Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

LIVE REACTIONS – GOP Debate

LIVE REACTIONS – GOP Debate

The Final Four

This should be fun.

As usual, we have live Twitter feeds below, and will post updates.

This is now basically “Stop Trump” time for the others. But can it be done?

Watch below and react in the comment section. If we can find a live video feed, we’ll add that.

(added post debate)

Trump campaign disputing Fox News info on Better Business Bureau rating. One of them is wrong, or maybe talking about different time periods or entities:

https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/705613140596236288

Political media reaction:

Hashtag #GOPdebate


Legal Insurrection Authors:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Trump and Rubio are disgusting, individually and combined. Screeching over each other like 3rd graders.
It is amazing that they could become president.

ugottabekiddinme | March 3, 2016 at 9:28 pm

I’ve been a political junkie all my adult life, but I cannot watch these “debates” unless and until they get the audience to STFU!

The whooping and hollerin’ just makes a travesty of the whole thing. Can’t we insist upon a tad bit of decorum? Must the audience scream and carry on at every utterance? This is not The Price Is Right. Disgusting.

    HandyGandy in reply to ugottabekiddinme. | March 3, 2016 at 9:35 pm

    Yes. It is most annoying. It ruins the whole thing.

    The audience is all political operatives. Why isn’t the audience just regular people like you and me?

      HandyGandy in reply to JoAnne. | March 3, 2016 at 11:38 pm

      I remember reading that there were like 20000 students who requested tickets, but only 50 got them. The reason being that the RNC has to have their political hacks in the audience to run their little jerry Springer antiTrump show.

If the GOPe backed Kasich instead of Rubio, they might have gotten what they wanted. Rubio just isn’t ready and will not ever be.

Fox goes easy on Rubio again, Shills. No hard questions.

Ted Cruz doesn’t answer his questions, he just launches into his pre planned speeches. Trump keeps making the mistake of listening and responding to these speeches which just launches crosstalk where nobody looks good.

    HandyGandy in reply to rotten. | March 3, 2016 at 11:03 pm

    Right now Cruz and Rubio have to attack Trump, and he has to defend. Kasich can stand back and look good. In the past that was not the case.
    Oh and it helps that they set his podium further from the others.

    Nevertheless he does look good. Too bad he is a Democrat.

I think we need that dumpster fire picture back up.

Sigh.
Ted Cruz picks on Rubio and Trump for going at it. Then he starts to go at with Trump. Then he keeps going at it through a break.

Yeah Ted real adult.

I think this debate was better than the last one. I think Kasich has done well by avoiding the fighting. Of course he is only one on the stage who could avoid the fighting. I would say that Cruz and Trump are tied in the middle and little Marco is last.

I think it is a shame for Kasich that he is just too weak on the border and immigration. Also his tweet today in support of Romney sadly marks him as owned by the GOPe.

    gulfbreeze in reply to Gary Britt. | March 4, 2016 at 1:14 am

    I know it’s not possible to give every candidate exact equal time. But I believe debates should truly have that as a goal. When debate rules seem to indicate that if a candidate is mentioned in a reply, the target of the comment gets to respond, that shuts out Kasich by definition, because he’s not going to engage in personal attacks. He has remained positive and focused on his own candidacy and solutions since day one.

    I can’t vote in my state’s closed primary, but as I’ve posted before, I admire Kasich’s pragmatic approach to governing. I much prefer governors moving into the presidency for their executive government experience, and only Kasich has a record of governing successfully in a divided purple state, succeeding in Ohio’s diverse economic sectors of agricultural, corporate, and manufacturing. As of today, I would not hesitate to vote for him.

    As for Kasich’s position on Trump, he explained it here today:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/kasich-romney-trump-delegates/

    “…Kasich has gone to great pains to keep from criticizing the Republican front-runner. He again denounced personal attacks of Trump on Thursday and said he had personally spoken to Romney by phone and warned him against such an approach.

    “I already told Mitt that I don’t think you beat Trump by personal attacks, Kasich told reporters. “I just don’t want to talk about the size of his hands or what kind of a tan he has. That’s not the way to get things done.”

