Image 01 Image 03

VP Debate Quick Reaction

VP Debate Quick Reaction

Pence for the win.

It wasn’t even close.

Mike Pence trounced Tim Kaine.

If Trump had given the performance in the first debate that Pence gave tonight, Trump would be leading in the polls instead of sinking.

Pence made the case against Hillary on Obamacare, foreign policy, law enforcement, immigration, the email server and a host of other issues, including her claim that half of Trump supporters are “deplorables.”

Kaine was incredibly rude and annoying — his constant flow of interruptions are being criticized even by Hillary supporters.

Leaves me wondering about what might have been, and whether Trump has it in him to pull a Pence in the next debate with Hillary.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I saw a tweet which said it all. To paraphrase,
Right now I think Hillary is considering “droning” Kaine.

Actually I think it’s kind of agreed that Trump won the first debate. Though he could have been better. He certainly got a bounce.

Sorry for flooding. I thought more people would comment, but maybe after that their brains are still groggy.

As I pointed out in the other thread, the #neverTrump ers hoping Hillary wins and drops dead have to think again.

    #NeverTrumpers that I know are #NeverCinton as well. We simply cannot believe that the country wants a self-centered septuagenarian with a 13 year old mentality running the greatest country in the world. Why did you folks put such an ugly choice before us?

    I am voting for Gary Johnson because he, at least, admits when he doesn’t relate to Allepo, while Donald talks for five minutes about the nuclear triad when he hasn’t a clue what it is. And Johnson hasn’t insulted anyone during the campaign. Honesty is where we have to start if the country is to turn around and we have two liberals heading up the major parties. Sad.

      jack burns in reply to gad-fly. | October 4, 2016 at 11:56 pm

      Who cares.

      MarkSmith in reply to gad-fly. | October 4, 2016 at 11:57 pm

      Did you say something?

      VaGentleman in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 12:30 am

      I disagree. If you want to change things you have to ELECT candidates. Protest votes don’t send messages. Perot got 19% on a platform of small gov’t and adherence to the Constitution. He didn’t get elected. He changed nothing. Clinton got elected. He changed everything. If you don’t have a good choice, elect the one who does the least damage while you work to get better choices in the next election. If you aren’t willing to work for your candidates and causes between elections, then you get what you earned.

        Clinton was running against Bush, a serious candidate.

          VaGentleman in reply to edgeofthesandbox. | October 5, 2016 at 9:21 pm

          Clinton was running against Bush and Perot. Perot siphoned enough votes to elect Clinton. Conservatives that year decided to punish Bush for breaking his ‘no new taxes’ stance and protest voted for Perot. (sound familiar?) Like all protest votes, the worst candidate got elected and the Clinton era began. How did that work out? Would conservatives have been better with 4 more years of Bush or the 8 years of Clinton? Did your protest votes change anything for the better? Apparently some think another Clinton term is just what we need. It makes a lie out of ‘voting your principles’ when history shows that it’s a great way to destroy what you believe in.

          The major party candidates were Clinto and Bush. Bush, unlike Trump, was a serious candidate.
          I don’t think you understand NeverTrump. It’s not that we want a Hillary presidency, it’s not that we are posers. We just don’t think Trump is better than Hillary and he shouldn’t be our president.
          Bush wasn’t destroying conservative movement; Trump is. It’s very much possible that if Trump is elected, there will no longer be a conservative movement.

          VaGentleman in reply to edgeofthesandbox. | October 6, 2016 at 6:43 am

          If Trump’s not a serious candidate, why couldn’t any of the 16 dwarfs defeat him? Other than the fact that you disagree with him, what makes him a less than serious candidate? Am I to believe the disinformation campaign the MSM is running against him? This less than serious candidate got 13 million votes in the primaries – almost 2x what Cruz got. This less than serious candidate sells out his rallies and has to turn away supporters. This less than serious candidate has, despite the backstabbing, the disinformation campaign from the MSM and being outspent by his opponent, battled to at least a tie if not a slight edge. By any standards, that’s a very serious candidate. He is leading a populist revolution that scares the s@@t out of the establishment. Their gravy train is in danger. They have to destroy him.

          Despite your hyperbolic rhetoric, neither Trump nor Clinton can destroy the conservative movement. Clinton, however, can neuter it with supreme court appointments. It’s almost certain the next pres will appoint at least 3 justices. Putting that in her hands will give us a court that kills any conservative legislation and continues the left’s reinterpretation of the constitution for at least 40 years. #NeverTrump doesn’t have a plan to deal with that. Perhaps because the best you could hope for is a slow, fighting retreat that doesn’t turn into a rout. If we did manage to score a victory along the way, it would be overturned by the supremes. Such is life under a Hillary court.

