Third Party & Independents Archives

The Texas Debate: It's Still Trump's Boot Camp

They say stress can be a positive thing if you know how to handle it, and there is no question that the GOP race has been heaping the stress on the remaining candidates as Super Tuesday is days away now. And it showed in the debate in Houston on Thursday. No candidate had a lousy night - not even Ben Carson who was as sharp as he’s been with the moments he had. Kasich was as convincing as he’s been, especially on economic issues.


But it was the Big 3 who had a barn-burner of a night. Even if it seemed to get a little too Larry, Curly, & Moe in the free for all between them just before the question on Apple and the FBI. And yes, Rubio won the debate, and seemed to corral a fairly willing Ted Cruz into a tag team that went after Trump like never before in the campaign. So even with the tag team, it was Rubio leading the fight.

Because Ted Cruz - for all his the scourge-of-the-Senate persona - just maybe is a touch too decent to truly enjoy the blood sport. That seems ridiculous right? Ted Cruz, decent? Is it his terrible dark secret? Is he not quite as tough as he seems? Or was his campaign turmoil, with underhanded tactics that recently backfired and caused him to have to fire staff, still nagging him up there on the stage?

Rubio, on the other hand, revels in the brawling as much as Trump does. And has nearly as much substance to back it up as Ted Cruz does. Whether Rubio is as authentically conservative as Ted Cruz is a good question. But as of tonight, he's the one most likely to stop Trump, as much of the GOP establishment have been desperately hoping.

To consider this debate a turning point - as many pundits who have been deeply opposed to Trump all along will surely proclaim it to be - is premature. Maybe even outright wrong. Rubio used just about every weapon in his arsenal, and played it as tough and dirty as possible. And if this doesn't work, it's over and Trump is the nominee. But it just may be enough of a change up to at least prolong the uncertainty. And give Rubio - less so Cruz - a fighting chance.

It's as if Trump's presence in this campaign has turned the GOP debates into a boot camp, with Rubio as the main beneficiary. But it's still Trump's boot camp.

Posted by AllardK at February 26, 2016 2:22 PM
Comments
Comment #403013

Allardk, Rubio and Cruz did make more noise last evening but, I didn’t note anything that would cause folks to change their favorite candidate post-debate.

The debate, IMO, was little more than a two hour food fight. Three-fourths of the debate was about ‘gotcha’ politics with maybe a quarter being of substance.

And, that substance amounted to mostly one liners or populist phrases like ‘obamacare is dead’, ‘on day one executive orders are gonee’ and so on - - -

The establishment is saying that Trump has reached a peak with about 1/3 of GOP voters for him. They say that freed up votes from any candidate(s) dropping out will not go to Trump and that he can’t increase his base further.

I don’t believe that. Trump will get a sufficient number of those voters to keep him in the cockpit, IMO.

So, it remains Trumps nomination to lose. He outpolls his opponests in all the super Tuesday states and is even with Cruz in Texas. Should he lose 155 delegates in Texas he is way likely to pick up 90 delegate votes in Florida. He can easily overcome a 60 delegate loss over super Tuesday and ride that crest to the finish.

Today, Trump was endorsed by Cris Cristi. He introduced Cristi and a well known Pastor at a Texas rally. Meaning that following the debate Trump captured the media for almost a full day.

I don’t believe the repubs will have the gonads to try and wrestle away Trumps victory in a brokered convention. I, for one, would cast a vote for Bernie should that happen.

And, what should we make of the Cristi endorsement? Would Cristi sign on as Attorney General? How would Hillary feel about that? Hillary must really want her case settled before Obama leaves office.

Let’s assume Trump wins the nomination by a slim margin and there is a call for a brokered convention. Only two possibilities; give the losers votes to Trump or nominate a new un-named candidate to go against Hillary. IMO, the establishment couldn’t stand the heat that would come from Trump and his supporters.

At this time Roy Ellis is able to project that Donald Trump is the GOP nominee for the next President of the United States.

Otherwise4 - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at February 26, 2016 3:29 PM
Comment #403014

IF Trump is the nominee, the Clinton machine won’t even have to try in order to discredit him and Hillary will chew him up and spit him out without batting an eye in any debate.

Posted by: kctim at February 26, 2016 3:50 PM
Comment #403015

Thanks for the laugh kc.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 26, 2016 3:54 PM
Comment #403016

Time will tell if the Senator from New York ever had political dealings with one of the largest real estate developers from New York. I wonder if there will be any “quid pro quo” evidence or “I remember when you tried to buy my vote for” memories re-visited?