    Despite a tweet from Kasich’s official Twitter account that stated “Well said, @MittRomney” and was signed “-John,” implying it was from the candidate, Kasich said he hadn’t actually watched the remarks and reiterated his position that “you don’t beat Trump by personal attacks.”

    “I think the notion that you can beat Trump by calling him names, I don’t think you get there that way,” Kasich said. “I’m not going that way and I’m not using that kind of rhetoric.”
    ________

      f2000 in reply to gulfbreeze. | March 4, 2016 at 7:09 am

      I see the “if a candidate is mentioned” rule as intended to cut back on personal attacks. A decent debate strategy would seem to to not give your opponent free time by mentioning them. Obviously that isn’t how the candidates have played the game though.

        gulfbreeze in reply to f2000. | March 4, 2016 at 9:24 am

        “A decent debate strategy would seem to to not give your opponent free time by mentioning them.”

        That would be wise. I would prefer a substantial amount of debate time where all candidates are given x minutes to answer the same questions, e.g. specific plans on economic and foreign policies. If a candidate wasted their time talking about their opponent, they would be taking time away from their own platform. All penalties would be self-inflicted.

      While there are many more things to like about Kasich than Rubio I could never support someone who is an open borders amnesty establishment guy. If we don’t get that right we lose the country.

        gmac124 in reply to Gary Britt. | March 4, 2016 at 9:49 am

        “While there are many more things to like about Kasich than Rubio I could never support someone who is an open borders amnesty establishment guy. If we don’t get that right we lose the country.”

        And what is Trump’s stand today on immigration? Last night he said it was negotiable and that he would increase H1B visas.

          The Friendly Grizzly in reply to gmac124. | March 4, 2016 at 9:57 am

          My opinion – and that’s all it is is opinion – is that Trump took a strong stand on immigration to build his base and win primaries and cauci. His true position is to have cheap labor for his properties. But, he showed his hand far too soon; he didn’t have the nomination sewn up. This will cost him.

          Build Wall, deport, enforce our laws. That is Trump’s immigration plan. And Mexico will pay for the wall.

          He did misspeak on H1B visas and clarified that mistake immediately after the debate. He was trying to speak about allowing highly skilled graduates of our major universities being allowed to stay in the country and work, innovate and create. H1B visas are for lower skilled workers and have been the subject of great abuse which Trump will STOP.

          No other candidate will build the wall, deport and enforce. They all say just the opposite is their position.

          gmac124 in reply to gmac124. | March 4, 2016 at 11:52 am

          “He did misspeak on H1B visas and clarified that mistake immediately after the debate. He was trying to speak about allowing highly skilled graduates of our major universities being allowed to stay in the country and work, innovate and create. H1B visas are for lower skilled workers and have been the subject of great abuse which Trump will STOP.”

          Sounds just like Obama and his red line in Syria. That’s REALLY what I want to elect is another Obama….NOT. Get back to me when you can find a stand that Trump has contradicted in the last 6 months.

          gmac124 in reply to gmac124. | March 4, 2016 at 11:56 am

          Sorry Trump hasn’t contradicted.

        In case you were unsure if you’d heard him right, last night Trump praised Rubio’s Amnesty plan as “fine”.
        http://ace.mu.nu/archives/361934.php

The debate was just a microcosm of the last week. The GOPe out to get Trump. The only one who looked a bit good was Kasich, but he didn’t look all that good.

All in all the debate looked like an episode of the Jerry Springer show.

It does make Kasich look good. I did not watch the whole thing, knew it would be a cluster****. I did catch Kasich on O’Reilly after the debate. I think he got more air time there then in the debate…

At the time of this comment…

**DRUDGE POLL** WHO WON THE 11TH REPUBLICAN DEBATE ’16?

TRUMP 63.46% (97,344 votes)

CRUZ 20.8% (31,908 votes)

KASICH 10.84% (16,631 votes)

RUBIO 4.9% (7,510 votes)

Total Votes: 153,393

I can only conclude from that poll that a majority of Drudge viewers are crazy.