          That’s why I think #NeverTrump is a threat to both the constitution and conservativism, not their salvation.

          jack burns in reply to edgeofthesandbox. | October 6, 2016 at 10:45 am

          Bush was a serious candidate in that he had the backing of the GOP machine and deep pockets. Result, he shattered the ME leaving how many American lives lost or shattered, and he wrecked the economy. But I guess he left “real conservativism” intact so he was a good guy. Revealing that you say that if Trump is elected “there will no longer be a conservative movement”. The connotation is that if Hillary, an avowed progressive, is elected the conservative movement will thrive. Then I have to ask what the goals are of the conservative movement, protecting the interests and values of the United States, or protecting and nurturing their own, which apparently are at least partially in alignment with progressivism?

      BillyHW in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 12:48 am

      Gary Johnson is a complete idiot, and voting for him makes you a complete idiot.

      Barry in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 1:00 am

      So, we have a pothead in office now, and you want another one.
      Great choice. /s

      Johnson is dumber that a damn brick.

      RodFC in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 1:02 am

      Anyone who thinks both #neverTrump and #neverClinton is deluding themselves. It’s one or the other.

      As Rush says, if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

        RodFC in reply to RodFC. | October 5, 2016 at 1:03 am

        Ah just realized that can be confused. I meant Rush the rock group not Rush the radio personality.

          inspectorudy in reply to RodFC. | October 5, 2016 at 10:33 am

          You are a lot like Trump in that when you say something that is true or has meaning, you then say something stupid that erases it. Your comment on not voting was good one but then you screw it up with your childish nonsense.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to RodFC. | October 5, 2016 at 6:33 pm

        As I try to piece together this nonsense notion, I’m told a ‘non-vote’ for Trump is a vote for Clinton. However, this equation must also hold that a ‘non-vote’ for Clinton is a vote for Trump. Therefore, voters like me who are both never-Trump and never-Hillary aren’t hurting either.

        Proponents of this nonsense need to get honest. You want us to vote for your candidate. The equation is just pseudo-logic used to remedy two things: (1) Your candidate, whether Trump or Clinton, has failed to win my vote. (2) Your candidate’s supporters have failed to convince me to vote for your candidate.

        Either Clinton or Trump will lose. The fault will lie with that candidate’s inability to win enough votes. Duh. It is never EVER the voters’ fault when a candidate loses. It just that losers need someone other than themselves to blame. This is the mindset and behavior of children.

        Here’s a suggestion. How about people vote for whomever the hell they wish, since they’ll be condemned by the moron portion of either party no matter what they do?

          /this. A thousand times this.

          jack burns in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 5, 2016 at 9:51 pm

          Not to worry. Nobody will mistake you as being responsible for anything.

          VaGentleman in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 6, 2016 at 8:00 am


          I must disagree. It does not necessarily follow that the only result is that you aren’t hurting either. At the very least, you could be hurting both or hurting a 3rd party. Since harm to a 3rd party is a logical possibility, your claim that your action is neutral must also be tested against that possibility. Since the purpose of the election is to elect a leader for the country, the obvious 3rd party is the nation. Based on facts available today, either Trump or Clinton will be elected. For your action to be ‘neutral’, there must be no difference to the nation between electing Trump and electing Clinton. Is that your claim?

          If voters are not responsible for a candidate’s losing, are they responsible for a candidate’s winning? Do voters have a duty to look past a candidate’s campaign rhetoric when deciding or is it just a beauty contest where the candidate puts on his / her best bathing suit and struts down the walkway? In other words, is it all up to the candidate to convince me or do I have a duty to step back and do my own analysis? It strikes me that, as an adult, I can’t just rely on the candidate. And that means that if I do a poor analysis it’s my fault, and I am responsible.

          As for your suggestion: if I were that cynical, I wouldn’t believe in representative government.

      mailman in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 7:04 am

      A vote for anyone other than Trump IS hiLIARy.

      It might make you feel good about yourself to vote for Johnson and no dount you have rationalised this to hell BUT you might just as well vote for the old hag and just be done with it.

      buckeyeminuteman in reply to gad-fly. | October 5, 2016 at 7:39 am

      At a time when ISIS is taking over the Middle East and invading Europe and the Russian and Chinese militaries are taking part in joint exercises; you really think it’s a good idea to let Gary Johnson cut the defense budget by 42%? You must be joking.

yes trump did win the debate on substance and policy – but overall he lost it because he came across as a baffoon

“Mike Pence trounced Tim Kaine.

If Trump had given the performance in the first debate that Pence gave tonight, Trump would be leading in the polls instead of sinking.”