Posted by: Speak4all at February 26, 2016 4:30 PM
Comment #403017

Believe me Royal, while I’m no Trump supporter IF it’s between Trump and Clinton I will be pulling for Trump. And if she doesn’t destroy him in the debates, I more than welcome and will take any crap you guys deserve to give me.

Posted by: kctim at February 26, 2016 4:32 PM
Comment #403019

On the national scene polls show that Hillary is consistently leading Trump by 5-10%. I believe that when Trump becomes the GOP nominee that gap will close.

In a Trump - HRC battle I believe Trump would win biggly.

I believe most of the negatives on Trump are out there and have had the life beat out of them.

But, for HRC, there is real fertile ground to til. Like, ‘Bill is a sexual predator’, ‘Hillary attacked Bill’s women’, ‘Benghazi’, ‘classified emails’ (more to be released today), ‘release your GS speech transcripts’, ‘NAFTA destroyed the US eonomy’, ‘DOS Secretary failure a la ISIS, Libya, red line in Syria, Iraqi’s cut and rum, Yemen down, Iran nuke deal, Russia in Crimea, NK rattling rockets’, and so on - - -

HRC might win but she would need an ambulance to get her to the oval office what with band aids, broken bones, black eyes, hair pulled, etc.

Posted by: roy ellis at February 26, 2016 5:20 PM
Comment #403020

Trump would beat her like a rented mule.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 26, 2016 5:22 PM
Comment #403022

Correction: More HRC emails won’t be released until Mon-Tue.

Posted by: roy ellis at February 26, 2016 5:31 PM
Comment #403024

Trump has come under attack from his fellow Republicans for his business dealings. It is strange it took so long for anyone to point it out.

With the usual complete lack of any sense of the ironic, Romney called for Trump to release his tax returns. Trump is refusing on the grounds that his returns are being audited. Audits are normal for complex returns. Nothing sinister about that. However, there is absolutely nothing to prevent an audited return from being released. Romney is right. Trump is hiding something.

Trump has been importing Romanians and other foreigners using temporary guest visas to work in a Florida club, Mar-a-Lago. The temporary guest visas are only supposed to be issued if Americans are unavailable to work those jobs. Trump supposedly used 500 of those visas, yet several hundred Americans applied to work at that club. That is a problem.

No one has even started talking about his wives, or paid much attention to a photo of his sons posing with a leopard they shot and killed for fun. These are awful people. No one is calling attention to it. Yet.

Posted by: phx8 at February 26, 2016 6:32 PM
Comment #403026

Hillbilly’s “charity” is worth billions of dollars. What does she spend that money on? If she spends that money, why is the charity sitting on billions of dollars?

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2016 7:01 PM
Comment #403027

phx8 writes; ” Romney is right. Trump is hiding something.”

Did you find agreement at the bottom of a tea cup or Jim Beam bottle?

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 26, 2016 7:02 PM
Comment #403028

The three musketeers of make-up believe, Mitt Romney, phx8, and Harry Reid.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2016 7:12 PM
Comment #403029

And now more is coming out on allegations of fraud surrounding Trump University. Cruz was actually right about that during the debate. Trump could be on the witness stand defending himself in the next few months.

And according to Chris Hayes, one Democratic opposition research firm estimates that only 20% of the material on Trump is even out there at this point.

Conservatives are following Trump over a cliff. The last debate was an absolute disgrace. It is hard to believe Trump, Cruz, and Rubio are running for president. They are interrupting each other, making personal attacks, and behaving like internet trolls.

You earned this, conservatives. You richly deserve Trump, Rubio, and Cruz.

Posted by: phx8 at February 26, 2016 9:04 PM
Comment #403030

ph, there is no life left in that stuff. 90% of businesses have or are using illegals in their work force. I would venture that 20% of small businesses couldn’t make it w/o an illegal workforce.

If Trump implements E-verify wages will have to go up dramatically. Which is a good thing, IMO.

Hillary should go into training as to how to ‘hurl and expletitive’ and ‘stick it in and break it off’, etc.

I’m feeling bad for her and it’s just near the end of Feb.

Well, when Trump becomes President he could ramp up his building business, tens of thousands of illegals and spend the next 4 years telling the folks how hard it is to build a wall. We just don’t know

But, we can be sure of one thing - - Corpocracy delivered us to this situation.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at February 26, 2016 9:40 PM
Comment #403031

Roy,
There is not much doubt in my mind that HRC will win the Democratic nomination and win the election in a landslide; nevertheless, the small chance that a bolt from the blue could somehow put a Trump or a Rubio or a Cruz in office is disturbing. And the reason it is disturbing is not just because of corporate influence and money on the political system; it is not just the unequal distribution of wealth, the garnering of virtually all economic gains over the past three decades by the 1%, or the hostility towards working people and unions.