Well looks like Boogerboy had a “Dukakis the Flying Squirrel” moment.

Be interesting to see how people try to spin this one.

Attention
Attention
Attention

Something that someone spotted:
http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00431171/1047622/

Your D- rated candidate:

“Trump definitively exposed himself tonight on radical H-1B reversal.” Michelle Malkin

(Negotiation 101, grade D- for negotiating away your position)
~~~
Today: “I totally disavow the KKK.”

Tomorrow: “I’m “changing” my position on David Duke. He’s not one of the little people”
~~~
Trumph: Look I can pick my nose with these fingers and your nose, too!
~~~
Trumph: “You little people are killing me here.”

#Nevertrump

Let’s get down to business:
For Hari Kari Britt, priest of the church of DJ Trumph, and his acolytes, barry, janitor, et al… I give you your yellow god:

“But the only part of his business track record for which we have the full picture shows that Trump wasn’t a successful executive but an absolute catastrophe.”

“For 10 years between 1995 and 2005, Donald Trump ran Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts — and he did it so badly and incompetently that it collapsed into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. His stockholders were almost entirely wiped out, losing a staggering 89% of their money. The company actually lost money every single year. In total it racked up more than $600 million in net losses over that period.”

“Donald Trump ran the worst performing casino company on the stock market. This isn’t a matter of “opinion.” This isn’t speculation or politics. It’s a matter of plain fact.”

“However, one person associated with Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts did make money: Donald J. Trump.”

Why, this sounds a lot like Trump U! DJ Trumph gets an absolute F in business acumen:

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

    Trumphites will give me a “thumbs down” on this comment because they don’t deal with facts. They deal only in phenomenon.

    All entrepreneurs have both successes and failures. The incentive of reward encourages risk-taking, and that’s why capitalism works. That’s why those who take bigger risks sometimes suffer bigger failures as well as become entitled to bigger rewards.

    How about considering the bankruptcies and failures (all of them) of the businesses of George W. Bush? Or Jeb (the only “real estate venture” I’m aware of went down the tubes while he pocketed management fees off of the investors and walked away from a no-recourse bank loan.)

    What businesses have been started and run by Ted Cruz? Marco Rubio (who never has held any real job — his “law practice” consisted of sporadic occasional lobbying work)? What business experience did JFK have? (None — military and then writer/professor).

    How many of our presidents have even had “real world” jobs, let along been businessmen?

    How many jobs have the other candidates created? What products have they manufactured? What businesses have they run?

    Let’s look that disingenuous Romney. What businesses has he ever started or run? His father’s cronies gave him a job in the financial sector pushing money around — and his own work history is that of acquisitions, liquidations, investing, etc. (Which is why the only thing he could point to as real work experience during his campaign was budgeting the Olympics.)

    Big talk from a lot of know-nothings.

    Here’s just one business, small scale. How Trump turned around and runs Mar-a-Lago: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3464605/If-want-know-Donald-Trump-run-White-House-look-operates-Mar-Lago.html

      inspectorudy in reply to janitor. | March 4, 2016 at 11:28 am

      What you say about all business ventures is true but not when you omit the facts that Trump is basing his entire credibility on. He has started many real estate ventures and most of them have either failed or were sold under duress. But a as a bankruptcy lawyer friend of mine told me there are always certain people in a bankruptcy that get their money before anyone else. The lawyer got his before most of the creditors but Trump figured out how to get his before filing. I am not a fan of anyone’s tax returns being exposed but in Trump’s case it might show that he isn’t nearly as great as he says he is. If you brag about your wealth then you should have to prove it!

        janitor in reply to inspectorudy. | March 4, 2016 at 12:15 pm

        most of [Trump’s businesses] have either failed or were sold under duress

        That’s simply not true. I’m wondering why you wrote that.

      “Big talk from a lot of know-nothings.”

      The author of the article I posted and who I quoted:

      “Brett Arends is an award-winning financial columnist with many years experience writing about markets, economics and personal finance.”
      ~~~

      “How many of our presidents have even had “real world” jobs, let along been businessmen?

      How many jobs have the other candidates created? What products have they manufactured? What businesses have they run.”

      As shown, Trump’s experience has been a Yuge deficit.

      Tell us about your vast business experience janitor. Maybe you have none and therefore look to Trumph to be your proxy homoerotic fulfillment.

      I started a multimillion $ mfg. business with two partners. I know what it takes to lead and exactly what businesses are looking for from the government – hands off policies and certainty. I have the experience and know who should be in the WH – Ted Cruz.

      Trumph’s little hands want to be in the till and, as shown las tnight, he does not have the quality of certainty.

I have a question. Where were the graphics and videos for the other three contenders?

    gmac124 in reply to MAB. | March 4, 2016 at 9:08 am

    “I have a question. Where were the graphics and videos for the other three contenders?”

    The other contenders were hit with graphics and videos in the debate that Trump skipped.

Trump keeps saying he's ahead of Clinton in the polls – but the polls don't show that pic.twitter.com/HlHK5pcV61— Jamie Dupree (@jamiedupree) March 4, 2016

I’m not a huge believer in polls myself, but since The Donald and his groupies keep quoting them as gospel whenever they fit their narrative…

Trump Gives Another Hint About Abandoning Supporters on All Things Immigration

The Trumpkins who staged the biggest collective LI meltdown I’ve ever seen here after Jon Levin pointed out previous evidence of Trump’s tip-toe to the left on this issue had better go back and stock up on ALLCAPS and swear words.

Ace on Donald Trump’s contributions to the debate:

Repudiated the Jeff Sessions Immigration Plan — which was the only reason to support him — by declaring he was “changing” and “softening” it because we need all these highly-skilled people to take our jobs. Then said he would be “flexible” on the wall and deporting illegals and pretty much admitted he’d said as much to the New York Times editorial board, and then, in case you were unsure if you’d heard him right, praised Marco Rubio’s Amnesty plan as “fine” and a good opening bargaining position.

Kept talking about his hand-size and then, just when you thought this was getting weird, brought it back into a more sensible area by assuring the world that his penis size was sufficient for most.

He then added some substance to his foreign policy platform by declaring that he would force American soldiers to break the law and murder children.

On other issues, he was less reassuring.

But the Trumpkins, in true Ronulan fashion, successfully poll-bombed another Drudge Poll! So it’s all good!

    So let me get this straight.

    Right after Sarah “Drill Baby Drill” Palin endorsed him, the Sunday shows have him on video saying that he thinks Obama’s “no drill” policy on oil resource development is just fine and there’s no need to change it.

    Right after Jeff Sessions endorses him because he’s the guy in synch with Sessions’ immigration ideas, he walks out on the debate stage and says “that Sessions plan is too harsh, anyone in favor of it has no heart, and I won’t be doing that.”

    Am I the only one starting to see a pattern here?

    All I have to say is that if you Trumpkins think the GOPe was crapping on you, you ain’t seen what a world class, Fabulous, sh*t shower the Donald has in store.

    Can’t wait for Gaghdad Gary to drown in the bath.

    Nope. Trump did misspeak on the H1B visas. That can happen when you are in a debate being attacked by all sides and the moderators. He issued a clarifying statement immediately after the debate when his misspeaking was brought to his attention.

      inspectorudy in reply to Gary Britt. | March 4, 2016 at 11:33 am

      Lately Trump has been having a lot of “Clarifying” statements the next day. That is just like hillary. It happens when you are either lying or do not know the subject matter of which you speak. I hillary’s case it is lying. In Trump’s case it is both.

        janitor in reply to inspectorudy. | March 4, 2016 at 12:31 pm

        Because slick practiced and memorized do-nothing talking coupled with clever consistency in prevaricating is, as we all know, the hallmark of a successful politician.

I didn’t get a chance to watch the whole debate last night but what I did watch confirmed my initial take on Trump. He CAN’T win in the general. With the baggage and easy attack ads that can be written about him he is toast. If Trump had core principles it might be different. Most of his stances, including immigration, have been like Obama’s red line in Syria.