Agreed, Pence is a polished speaker and a smart guy. Easy to see why Trump picked him, and that choice makes Trump look good.

I disagree with the “Trump sinking” however. The same main stream media that is dishonest produces polls that are honest? I don’t think so. They are thoroughly corrupt. On everything.

    inspectorudy in reply to Barry. | October 5, 2016 at 10:38 am

    I agree with the statement that Pence trounced Kaine. The problem with Pence is that he could put everyone to sleep in a hurry. He is intelligent and articulate but has the speaking manner of a first-grade teacher during nap time. Kaine was so objectionable that I wanted to slap him and that stupid woman who lost control of the “Debate” in 30 seconds of opening. She was almost as embarrassing as Kaine and her employer should give her a closer look at any future outings that require journalistic skills.

    Arminius in reply to Barry. | October 5, 2016 at 11:59 am

    You Trumptards are HILLARYous! Throughout the primary season Trump bragged about the polls. You Trumptards bragged about the polls. Do I really need to dredge up the evidence that we all know exists? The polls were golden, pure as the driven snow. Now the polls are corrupt and dishonest.

    This was all so, so, what’s the word? Oh, yeah, that’s it. Predictable.

    As are all the thumbs down I’m going to get for resorting to basic facts.

    And the thing is you know your candidate sucks. You constantly bring up #NeverTrumpers. Actually, it really is #CanISuppressTheGagReflex. Losers blame the voters That’s just a fact. Hillary Clinton is rightly getting castigated for her “Basket of deplorables” comment. But look in a mirror, Trumptards. You’re no different. All you have are insults, just like Hillary Clinton.

      jack burns in reply to Arminius. | October 5, 2016 at 12:58 pm

      Are you the same guy who usually posts measured, thoughtful comments here and maybe you’ve just had a TIA? Little hypomanic there son.

      inspectorudy in reply to Arminius. | October 5, 2016 at 4:08 pm

      “But look in a mirror, Trumptards. You’re no different. All you have are insults, just like Hillary Clinton.”

      I assume that you are very young and stupid. You just insulted everyone who has a brain. You have to be a Bernie supporter because nothing you say has the slightest chance of ever happening.

      Barry in reply to Arminius. | October 6, 2016 at 2:33 pm

      “You Trumptards bragged about the polls. Do I really need to dredge up the evidence that we all know exists? The polls were golden, pure as the driven snow. Now the polls are corrupt and dishonest.”

      Yes, dredge up the evidence were I have ever said “polls were golden, pure as the driven snow”. Please waste your time as you did with that particular comment…

      You think media polls are honest? Done by the same dishonest media in everything else? There is a bridge in Brooklyn for sale…

      Some polls are better than others in that they try to be honest. None done by the media are. And all polls suffer from their modeling. Does the model fit todays environment? Beats me. I take polling with a big grain of salt no matter what the results show, including when trump is up.

      The only “poll” I have faith in is the one I see on the ground and that poll is why I predicted way back around Oct that Trump would be the R nominee. And that poll is why I predicted Trump would be the next president.

      “And the thing is you know your candidate sucks.”
      Projection. I like trump. I think he will make a great president for the American people. I’ll just compare him to the list of recent republican nominee’s and presidents:

      Bush 2
      Bush 1

      Nope, not a “conservative” in the bunch. Every one a loser except for Bush 2. Not a single one that would fight back against the corrupt DC establishment. All part of the same group as the clinton crime syndicate. Three of which reportedly support Shrillary…

Agree. Pence did very well, and sounded solid and presidential. Shame he is not going to be a VP this year.

Kaine came off like a hysterical ward healer.

David Breznick | October 4, 2016 at 11:27 pm

Sen. Kaine was attempting to replicate Joe Biden’s successful technique of bullying and constantly interrupting Paul Ryan during their VP candidate debate four years ago.

Senator, I served with Joe Biden. I knew Joe Biden. Joe Biden was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Joe Biden.

    This is what I thought and it came across the same way as it did 4 years ago…as a tosser.

    If hiLIARy was looking to turn off independents and democrats who aren’t convinced who to vote for then she took another step towards that goal last night.

Pence is an adult. Not so Trump, Kaine and Hillary.

Maybe if Kaine got heat exhaustion like Hacking Hillary got at the 9/11 ceremonies maybe he would have gotten some sympathy.

Listening to CSPAN callins, it was interesting. It seems that most of the Dem. callers were DNC plants. I use surprised to hear so many independents pulling for Trump. One caller that have never voted and is 53 says he is voting for Trump. My brother is the same way. He never votes, but this year, he is voting for Trump. They are just sick and tired of the same old stuff.

Bottom line, who cares who won the debate, I doubt it is going to change any votes.

Not sure about Kaine though, some might question if there is a straight jacket waiting for him behind the stage. He really does not look like a balanced dude.

    fwiffo in reply to MarkSmith. | October 5, 2016 at 2:02 am

    Let me see if I understand this correctly. Dem. callers were DNC plants, but the 53 year old guy who never voted, but this year watches CSPAN and votes Trump is not a plant. Is that correct take?

      Valerie in reply to fwiffo. | October 5, 2016 at 4:56 am

      It’s not the opinion: it’s the language. Detecting plants has become a skill people have. The Democrats use so many of them.

      inspectorudy in reply to fwiffo. | October 6, 2016 at 12:13 am

      All you have to do to determine who is the plant is just listen to their comment. A Trump supporter will talk about America and the desire to make it great again or to bring back the feeling that
      Reagan gave us. A hillary supporter will talk about specifics and trash Trump and Republicans in the process. Trump supporters always talk about emotions and feelings whereas hillary supporters talk about negative issues such a war on women or disrespecting Hispanics at Trump’s expense. All you have to do is look at the latest Demorat plant that was a 13-year-old girl who asked hillary about “Womens’s Bodies” and how evil it is for Trump to trash women because of differing sizes. It turned out to be a hillary supporter who had used his daughter in his own failed Congressional campaign.

    buckeyeminuteman in reply to MarkSmith. | October 5, 2016 at 7:44 am

    I have a message for you to tell your friends who have never voted before, “thanks for giving us Obama.” If you don’t vote you don’t get to complain, I don’t want to hear it.

      MarkSmith in reply to buckeyeminuteman. | October 5, 2016 at 8:59 am

      Yea, lets talk sense to someone that hasn’t voted for 30+ years. Bottom line, reality of how government really is has finally taken hold and maybe he will be more proactive.

      The talking points on the CSPAN callers on the Dem. line are so predictable. Either they are scripted or just plan sheep. They sound so much more scripted than the other callers.

      Sorry, I don’t blame him for not voting. I voted against Obama and if my guy lost, it is because my team was not strong enough. In this case, it was the Republican Party. I blame the coach and the players and myself for not doing enough to convince others to vote for my candidate. Personal responsibility is what matters.

      The blame game is an distraction. Time to be focused.

        buckeyeminuteman in reply to MarkSmith. | October 5, 2016 at 1:51 pm

        Good perspective, I like that. Sad that 4 years of Obama wasn’t enough to wake people up. It took 8 years to do that trick. The opposing side does need someone who is better at getting their message across. If it weren’t for the liberal media yelling in our faces, I think we may be able to do that this time around.

As a thought experiment, try and imagine how Pence would have done if he didn’t have to defend every idiotic thing that Trump has said for the past eight months. Seriously, there’s only so much you can do when you’re lashed to the mast.

If Pence had just been able to focus on Obama & Hillary, he absolutely would have won. Instead, he spent half the night trying to defend Trump’s tax returns or spin that his business losses were somehow a smart financial move, while trying to dodge every quote that Kaine could put to Trump about NATO, the Mexicans, Nuclear Weapons, etc. When Pence hit Clinton on her foundation, Kaine was right there with the Trump foundation making the political donation to the Florida AG. This should have and would have been a rout, if not for Trump’s basket of undefendables.

And whoever wrote that Kaine has a 50% favorable in Virginia needs to check the batteries in their calculator. I’d have a beer with Allen or even Warner or Webb and I don’t even like beer, but if Kaine showed up at my house with a case of Moet and a plate of tiger rolls I’d turn off the lights and pretend I wasn’t home. Five minutes of watching him in the debate pretty much shows you how those of us from VA will always think of him, although maybe he looks good in comparison to McCauliffe.

    Valerie in reply to tyates. | October 5, 2016 at 4:59 am

    There is a big difference between what Trump said, and the idiotic things Kaine claimed he said.

      tyates in reply to Valerie. | October 5, 2016 at 6:50 am

      Kaine stretched some things, but mostly got the quotes right since they’re not exactly hard to miss. Things like saying McCain wasn’t a hero because he was captured, that Curiel couldn’t try Trump’s case because his family was Mexican, that Obama wasn’t a US citizen (well, in Trump speak “some say he isn’t a US citizen, who knows?”), women should be punished for having abortions, illegal aliens would be rounded up and deported, etc.

      The stretches were minor I’d say – Trump did want to privatize social security a while back but no longer has that position, and Trump has gone back and forth on the minimum wage. Trump wanting to pull out of NATO is maybe the most egregious since that’s more interpretation, but there’s no question Trump did question how relevant the alliance was.

      But my point is that Trump did say this stuff, more or less, and Pence had to waste his time defending it None of the items above are Republican policy positions, they are just Trump being Trump, but because the GOP is now shackled to a clod, we have to take time out of one of the few opportunities we have to engage with the left and make our case directly to the American people to address Trump’s nonsense.

        mailman in reply to tyates. | October 5, 2016 at 7:10 am

        Its funny how hiLIARy uses all these supposed “stupid” comments yet Im pretty sure Trump wasn’t asleep at 3am while Americans were being butchered in Benghazi.

        Im also sure Trump never destroyed a 12yo girl to get a pedophile off the hook.

        Or that Trump destroyed the lives of rape victims.

        inspectorudy in reply to tyates. | October 6, 2016 at 12:27 am

        “Kaine stretched some things, but mostly got the quotes right since they’re not exactly hard to miss. Things like saying McCain wasn’t a hero because he was captured, that Curiel couldn’t try Trump’s case because his family was Mexican, that Obama wasn’t a US citizen (well, in Trump speak “some say he isn’t a US citizen, who knows?”), women should be punished for having abortions, illegal aliens would be rounded up and deported, etc.”
        You are wrong on every single quote. I do not like Trump but he is being painted with a sloganeer’s brush. You have fallen into the same trap. You got just a little of each quote and then you shut down. None of the things you quoted were complete quotes and the context was omitted. He didn’t say McCain wasn’t a hero because he was captured but that being captured does not make you a hero. I totally agree with that statement and I was flying in the same skies as McCain. Trump was ASKED by a host if some future law forbade abortions what would he do about it. Trump said if it was the LAW of the land, women would have to be punished according to that law. About the birther issue. There has been no other presidential candidate in our history who SEALED his records from public scrutiny. The absurd birth certificate that was released was an obvious fake and the WH ran with that to make everyone involved look stupid. Trump NEVER claimed that ALL Mexicans were rapists or criminals but that is what the msm and every sorry Demorat says he says. He NEVER said he would round up and deport every single illegal. He said that was the law and we are a law-abiding country. All of the little quotes that Kaine used were half truths and make great sound bites but to come on this website and claim they are true is just an insult to any of us who can read above the 5th-grade level. Pick a site that more reflects your abilities like the beast or HuffPo.

          Mike Pence could have spent the whole debate trying to provide context for Trump’s quotes, but he didn’t – why do you think that is? Maybe the context wasn’t as helpful as you think? Even a political junkie like me who reads 20+ articles a day can’t place every one of Trump’s dumb remarks in context, but I do know that the McCain comments came in the context of a childish twitter war in which Trump actually called McCain a “dummy” for his poor grades at Annapolis. Do you think it would have been helpful for Pence to bring that up?

          Trump got the nomination and after that he was supposed to then go unite the party, cross blue state lines, and win the election. What part of that is incomprehensible to you Trumpsters? If you want to get the Never Trumpers on board or at least isolate them then go and do that and believe me, I’ll be right here – no, not at Huffpost sorry – cheering you on all the way. But seriously, the hubris of you guys who can’t meet the expectations that you yourselves set is way off the charts and I’m thinking the nemesis that follows will equivalent.

          “Mike Pence could have spent the whole debate trying to provide context for Trump’s quotes, but he didn’t – why do you think that is?”

          Probably because he was smart enough to know that kaine would just repeat the same false quote just like you do. Nothing to be gained, better to discuss the issues as he did. As a result, he won the debate large.

          You seem to think a lie repeated makes it the truth. Something you TDS sufferers have in common with the left. Hard to tell the difference.

          If you will not defend Trump against dishonest quoting, you’ll not defend any other American against them. When they came for me there was no one left…

        jack burns in reply to tyates. | October 6, 2016 at 10:47 am

        Which has more weight, words or deeds?

    inspectorudy in reply to tyates. | October 5, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    A great comment! Pence was one of my early hopefuls to run in the primary but did not. He is such a steady man with a lot to show for it and then, like you said, has to defend the indefensible crap that Trump has thrown out. Instead of being able to explain the hillary and jetboy have no agenda except obama’s, he had to try and explain away all the stupid comment Trump has made.

DieJustAsHappy | October 5, 2016 at 5:35 am

The big loser in last night’s debate? America. Mike Pence is in a class by himself compared to the other three. Yet, sadly he won’t be POTUS, at least this time around.

Pence I’d vote for in a heartbeat. Trump? I’ll be fighting with myself all the way to the polling station and arm wrestle with myself to cast the ballot for him. Whatever the outcome, we’re likely in for another four years of utter disgust for who occupies the Oval Office.

    MarkSmith in reply to DieJustAsHappy. | October 5, 2016 at 9:07 am

    “The big loser in last night’s debate? America.”

    Gee, my favorite color is green and the sky is blue!

    I am sick of hearing that. Get involved and stop whining if you do not like what is out there. All politics is local.

    Boo Whooooo another 4 years…… Yea, you’re struggling. We are all dealing with it. Last good President was Washington. Still waiting for the next one.

I cannot watch Tim Kaine because of his unfortunate, unmistakable resemblance to Liberace. This aversion reminds me of what Oscar Levant said of a popular 1950s entertainer who had a cloying manner: “I can’t watch Dinah Shore because I have diabetes.”

    buckeyeminuteman in reply to nisquire. | October 5, 2016 at 7:48 am

    He does look exactly like Liberace. We really need to keep that going for the next month, it’s hillaryous!

One of Pence’s best moments was a subtle one, where he slipped in that Trump is not a “polished politician like you and Hillary Clinton” so its not surprising that he would have the occasional gaffe. He slipped the punch and positioned Trump, and himself, as agents of change.

After the debate, I checked the various MSM to hear their feedback. Public Broadcasting, NBC, ABC and CNN. They all said the same thing like they were reading from the same script. “Pence did not defend Trump”

Well I think Trump is a big boy and does not need defending.

The senergy the DNC has with the media is madding.

Here is the latest email that Kaine sent out last night. I like the comment” nasty, divisive platform championed”

It screams victimized. I wonder how they will handle true nastiness when some terrorist is killing children and widows.


Last night, I defended the ideas and the ideals that Hillary and I hold most dear — after arguing against the nasty, divisive platform championed by the other side.

xxxxxxx, Hillary and I have spent our entire lives fighting for the kind of inclusive values that men like Donald and Pence have flat out rejected. She and I have tried to devote our careers to embracing the diversity which Donald shuns.

I promise that Hillary and I will bring these battles and beliefs to the White House, too. But we need your help to get there. If you’re with Hillary and me, and the Democrats in your community who are fighting with us, chip in $3 or more now, and let’s show Donald and Pence just how powerful a positive, progressive campaign can be.

Just because you think Trump is a dumbass idiot doesn’t mean you support Hillary. That is the stupidest assertion I have heard this election season. These Trumpbots got their man nominated, but somehow it’s my fault he isn’t wiping the floor with the weakest candidate ever nominated for president (besides him). You got what you wanted, an outsider who will kick ass and fix things. Yeah, right. Because of YOU, with support from the Hannity mob, we will end up with this hag as president. I told you this would happen, it ain’t my fault, or Jonah Goldberg’s, or Erick Erickson’s. It’s is squarely on the shoulders of the Trump Brigade. Enjoy!

    tyates in reply to Jedbone. | October 5, 2016 at 4:38 pm

    Well put. One thing Trump supporters don’t realize is that all of those GOP leadership endorsements in May & June were made because Trump stood in front of Ryan, McConnell, Sessions, etc and promised to run a serious campaign, turn blue states red, etc. They didn’t endorse Trump as he as, but how they wanted him to be. And because those promises were not kept, GOP leadership has rightfully turned their back on them and the game is basically over.

    Now I’m not saying Ryan is going to pen a NeverTrump op-ed anytime soon – they don’t work that way. But the reason Giuliani is stumping for Trump is that there’s noone else. McConnell won’t even discuss Trump. From their perspective, they gave him a chance and they blew it. If he wins, maybe he gets another chance – he would be President after all. But if he loses, which seems almost assured, there’s no future for him, and he and his supporters should expect to reap the whirlwind.

      MarkSmith in reply to tyates. | October 5, 2016 at 4:49 pm

      One thing Trump supporters don’t realize is that all of those GOP leadership endorsements in May & June were made because Trump stood in front of Ryan, McConnell, Sessions, etc and promised to run a serious campaign, turn blue states red, etc.

      Glad you are on top of things. I saw Sessions a few days ago promoting Trump. So where are you getting your information? Another attempt to distort the truth. You better catch-up on the latest news.

        tyates in reply to MarkSmith. | October 5, 2016 at 6:59 pm

        Not sure what your point is. Sessions has been a Trump guy since 2015 and is a policy advisor so of course he’s campaigning for him. He was one of the people that stood right next to Trump and made the same promises. Here’s a quote from him in May. Do you think those promises were kept?

        “Trump is going to appeal better to African-Americans, Hispanics and others than previous Republican candidates because he’s talking about what they want: a fair chance to have a better life economically,” he said.

        In case you don’t know how the story ends, in August Nate Silver averaged four polls to caculate Trump’s support among black voters to be about 2%, behind Hillary (86%), Stein (5%), and Johnson (4%).

    MarkSmith in reply to Jedbone. | October 5, 2016 at 5:11 pm

    Jebbone said” These Trumpbots got their man nominated, but somehow it’s my fault he isn’t wiping the floor with the weakest candidate ever nominated for president (besides him).

    No, what is your fault is trying to promote a weak candidate that would not win. Some of us realize this and supported someone that does. Trump is far from the perfect candidate, but if Clinton wins and you do nothing to stop her, then yes, you are part of the problem. Take some responsibility for yourself and quit whining.

    Shall I have a Molson in honor of your number one choice? Where I live I see one small Hillary sign for every 20 large Trump signs and I live in a Blue state that averages 2 Blues to 1 Red. I want to win this because I can’t stand the Democrats. I think Trump can do it, unlike the weak RINO’s that were put forth. You can try to blame Trump or TrumpBots, it it is you who has fail if you do not get what you want. Own up to it.

    As for the weakest candidate. BS. Behind Hillary is Wall Street, MSM, and celebrities combine by the #NeverTrump stupid republicans that don’t support their own system of choosing a candidate. Sorry, I don’t see Hillary as a push over. Nice try to make it something that it is not.

    Arminius in reply to Jedbone. | October 5, 2016 at 9:35 pm

    Welcome to the era of the stupid assertion. The entire Obama presidency has been one stupid assertion after another, and it looks like no matter who wins in November the era of the stupid assertion will continue for at leas the next four years, and probably for the rest of our lives.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Jedbone. | October 5, 2016 at 10:00 pm

    Trump is basically replaying the Obama approach – present a tabla rasa, made so in Trump’s case by changing his positions so often he becomes a blank slate, in essence, upon whom his supporters glue on their hopes and dreams. Trump is selling vague hope and change, but he can’t call it that because it’s already taken. I’m all for hope and change, but I’d like some sort of clarity and certainty as to what those changes will be.

“Leaves me wondering about what might have been, and whether Trump has it in him to pull a Pence in the next debate with Hillary.”
I think by now it’s abundantly clear that Trum is no Pence. Pence, whatever you say about him, is a learned, serious person. Trump is Trump. It’s now dawning on his supporters that he is going to lose. Check out this tweeter storm by Norte:

    “It’s now dawning on his supporters that he is going to lose.”

    More bullshit from the kook.

    Trump fills every venue to overflowing with supporters. They do not think he is going to lose. TDS blinds you to reality. You search for confirmation of your bias. Any tidbit, no matter how ridiculous will do.

    He might lose, but supporters do not think so.

I think Pence said it perfectly when he mentioned that Trump is not a politician, your going to hear what he thinks not what he thinks you think. We’ve gone through all the presidential sounding candidates, presidential looking candidates, presidential acting candidates etc. Why can’t we get away from the trained monkeys and let someone lead that hasn’t either helped to screw up the country or caved in and sold out their beliefs for one more election cycle? We’re all so damn proud of our beliefs that we’d rather attack each other and let the worst possible person win the presidency. SMH

Henry Hawkins | October 5, 2016 at 6:38 pm

Not a rhetorical question: Have we ever elected a true ‘outsider’ to the presidency, and if we have, how did he do?

    DieJustAsHappy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 5, 2016 at 6:53 pm

    “Since the start of the 20th century, there have been four presidential nominees who never held elective office. Three of them, former Secretary of War William Howard Taft, former Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover and General Dwight Eisenhower, held other major position in government.

    The fourth nominee is clearly the official that Fiorina and Carson would hope to emulate—at least in terms of winning a nomination, not his general election performance—is Wendell Willkie, the Republican’s 1940 standard-bearer. Willkie was a corporate utility executive and lawyer before being tapped to run. His campaign, which took place before primaries and caucuses were the main method for choosing candidates, wasn’t based on grassroots support. Rather as the only internationalist in a field of Republican isolationists, Willkie won the backing of the Republican establishment.”


      Henry Hawkins in reply to DieJustAsHappy. | October 5, 2016 at 10:06 pm

      Thank you for that. I admit google laziness. I might consider Ike an insider given his lifelong employment in the military at high levels and then the WH. I guess I’m saying that ‘outsider’ and ‘never held office’ aren’t 100% overlap for me. But thanks for digging that up.

        DieJustAsHappy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 6, 2016 at 5:21 am

        You’re welcome. Due to the absence of an edit feature for comments, I didn’t include the following in my original post. It’s from the same article.

        “Only former Collector of the Port of New York Chester A. Arthur, who stepped up to the presidency after the death of James Garfield, never really held a position of importance before rising to the top (outside of his brief stint as vice president).”

    Well, technically, Zachary Taylor was an outsider, but he dropped dead before he could do much of anything. Not that anyone knew what he’d do if he had lived.

    “Outsiders” have always held a certain romantic attraction to people fed up with the system or whatever, but they don’t get elected because they are typically unpolished and unskilled in the political arena to the point that they seem unfit for office on any number of levels (Ross Perot, Jesse Jackson, Ralph Nader, Ben Carson come immediately to mind, but there’s a long list of other “outsiders” who’ve crashed and burned. Trump is only an outsider if you pretend that he didn’t buy influence and political favors for decades and ensure that he donated only to all the more influential people who would do him favors down the road, most of whom were Democrats. Obviously people do pretend this.).

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 5, 2016 at 10:13 pm

      I suspect that the definition of ‘outsider’ is one of those eye of the beholder thangs.

      I was curious about why it is assumed an outsider would do better when there is so little data to support it. It may be a blind assumption born of frustration that an outsider *has* to better than an insider.

      Theme for Fuzzy to consider for an article – how American politics and culture is being reduced to very basic, often binary, positions, no nuance, no… ahem… diversity of ideas, just binary camps in constant opposition and polarity, one must fully support or fully oppose, no middle ground positions allowed.

      We like the idea of outsiders. Obama was a bit of an outsider. A young “community organizer” from Chicago who voted “present” most of the time. How did that work out?

        I was thinking the same thing. His “outsider” of voting present kept him from being pinned down on any issue, he could squirm his way out of any labeling. Add in his race, looked good in profile, could read the hell out of a teleprompter and had a fire proof media blanket then you’ve got a slam dunk. What a lot of voters didn’t want to see about him was that he was made to be President, like a science experiment, a political chameleon. He was made from the lost chapter of the Anarchists Cookbook.

      You might also be able to claim Eisenhower as the most successful outsider candidate and President. For most of his career he was a general or heading the military in some way (in both Democratic and Republican administrations) and uninvolved in politics, even saying that it wasn’t the role of military men to run for office.

      With Sen. Taft, the anti-NATO conservative minority leader looking like he could be the next president, Lodge and other Republicans basically drafted Ike as the nominee, even entering his name into the New Hampshire primary without his permission – which he then won even though he wasn’t even in the country.

      He resigned his NATO post in June and started campaigning, won the nomination in July, and the general election in November. The Republicans also took control of the Senate, and to their credit, both Eisenhower and Taft made amends quickly and accomplished a great deal to the point where the former is considered one of the top ten Presidents and the latter one of the five greatest Senators. (Yes, we still like Ike!)

Reality is beginning to set in for all of us who are rational. There isn’t going to be any campaign stopping expose from Assange and there isn’t going to be any “Big” change in Trump’s personality. Life is what it is and this ain’t no movie. hillary is disgusting and without a soul. Trump is as shallow as bar stain. He is not going to become a Reagan in the next debate and we all know it. He is a used car salesman and an egotist. He craves the limelight and common sense is not a common virtue for him. If he wins, the Republicans in Congress along WITH the Demorats will control him. If hilary wins there will be no Demorat support to control her. They are so left wing that they will follow her to the abyss. If for no other reason, a vote for Trump is a vote for Congressional oversight and a vote for hillary is a vote for a runaway third world mindset leading to our ruin.

After reading the lamentations of #nevertrump’ers I’m put to mind a quote from their archbishop in the magazine that contains their liturgy: “And I will say the politics of it would be very, very different if a bunch of lawyers or bankers were crossing the Rio Grande. Or if a bunch of people with journalism degrees were coming over and driving down the wages in the press. Then we would see stories about the economic calamity that is befalling our nation.” You are not immediately threatened by a flood of illegal or say H1-B or H2-B legal immigrants so conservatism Inc is comfortable with sustaining or nurturing the status quo, even if it means aiding an avowed enemy of America. Sorry, but I can’t avoid that conclusion.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to jack burns. | October 6, 2016 at 2:04 pm

    Well, that says more about you than folks who can’t support Trump. You assign errant beliefs to non-Trumpers, which directs you to an errant conclusion.

      jack burns in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 6, 2016 at 2:33 pm

      I quoted Cruz’s observation which I think applies to #nevertrumpers. It was less about their beliefs than their lack of them. But please, set me straight, what makes a #nevertrumper love a Johnson? We can tick off the things that they reserve a monopoly on such as small government, self determination, etc. but what’s the prime mover? I’d say that its a determination that the status quo just isn’t bad enough to rock the boat.