I am more concerned about the emotional underpinnings of what is happening right now to a large portion the conservatives in the GOP. They are motivated by anger. They are motivated by hatred, and it has blinded them. The conventional take on that suggests the anger is directed towards the government. David Brooks wrote a good editorial on that, but he refused to acknowledge what drove the downward spiral of anger in the first place.

We are seeing a shift in conservatism shift as Trump makes it acceptable for them to openly express their hatred, bigotry, and racism. It is now becoming obvious. They no longer feel constrained by ‘political correctness,’ which most of us consider to be basic decency and civility. It is as if a portion of the Republican party has been taken over by the talk show hosts and their brand of hate entertainment. Trump is the embodiment of Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Beck, and many others. Insults and name calling have become commonplace. Conspiracy theories abound. The God, Guns, and Gays crowd of the 2004 election are howling at the moon because they were led to believe elected Republicans would do what they promised, even though the promises were based on bad premises and were impossible to fulfill in a two-party government. Now they are in a minority, and change is leaving them behind. And they are ready to lash out.

Posted by: phx8 at February 27, 2016 12:53 AM
Comment #403033

ph, how do you sleep at night? Like the boogie man is going to get you…

And, where were your pols when they had control of both sides of the house?

The folks aren’t ANGRY angry, ph. The Bernie/Trumpers have had it with corpocracy, establishment, oligarchy and all that that entails.

If we could build a wall and make the establishment pay for it that would be great. But, Mexico will have to do.

After 8 years of the Obama admin we’ve had the reset with Russia, NK threatening SK, China taking ground, ME has become a basket case; Iraq down, Syria down, Libya down, Yemen down. Iran and Russia tagteaming. The Kurds would fight but have not bullets.

We could use a big man at this time. SOmebody who will speak truth to power and so on - - -

The next admin has a multitude of tasks in trying to get the genies back in the bottle.

I can’t imagine a person who would take on such a mission.

I don’t see Hillary as a strong leader. Let’s get behind Trump and hope he can be successful to a large degree.

Posted by: roy ellis at February 27, 2016 11:52 AM
Comment #403034

Roy,
“If we could build a wall and make the establishment pay for it that would be great. But, Mexico will have to do.”

You can’t be serious.

After 8 years of Obama we have peaceful relations with Russia and China, and worked with them as negotiating partners to sign a nuclear non-proliferation agreement with Iran and begin re-integrating them into the international community. When Russia became aggressive with its immediate neighbors we tanked the ruble. They are not going anywhere.

Iraq has been effectively partitioned. The Shia/Iranian portion is doing all right. The Kurds have been independent for all practical purposes for years. The Sunnis in Iraq and Syria are still in turmoil. But Obama got us out of Iraq. He was elected to do that. Americans are no longer dying there, and we are no longer hemorrhaging our national treasure over it.

Yemen? You’re worried about Yemen! Do you know one person who comes from Yemen? Seriously…

“We could use a big man at this time.” This is an open wish for an authoritarian, or a fascist. At least you are honest about it.

How about that Christie endorsement of Trump! Recently Christie declared Trump unqualified and unfit and that he would never endorse him. Wonder how Trump paid him off. Money? A plum position? He’ll need a job once his term ends. Or maybe something a little more subtle.

The wife of Clarence Thomas works as a ‘lobbyist’ for the Heritage Foundation and makes $400,000. Thomas tried to hide that, but eventually it came out. In the meantime, he never recused himself, and at times was the only one of nine justices asking Heritage cases be heard. Let’s hope Christie holds out for at least $400,000 for his spouse.

Then again, he could go the Scalia route. You know. Take dozens of free vacations around the world at no cost. Fly on a chartered jet free of charge, thanks to some mystery money, and in exchange offer a little help with a case here and there. Aha! So THAT is what is means to be a ‘strict constructionist!’ What a corrupt SOB.

Christie was always bad news, and this just makes it more obvious.

Posted by: phx8 at February 27, 2016 12:24 PM
Comment #403035

It is as if a portion of the Republican party has been taken over by the talk show hosts and their brand of hate entertainment.

Huh? The Hatertainers have been wagging the Rpblcn dog for about a decade. The funny part of it is that it’s not just dumbbells that they’re persuading. Some well educated indviduals listen to that crap all time and repeat the drivel that they spout. It’s pervasive mind control of weak individuals, no matter how smart they think they are.

Posted by: ohrealy at February 27, 2016 2:00 PM
Comment #403036

phx8 wrote; “They no longer feel constrained by ‘political correctness,’ which most of us consider to be basic decency and civility.”

That comment deserves First Place in hyperbole.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 27, 2016 2:14 PM
Comment #403037

ohrealy,
“The Hatertainers have been wagging the Rpblcn dog for about a decade.”

True. What makes this election different is that a candidate embodying all that crazy stuff may very well be the next party nominee. Trump has managed to drag down Rubio too. Cruz is such a horrendous liar it hardly matters. What has changed is not just the crazy content of what Cruz and Rubio say, but the viciousness of their personal attacks.

RF,
Do you know what ‘hyperbole’ means? Judging from your comment, you do not. Your homework assignment is to look it up. You are welcome to post the definition on WB, but since no one else needs it, proving you actually checked is up to you.

Posted by: phx8 at February 27, 2016 3:53 PM
Comment #403038

phx8 obviously doesn’t know the meaning of hyperbole as he can’t understand how it applies in his statement regarding “political correctness” means “basic decency and civility.”

LOL

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 27, 2016 5:00 PM
Comment #403039

RF,
It took me a while to recognize you believe political correctness to be a bad thing. It never occurred to me that speaking about women, minorities, the disadvantaged, and opponents in the public sphere in a civil, polite manner could be viewed as a negative. Apparently the idea of basic decency is no longer in vogue with conservatives.

Of course, we see what this looks like among the GOP contenders for president, especially Trump. This is what it looks like when political correctness no longer is considered a virtue. For a long time we heard such talk from the likes of Limbaugh, Savage, and others. Now, the leader among Republicans, the man who very well may represent them in an election, routinely talks about women, minorities, the disadvantaged, and opponents in an appalling way. Apparently conservative Republicans approve.

You reap what you sow. Happy?

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2016 10:22 AM
Comment #403043

phx8

It took me a while to recognize you believe political correctness applies only to speech.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 28, 2016 2:39 PM
Comment #403059

Bill Clinton doesn’t believe in freedom of speech. Neither does his, and Hillbilly’s supporters.

A veteran stood to ask a question and was immediately booed. He was not cowed by this rude behavior and continued to ask his question. Bill Clinton then ridiculed him from the stage and the crowd continued to shout him down until the authorities escorted him from the room.

That is not civilized behavior, yet it is the standard response when met with speech Democratics disagree with.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 28, 2016 9:24 PM
Comment #403063

WW,
Looked that one up. Here is a link and video to what happened:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/27/politics/bill-clinton-argument-over-benghazi/

Clinton was extremely polite to the man. Watch the video. The questioner started asking about the VA, but when Clinton attempted to answer, the questioner changed the subject to Benghazi, and said some very impolite lies. Watch the video. He continued talking over Clinton at Clinton’s rally. After Clinton made repeated attempts to initiate a dialog, the questioner continued to shout over him. He was escorted from the room. Watch the video.

WW, you are lying. The video is there, Clinton was polite, and this is a textbook example of civil behavior when a protestor and heckler attempts to shout over the speaker. You are intentionally misrepresenting what happened. You should be ashamed.

Anyone not sure about the truth should simply watch this short video.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2016 11:37 PM
Comment #403064
A veteran stood to ask a question and was immediately booed.

Bulls**T Weary, you speak bulls**t. The veteran wasn’t booed until he brought up the bogus line of conservative crap regarding Bengazi. Then rightfully so BTW, he reaped what he has sown and the crowd reacted as it should have when presented with crap.

Why on earth would you use such nonsense to leap to the illogical conclusion of anyone being anti free speech? Do you think a lying veteran deserves more respect than a truthful veteran?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 29, 2016 12:09 AM
Comment #403065

Bill Clinton tried to stop the guy from finishing his question. He wanted to stop the guy at his mention of the VA. When the guy mentioned Benghazi the crowd booed him.

Hillbilly lied to the families about why Benghazi happened. We have a right to question that lie. Bill Clinton wasn’t about to answer that marine’s question. The crowd, and the security, made sure Clinton didn’t have to.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 29, 2016 12:22 AM
Comment #403067

WW,
You’ll twist and you’ll turn with you B.S. conspiracy theories, but the video is right there for anyone to see. Watch the video. And Hillary did not lie. She testified for over 11 hours to a hostile House committee on live tv, and no one showed she lied. At that meeting, Bill Clinton offered to answer a question about the VA. Watch the video. He was civil and polite. The crowd came to see him speak, not some whack job who changed the subject from the VA in order to make a speech about Benghazi. The questioner was given every chance. He was rude and deserved to be escorted from the premises.

But this is today’s conservatism: lies, conspiracies, rude behavior, incivility, and a basic lack of decency.

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2016 1:34 AM
Comment #403068

11 hours. Isn’t that about how long those 2 guys spent on top of that consulate, waiting for assistance that wasn’t coming? That’s what conservatives call a hostile environment, phx8. Hillbilly got to walk away from her 11 hour ordeal. I saw a photo of the ambassador after his. He was being dragged.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 29, 2016 7:11 AM
Comment #403075

Such concern Weary, where were you when this same thing happened on GWB’s watch? Seems to me this supposed outrage didn’t stop you from supporting GWB administration both terms. Now all of a sudden it is a cover up, what a joke you guys on the right have become.

Seems to me this is faux political concern more than sincere concern for those that lost their lives that day. Why, You ask? Because you try finger-pointing at Clinton despite all evidence to the contrary. Real concerned people look for the truth not continue to express weird disproven conspiracy theories espoused by the tinfoil hat crowd. Despicable man despicable.

Your hatred for Clinton has rendered you incapable of truth as you continue to try and create smoke where no smoke exists, let alone a fire. DO you think your conservative witch hunters in Congress are so inept they could spend years and millions investigating and come up with nothing but dumb looks if in fact there was smoke?

To bad your team has nothing of substance to bring to the table Weary. Perhaps then you guys wouldn’t have to continuously attempt to focus the voters on lies and damned lies espoused by your team. The veteran made of fool of himself and dishonored the uniform. When he used the bait and switch tactics on Clinton, he got what he deserved from the crowd.

It makes me sick when fools like that man use his status as a veteran to embarrass veterans everywhere with cheap political stunts based upon myths and misinformation from the right winger propaganda machine. Especially when he did it on the back of other veterans. It is sad you would give someone who started with a veterans administration question (a good question that needs a solution) and then turns it into propaganda, the time of day Weary.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 29, 2016 11:34 AM
Comment #403080

Wow. Just saw a hit piece on FOX. They show an edited version of the heckler and Clinton, try to make it look like Clinton is being disrespectful to a veteran, and then a couple people on a couch denounce Clinton. Incredible.

This is today’s conservatism: lies, conspiracies, rude behavior, incivility, and a basic lack of decency.

That segment was preceded by one on HRC’s e-mails. They kept trying to fan the fake scandal, but they knew nothing would happen.

This is today’s conservatism: lies, conspiracies, rude behavior, incivility, and a basic lack of decency.

WW ignored the fact he lied by talking about how the Benghazi attack lasted 11 hours and so did the Committee testimony. What that has to do with anything is anybody’s guess.

It is weird. The GOP seems to be completely uninterested in issues. It has turned into a sinkhole of bigotry and hatred, a morass of misogyny, xenophobia, and homophobia, with false accusations and personal insults now the making up most of the message.

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2016 12:31 PM
Comment #403083

They seem completely uninterested because you attack all differing opinions with false accusations and personal insults like bigotry, hatred, misogyny, xenophobia, and homophobia.

When all you do is shout ‘racist’ to a non racist person, over and over and over, they tend to start ignoring you.

Posted by: kctim at February 29, 2016 12:57 PM
Comment #403084

kctim,

Can someone really claim to be non-racist if he feigns ignorance when asked to disavow David Duke and the KKK?

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 1:07 PM
Comment #403088

kctim,
Sorry, but Trump started his political career in 2012 promoting a racist conspiracy about Obama’s birth. Today, roughly half of all Republicans believe Obama is a foreigner and a Muslim. The percentage among Trump supporters tops 60%, more than any other candidate, according to a recent PPP poll. And, as WP mentions, Trump pretended he did not know who David Duke was. Years ago Trump published an editorial on Duke. He knows perfectly well. He just doesn’t want to alienate that part of his base.

I know you don’t like to hear it. Sorry. But “bigotry, hatred, misogyny, xenophobia, and homophobia” are the motivating forces behind the anger of many conservatives and Republicans.

Meanwhile, slanderous attacks on Hillary Clinton continue despite being demonstrably false.

These two factors are how conservatives and Republicans reached this place today. You may not like it, but if you do not understand it, then you will be left confused and unable to connect the threads of today’s politics.

When it comes to HRC, there are substantive issues to question. Benghazi, e-mails, and the Clinton Foundation are NOT substantive issues. Calling her a liar does NOT address substantive issues. There ARE decent, conservative, qualified Republican candidates out there. Unfortunately for the GOP, none of them will win the nomination.

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2016 1:43 PM
Comment #403092

Phx8,

I can’t keep up with these conspiracies, so maybe you could help some.
What proof is there that Obama’s birthplace is all about stopping the black guy, and not about stopping leftist policy? And if it is ALL about stopping the black guy, how is it that Dr. Carson is so beloved by those very same people?

What proof is there that people believe Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim foreigner simply because he is black, and not because he is a leftist with a foreign sounding muslim name?

I am no Trump supporter, but according to Warren’s link Trump condemned Duke one day and then Duke ‘endorsed’ Trump the next day or two. But because Trump didn’t disavow Duke again, immediately, it’s because he doesn’t want to alienate that supposed part of his base that consists of around four thousand people?

“Meanwhile, slanderous attacks on Hillary Clinton continue despite being demonstrably false.”

Again, what proof do you have that it’s due to a dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women, and not just a dislike for the liberal politician and the leftist policy she supports?

“Benghazi, e-mails, and the Clinton Foundation are NOT substantive issues.”

The lies, corruption and cover-ups should be though.
Absolutely shameful.

Posted by: kctim at February 29, 2016 2:37 PM
Comment #403093

Warren, Phx8 was signalling out the GOP, Conservatives and everybody else who does not agree with leftist policy. IF he were only speaking of Trump, I probably wouldn’t have had any desire to reply.

Posted by: kctim at February 29, 2016 2:40 PM
Comment #403094

kctim,

On Sunday, Trump claimed to have never heard of David Duke or White Supremacy, which ought to be just as troubling to you as it is to me. For anyone who doesn’t want to be perceived as a racist, condemning Duke and his ilk should be as automatic and reflexive as remembering how to breathe.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 2:44 PM
Comment #403096

kctim,

How do you square this:

signalling out the GOP, Conservatives and everybody else who does not agree with leftist policy.

With this:

There ARE decent, conservative, qualified Republican candidates out there.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 2:48 PM
Comment #403097

Democrats should carefully consider their past history with regard to the KKK. Many notable Dems applauded the Clans efforts and were members. Should we dig them all up and make them apologize?

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 29, 2016 2:49 PM
Comment #403100

Firstly, as far as I am aware, all prominent Democrats with any former ties to the KKK have apologized. If I am wrong, please let me know.

Secondly, it has been repeated ad infinitim on this website that for most of the Jim Crow era most Southern Democrats did not espouse a liberal ideology. Many were conservative and switched to supporting Republicans after the parties realigned between 1968 and 1980.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 3:14 PM
Comment #403101

Does anyone on Watchblog buy Trump’s bullshit excuse that his earpiece was faulty? In Sunday’s video he clearly repeated Duke’s name as well as the phrase “white supremacist”. Give me a break, Trump heard Tapper loud and clear.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 3:21 PM
Comment #403102

I am going to go on the record and say that I actually do not believe Trump is a racist. If he was, he definitely wouldn’t have cited David Duke as a reason for leaving the reform party in 2000. Instead, we have a phenomenon where a non-racist is masquerading as one purely as an effort to pander to voters in the Republican Party. This also explains the inconsistency between Trump’s disavowal of Duke on Friday and his equivocation on Sunday. It is hard to be consistent when one is merely pretending to be a Republican.

Posted by: Warren Porter at February 29, 2016 3:27 PM
Comment #403106

I “square” it this way, Warren: My post #403083 was in response to Comment #403080, not Comment #403088.

Combine that with the fact that even the most moderate Republican is constantly attacked with the bigotry, hatred, misogyny, xenophobia, and homophobia rhetoric, and Phx8’s concern rings pretty hollow.

Posted by: kctim at February 29, 2016 3:45 PM
Comment #403107

Warren, Trump is difficult to analyze politically. Should he win the nomination, many will say he ran a brilliant campaign. Should he lose the nomination, many will say they knew he would fail.

I believe Trump is smart, willing and able to fight in the gutter, and uses every lever, including his money, to great advantage. He has played the media like a maestro.

I can understand why so many are attracted to Trump. Much of what he says appeals to me as well. It is impossible for me to discern what kind of president he would be, and that is worrisome.

My choice remains Ted Cruz. I know exactly where he stands. He best represents my views. And, I believe I know how he would perform as president. Above all, he “walks his talk”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 29, 2016 3:48 PM
Comment #403108

Here’s a thought provoking article.

“Christy got to the heart of the climate debate: How well do we understand climate change? If, as the climate advocates assert, we understand it because the science is settled, it should be possible to predict its behavior. We can’t, and claims to the contrary instill fear, waste scarce resources and lead to flawed policies, and damage the scientific enterprise.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/so-much-for-settled-science/article/2584008

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 29, 2016 4:09 PM
Comment #403109

kctim,
You write: “What proof is there that Obama’s birthplace is all about stopping the black guy, and not about stopping leftist policy?”

Because challenging his birthplace attacks who he IS, not what he thinks. It undermines his legitimacy, and if he were a foreigner, an other. It suggests he does not share American values. This kind of attack has never been made on such a large scale, and Donald Trump became its chief cheerleader in 2012. It was made despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Sometimes partisanship and ‘stopping leftist policies’ plays a role. Sometimes it is impossible to tell. Most of the attacks on Obama go after intangibles that are impossible to trace to their motivating origin. The attacks may be obviously and factually false, but for both partisans motivated by ideology and racists, the appearance will be the same and the so will the results. These types of attacks use terms like lawless, unconstitutional, tyrant, weak. Facts that undermine the attacking partisans are dismissed as conspiracies.

Do conservatives love Dr. Carson? Not so much, I would say, judging by his single digit polling performance. He never came close to winning anything, and most of his social ideology serves as a justification for white partisans and racists to continue and feel good about their repressive policies. Blacks supporting Carson were too few in number to be worth mentioning.

Will we see men unwilling to vote for HRC just because she is a woman? Absolutely. Mrs. Phx has spent a career as a high level executive and encountered sexism again and again, ranging from unspoken assumptions to outright harassment. Most men will deny it, but those prejudices are there for an absolute fact. Some men have huge problems with women being in charge.

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2016 5:31 PM
Comment #403110

I watched a 20 minute video of Hillbilly contradicting herself in her own words. Over and over she says what she does to pander to who she’s talking to. Over and over she then contradicts herself when she talks to another group.

When asked if she’s ever lied she responds, “I don’t believe I’ve ever lied.”

Isn’t there a mental condition that has that as a symptom?

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 29, 2016 6:45 PM
Comment #403115
Isn’t there a mental condition that has that as a symptom?

I believe you may be right Weary it’s called conservatism

Posted by: j2t2 at March 1, 2016 1:39 AM
Comment #403117

Hillbilly’s a conservative!? That’s news to me, or are you being sarcastic?

Never mind discussing Hillbilly’s obvious lying over the years. Just ignore that and make ad hominem attacks on those who recognize her deficiencies.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI


http://www.naturalnews.com/036112_sociopaths_cults_influence.html

Don’t bother watching the video or reading the article, j2t2. I realize you can’t handle it. I can’t expect you to suffer the facts.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 1, 2016 7:16 AM
Comment #403121

Weary, you guys and your silly attacks on Hillary are reminiscent of the little boy who cried wolf. After a while no one listens and you guys have droned on for so long I wonder if you even listen anymore?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 1, 2016 9:14 AM
Comment #403122

Phx8
Wouldn’t undermining his legitimacy render his policies worthless?
And what about yourself? When Cruz and Carson were doing well, you challenged and mocked them for their religion. Was that because you are racist, or because you didn’t want them to win?

Obama does not share American values with those who do not support liberalism. He supports new values as created and defined by liberalism.
Does hope, change and transforming the country ring any bells?

If it’s impossible to tell the motivation behind it all, why do you always automatically assume racist? Politics, plain and simple. Dismiss differing opinions rather than justify your own. Use guilt and fear to get votes, rather than earn those votes.

“These types of attacks use terms like lawless, unconstitutional, tyrant, weak.”

Those types of attacks were also used on Bill Clinton and GW Bush. The so-called ‘facts’ that undermine these attacks are created and interpreted by inconsistent partisans.
This is NOT something new that was created to get the ‘black guy.’

“Do conservatives love Dr. Carson? Not so much, I would say, judging by his single digit polling performance.”

Polling numbers? I would say that you know you are stretching with that. Carson was treated with respect before his run and had good support at the beginning of his run, but has suffered from poor debates.
There is absolutely nothing that points to racism.

“most of his social ideology serves as a justification for white partisans and racists to continue and feel good about their repressive policies.”

No, you disagree with his social ideology simply because it doesn’t pander to one group over another. The question still is though, do you challenge and attack him for who he is, a Conservative who supports Conservative policies, or do you attack him because you are racist?

“Most men will deny it, but those prejudices are there for an absolute fact. Some men have huge problems with women being in charge.”

Most do not, so, just as with racism, why pretend otherwise just to push your political agenda?

Obama has made you guys very lazy.

Posted by: kctim at March 1, 2016 10:26 AM
Comment #403124

“Wouldn’t undermining his legitimacy render his policies worthless?”

Not exactly, because the worth of the policies do not get addressed on their own terms; instead, undermining Obama’s legitimacy undermines his ability to govern and compromise. It results in a destructive spiral for conservatives. They cannot destroy Obama and the Democrats in Congress, yet they keep insisting he is a Muslim and a foreigner, and therefore conservatives will keep running primaries to elect more and more extreme candidates, all in a search for politicians who will destroy the ability of Obama and the Democrats to govern.

“When Cruz and Carson were doing well, you challenged and mocked them for their religion.”

Yes. I do not respect people who wear their religion on their sleeve, and use media and government to put it in my face at every opportunity, then claim to be persecuted Christians when I object. My religious views do not require me to do that to others, and while people like Cruz and Carson are welcome to believe what they will, they have no right to do that to me.

The general tenor of your comment seems to be that, since no one can ever no beyond a shadow of a doubt whether a person is a racist or merely a partisan, racism (and bigotry and misogyny and xenophobia) really doesn’t matter. If we only dealt with isolated incidents, that might be true. But we deal with a consistent pattern; for example, Obama receives many more death threats than any other president in history. His most vehement opposition comes largely from states that formerly belonged to the Confederacy and practiced slavery, and so on.

Posted by: phx8 at March 1, 2016 11:34 AM
Comment #403126
This is today’s conservatism: lies, conspiracies, rude behavior, incivility, and a basic lack of decency.

It was yesterday’s conservatism too, but they had better spokespersons.

From the Wiki page of Cornelis Tromp:

At home, without fighting to distract him, Cornelis, or Kees as he was normally called, grew quickly bored and indolent. He had the reputation of being a heavy drinker, so much so that many inns at the time were named after him. An example book for inn signs proposed the following inscription:

IN THE ADMIRAL TROMP
The heaviest drinker that is known
Is Tromp, as he has often shown.
So all real men do gather here,
To likewise fill their mouths with beer.

Tromp was a vain man, having an extremely high opinion of himself, which he never hesitated in sharing with others. He felt that, son of a famous father, he had a natural right to the position of naval hero. During his life he posed as a sitter for at least 22 paintings, a record for the 17th century….

Posted by: ohrealy at March 1, 2016 12:27 PM
Comment #403127

The worth of the policies do not get addressed because of their terms of more government and more government control over the individual. To believe the rejection of such policy is due to race or gender, is silly.
The goal of questioning Obama’s ‘legitimacy’ is no different than questioning Clinton’s integrity: To stop them from having the ability to advance those policies.

“They cannot destroy Obama and the Democrats in Congress,”

Yet the did just that in 2010 and 2014 when they limited their ability to govern with unchecked leftist policy.

“Yes. I do not respect people who wear their religion on their sleeve”

How is that any different than not respecting people who wear their liberalism on their sleeve, use the media to put it in my face 24/7, and use government to force me to live a certain way? It’s not.

“The general tenor of your comment seems to be that, since no one can ever no beyond a shadow of a doubt whether a person is a racist or merely a partisan, racism (and bigotry and misogyny and xenophobia) really doesn’t matter.”

Nonsense. Actual evidence of such things matter a lot and should be discussed.
What I am saying is that it is dishonest to automatically assume any of those things based solely on disagreement with your position on the issue. That it is intellectually lazy to lump the vast majority in with the tiny fringe just to dismiss the rejection of the policy you support.

Posted by: kctim at March 1, 2016 1:00 PM
Comment #403131

Ignorance is bliss, isn’t it j2t2?

I knew you wouldn’t watch the video. Let me give it to you in short terms.

Hillbilly says one thing.
Hillbilly contradicts herself.
Hillbilly says another thing.
Hillbilly contradicts herself.
Hillbilly lies.
Hillbilly says she never lies.

That pretty much sums it up, j2t2. There’s no one else in the video saying anything other than a CBS news reporter and Anderson Cooper. Everything else is Hillbilly talking/lying/pandering.

Your ignorance when it comes to Hillbilly and the Democratic party is blatantly obvious, j2t2. It makes it really hard to want to take you seriously.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 1, 2016 4:59 PM
Comment #403136

I see some here are still flogging the “Hillary lies” race horse. That poor animal died at the first turn but we still find conservatives and the conservative media pundits trying to make something stick. The race continues and shall do so absent the poor old “Hillary lies” horse. Hillary seems to be taking it in stride and is in a very good battle with Sanders. Now that Republican field, yikes! Looks like the nomination will go to someone the Republican leadership can’t stand and won’t accept. This is gonna get good.

Posted by: Speak4all at March 1, 2016 5:51 PM
Comment #403141

It’s her in the video, Speak4all!!! OMG!!!

You people are in denial! Pull the fingers out of your ears. The NANANANANA is getting so tiring.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 1, 2016 7:03 PM
Post a comment