Could everyone just quit with the name calling, please! LI was once a pleasure to read, but no longer. Make your point without insulting each other. We are adults, or aren’t we?

Really? Is it the saggy, frowny face? Or the multi-direction comb-over? Or the baggy, clown costume fit of his expensive suits? Or maybe the old wives tale little hands correlation?

Now I really don’t understand the attraction.

Henry Hawkins | March 4, 2016 at 10:03 am

Trump refuses to allow release of the NY Times recording of his ‘flexibility’ on illegal immigration, and for good reason, since it is in direct opposition to what he claims to his supporters.

[Obama: ‘Tell Vlad that after the election I’ll have more flexibility.’]

What do we think the chances are that the NY Times would not leak this recording during the general election should Trump win the nomination?

How stupid was it for Trump to trust the NY Times?

    There is no basis for calling for Trump to release this “alleged” recording UNLESS AND UNTIL ALL THE OFF THE RECORD CONVERSATIONS AND NOTES FROM CONVERSATIONS OF EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE INCLUDING HILLARY AND BERNIE ARE ALSO RELEASED.

    Simple fairness. Either everything is released or NOTHING is released. I want to see what Cruz and Rubio and Hillary and Bernie have to hide in their off the record conversations.

      inspectorudy in reply to Gary Britt. | March 4, 2016 at 11:39 am

      “Simple fairness. Either everything is released or NOTHING is released. I want to see what Cruz and Rubio and Hillary and Bernie have to hide in their off the record conversations.”

      What a little boy you are. Simple fairness from the NYT? Would you trust them? Would anyone here at LI trust them? Trump did! That means that he has dealt with them a million times before and hasn’t had any problems with their “Fairness”. But he hasn’t ever run as a Republican before either. What he said WILL be reported through a “Leak” after he becomes the nominee for the Republican party. Just like every sealed court document for any Republican is always revealed by a “Leak” just before an election but NEVER a Demorat’s!

    janitor in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 4, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    What do we think the chances are that the NY Times would not leak this recording during the general election should Trump win the nomination?

    Well if they do (unlikely) and if there were nefariously flexible off-record comments, then I guess a whole lot of wavering independents and Democrats who hate Clinton will vote for Trump.

    It’s more likely that there was a lengthy conversation off the record that included casual or personal information, e.g. of Trump’s family, and he’s not going to agree to release something that if edited will not allay the hopeful carryings on.

      It’s more likely that there was a lengthy conversation off the record that included casual or personal information, e.g. of Trump’s family

      Far out. You do get that that’s the exact same excuse Hillary Clinton originally used for not releasing her emails, yes?

      “Clinton she did not preserve half of the 60,000 emails she sent during her tenure because they were personal and dealt with things like planning her daughter’s wedding and her mother’s funeral, and contain personal correspondence with her husband and friends.”

Well I guess Trump won the debate. You know we would see a ton of new strories about the debate if he lost.

    inspectorudy in reply to HandyGandy. | March 4, 2016 at 11:43 am

    Well handy we are now seeing the “Clarifying” statements today of what Trump REALLY meant last night. This is becoming a pattern for him. He is no longer able to remember his last position on any issue and daily makes contradictory statements. This is what happens when you speeches are a script and not what you believe. obama has the exact same problem.

      Merlin in reply to inspectorudy. | March 4, 2016 at 12:07 pm

      Triangulation, at least as the Clintons use it, doesn’t seem to fit Donald Trump. What do we call perpetually shifting positions that are simply explained away as “negotiation”?

      Serious question now. Is there a single term that adequately describes the mirage that is Trump?

    Rush just said that he thought Cruz won the debate “hands down”.

    try again.

      MarlaHughes in reply to jennifer a johnson. | March 4, 2016 at 4:53 pm

      As a frequent and vocal Cruz critic, I completely agree. For the first time he showed himself as a top tier debater with a great grasp of the issues as well as good timing and a pretty good comedic touch, too.
      I hated that Rubio was ill (flu) but Cruz stepped up in their tag team match and it still worked smoothly and almost seamlessly. *Excellent*.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend