to pretend to be an actual evangelical instead of an end times cultist who doesn’t tithe.

          Projecting just a little, are we? Or maybe you’re just another lying troll.

          Merlin in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 1:26 pm

          Time for a cup check there, bud. Criticism of your demigod has only just begun. His new Republican colleagues are still playing rather nicely given the volume of Trump baggage yet to be mined. What’s left of the Clinton machine hasn’t even turned their attention to him yet, but they will. Before long you’ll be looking back at today as being the good old days.

          janitor in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 2:33 pm

          Clinton doesn’t have any machine that Trump isn’t already familiar with, and Trump has no meaningful baggage at all compared with Clinton’s life-long steady violation of ethics and fiduciary obligations when she wasn’t being just plain old incompetent.

          Clinton blathers meaningless platitutes and panderings. I can hardly wait until she is asked in a debate and in the media for her “specifics”.

          W0X0F in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 2:50 pm

          Donald Trump’s easy days are behind him. The grade gets much steeper the rest of the way.

        Ragspierre in reply to ldwaddell. | March 7, 2016 at 12:12 pm

        “#neverTrump is just a phonied up variation of the Trump won’t win in general so vote for Cruz in primary lies and bullshit.”

        There MAY be someone who predicates their decision to NEVER vote for Der Donald on that idea, but I’ve never read one.

        Not one.

        The MANY, including me, state much more valid and grave reasons.

        But you lie constantly, reflexively, and knowingly.

      Ragspierre in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 12:07 pm

      It’s one of those things that I won’t condemn anyone over…it couldn’t be a more individual matter of conscience.

      I know my own conclusions, but nobody is bound by my certainty.

      I’m free to persuade where I can, and nobody who I fail to persuade is necessarily evil…or even wrong.

      Now, if you lie…even to yourself…I DO and WILL condemn that.

      Hillary is an incompetent, unpatriotic, criminal. She has never done anything at all productive in her entire life. If you think, given the choice of Trump or Hillary that it makes no difference, that just strikes me as delusional.

      From https://ricochet.com/an-open-letter-to-the-conservative-media-explaining-why-i-have-left-the-movement/

      I spent the last 20 years watching the conservative media in Washington endorse and urge me to vote for one candidate after another who made a mockery of conservative principles and values…

      Mitt Romney, a Massachusetts liberal who proudly signed an individual insurance mandate into law and refused to repudiate the decision… George W. Bush, the man who decided it was America’s duty to bring democracy to the Middle East [crony capitalism]…Bob Dole, the man who gave us the Americans with Disabilities Act… the conservative media’s claims that the Republican party must reject Donald Trump because he is not a “conservative” are pathetic and ridiculous…

      I do not care that Donald Trump is in favor of big government. That is certainly not a virtue but it is not a meaningful vice since the same can be said of every single Republican in the race. I am sorry but the “we are just one more Republican victory from small government” card is maxed out. We are not getting small government no matter who wins…

      Trump offers at least the chance that he might act in the American interest instead of the world’s interest or in the blind pursuit of some fantasy ideological goals. There is more to economic policy than cutting taxes, sham free trade agreements, and hollow appeals to “cutting government” and the free market. Trump may not be good, but he at least understands that…

      [A]s much as I like Cruz on many areas he, like all of them except Trump, seems totally unwilling to admit that the government has a responsibility to act in the nation’s interests on trade policy and do something besides let every country in the world take advantage of us in the name of “free trade.”…

        Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 12:21 pm

        “If you think, given the choice of Trump or Hillary that it makes no difference, that just strikes me as delusional.”

        And that’s why nobody has EVER made that argument.

        But BOTH are stinking, lying Collectivist frauds. They vary widely in their views, like Stalin and Hitler. But at their base, they are BOTH Collectivists who LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT and have NO understanding of or allegiance to the Constitution or individual liberty.

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 12:40 pm

          You don’t have to voice the argument. Insisting that you will never vote for Trump is the same thing. Moreover, it’s certainly not a way to warm the hearts of those who are supporting Trump because they can’t have Carson and recognize that Cruz will result in another Obama term.

          There is a reason Jeff Sessions endorsed Trump. There is a reason that Newt Gingrich is working with him. And there is a reason that those of us who actually know that man are getting more and more disturbed by the vile speculative and unprecedented carryings on anti-Trump.

          Where were these carryings-on against the Bushes? Romney? Etc.

          The abuse this man is taking because he stepped forward in frustration to address and fix crucial issues that no one else was close to even talking about is disgusting.

          Let Trump come in and do his work and then move to hone the rest. Because if we don’t have a country, you can kiss goodbye all the rest.

          Priorities.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 12:59 pm

          My priorities…as often stated…are the Republic, the Constitution that charters it, individual liberty, and REDUCING government at all levels.

          Those are things INIMICAL to Collectivists T-rump and Clinton.

          When you have a DEMONSTRATED narcissist, liar, fraud, and crony capitalist, YOU are delusional to believe ANYTHING that person PRETENDS to believe or PROMISES to do. ESPECIALLY if you IMAGINE he’s being “selfless”.

          Or did you vote Obama, too?

          Jeeebus…

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:10 pm

          I have listened to Ted Cruz lie over and over again about Trump and other things.

          The KKK crap, for example. What he did to Carson in Iowa. His failure to disclose his sweetheart campaign loans, as another.

          There are many others, but given that I’ve said at least a half-dozen times here alone that Cruz would have been my choice if I thought he could win and, especially, before Trump entered the race, I’m really not into doing a tit-for-tat.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:54 pm

          “The KKK crap, for example. What he did to Carson in Iowa. His failure to disclose his sweetheart campaign loans, as another.”

          But EVERY SINGLE ONE of those is YOUR lie.

          Not one is based in the truth. You don’t need to take my word for it, you can research for yourself. But you won’t. You’re gone.

        How can anyone take Ragspierre seriously about anything when he argues here everyday that he would rather have Hillary Clinton pick the next 3 or 4 supreme court justices than Donal Trump who has promised to pick judges like Scalia, Thomas, Sykes and Pryor.

        Hillary will pick judges like Obama, Holder, and Lynch, and that is just fine with Rags.

        Rags = NOT SERIOUS PERSON or maybe he is just a LIAR and he’s an active part of the CIA inspired Cruz disinformation campaign.

        I think it is both actually.

          Rags = NOT SERIOUS PERSON or maybe he is just a LIAR and he’s an active part of the CIA inspired Cruz disinformation campaign.

          lolololol

          Careful Rags, you’re on the verge of making our TrumpBot overheat 😀

I first came across the Mark Levin clip from 2011 in the excellent piece by neo-neocon…

http://neoneocon.com/2015/10/16/bush-derangement-syndrome-left-right-and-trumpian/

When I published it in a comment, I was attacked by T-rump cultist (as opposed to supporters) on various pretexts, including that is was “years old”.

Yet every word and basic observation has been more than vindicated.

Der Donald is a dangerous, Collectivist, fraud.

    janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 12:46 pm

    T-rump. Der Donald. Collectivist. Mr. Establishment.

    This, apparently, is your example of not name-calling, not mocking Trump’s supporters, and being objective. (Of course, it’s not close to the Jennifer girl whose intellect has led her to write something along the lines of that I must be having homoerotic fantasies and similar.

      Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 1:04 pm

      I like word-play. Sue me.

      “Collectivist” has a meaning. Educate yourself. Look up Nock.

      I make no pretense at being what you seem to think of as “objective”. I am DECIDEDLY NOT objective about the dangers that Der Donald and his cultists pose to this country.

      And those are GRAVE dangers of clear and present threats.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:11 pm

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Jay_Nock

        The guy who coined the term “Collectivist”, with the insight that socialism, communism, and fascism were simply siblings in the same family. They share MOST of what they are in common with each other.

        A GOVERNMENT COMMAND ECONOMY is one. That’s what Der Donald advocates. He HATES market economics, and he’s told you so.

        janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:19 pm

        Your conclusion does not have to be objective, but your reasoning does. Name-calling any kind of convincing argument. We can all have our own opinions, but not our own facts.

        I have so had it with LI and the traffic trolling anti-Trump. I am only venturing back into this sewer of irrational invective because I fear that casual readers who don’t realize that LI community members have lost so much credibility will read some of the posts of late and become misled. I truly hate adding to the traffic, and I am looking forward to the time, hopefully, not too long from now, when Cruz is out. At least then, if LI goes full-bore pro-Hillary (so indirectly and cleverly) at least it will be obvious.

          Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 1:37 pm

          Remember when Prof. Jacobson was “Trump curious”?

          You and others here were all excited!

          Now that the Prof. has investigated and is “Trump disgusted” he’s all kinds of dirty names.

          You can’t even recognize when you’re being nuts. You’re gone as a thinking person.

          janitor in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 1:50 pm

          No I don’t remember. But I do clearly recall four years ago the professor coming into a comment thread to remind me, when I said something along the lines of will never vote for Romney, that that would be the equivalent of a vote for Obama.

          I also clearly recall the professor considering Loretta Lynch and then deciding that she would be fine.

          One right. One wrong. No one is perfect.

The weekly bullshit LI Trump attack comes early this week.

2011. So five years ago…

Trump will build the wall, deport illegals, enforce our laws, and tear up stupid trade deals like TPP.

Cruz and Rubio, no wall, no deportation round ups, AMNESTY, AND WILL SIGN ALL STUPID TRADE DEALS LIKE TPP.

That is TODAY. I really don’t give a crap about what Levin thinks or what is claimed that Trump did or said in 2011.

Build Wall, deport, enforce. SMART TRADE DEALS.

You want jobs and prosperity then vote Trump.

You want to continue to ship middle class jobs overseas and continue the flood of foreign workers then CRUZ/RUBIO are your ESTABLISHMENT choices.

Cruz is now supported by Lindsey Graham. That says it all !!!

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    “Cruz and Rubio, no wall, no deportation round ups, AMNESTY, AND WILL SIGN ALL STUPID TRADE DEALS LIKE TPP.”

    Again, we get the litany load of lugubrious lies.

    NOBODY can give you “deportation round-ups”. They are impossible both legally and politically.

    T-rump just talks boob-bait for boobs.

    Cruz WILL deport using what we like to call “law enforcement”. It WILL work.

    CRUZ, with Sessions, KILLED TPP.

    Britt just lies. It’s all he has.

      Cruz didn’t stop TPP CRUZ SUPPORTS TPP. But he along with McConnell want to put off passing it until after election in November.

      Typical Cruz/McConnell lies and disinformation.

      AS FOR SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS, HE ENDORSES TRUMP !

      Jeff Sessions understands only Trump will build wall, deport and enforce our laws and only Trump will end these stupid anti USA job killing trade deals.

      You constantly lie and claim anyone who doesn’t support your end times cultist is a liar but you can’t get around the FACT THAT JEFF SESSIONS ENDORSES TRUMP !!

      Rags second choice after his boy Cruz I s Hillary. That is what he advocates are argues for with his #neverTrump disinformation campaign.

      Cruz is now endorsed by Lindsey Graham. He is always part of the Establishment.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 2:39 pm

        Cruz and Sessions DID kill TPP, you lying SOS.

        People can look it up.

        As to your “Graham endorses Cruz” lie, here’s the truth, you stinking lying SOS…

        Charlie Rose asked Graham, “So there is no way, you’re seem to be suggesting, at the convention or before the convention to stop Donald Trump from being the nominee?”

        He replied, “Short of a major scandal, probably not. And if Marco doesn’t win Florida, I don’t know how he goes forward. If Kasich loses Ohio… you know, Ted Cruz is not my favorite by any means. I don’t wish him ill. I was making a joke about Ted, but we may be in a position where we have to rally around Ted Cruz as the only way to stop Donald Trump, and I’m not so sure that would work.”

        Rose followed up. “But you would recommend that in order to stop Donald Trump and rally behind Cruz?”

        “I can’t believe I would say yes, but yes.”

        http://www.weeklystandard.com/lindsey-graham-proposes-rallying-around-ted-cruz/article/2001353

        I LOVE punking you out, Gaghdad Bob.

    “You want jobs and prosperity then vote Trump.”

    On what historical fact do you base your wild-eyed assumption on?

    Certainly not thse facts:

    “As Trump’s bandwagon rolls over the Republican primaries, it is high time everyone started focusing more seriously on his proposals and promises.”

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/president-trump-would-send-the-national-debt-soaring-2016-03-07

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-worse-than-you-think-trumps-business-disaster-2016-03-04

      What jobs has Cruz ever created? Keep quoting U.S. Chamber of Commerce and establishment sources.

        We do know that Trump’s business has imported more than 1,100 foreign workers on temporary visas since 2000.

        Some job creation.

        The posted links: The facts speak for themselves.

          Yes I do. Do you remember his explanation for his importing a relatively minor few (compared with the tens of thousands of other employees) seasonal workers for his South Florida resorts?

          Apparently not.

          Ragspierre in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 2:17 pm

          Yeah. He LIED. He said that AMERICANS…who APPLIED for the jobs…didn’t really want them.

          You’ll believe anything. You are gone.

          Ragspierre in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 2:20 pm

          Oh, and it ISN’T JUST “his Florida resorts”.

          It’s his modeling agency. ‘Cuz their aren’t ANY American beauties who would LOVE a modeling career.

          It’s his vinyards.

          It’s LOTS of his hotel properties.

        Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 1:44 pm

        You can’t even meet the substance of those pieces on their merit.

        You just deflect. I think it would be interesting to run a calculation of the NET jobs that Donald Ducks has “created” versus how many he’s destroyed, and how many would have just been part of a market player filling a demand.

        Because, really, T-rump isn’t a creator or innovator, but an exploiter. He never created anything that wasn’t in existence or was novel. He just did the equal of opening another grocery store. And has failed at a lot of that…

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:57 pm

          Since we’re speculating about Trump based on LSM misleading by omission, let’s speculate about how successful Cruz would be in running a business or making decisions as an executive, based on all the legislation he’s succeeded in getting through Congress.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 2:10 pm

          …OR let’s use his history as one of the great appellate lawyers in America, who has several times defended the Constitution SUCCESSFULLY.

          Shall we…???

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 2:22 pm

          Since we’re speculating about Trump based on LSM misleading by omission, let’s speculate about how successful Cruz would be in running a business or making decisions as an executive, based on all the legislation he’s succeeded in getting through Congress.

          …OR let’s use his history as one of the great appellate lawyers in America, who has several times defended the Constitution SUCCESSFULLY.

          That’s a staff line position. Yes, absolutely would Ted Cruz make a superb Supreme Court Justice, prosecutor, or policy advisor. Different skills from running a business or making executive decisions.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 2:26 pm

          …or lying to regulators, stabbing business associates in the back, screwing over contractors, and buying crony influence. Along with making ASTOUNDINGLY BAD decisions.

          Like Der Donald.

          CloseTheFed in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 7:24 pm

          My God, Rags, where is YOUR jet?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 7:36 pm

          Haven’t one.

          If that’s how you measure a man, I guess I’m just a poor country lawyer with a very high sense of honor. And no jet.

          No golden bathtub, either. Oh, well…

      What fact you ask.

      The last 35 years of destroying USA JOBS and the middle class with stupid trade deals and open borders by the GOP those are pretty big and obvious facts.

      And Trump wants to do something different. Thank god.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 2:23 pm

        Yah, he wants to COMMAND the American economy.

        He can’t. It’s failed EVERY TIME IT’S BEEN TRIED.

        It’s also immoral. A POTUS NEVER has that right.

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 2:29 pm

          Rags, you keep saying that Trump wants to “command” the U.S. economy. Please explain what you mean by this, and also how you know what Trump “wants” in his mind so much better than people who actually know him.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 3:01 pm

          Look up “command economy”. It has a definition, and I use it correctly.

          Look up Der Donald’s comments on Ford Motor Company.

          Look up his comments on the oil, pharma, defense, and insurance industries.

          There’s really no difference between T-rump and Sanders. They both think that a POTUS can tell you what you may do with your property, the prices you may charge, and who you elect to deal with as a free person.

          One is a quasi-socialist (he won’t nationalize anything), the other a fascist. Look up the definition of “fascist economics”.

        janitor, you better ask Britt those questions. Britt’s the mind reader. He knows what the Trump is thinking right now, in fact.

        Britt is in touch with Commander Bankruptcy.

          Yes I do read his mind and Trump thinks:

          You are a LOSER and STUPID

          but he assumes a nice person.

          Ragspierre in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 6:52 pm

          And he KNOWS…on the best of evidence…that you are a lying tool who will swallow any lode he shoots at you.

          And he has utter contempt for you and your fellow cultists.

          Sméagol your Precious is calling you. You don’t even see what your Precious has done to you.

          Now it’s time for you to take your foul Gollum presence and be off.

          CloseTheFed in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 7:33 pm

          “Commander in Bankruptcy”? This website is run by a lawyer; can we please have some clarity on Trump’s bankruptcies.

          As a LAWYER, I tell you, the business entities system we have established in Western Civilization, is created so that individuals may own CORPORATIONS or other entities, without having PERSONAL LIABILITY if the business is unsuccessful, and those dealing with such entities make a business decision (business calculation) as to whether to deal with such entities with ONLY corporate liability or to INSIST on personal liability as well.

          If anyone lost money on a Trump business bankruptcy, they knew in advance, if they cared to know, that he was not putting his own assets on the line.

          This is BASIC business law.

          Ragspierre in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 7, 2016 at 7:42 pm

          Well, sorta.

          In the case of the SEVERAL T-rump bankruptcies, there was a LOT of evidence of skulduggery. You might want to read up on them.

          If I recall correctly, he had to liquidate a LOT of his personal assets. So, not as clean as you assert.

          PLUS, they were brought about by THUMPINGLY BAD business decisions, supported by outright lies, so it wasn’t like the people who were trusting him had their eyes open.

          CloseTheFed, I understand something about business law. I was a partner in a Chapter S corporation for many years. During that time, we issued bonds. During that time, I made sure that we did not go belly up and screw our creditors and my good name. That last part is called ethics.

          I understand that corporation law limits liability and exposure.

          But, I don’t understand your HUBRIS, LAWYER. Why should anyone be screwed over because they can be? But then again you and others are pushing the “highly ethical” (casino man, mob tied?) Trump to be CEO of America and to play fast and loose with America’s moral and financial probity.

Trump helped those opposing the Tea Party? You mean like the GOP Establishment? Which hates “trash voters” “muppets” “coo coo birds” “Kooks” & “Hobbits” even more than their Democrat chums across the aisle?

This meme has already been quashed months ago.

Rubio has no path forward with Trump and Cruz towering over him. Give it up Marco…

    Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | March 7, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    “Trump helped those opposing the Tea Party? You mean like the GOP Establishment?”

    Yes. Exactly. AND he helped the Collective. Did you even bother listening to the Levin clip?

    He IS Mr. Establishment, as he PROVED beyond question in Iowa.

    Step up to reality.

    Trump helped those opposing the Tea Party?

    Yes. Yes, he did. See the Professor’s post above.

    You’re welcome!

    inspectorudy in reply to VotingFemale. | March 7, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    I don’t know if you are widely read or not but do you not remember the KY election where Matt Bevin, the TEA party candidate was defeated by McConnell? Trump gave $50,000 to McConnell in that primary to defeat a TEA party and conservative candidate. Matt Bevin later went on to win the governor’s seat in spite of Trump of McConnell. Sometimes it pays to Google a subject before you insert your foot into your mouth!

      janitor in reply to inspectorudy. | March 7, 2016 at 1:30 pm

      Trump gave money to pretty much whoever came to him and begged for it.

      He admits that. He admits that he did it so that he could have a voice when policies on the table might affect one of his business interests.

      He’s also said quite clearly that he entered this race because he became disgusted with this system which years of attempting to influence through other means just didn’t work. He entered this race out of high concern for the economic state and security of this country, and after so many years of watching the politicians lie and do nothing, notwithstanding his attempts to influence from the outside.

      He entered this race because he is a patriot who cares about the future for his children and grandchildren.

        Kondor77 in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 1:47 pm

        Read:
        Donald is upset his money didn’t buy him enough political good will (from both Democrats and some Republicans). Decides to run for President to ‘fix the system’.

        God bless the “poorly educated”.

          janitor in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 2:14 pm

          “Poorly educated”… An example of smearing via false insinuation about Trump. Also a logical fallacy.

          If you trying to insinuate something about me as a Trump supporter, well I have 3 post-graduate degrees, and my pro-Trump clan includes 3 doctorates from Cornell, 6 other Cornellians (including a valedictorian), and 7 top-of-their class graduates of MIT, Wharton, Brown, West Point and Annapolis.

          Kondor77 in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 2:34 pm

          Was merely quoting your lord and savior. When’s his HOPE poster coming out?

          You didn’t respond to my original point. Is it because you yourself, being so well educated, understand and can read between the lines?

          Congratulations on your clan. Proof positive that stu.. well, let’s say naivety affects all intelligence spectra.

          janitor in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 4:05 pm

          Was merely quoting your lord and savior.

          No. You were selectively quoting, to further a misleading impression.

          You didn’t respond to my original point. Is it because you yourself, being so well educated, understand and can read between the lines?

          You didn’t make a point. Every single one of us has the right to contact and lobby our legislators. The reality is that unless you are a big campaign contributor, they pretty much ignore you (if you can even get past the aide and the circular file.)

          Trump has explained quite clearly that he did what most all of us would to get the equivalent of an audience when he had something to say.

          He also has explained that he got fed up with this system, and how the candidates are literally controlled by their big donors, and is running to do something about it.

          If not Trump, then who else. Even Cruz is beholden to his contributors.

          janitor in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 4:27 pm

          Congratulations on your clan. Proof positive that stu.. well, let’s say naivety affects all intelligence spectra.

          What is “stupid” is to be so rabidly supportive of a man who cannot win that you trash the only one who can — along with his own chances (which he may now have blown) of using that winner as a means to continue climbing up into a position in which he could prevail.

          This guy was totally right too:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeFzeNAHEhU

          Ragspierre in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 4:29 pm

          “Trump has explained quite clearly that he did what most all of us would to get the equivalent of an audience when he had something to say.”

          Bullshit. This is the oft-repeated LIE that “everyone does it”.

          No. We DO NOT. It is NOT commonplace among ANY business person with any character. And AVARICE is NOT character.

          NOR do we elect to swim in a cesspool of corruption, as has Mr. Establishment.

          I LOVE this “Yes, he’s a stinking, lying crony capitalist, BUT…” brand of apologia.

          This variation is “…BUT, he got sick of it, so now he’s going to fix it”.

          You are just delusional, as are the other cultists here.

          Kondor77 in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 4:32 pm

          That’s rich.

          Now we’re getting defensive about ‘selectively quoting’. Not to mention he was wrong about winning “46%” of hispanics in that same quote. Credit to you guys. Y’all have taken that 1990’s Clinton media playbook and are just running fly patterns all day.

          So what you’re essentially saying is Trump will do away with Citizens United? LOL. Feel that Trump burn Wall St.!

          Kondor77 in reply to Kondor77. | March 7, 2016 at 4:37 pm

          “What is “stupid” is to be so rabidly supportive of a man who cannot win that you trash the only one who can”

          Yeah. The plethora of polls that show Trump CRUSHING Hillary in an election. Oh wait. That’s Cruz in those polls. Rookie mistake.

          Do you even follow politics?

    No, like donating to Harry Reid over TEA Party candidate Sharon Angle, like multiple similar donations to progressive democrats who are, in actuality, worse than the GOPe. Trump was working against the TEA Party with both the progressive democrats and the GOPe. But hey, that doesn’t matter now because the only record that matters is anyone’s but Trump’s. Or something.

    What on earth makes you think that Trump is anti-establishment? He brags that he was happily ensconced with the establishment mere months ago. He states, “I was the establishment” with the same swagger he uses when he brags about his penis size during presidential debates. That he claims he is not establishment now is merely a measure of the pandering he engages in to enable his candidacy, a pandering he pushed Romney to do in 2011-12 (with regards to Trump’s then-favored but ultimately failed red meat strategy to rally base support, Obama birtherism). I’m stunned that people buy this crap, truly stunned.

    You can bet that if elected he will be making deals not only with the GOPe but deals that will make the GOPe look like conservative stalwarts guarding American freedom, and he’ll be making them with the most vile progressive democrats around (we know this not only because he is one but because he has said that he’ll “make great deals”–that his fans think this means anything other than “great” for Trump or in light of his limited understanding of the American republic and her Constitutional foundation is puzzling.).

    America is not a corporation, and Trump has repeatedly indicated, as do his fans, that it should be “run” like one. America does not need to be “run” by anyone, not a CEO, not a wannabe king who dreams of his “reign,” and certainly not by a man who is presenting himself as something he not and has never been.

Things are pretty bad when we look to a liberal Democrat to save the Republican party.

I listened to the whole clip.

First, Levin notes all of the democrat people who Trump gave money to, but ignores all of the Republican people Trump gave money to, including a lot of tea party people. Ignoring half the story is being dishonest. Today, Trump admits that he gave money to everybody.

I regret supporting Rubio over Charlie Crist. Crist is a one in a million retail level politician. Nobody shakes hands and kisses babies better than him. He just doesn’t have a soul. But, I assume a Republican Crist would have acted in the Senate like George Lemieux (Crist’s campaign chief who was appointed by Crist and served in the Senate for 2 years and was ok).

Rubio was a disaster for Florida. He lied to his supporters. Rubio ducks votes all the time and is famous for his amnesty bill.

So, Trump was wise there.

    Ragspierre in reply to rotten. | March 7, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    “…but ignores all of the Republican people Trump gave money to, including a lot of tea party people.”

    Best listen again.

    T-rump wasn’t “wise” in supporting Crist. He was Mr. Establishment. The TEA party was solidly behind Rubio, including Palin, et. al.

    inspectorudy in reply to rotten. | March 7, 2016 at 12:39 pm

    Rotten, you talk about soul. Do you have any idea who Trump is or what he stands for? The only soul he knows about is the kind that is on the bottom of his shoe, (Sole). I will admit he is a better choice than hillary. Not because I trust him to be more conservative but because I simply do not know what he will do and we all know what hillary will do. It boils down to a known disaster or a coin toss on a possible disaster.

    But, I assume a Republican Crist would have…

    ???

    He left the Republican Party in April 2010, seven months before the election — he ran as an “Independent”, not as a Republican. And by 2012, the transformation was complete:

    Proud and honored to join the Democratic Party in the home of President @BarackObama! pic.twitter.com/lQVn7DKf— Charlie Crist (@CharlieCrist) December 8, 2012

    This is Trump’s kind of person. This is also, apparently, your kind of person.

And so all the previous LI icons from Jeff Sessions to Newt Gingrich to Sarah Palin et al. are all wrong.

Cruz cannot win. One reason he cannot win is illustrated by the vicious, unrelenting lies and attacks coming from the purist (yes, Mark Levin, I will use that adjective) conservative movement here. Nasty, intolerant, self-righteous, unwilling to bend even a little — and terrifying to northeast moderate Republicans and independents, as well as liberals. Ted Cruz’s supporters keep proving that they are not the sort of people who the majority of people in this country ever want to be in control.

That would be Ted Cruz of Princeton, Harvard, GWBush staff, federal bureaucracy employee, wife Heidi and National Security Council, Goldman Sachs and Citibank, and TPP supporter ID — and who is without experience in economic or military matters, who repeatedly takes minutiae and exaggerates it into lies about Donald Trump, and whose own interpretation of the U.S. Constitution would make him ineligible to run for president.

    Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 12:37 pm

    The crazy self-parody of the true T-rump cultist.

    Scary.

    inspectorudy in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 12:48 pm

    Wow! Your comment is a good example of extreme hyperbole. You throw things with no support and do not realize that your own candidate has more of a liability than the person you are promoting. You mention that Cruz has no economic or military experience. Do you suppose Trump has ever been in the military? Do you suppose Cruz has ever been bankrupt 4, FOUR, IV times? Cruz never bends? Is that your new criteria for a candidate? Trump is a human pretzel for God’s sake! He bends every thing he touches and says. Now he is bending what he said on immigration and “The Wall”. He is bending what he said on Planned Parenthood and obamacare. I do not begrudge you your choice of candidate but at least try to keep your pros for him and the cons for his opponents truthful.

      janitor in reply to inspectorudy. | March 7, 2016 at 12:58 pm

      Wow! Your comment is a good example of extreme hyperbole.

      Where is the “hyperbole”?

      You throw things with no support

      Point out what was said that has “no support”.

      You mention that Cruz has no economic or military experience. Do you suppose Trump has ever been in the military?

      Well then we’d have a wash, wouldn’t we if Cruz had at least gone to a patriotic military high school and Wharton instead of Princeton and Harvard.

      Do you suppose Cruz has ever been bankrupt 4, FOUR, IV times?

      Donald Trump himself has never been bankrupt. Four of hundreds of companies and entrepreneurial ventures. Cruz, of course, has never owned even one business, successful or otherwise.

      Cruz never bends? Is that your new criteria for a candidate?

      I was referring to, not the candidates, but the supporters. Perfection is not possible. And Cruz can’t win. So the anti-Trumpers are not succeeding in furthering Cruz but essentially demanding that if they can’t have everything they want, then f’it, just blow all of it.

        gmac124 in reply to janitor. | March 7, 2016 at 7:15 pm

        “but essentially demanding that if they can’t have everything they want, then f’it, just blow all of it.”

        Funny that is what many Trump supporters are saying why they will vote for Trump, because they want to blow it all up.

Reports coming in that Cruz cancelled a Mississippi event citing not feeling well. Hope Ted is ok.

Ted Cruz’s supporters keep proving that they are not the sort of people who the majority of people in this country ever want to be in control.

This may be true. But I don’t usually blame a candidate for the low quality of his fanboys.

But in this election, the more I see of Cruz himself— as opposed to his minions and sycohants—the more underwhelmed I become. The guy’s something of a sleaze, and every day he gets sleazier. I can’t wait for the next batch of primaries.

Perhaps Cruz is just a Manchurian candidate for the Establishment.

Where does he get his money and backing, from the Tea Party?

Princeton, Harvard, tutelage under the Bush clan. Super-PACs with big oil and gas money. Wife from Wall Street.

Buyer beware.

    Ragspierre in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | March 7, 2016 at 1:13 pm

    Do you have your OccupyWallStreet sign still…???

      No, I don’t. I talked about Cruz. Your need to make a personal insult is telling.

        Ragspierre in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | March 7, 2016 at 1:29 pm

        Where did Scalia, Thomas, and Alito go to college and law school?

        Big gas and oil? The people who provide you fuel, fiber and materials? A market rates AND considerable RISK.

        Mrs. Crus is from Houston, where she works for Goldman Sachs. ZOMG…THEY’RE EVERYWHERE…

        Yessereee, Cruz is a Manchurian candidate, allllrighty.

        Under your tin foil hat.

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:34 pm

          I don’t recall Scalia, Thomas or Alito thinking that they would be good executives, running for office, or wallowing in the executive branch of government.

          It’s not just gas and oil. It’s Wall Street!

          To listen to Cruz, you’d think he went to TCU.

          By the way, I notice you make more comments by yourself than almost the rest combined. And not only in this thread. Are you paid to do this?

          In any event, calling people names because they dare disagree with you is the best way not to convince. Indeed, after reading your Cruz worship, maybe you are the one with the tin foil hat?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 1:48 pm

          You’re an ignorant cultist. Just gone.

          “Where does he get his money and backing, from the Tea Party?”

          I don’t think the people you mentioned support him. Trump supporters repeatedly tell us that nobody important likes Ted Cruz. His support must come from those who DO like Ted Cruz, like me.

          Trump supporters seem to be non-business types who are placing all their fragile eggs in one basket case.

    HandyGandy in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | March 7, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    No. Romney is the establishment candidate.
    Their plan is to create a brokered convention.
    Then they bring in Romney as the savior.
    A vote for Cruz is a vote for Romney.

Will Ted Cruz disavow Glenn Beck?

Will Ted Boogerman Cruz disavow Bryan Fischer?

    Ragspierre in reply to HandyGandy. | March 7, 2016 at 1:23 pm

    Maybe you should disavow BOTH People For The UNAmerican Way and Rachel Madcow, BOTH of whom you’ve cited today for your Collectivist bullshit.

    Ragspierre in reply to HandyGandy. | March 7, 2016 at 2:03 pm

    Yah, the fact that people know some damned thing about foreign relations are worried about Der Donald and his crazy, illegal bullshit would be a GREAT reason to vote for T-rump.

    PLUS! As a BONUS, T-rump WINS CAIR’s poll of GOP candidates!

Poor Rubio… Poor Little Feller…

Hot New Poll via Twitter:

Fox News
@FoxNews

Polls shows @realDonaldTrump leading in Michigan with 41%.

http://pic.twitter.com/4UZq6WD5om

5:26pm · 6 Mar 2016 · Twitter Web Client

645 Retweets 1,187 Likes

Note: See the link for the standings… Cruz has risen to 2nd place putting Rubio in 3rd, Again.

Seems… somebody is laughing at the Marco-Hugging GOP Establishment. Don’t think Newt has a horse in the race, rather he is admonishing his Estab friends for losing their minds over Trump…

Twitter Feed:

Washington Examiner
@dcexaminer

Newt Gingrich: Mitt Romney’s speech hurt himself more than Donald Trump

washex.am/1RwFpu

http://pic.twitter.com/GwH465UkmE

8:49am · 7 Mar 2016 · SocialFlow

28 Retweets 17 Likes

Twitter Feed:

Frank Luntz
@FrankLuntz

Marco Rubio now has a lower chance (2.5%) than John Kasich (2.9%) of becoming president.

http://ElectionBettingOdds.com

http://pic.twitter.com/idkYbEGy3y

11:31am · 7 Mar 2016 · Buffer

167 Retweets 115 Likes

Question: If Rubio Suspends His Campaign, Who Would The GOP Establishment Back?

A. Ted Cruz

B. Donald Trump

C. Hillary Clinton

My point with any big government person, be it Trump, Obama or Hillary, is that once you give them the power, it’s hard to get it back and you lose control over your own lives. You end up putting your faith that they will not abuse that power.

It’s bigger than that.

You not only put faith that that person will not abuse that power, you’re putting faith that their successors — whose identities and ideologies you have no way of knowing — will also not abuse that power.

Some of us might approve Ted Cruz (for example) having additional statutory powers. But suppose Hillary Clinton is eventually elected as his successor. Would you approve her having them?

If not, then Cruz shouldn’t have them, either.

I cannot state that strongly enough, but the point is lost on far too many voters.

Just when you think things could not get better for Cruz 🙂 and worse for Rubio 🙁

Twitter Feed:

Sahil Kapur Verified Account
@sahilkapur

New Michigan poll — @MonmouthPoll

GOP
Trump 36
Cruz 23
Kasich 21
Rubio 13

DEMS
Clinton 55
Sanders 42

9:30am · 7 Mar 2016 · Janetter for Mac

209 Retweets 117 Likes

This is the poll:

http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/23a456ac-d673-4189-9742-1f060ec2d926.pdf

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/03/trump-and-the-phony-job-creating-eb5-green-card-racket

Yep. BIG money Chinese investors get an apartment AND a greased path to a green card at T-rump’s latest racket.

I’m betting that there’s a LOT more feces that will be hitting the blower in the near future…

To The Benefit Of Cruz & Trump, A New Anti-Rubio Attack Ad Has Been launched

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrvdyeD7NYs&feature=youtu.be

    DaMav in reply to VotingFemale. | March 7, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    It would be great to KO Rubio in Florida. Bring the race closer to a Cruz vs Trump anti-establishment contest. Cruz chances improve with Rubio and Kasich out.

    Good for Trump going after Rubio.

Not talking about Charlie Rose Rags. Cruz was endorsed by Lindsey Graham on the Sunday Shows this weekend. Face the Nation and/or Meet the Press.

Cruz NOT endorsed by Jeff Sessions BUT endorsed by Lindsey Graham. That says it all about Cruz and his plans to approve TPP and more stupid trade deals, AMNESTY, and open borders.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    Put up your links, liar.

      Not my job to do your research Rags. No doubt you already have the link and have watched the clip but wanted some lie any lie as a response.

      Here is a link for ya. google.com

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 6:12 pm

      I did my research, you lying SOS.

      I always do. That’s how I knew you were lying.

      Again.

      Some more.

      As so often before.

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 6:26 pm

      Oh, and…as always…I invite everyone not to take my word for it, but to do their own investigation.

      I LOVE PUNKING YOU OUT…!!! You lying Collectivist SOS (sack of sophistry for the delicate).

      Lindsey Graham on Meet the Press, Sunday 3-6-16:

      ” SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:

      I would support Cruz over Trump,”

      Yep Cruz is Mr. Establishment and he has the support of Lindsey Graham over Trump

      Transcripts available from NBC.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 7:52 pm

        Bullshit. Put up the WHOLE interview, in context, up.

        If there’s a transcript PUT IT UP, you lying SOS.

        There isn’t any “endorsement”. If there were, it would be all over the net.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 4:38 pm

    As between T-rump and Cruz, T-rump has EXPRESSLY stated his plans for AMNESTY (as you scream).

    Cruz has expressly said there will be no amnesty.

    As to why Sessions endorsed Mr. Establishment, one may only conjecture. To suggest it “says it all” about any-flucking-thing is simply more of your irrational cult worship.

    As to why he didn’t walk away from the lying Collectivist thug after last Thursday, one can only conjecture more darkly about Sessions own integrity.

      genes in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 8:32 pm

      Sessions has been brought in as a “national security adviser” to Trump. IMHO he was offered State or Defense.

Doesn’t mean anything but it is pretty funny…

Twitter Feed:

John Roberts Verified Account
@johnrobertsFox

Soft porn actress in yanked @tedcruz ad endorses @realDonaldTrump. We’re not making this stuff up, folks..

2:42pm · 7 Mar 2016 · TweetDeck

1 Retweet 4 Likes

(That one RT – so far – was mine)

The same small handful of Trumpophobes slinging insults against 40% of Republicans like a house on fire. What could be fueling this vicious divisive nonsense?

Meanwhile, in a universe not far away…

NYT Headline: Money Pours In as Move to Stop Donald Trump Expands

GOPe Itemized Posting Payscale Revealed 🙂
your little yellow god $ 2.00
Mr Establishment $ 9.95
Der Donald $ 3.95
accuse them of lying $ 0.10 / dozen
call them invented names you think are clever $ 0.10 / dozen
etc etc etc

    Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | March 7, 2016 at 5:11 pm

    Huh.

    If your slimy innuendo held anything like truth, you should be able to link to other uses and users of my word-play. They’d be used all over the interwebs.

    But you can’t, just like you can’t use words correctly when you become hysterical. Like the other night.

    Or like you can’t use numbers truthfully, as in “40% of Republicans”, because there are not 40% of Republicans who are Donald Ducks supporters, and certainly not who would be “insulted” by my reasoned opposition to the stinking, lying Collectivist thug.

    Here’s a new name: Donaldore McTrumpenBerry. I want my $0.0083. in cash. now. 😛

Donald Duck supporters – $ 1.95

lol

Gary Britt you magnificent bastard, I found your Tweeter account! lol

Please refrain (ha,ha) from shooting the messenger and let me know if there is any truth to the reports Brian Fischer is/was going to appear at a cruz rally and with cruz himself.

I simply don’t know what to make of these reports. true/false?

The Ragspierre AI retort engine is spinning furiously today. Still programmed for 5th grade level english.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/07/surprise-cruz-to-unveil-endorsements-this-week-from-more-than-four-senators/

Interesting.

Look for that process to gather momentum as the battle lines become more clear.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 7, 2016 at 8:07 pm

    There’s speculation that some of those endorsements will come from what I would classify as “establishment” Senators.

    Which will blow the bullshit meme that Cruz has too narrow an appeal out of the water.

    Right, Gaghdad Bob…???

      Since Trump is the only anti establishment candidate and Cruz is and has been part of the Bush neocon open borders amnesty establishment fo 20 years it is hardly surprising that some establishment types would endorse him over Trump. Even Lindsey Graham has endorsed Cruz.

    Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | March 8, 2016 at 12:14 am

    Since revised to one (1) senator.

    But hey, endorsements don’t rally matter, remember?

      Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | March 8, 2016 at 8:12 am

      Well, not for T-trump so far. Instead, it seems more like a curse to have a governor endorse Der Donald.

        Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | March 8, 2016 at 10:45 am

        And the second revision is zero.

        lovely place that NRO, 4 to 1 to 0 in the span of just a few hours. TDS alive and well over there.

**Not Safe Reading For Rubio Fans**

Some Rubio Advisers Say Get Out Before Florida

Publicly, the campaign is maintaining they are still a contender in this race, touting a Sunday win in Puerto Rico’s primary that delivered Rubio 23 delegates. But privately, the campaign is having a debate about whether he should remain in the mix — even for his home state of Florida’s primary.

“He doesn’t want to get killed in his home state,” one source familiar with the discussions said, noting “a poor showing would be a risk and hurt his political future.”

Alex Conant, Rubio’s communication director, said the report of such an internal debate is “100% false.”

“That is fiction,” he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on “The Situation Room.”

“I was sitting in a senior staff meeting planning out next week’s schedule when I saw this report suddenly air and I came racing across town to correct it,” he added.

Conant pointed to the fact that Rubio appears to be closing in on GOP front-runner Donald Trump’s lead in Florida.

A Monmouth poll released Monday shows Rubio behind Trump, 38% to 30%. A Quinnipiac poll released two weeks ago put Rubio behind Trump by a wider margin: 44% to 28%.

Most of the senator’s advisers agree he does not have a path to the nomination and some are advising him to get out ahead of the March 15 primary.

Polls show Rubio trailing GOP front-runner Donald Trump in Florida. A Monmouth poll released Monday shows Rubio behind Trump, 38% to 30%. A Quinnipiac poll released two weeks ago put Rubio behind Trump by a wider margin: 44% to 28%.

Most of his advisers agree he does not have a path to the nomination and some are advising him to get out ahead of the March 15 primary.

Sources within the campaign also say the pressure will only continue to mount following an expected disappointing showing Tuesday, when voters in Michigan, Mississippi, Hawaii and Idaho make their picks in the GOP primary.

“Not going to have a great day is an understatement,” one campaign source said.

read the rest here: http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/07/politics/marco-rubio-campaign-weighs-getting-out/index.html

Rut Row….

Ben Carson on Hannity tonight.

Question: If it comes down to just Trump and Cruz who would you recommend Dr. Carson ?

Answer: I would go with Trump because he has crossover appeal and is more electable.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 7:32 pm

    …he fantasized as he fondled his stupid Make America Great Again cap and…other junk…

    Typical. Cruzbot Rags calls a decent man like Dr. Carson a pervert because he is smart enough to recognize that Trump is the only candidate with crossover appeal who can win the general election.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 8:01 pm

      No, stupid. I was talking about the lying SOS who fantasized about what Carson would say. That being YOU.

      A Bot is a thing that rejects evidence, follows style over substance a la Obamabots.

      Trump’s amoral and unprincipled record is irrefutable. So who’s the real Bot? Look in the mirror.

    So Dr. Carson shows his political astuteness on the qualities of other candidates to be equal to that shown in choosing himself as an informed and electable choice – which is to say, not at all.

    Perhaps Carson is holding a grudge, or perhaps he cannot bring himself to admit that Cruz, whose views are closest to Carson, has carried the religiously inclined vote far better than Carson. Whatever the source of Carson’s ignorance, anyone familiar with polls and analytics knows better.

    For example, on March 3rd Polit Fact published the average of RCP averages in head to head matchups with Hillary:

    Kasich plus 7.4
    Rubio plus 5.0
    Cruz plus 1.5
    Trump -3.4

    Trump is the only one of the four to lose to Hillary Clinton.

    Or take the latest CNN/ORC poll of a week ago. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

    “In the scenario that appears most likely to emerge from the primary contests, Clinton tops Trump 52% to 44% among registered voters. That result has tilted in Clinton’s favor since the last CNN/ORC Poll on the match-up in January.

    But when the former secretary of state faces off with either of the other two top Republicans, things are much tighter and roughly the same as they were in January. Clinton trails against Rubio, with 50% choosing the Florida senator compared to 47% for Clinton, identical to the results in January. Against Cruz, Clinton holds 48% to his 49%, a slight tightening from a 3-point race in January to a 1-point match-up now.”

    In other words, while Rubio and Cruz can beat Hillary, Trump is crushed by an 8 point gap (and he even loses to Sanders).

    So please tell us again why we should join in drinking the stupid juice?

      The polls you cite are completely meaningless. At the same point and later compared to current election cycle. Jimmy Carter led Reagan by 20 points and Dukakis led Bush by double digits.

      Idiots supporting other candidates to Reagan said just like you “but Reagan can’t win”, “Reagan is hitler”, “Reagan will get us into world war 3 and should never have nuclear codes”, “Reagan is racist”. Blah blah blah.

      Every democrat analyst I see on CNN, FOX and MSNBC when asked who will be hardest for Hillary to beat ALL SAY TRUMP !!! Because he his hardest to campaign against, can’t be portrayed as an extremist like Cruz, AND HAS CROSS OVER APPEAL WITH UNION MEMBERS AND REAGAN DEMOCRATS.

      None of the polls take into account in their modeling Trump’s crossover appeal and how he puts various states in play no other GOP candidate can put into play, like Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania.

        Evil Otto in reply to Gary Britt. | March 8, 2016 at 5:11 pm

        “Every democrat analyst I see on CNN, FOX and MSNBC when asked who will be hardest for Hillary to beat ALL SAY TRUMP !!!”

        “Don’t throw me in that there briar patch, Brer Fox.”

        Listening to Democrats say who they think could beat Hillary is like taking advice from the opposing coach during a football game. “You should punt on first down. It’s what *I* would do.”

        Don’t be naive, Gary. They aren’t saying Trump could beat Hillary because they actually think that.

        Mark in reply to Gary Britt. | March 8, 2016 at 6:09 pm

        Naturally you hand-wave that the polls are meaningless. However, your hope for Trump is not based on real evidence, and cherry picking a false comparison won’t convince.

        A contest between Trump and Hillary is nothing like that of between Dukakis (a largely unknown NE politician) nor a Bush (who had the Reagan popular legacy and very low “unfavorable” rating).

        And actually both candidates held substantial leads. Bush substantially led Dukakis in March; in May Dukakis led Bush by similiar margins; in September Bush regained his prior substantial lead and won. Why? Because Dukakis’s was an unknown whose bandwagon effect expired when Lee Atwater successfully defined and portrayed Dukakis as a soft on crime liberal dweeb, while Bush promised no new taxes.

        But 1988 is not 2016. This a highly polarized electorate and Trump and Hillary are two VERY WELL KNOWN candidates – both with very high unfavorables (up to 68 percent). Far fewer see themselves potentially as voting for the other guy and you don’t expect to see wild swings in poll numbers of prior eras because the undecided and independent voter is no longer critical for Democratic victory.

        And in this case they tell us that unlike Dukakis v. Bush, Hillary has almost constantly dominated Trump, often by substantial poll numbers of 8 points. Unlike B v. D, its been a mainly one-side seesaw.

        finally the issue is not whether it is possible for Trump to win, the issue is who has the best chance of winning.

        Since campaign season began Trump has been poorest in polling on head to head matchups…even on the rare occasion he barely edged out Hillary. There is no reason to expect that to change unless Trump undergoes a brain (or personality) transplant.

        FYI – Trump is no Reagan, in either personality, warmth, humor, appeal, vision or generosity of spirit. If he were, we wouldn’t need this discussion. In 1980 the gipper was broadly liked in the GOP, and never engendered fractured backlash. Party unity was never a serious problem.

        You say that every democrat analyst you see says Trump is hardest to beat, to campaign against, because “he can’t be portrayed as an extremist like Cruz, AND HAS CROSS OVER APPEAL WITH UNION MEMBERS AND REAGAN DEMOCRATS.”

        He is also hardest to campaign FOR, because of his stratospheric
        disapproval ratings. Trump, like Hillary, tends to be stuck in a narrow range because they are already defined as scumbags for a large portion of the population.

        Moreover, there is no evidence of a ‘cross-over’ that somehow fails to show up in the polls of registered voters of both parties. That’s just more wishful thinking – unsupported speculation trotted out as “Trump Facts”.

        As I stated earlier, polling continues to show Rubio, Cruz, Carson, and Trump (in that order) as most likely to acceptable to voters.

        PS Trump is not an extremist? Oh yes, his stances on immigration, torture, and trade are 100 percent moderate. (rolling eyes time).

      Oh and as for the “stupid juice” you asked about. I’m afraid you have already ingested it, and I’m trying to save you.

Except Rags you liar it is what really happened on Hannity’s Radio show. When asked to choose between Trump and Cruz Dr. Carson said he would chose Trump because his crossover appeal makes him more electable.

So sorry….

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 10:09 pm

    How was anything I said a lie, you lying SOS? That is, even IF this latest lie of yours (above) is now converted to something you heard today?

    And how is Carson now some kind of political maven? Sure, it’s fine for him to have an opinion, but it’s not better than anyone else.

    Is it, you stupid, lying SOS?

    BTW, you have a link proving what you said about what Carson said is…you know…NOT another lie.

    Cause I was just on Hannity’s radio site, and there ain’t nothing there supporting your bullshit.

    spartan in reply to Gary Britt. | March 7, 2016 at 10:30 pm

    Trump has a lot of crossover appeal … especially those who crossover the Pacific Ocean.

    Do you know what Donald J Trump has in common with Terry McAuliffe, Tony Rodham, and Hillary Clinton?

    Yep, they all use the EB-5 to raise money for their projects. This is not only very sleazy and corrupt, but quite hypocritical. Trump will build a wall to keep the Mexicans out but if they invest in one of Trump’s buildings, they too can get a legal EB-5 visa and stay here for 2 years.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-07/trump-tower-financed-by-rich-chinese-who-invest-cash-for-visas

    I have a funny feeling that Carson, Palin, Coulter, Jerry Jr., and all the others who endorsed Trump will have that Colonel Nicholson “What have I done?” moment from Bridge Over The River Kwai.

    https://youtu.be/tRHVMi3LxZE?t=47s

    Hey Gary Gollum,

    Carson has made himself invalid with regard to politics and has deeply discounted his faith to endorse Trump, a known supporter of the PPH death cult, but…

    The President of the National Religious Broadcasters endorses…Ted Cruz. He sees Ted Cruz as more electable.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXjJa7to6ak

    And, Investor’s Business Daily says:

    IBD: Cruz Gets To The Heart Of Making America Great Again

    http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/ted-cruz-gets-to-the-heart-of-making-america-great-again/

    Your Precious Trump is calling you, Gary Gollum. Go to it. The ring of power will destroy you.

Oooooooooooo….SaaaaMACK…!!!

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/03/what-is-donald-trumps-final-position-on-illegal-immigration

Levin schlongs Der Donald on his greasy immigration positionsssssssss.

Tea Party-supported and ostensibly “representing” Marco Rubio rented out the Tampa Convention Center for a rally yesterday (seating for 5000) — and 300 people showed up.

2016 is not 2012.

Time for Mark Levin to pack it in because Cruz cannot win. As far as Trump’s positions, he has called for supportive lawyers (lawyers only) to send his campaign researched position papers on their issues (with cites). So instead of screeching anti-Trump, perhaps a different approach would be more appropriate. Trump is educable, and he listens and takes advice.

    Mark in reply to janitor. | March 8, 2016 at 2:54 am

    So you are telling us to vote for a guy who has yet to take positions, and is relying on lawyers (the large majority being democratic liberals) to tell him what to think?

    LOL…

      janitor in reply to Mark. | March 8, 2016 at 12:56 pm

      Government officials are supposed to be representing the people.

      Would you prefer that they just consult with their big donors and handlers on the issues or parrot party lines.

      Or do you imagine that individuals candidates enter races knowing everything about everything.

    gmac124 in reply to janitor. | March 8, 2016 at 9:10 am

    “Time for Mark Levin to pack it in because Cruz cannot win.”

    Evidence? Because your opinion is completely different from what all of the polls are saying.

    As far as Trump’s positions, he has called for supportive lawyers (lawyers only) to send his campaign researched position papers on their issues (with cites)

    (1) Is it expecting too much to think that a candidate should have his main platform pretty much solidified before asking people to vote for him, so they know more or less what they’re voting for?

    (2) They’re not “Trump’s positions” if he’s outsourcing them, and in fact even he doesn’t know what they’re going to be yet.

    Trump is really starting to remind me of Groucho Marx here: “These are my principles, and if you don’t like them, I’ve got others.”

      janitor in reply to Amy in FL. | March 8, 2016 at 12:54 pm

      Godforbid a candidate listen to anyone else or keep an open mind. Godforbid the general public ever recognize that individual candidates don’t know everything, and that most of them just consult their big donors and handlers to parrot the their positions.

Levin? Levin? Who sold us out in his meeting with Murdock? That Levin?

Trump 2016

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/07/bret-baier-there-are-already-d-c-republicans-saying-privately-theyll-support-hillary-to-stop-trump/

Why is this ok, yet we were all browbeaten in the last election cycle to vote for Mitt and called all kinds of unsavory names and our loyalty questioned if we did not do as told? I for one will decide on my own who I vote for. If the establishment brings to bear its dirty tricks to impose a candidate in a brokered convention, I will leave the party. It’s just my voice and vote, but I will not be part and parcel to illegality and behind the scenes machinations by those who think they are our betters. What gives the establishment the right to toss out the votes of all the people who have taken the time to vote in primaries and to decide that their voice is not worth the paper it is written on? NO ONE decides for me.

    but I will not be part and parcel to illegality

    A brokered convention is not illegal.” If no one receives 1/2 +1 of the delegates before the convention, then they haven’t earned the nomination. I agree that it wouldn’t be a good look for them to then select a minority candidate rather than going with whoever did get the most delegates (even if they didn’t get 50%+1), but it wouldn’t be illegal.

      No, but all the machinations to bring one about are……. any way you cut it, the establishment is pulling out all its dirty tricks to impose their candidate….. that in my book is tantamount to being illegal. That’s what I take exception too. We were all told to sit back and take our medicine and vote for Mitt by the same people who are now going behind our backs to impose whoever it is they feel is correct.. They sure were right in 2012, weren’t they, starting with Carl Rove. What the hell has happened to the will of the people. Do things fairly and above board and you have my support…. otherwise, bug off!

        that in my book is tantamount to being illegal.

        Words mean things. The fact that something strikes you as unfair doesn’t make it “illegal.” Normally that’s a SJW trope, to try to conflate the two. Let’s try to be better than that.

          that’s just my way of saying I’m sick and tired of others telling me what to think, when to think it and what to do with what I think… Right now I’m ready to tell them where they can put their advice! 🙂 Yes, words have meaning — I shouldn’t have used illegal but rather hypocritical or some such other word, but you get my drift. I hate being told what to do and what not to do and detest unfairness. If what the people want is Trump or Cruz or Rubio or the dog next door it’s there decision!

          I agree with you on that one. I think it would be colossally stupid for the GOP to do something like try to parachute Mitt in to the nomination. Legal, but still colossally stupid. Sigh.

Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant endorsed Texas Sen. Ted Cruz for president less than a day before the Hospitality State’s Republican primary begins.

“It’s time for Republicans to join together and unite the party for the good of our state and our nation,” Bryant said Monday evening. “I urge my fellow Mississippians to join me in standing behind Ted Cruz tomorrow.”

The second-term governor’s endorsement could boost Cruz in Tuesday’s race. Bryant received more than two-thirds of the state’s support in the 2015 election, indicating he has a significant amount of backing from conservatives.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/mississippi-governor-makes-endorsement-hours-before-primary/article/2585184

Well, I hope that works better for Cruz than T-rump, who seems to be cursed when Palin or LaPage have endorsed him.

National Review Online, which sort of lost me after their Newt-bashing frenzy last election cycle anyway, really messed up yesterday. They announced the Cruz campaign was set to unveil four or more endorsements from Cruz’s fellow senators, and of course lots of other blogs picked that up and ran with it.

Today, we have this:

An earlier post stated that Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign was set to unveil a series of endorsements from Cruz’s fellow senators. The report was erroneous. As of this writing, the campaign has no pending Senate endorsements to announce.

Given that NRO is almost as anti-Cruz as it is anti-Trump, I can’t help but wonder what was up with that. I don’t think anyone who’s anti-GOPe, whether they’re pro-Trump or pro-Cruz, should trust anything coming out of that rag.

    Yup. That’s how it is for the National Review.

    Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | March 8, 2016 at 9:53 am

    Tarring with WAY too broad a brush, Amy.

    I trust most NR authors very much. A few I disagree with regularly.

    “Rag…???” Recover your marbles.

      I like some of the authors they have in their stable, but the magazine/organization as a whole, I don’t trust. They as an organization have their own agendas (such as the extreme pro-Mitt anti-Newt agenda in 2012), and just because I agree with some of their anti-Trump arguments this time around doesn’t mean I’m going to let my guard down. I know full well that if they somehow managed to knock Trump out, it would be Cruz in their their firing line.

      The enemy of our enemy isn’t necessarily our friend. YMMV.

        Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | March 8, 2016 at 10:26 am

        I think you’re mistaken again in your generalizations.

        There are open Cruz supporters prominent in their line-up, including Andy McCarthy.

        As to “letting your guard down”, I think I’ve advocated that one should always read critically and “look under the hood”. I don’t surrender those ideas for any author or pundit.

        Good case-in-point…
        http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432340/donald-trump-tough-guy

        Williamson is a polemicist, and no doubt. I agree with most of what he says here, and disagree sharply with other parts.

Donald Ducks lies every day, and in big and small things.

http://twitchy.com/2016/03/08/cbs-fact-checks-donald-trump-on-i-employ-many-people-in-hawaii/

Which is just crazy when the facts are so easily ascertained.

Right Gaghdad Bob…???

Awww….

The T-rump cultists must have a sad today.

The Illinois suit challenging Cruz as ineligible for POTUS has been tossed.

Suits have been filed in Florida, New York, Alabama and Texas. The New York and Florida lawsuits have also been tossed out.

The Texas and Alabama ones will follow shortly.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend