#Hillary2016 Beware: Donald Trump Can Win It All And Restart Republican Party! – Plus: Cruz Fail; Biden Fail; Saint Bernard Fail

Update: The “ignore Trump” strategy which replaced the “attack Trump” strategy means these two new national polls will be either underplayed or not reported. Reuters/Ipsos #1 Trump at 24.9% followed by Bush at 12. Quinnipiac #1 Trump 20%, Walker 13%, Bush 10%.

——————————-

Donald J. Trump is running a real HOPE AND CHANGE campaign with unceasing attacks on the political establishment of the country which includes both parties, Big Media, lobbyists, special interests, unions, the Chamber of Commerce, the regulatory bureaucratic state, and all those who encourage or feed upon this gargantuan power structure – which is what makes Trump so difficult to destroy.

Hillary2016 is all giggles at the thought of GOP Presidential nominee Donald J. Trump. This is foolishness. There should be terror at the very thought of even the possibility of Donald J. Trump as the GOP nominee on the part of Hillary2016. Donald J. Trump as the GOP nominee means a revitalized GOP as the party of reform to “Make America Great Again.”

Donald J. Trump as the Republican nominee is no longer a “nah, can’t ever happen” nor a “not likely.” Donald J. Trump as the Republican nominee is more like “yeah, it’s the likely future.”

Consider: In the latest Iowa poll, Trump is shy of the #1 position by 2 measly points. Scott Walker, the governor of the neighboring state of Wisconsin based his campaign on an Iowa win and for a long time Walker has been the clear frontrunner in Iowa well ahead of every other candidate. Walker hoped to springboard from an Iowa win to a New Hampshire win and as the candidate who was seen as everybody’s second choice and the candidate acceptable to all wings of the intra-warring party Walker’s path to victory was clear. Then Walker (and one of his donors as well) attacked Trump and Trump counterattacked. Now Walker has Trump about to trump him in Iowa. If Walker loses Iowa – lights out for Walker2016. Trump then gets the Walker voters or a large percentage.

Consider: In the latest New Hampshire poll, Trump is #1 with double the support of #2 Jeb Bush. If Trump wins Iowa then New Hampshire he can leverage those wins to unify the anti-establishment vote to defeat Lindsey Graham in his home state of South Carolina. These victories would knock out Graham, Pataki, Carson, Christie, and all those who based their strategy on winning New Hampshire. Trump would get the bulk of those voters. Then the fourth state to vote, Nevada, is another state with Trump at #1 so Trump can conceivably win the first four voting states. Then imagine if Trump decides to compete in the winner-take-all Florida primary which up to now is seen as an expensive fight between only Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, with the loser forced to withdraw from the race. From his properties in Florida and his frequent visits to the Sunshine State Trump could run in Florida and finish off both Bush and Rubio with one stroke sending them both into oblivion and therefore – presidential nominee Trump.

Is the above scenario nuts? Can Trump win? For once in his life left wing kook Tommy Christopher has stumbled into reality and issues a stark warning to Hillary2016 and the Republican establishment:

Republican strategists are consoling themselves by alternately insisting that Trump will exit the race when he loses in Iowa (where he’s currently almost in the lead), and that his stands on issues will trip him up once the debates begin. Even with Trump so clearly in the lead, the media have the nerve to fret about a Trump third-party run. The day will come when they’ll be begging Jeb Bush to mount a third-party run against Trump.

What they’re all missing is that Trump is immune to all of the things they think will take him out. [snip]

If you thought Trump relished that opportunity, wait until the primetime debate on Fox News next week. Anyone who thinks that Chris Christie or Rick Perry are going to put a dent in Trump needs to have their head examined. [snip]

The current theory is that as the field narrows, Trump will hit his ceiling, but when your lesser-polling candidates start dropping out, is their support going to go to candidates who can’t stand up to the guy who’s not even supposed to have a chance? Even if they disagree with Trump on the issues, Republican voters aren’t going to vote for a wuss. As long as he continues to get the privilege of busting these guys up in debates, and enjoying non-stop free publicity, Trump will continue to gain support.

Liberals and Democrats, meanwhile, are laughing all the way to the Whole Foods at the prospect of a Trump general election candidacy, but if you accept the possibility of a Trump nomination, then you dismiss his general election chances at your peril. Assuming that Hillary Clinton is the nominee (which she will be), Trump will head into the general election with the same attack-dog skills and media attention that he had in the primaries, but with the additional benefit of a clean slate on the issues. While the Clinton-hating media continues to attack Hillary with stories that don’t actually add up, don’t be surprised to see Trump outflank Hillary by, say, proposing instant citizenship to go along with his Mexican-proof fence. Once he’s got the GOP nod, The Donald can freestyle on the issues like it’s 8 Mile Road up in here.

While Trump is busy collecting Republican voters, who will turn out no matter what in order to defeat Hillary Clinton, Hillary will be turning out the Obama coalition that helped President Obama win twice, but might not be turning out the bitterly defeated Sanders/Warren wing. Then, your election will be decided by the handful of soft-headed “independents” who always decide things, and who are relentlessly being told that they can’t trust Hillary Clinton

Other than that bit about a Trump turnaround on illegal immigration Tommy Christopher surprisingly gets it right. Repeat: Donald J. Trump is running a real HOPE AND CHANGE campaign with unceasing attacks on the political establishment of the country which includes both parties, Big Media, lobbyists, special interests, unions, the Chamber of Commerce, the regulatory bureaucratic state, and all those who encourage or feed upon this gargantuan power structure – which is what makes Trump so difficult to destroy.

And it is imperative that Trump be destroyed well before August 6. Once Trump gets on a debate stage with governors and senators he will halve his biggest problem and be on the way to the scenario we’ve outlined above. What is Donald Trump’s biggest problem? Trump’s biggest problem is that many Americans do not believe he is really running for president, that this is all a big publicity stunt for something and therefore these Americans do not even consider voting for Trump. But once Trump is seen as a real candidate for president that vast ocean of “he’s not really running” skeptics will be a new target of opportunity for The Donald and Trump’s poll numbers will rise ever higher.

That’s why it is so important to destroy Trump now. Some argue that there is no need to “destroy” Trump because Trump will fade away and the “better” candidate will then rise. This is sheer foolishness. In every election cycle candidates come and go, that is true. But the candidates that come and go do not do so out of happenstance and willy-nilly. Herman Cain was a popular candidate until the hammer dropped on him and Cain was destroyed. Rick Perry once had a real chance to win the nomination, then he blundered, did not know how to recover, and Perry’s enemies destroyed him.

When a campaign implodes it is not because “well, it just happens.” Presidential campaigns implode because they are targeted, attacked, destroyed. Bill Clinton’s campaign in 1992 was targeted, attacked, but survived because Bill Clinton had extraordinary political skills and he knew what the attacks would be, prepared for them, and had the resolve to survive. Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign was targeted and attacked but did not survive because Hillary Clinton did not understand that the party establishment had conspired with Barack Obama well before 2007 to take her out. The party establishment could not defeat her at the polls so it simply stole Michigan delegates from her to gift to Obama, negated her big Florida win, shifted the super-delegates controlled by the party to Obama and the rest is disgusting history.

All campaigns are targeted and then attacked. Survival requires a smart counterattack and a strong understanding of strategy and the zeitgeist. Which brings us to why Donald Trump is so difficult to destroy especially when the competition is someone like Ted Cruz.

We like what Ted Cruz says. Ted Cruz is very smart. He’s not very bright, but he is well educated and very book smart. We like that Ted Cruz fights but we wish Ted Cruz would fight smart fights and then come up with an occasional win. But that seems too much for Ted Cruz.

Consider: The Ted Cruz campaign has raised a great deal of money but has been entirely eclipsed by the rise of Donald Trump. So Ted Cruz set about to try to trump Trump. Cruz decided to stage a publicity stunt on the senate floor with a brutal attack on Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

We applaud the Ted Cruz attack on Mitch McConnell. We tolerate publicity stunts too – as long as they serve a purpose and succeed. But the Ted Cruz publicity stunt attack against Mitch McConnell was a fail that is entirely the opposite of what makes Trump so successful.

Why was the Ted Cruz attack on Mitch McConnell a publicity stunt and a fail? First of all, the “issues” upon which Cruz attacked were a joke. The House of Representatives was not about to vote on the Senate bill or take up the Senate bill at all. The Senate bill was a Mitch McConnell publicity stunt without meaning which Ted Cruz countered with a publicity stunt of his own. It was a publicity stunt and to deny that is to deny reality. Subsequent to the Ted Cruz attack on Mitch McConnell the House confirmed that there would be no vote on the McConnell publicity stunt.

Worse for Ted Cruz his publicity stunt tactic is not very Trump-like at all, quite the contrary. The Ted Cruz publicity stunt is the opposite of what Trump is up to.

The Ted Cruz publicity stunt was a yelp from within the establishment. It was an intra-establishment fight delivered in one of the centers of establishment power. It is an example of what Americans hate most about Congress. It wasn’t an outsider delivering an attack against an insider. Ted Cruz complained he was lied to about something about something that was a vote about something that something. Hey, Ted Cruz, you are very smart but stop doing an Obama and think you are the smartest person in the room. On this you goofed. Hey, Ted Cruz campaign, go and read about Bob Dole and his “senate-speak” campaign and why it failed.

Donald Trump’s campaign against the establishment will never speak mush about some bill that was stacked on a vote for a bill that was committee-ed and Rules Committee-ed and procedural this and that, Roberts Rules of Order-ed, clotured, whatever. Trump’s campaign is about English and issues. What Cruz managed to do with his attack on Mitch McConnell was prove how insidery Washinton, D.C. and senatery and Bob Dole-ish his campaign is. This was the anti-zeitgeist. If Ted Cruz wanted to try a Trump style attack he should have considered an attack against McConnell and the entire stinking Washington establishment from a different venue preferably holding a pitchfork.

Ted Cruz should put his books aside, forget the dictionary definition of zeitgeist and instead try to feel the zeitgeist and respond to it. Even Big Media is beginning to understand that Donald Trump is more than words, more than a feeling, more than just anger. Trump gets and rides the zeitgeist.

Even the dense Roger Simon at Politico senses that Trump is more than just Trump:

Donald Trump and the high priests of the press

Having decided that Donald Trump is unworthy of his popularity, the grandees of journalism are hard-pressed to explain why he is so popular. [snip]

I think Trump is flawed on many counts. But I don’t think he has “coarsened our political dialogue and cheapened the electoral process.”

I think it was coarse and cheap by the time Trump got here.

Chris Cillizza is still baffled by Trump but knows that Trump is someone/something he does not like:

Mark Cuban summarized Donald Trump’s appeal in just 43 words

Noted Maverick Mark Cuban is a fan of Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy. And, writing on something called Cyber Dust, Cuban succinctly and effectively explained the Trumpian appeal. Here it is:

I don’t care what his actual positions are. I don’t care if he says the wrong thing. He says what’s on his mind. He gives honest answers rather than prepared answers. This is more important than anything any candidate has done in years. [snip]

Where I part company with Cuban is in his insistence that Trump’s candor is “more important than anything any candidate has done in years.” [snip]

My issue with Trump — and Cuban’s analysis of how important Trump is — is that The Donald’s honesty is almost entirely substance-less and pointless. [snip]

Trump has quite clearly stumbled on to something that appeals to a not-insignificant portion of the electorate. But, does he have a second act that goes beyond just, well, saying stuff?

Cillizza can’t be this dumb. Cillizza must know that something other than “saying stuff” is the secret of Donald Trump’s success.



That’s the soundtrack for this election cycle.

Some get it. Some don’t.

This headline (and story) “gets” the GOP part of it:

GOP Leaders Are Driving Their Base Into The Arms Of Donald Trump

This Politico article also “gets” the GOP component of the Trump phenomenon:

Trump Schools the Republican Establishment

GOP elites are only making The Donald stronger. [snip]

That Trump is mocking and bewildering the reviled GOP hierarchy—who lead a party with plummeting approval ratings among Republicans—fills the GOP electorate with a not-so-secret glee.

And is it really The Donald’s fault that he’s so interesting? Anybody bother to take a look at his main competition in the polls right now?

One candidate, Jeb Bush, comes across as what might have happened to George W. had he decided to become a physics teacher. [snip]

Donald Trump is, well, choose your metaphor: a bull in a China shop, a tempest in a teapot, Leslie Nielsen setting an apartment on fire, Kramer trying to host the Merv Griffin show in his apartment, Cersei handing over Kings Landing to a bunch of religious wackos wearing smelly bathrobes and branding weird symbols on their heads. Trump is offensive, impulsive, unmanageable, unpredictable and—he is, by the way, exactly the candidate the DC establishment deserves.

To many voters, rightly or wrongly, Trump is the antidote to years of Washington’s cynical, manufactured outrages, the petty punishments of those who deviated from the party line, its broken promises, meaningless “show votes,” careful, poll-tested politician speak and a multitude of backroom deals that have solved exactly zero of our nation’s problems. How deliciously humiliating it must be for the political pros of DC. [snip]

Unlike the DC crowd, Trump knows something about building “brands”—and for now at least he has one that sells. The business guy who can’t be bought. The iconoclast who won’t be controlled. The unrepentant loudmouth who will tell the Boehners and Pelosis and Putins and Kim Jong Uns of the world to stuff it. The quip machine—or insult generator if you prefer—who stands in sharp contrast to the dry, safe, meaningless drivel that passes for most political discourse today.

Intentionally or not, Trump also lets people in on the little DC secrets that those inside the Beltway wouldn’t dare share with regular America. He’s exposed, for example, the fact that office seekers like Rick Perry sucked up to him for millions before he started attacking him. Or that politicians like Lindsey Graham have turned to him for help to get on various TV programs. Or pointing out that the wife of a well-respected political pundit on Fox News works for rival Scott Walker.

Because he is defiantly not a part of the political class, he is impervious to conventional political weaponry. In fact, the attitude of the DC class toward his candidacy—temper tantrums and bouts of monumental arrogance—is only making him stronger. [snip]

The fault for the Trump phenomenon lies not only with the GOP, however. In a first for a news organization, the Huffington Post announced that it was unilaterally relegating a legitimate frontrunner for a major political party’s nomination to the entertainment pages. This was the perfect manifestation of the arrogance and elitism Americans despise. [snip]

Thanks to this sort of clumsy incompetence, Trump has been handed every Republican candidate’s dream: the chance to run against both the GOP leadership and the mainstream media.

Trump thus far has been an ideal candidate to take on the political establishment in all its myriad corruptions. Can anyone else do a Trump?

Some think Bernie Sanders is the socialist version of Trump. But Saint Bernard is a high priest of the political establishment. Like Ted Cruz, Saint Bernard is a United States Senator. You can’t shout “whore!” from the bedroom in a whorehouse.

That’s not to say Saint Bernard can’t hurt Hillary. Hillary hater Mark Halperin chortles as he lists the damage Saint Bernard can inflict on Hillary2016:

Hillary Clinton’s Bernie Sanders Problem Is Bigger Than Anyone Realizes

Seven ways in which the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont actually presents a mortal threat to the Democratic front-runner. [snip]

1. Pulling her to the left [snip]

In recent months, Clinton’s political and rhetorical message has boiled down to an Old-Democrat, big-government, Pelosi-Reid-AFL-CIO-pleasing stew that a skillful Republican nominee could exploit, shoving Clinton out of the vital political middle in the general election.

2. Exposing her biggest weaknesses

If Clinton’s main four-point agenda sounds like it is the product of extensive research by her polling and focus-group teams, well, that is because it is. A lot of voters grasp that calculation intuitively, and find it a turnoff.

3. Forcing her to go negative

First, as Sanders himself has eschewed negative politics throughout his career, potent political martyrdom could ensue. Second, Clinton could look like a hypocrite, since she has been regularly railing against negative attacks from the GOP. Third, it could unleash even more vigorous Republican assaults, with far less concern about public or media backlash.

4. Playing a losing expectations game [snip]

She has to finish far enough ahead of Sanders to prevent the press from treating a win like a loss. [snip]

5. Beating her in early states [snip]

6. Forcing her to invest in caucus states [snip]

Once again, this dynamic means Clinton has to continue to take left-wing positions and to devote precious resources to targeting small numbers of activists, rather than building a general-election machine.

7. Forcing her into an extended nomination fight

Saint Bernard of the Green Mountains will not win the nomination from Hillary. There are structural reasons for this involving Super Tuesday and the fact that Saint Bernard cannot self-finance a campaign even if by chance he would win Iowa and New Hampshire.

But Saint Bernard could be a rescue dog bringing a cask of political liquor to Joe Biden. Already there are desperate calls for Uncle Joe to drink from Saint Bernard’s cask of brandy and run for president. Before it happens let’s call it a “fail.” That’s what it is.



Has Uncle Joe Biden ever had success running for president? Every time Uncle Joe has run for president it has been a joke. Candidate Biden 2016 is a fail even before it happens and fails.

Which somewhat explains Barack Obama’s buffoonery in Africa. Barack Obama does not want Hillary to succeed him. President Hillary would mean Obama is only a brief interlude in the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton drama. But Barack has a problem if it is not Hillary.

Barack Obama does not want Donald Trump of the birth certificate and college application requests to get into the Oval Office. Barack can only shudder at the investigations he will have to testify in if Trump is president. Barack also does not want Trump to show what real HOPE AND CHANGE look like. Barack does not want Trump to be the reformer President who really does reform the GOP and breaks the back of the corrupt political establishment that has promoted slime like Barack.

So what does Obama do? Barack knows Trump is resonating with the voters. So from Africa he attacks Trump. Barack knows Elizabeth Warren cannot win against Trump. Barack knows Uncle Joe cannot win against Trump. Barack knows Saint Bernard cannot win against Trump. Barack knows the Obama cult will not vote for Hillary even as she begs and cowers before it. And from Africa Barack declares he could win a third term if he could run.

What goes on? Is Barack’s declaration of an Obama running in 2016 and winning a hint to muscular Michelle? Or is it just egotistical braggadocio to mock the faltering Hillary2016 and the hated Hillary?

Hillary2016 better wake up to the dangers it faces. The Obama cult won’t vote for Hillary. There are knives behind tapestries. The country wants real HOPE and real CHANGE. Donald Trump is the candidate of an annihilating change.

Hillary2016 better change.

Share

141 thoughts on “#Hillary2016 Beware: Donald Trump Can Win It All And Restart Republican Party! – Plus: Cruz Fail; Biden Fail; Saint Bernard Fail

  1. Sauce for the gander:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/kochs-freeze-out-trump-120752.html?hp=t2_r

    The Kochs freeze out Donald Trump [snip]

    In fact, independence from major donors and special interests is among Trump’s main selling points — an image that in some ways may be bolstered by his Koch snub and one that appears to resonate with his supporters.

    “The good news is that Donald Trump doesn’t need the Koch brothers, and he can do this perfectly without their assistance,” said Josh Youssef, who’s chairing Trump’s campaign in Belknap County, New Hampshire. Of the Kochs, Youssef said: “Their motivations are clearly not to break the mold of political insider-ship. Their goal is to keep the wheel spinning. Trump’s bad for business for them.” [snip]

    But Stephen Stepanek, a New Hampshire state legislator who is co-chairing Trump’s state campaign and owns the building that houses the Manchester Trump headquarters and AFP, said Trump’s appeal is partly his willingness to buck traditional ideological lines and the powerful interests behind them.

    “I think that’s what is sort of scaring a lot of people, especially on both Republican and Democratic sides, because they can’t control Trump,” said Stepanek, whose company made $5,000 in rent from Trump’s campaign, according to its FEC filing. “People are really afraid to speak their mind, and it is actually with the way people react to things and the way that these various groups attack people if they say anything, we’re having our First Amendment, freedom of speech, stepped on, walked all over by these various groups.”

  2. Amazing post Admin!!!

    Yes, Hillary had better stop the giggles, put on her big girl, Presidential pantsuit, drop the butt-kissing to the Kooks and get in the game.

    GET TOUGH HILLARY, or Trump will mow you over!

    (Admin)—-

    To many voters, rightly or wrongly, Trump is the antidote to years of Washington’s cynical, manufactured outrages, the petty punishments of those who deviated from the party line, its broken promises, meaningless “show votes,” careful, poll-tested politician speak and a multitude of backroom deals that have solved exactly zero of our nation’s problems. How deliciously humiliating it must be for the political pros of DC. [snip]

    Unlike the DC crowd, Trump knows something about building “brands”—and for now at least he has one that sells. The business guy who can’t be bought. The iconoclast who won’t be controlled. The unrepentant loudmouth who will tell the Boehners and Pelosis and Putins and Kim Jong Uns of the world to stuff it. The quip machine—or insult generator if you prefer—who stands in sharp contrast to the dry, safe, meaningless drivel that passes for most political discourse today.

    —-
    Absofrickin’lutely!!!!

  3. The issue is not whether the House is voting on the ExIm Bank Reauthorization (plus Highway pork bill) AFTER Ted Cruz’ publicity stunt shined a light on the ExIm Bank. Of course they aren’t voting to Reauthorize the Ex Im Bank now. These fools are all up for re-election in 2016. They can only cast a vote thumbing their noses at the tea party fools back home when nobody is looking.

    The issue is whether they would have staged a vote under cover of darkness to reauthorize the ExIm Bank if Cruz had NOT shined a light on it. We can’t know the answer to that. How many squish Repubs in the House would have voted for the Ex Im Bank Reauthorization Act of 2015 (plus Highway pork) if they thought they could have gotten away with it unnoticed?

    But, forget all that. I think Cruz’ actions were clearly political. And, they had an impact on the political audience he was targeting. He is competing for votes in a specific bracket of the Republican field and competing for campaign funding from a specific universe of major donors. His stunt and the day of attacks on him subsequently from Establishment Republicans raised his visibility as a “fighter” in his bracket of the party. There is more than one candidate engaging in brand building efforts.

  4. On the Koch sponsored donor conference this weekend, four major candidates are making presentations: Bush, Cruz, Walker, and Rubio. Paul was invited, but has inexplicitly turned down the invitation.

    To understand the hot button issues that drive this particular group of donors (expected to spend $889 million in the 2016 presidential race), here are the 25 questions on their candidate questionnaire used to screen candidates, thanks to the Washington Post.

    In consideration of whether Ted Cruz stunt in the Senate was successful in political terms, I would call your attention in particular to question #9:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/06/18/scoop-25-questions-the-koch-brothers-want-every-2016-candidate-to-answer/

    Section 1: Expanding Opportunity for Everyone

    Question #1: What specific policies would your administration pursue to create greater opportunity for all Americans?

    Question #2: Do you believe too many activities are criminalized in America and, as a result, too many people are incarcerated? What criminal justice reforms would you support?

    Question #3: Do you believe current federal prohibitions and policies used to fight drug abuse are working? If not, what would you change?

    Question #4: Do you believe federal spending on education is insufficient?

    Question #5: Do you believe some government programs or policies present barriers to opportunity for the poorest Americans? If so, which are the most destructive?

    Question #6: How would your administration address rising health care costs?

    Question #7: If repealed by the Supreme Court, would you support extending federal subsidies for health insurance in states without exchanges, even if it would extend individual and employer mandates?

    Section 2: Combating Cronyism and Corporate Welfare

    Question #8: Do you agree government mandates and subsidies distort the economy and allow certain individuals and corporations to profit at the expense of others?

    Question #9: Do you support reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank?

    Question #10: Do you support federal agricultural subsidies?

    Question #11: Do you believe the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was necessary?

    Question #12: Do you support the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)?

    Question #13: Should tax reform eliminate all preferential treatment and credits for individuals, industries and activities in order to lower marginal tax rates?

    Section 3: Restoring Fiscal Sustainability

    Question #14: What is your plan to deal with the $18 trillion national debt and the more than $200 trillion unfunded liability burden facing the U.S.?

    Question #15: As president, would you uphold the overall discretionary spending limits set by the Budget Control Act of 2011?

    Question #16: Do you believe the debt limit should be used to leverage federal spending reductions?

    Question #17: Do you support increasing tax revenue in order to pay for infrastructure spending?

    Question #18: Do you support Social Security and Medicare reform that would increase the age of eligibility and reduce benefits for wealthier retirees?

    Question #19: Do you support expanding Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act?

    Question #20: Do you support capping federal spending on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by allowing states to control those funds in the form of federal grants?

    Question #21: Do you support targeted federal spending or limited tax benefits to help spur economic growth within a particular industry or geographic area?

    Section 4: Shaping Foreign Policy

    Question #22: What criteria would you use to determine when to deploy U.S. armed forces overseas? For instance, should the military be used to address humanitarian crises abroad?

    Question #23: Do you believe military intervention in Libya made America safer? Should the U.S. intervene in Syria and/or Ukraine?

    Question #24: Should the U.S. use any means necessary to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon even if it required the use of ground forces?

    Question #25: Can current military spending be reduced without compromising national security?

  5. For anyone who thinks the scenario described in the front page article is absurd – this just popped up on Drudge:

    http://www.saintpetersblog.com/archives/236488

    Shock poll: Donald Trump leads Jeb Bush 26-20% … in Florida

    For the first time this year, Donald Trump tops a state poll of GOP presidential candidates in Florida.

    A St. Pete Polls survey released on Wednesday shows the New York businessman with 26 percent support, with Jeb Bush in second place with 20 percent.

    Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is in third place with 12 percent, and Marco Rubio is in fourth place with 10 percent. He’s followed by Dr. Ben Carson at 5 percent, Ted Cruz and John Kasich at 4 percent, and Rand Paul at 3 percent. 16 percent are unsure or are supporting another candidate not named in the survey.

  6. The first “debate” is the candidate forum hosted by the Manchester Union Leader in NH next Monday and broadcast on C-SPAN. Fifteen candidates were invited (everyone but former VA governor Happy Gilmore). Fourteen have accepted and will be on stage Monday night.

    The 15th candidate declined to appear. In a letter to the publisher of the Manchester Union Leader, the candidate said that he wouldn’t appear because he didn’t believe he would get the Union Leader’s endorsement:

    http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150729/NEWS060501/150729077

  7. SecState John Kerry refuses to apologize to families of US Servicemen who were killed by Iranian IEDs in Iraq:

  8. Trumps FL over ShrubIII and Rubio.

    I am so glad I am not the room with Trump to have to listen to him boast 😉

    Good for him!

  9. Admin: I agree with most of this analysis.

    In an age of corruption, Trump has tapped into the growing backlash against the Washington cartel, which grows more corrupt, more controlling and more divorced from the needs of the American People with every passing year.

    In that vein, the strategic decision by the Republican elites to cannibalize their base and repudiate their campaign promises in 2014 was a blunder on a scale with Hitler’s decision to invade Russia.

    But the power of Trump does not stop there. No does it stop with the fact that he does not need money, therefore nobody owns him. His ultimate appeal is what his style and his shtick connects with our narcissistic culture in a good way.

    And why is that important? It is important because the cultural dimension is what connects with the low information voter. There is nothing high brow about it. It is the emotional mother load, which avoids the impossible task of trying to make them economists.

    Trump has only two sacred cows: the welfare of the country and the promotion of his own image. Those are sacred. Everything else is profane. Everything else is negotiable.

    Where other candidates produce platforms which pay subtle obeisance to the ponderous factions that comprise their coalition and vapid references to the country, by virtue of who and what he is, Trump is more likely to produce a business plan to save the nation.

    With respect to Cruz, you are right that he must learn when and where to pick his fights. But the notion that you and hwc have that his attacks on McConnell were simply stunts misses the mark. Honey badgers do not engage in stunts. And they do not read books.

  10. “Richard Nixon’s ghost must have been smiling… Tricky Dick understood destroying e-mails, in his day it was erasing tape….”

  11. I don’t know why Drudge consider it a shock poll when the candidate who has led in every recent poll leads in another? It’s hardly a shock when the front runner in a political race shows to be the front-runner in another poll.

  12. The production of the business plan begs the ultimate question who wins, who loses, and can the losers be mollified.

    The business plan Trump would promote, would make the American People the winners, and the Washington cartel the loser, until such time as those who are part of that cartel come up with a new game that serves the people, as opposed to the current one which jeopardizes their future. They way to mollify them is to present that challenge to them, as the alternative to fucking the country.

  13. I don’t understand why a billionaire self funding a campaign is any more beneficial to the “little guy” than a billionaire funding somebody else’s campaign. If anything, the self-funding billionaire would be even MORE likely to represent the billionaire’s interests.

    Would there suddenly be less fear or more fear of Charles Koch if he funded his own campaign?

  14. Admin
    Forgot about a Trump president looking into BOs education and BC issues. Wouldn’t that be sweet!

  15. I don’t understand why a billionaire self funding a campaign is any more beneficial to the “little guy” than a billionaire funding somebody else’s campaign. If anything, the self-funding billionaire would be even MORE likely to represent the billionaire’s interests.
    ——-
    Not the same at all.

    If he self funds, he has only his own interests to worry about.

    If others fund, he has his own interest and their interest for worry about.

    The latter imposes a de facto lien on the general welfare, which can be foreclosed on at any time, e.g. the stimulus package.

  16. Furthermore, as Edmond Burke observed, men of wealth have less incentive to vote themselves the nations wealth or do the bidding of other men of wealth in the hope of advancing their own. As such, they are less corruptible and better able to focus with laser intensity on the welfare of the nation, as opposed to their own.

  17. Furthermore, as Edmond Burke observed, men of wealth have less incentive to vote themselves the nations wealth or do the bidding of other men of wealth in the hope of advancing their own. As such, they are less corruptible and better able to focus with laser intensity on the welfare of the nation, as opposed to their own.

    Then why all the pearl clutching over George Soros and Charles Koch?

  18. Unleash another Kraken:

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/federal-judge-threatens-to-hold-irs-commissioner-doj-lawyers-in-contempt-of-court-over-lerner/

    Judge Sullivan referenced his contempt findings against Justice Department prosecutors in the prosecution of late Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) and reminded the Justice Department attorney he had the ability to detain him for contempt. Warning he would tolerate no further disregard of his orders, Judge Sullivan said, “I will haul into court the IRS Commissioner to hold him personally into contempt.

    After the hearing, Judge Sullivan issued the following “minute order”:

    At the July 29, 2015 status hearing, the Government agreed that the Court’s July 1, 2015 oral order from the bench was clear and enforceable. Nonetheless, the Government reasoned it inappropriate to file a motion for reconsideration until a written order was issued. As expressed at the hearing, the Government’s reasoning is nonsensical. Officers of the Court who fail to comply with Court orders will be held in contempt. Also, in the event of non-compliance with future Court orders, the Commissioner of the IRS and others shall be directed to show cause as to why they should not be held in contempt of Court. The Court’s July 1, 2015 ruling from the bench stands: (1) the Government shall produce relevant documents every Monday; (2) the Government’s document production shall be accompanied by a status report that indicates (a) whether TIGTA has turned over any new documents to the IRS, (b) if so, the number of documents, and (c) a timeframe for the IRSs production of those documents. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 29, 2015.

  19. This is i360, the Koch-funded campaign voter targeting database that is in the news today because i360 has decided not to work with all of the Republican Presidential candidates. That should be no big deal. Any candidate not able to work with i360 should be able to tap into the RNC’s voter database. Reince Priebus isn’t going to shut out candidates. And, the RNC database is cheaper.

    The least-known vehicle for the Kochs is a for-profit company known as i360, started by a former adviser to John McCain’s presidential campaign after McCain lost to Barack Obama in 2008. Subsequently, it merged with a Koch-funded data nonprofit. The Koch-affiliated Freedom Partners, formed in late 2011, eventually became an investor, officials confirmed to POLITICO.

    Spending more than $50 million in cash over the past four years, i360 links voter information with consumer data purchased from credit bureaus and other vendors. Information from social networks is blended in, along with any interaction the voter may have had with affiliated campaigns and advocacy groups. Then come estimated income, recent addresses, how often a person has voted, and even the brand of car they drive. Another i360 service slices and dices information about TV viewing to help campaigns target ads more precisely and cost efficiently.

    GOP campaigns can get less-expensive data through the RNC, but happily pay i360 for its superior profiles. Midterm clients included several of the GOP’s marquee Senate and gubernatorial victors, including Sens.-elect Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Joni Ernst of Iowa, and Gov.-elect Larry Hogan in Maryland.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/koch-brothers-rnc-113359.html#ixzz3hJnBWril

  20. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/28/charles-hurt-obama-holds-trump-card-in-democratic-/

    So who does hold the trump card for Democrats? Who is the one Democrat who could keep all of Hillary Clinton’s supporters and mop up all the voters dissatisfied with her — all the while remaining at least marginally acceptable to the broader American electorate?

    Only one man: Joseph R. Biden.

    And what makes this all the more intriguing is how curiously silent Vice President Biden and President Obama have been lately about the 2016 race. Are they quietly plotting a way for President Obama to stun the political world and go all in behind a Biden candidacy?

    There are many, many reasons this ruthless president would do such a thing.

    It would allow the president to finally make good on the initial galvanizing promise of his 2008 campaign. He would finally seize control of the Democratic Party and take it away from the Clintons. Forever.

  21. alcina
    July 29, 2015 at 4:29 pm

    Admin
    Forgot about a Trump president looking into BOs education and BC issues. Wouldn’t that be sweet!

    ——-

    That would be sweet, indeed.

  22. Admin

    Who is the one Democrat who could keep all of Hillary Clinton’s supporters and mop up all the voters dissatisfied with her — all the while remaining at least marginally acceptable to the broader American electorate?

    Only one man: Joseph R. Biden.

    ——–

    Hahaha, Uncle Gaff Biden…I think ol’ Joe has lost his spark and senses from many Hillary supporters.

    Who takes Joe seriously??

  23. Florida loves Donald Trump.

    He has status. He has money. He creates entertainment and he has real estate.

    What more could the Sunshine State want?

    Trump gets respect in Florida.

  24. August 6th is coming.

    So, who would BO rather have as the next POTUS?

    Hillary or Trump?

    BBBBBbbbwwwwwwwahhahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  25. admin
    July 29, 2015 at 3:06 pm

    ….”Marco Rubio is in fourth place with 10 percent” in his own state. Well that blows his backers arguments to hell and back. He can’t win Florida and he won’t be the VP. Now his money will dry up. The little weasel.

  26. admin
    July 29, 2015 at 5:44 pm
    ———————————

    If it happens, then that should be a wakeup call to Hillary to take off her gloves and start squeezing, twisting, punching and kicking Obama and his cohorts in the balls.

  27. …remember yesterday I mentioned that I called the Florida voting office to inquire about procedures for voting in a closed primary…

    and I mentioned that the man told me many people are changing parties to vote in the primaries for a different party…

    I predict that many Dems will cross over and vote for Trump in the primary…that does not mean they won’t vote for Hillary in the national…

    People are really, really fed up in Florida…

    and as Lu4Puma says people love/like Donald in Florida…geesh he owns Mar-a-lago in Palm Beach which hosts all kinds of events…he has ‘star power’ in Florida…

    http://www.maralagoclub.com/

    he is generously philanthropic with charities…

    ******************************

    I would like to add something to the list Admin has so acutely described…

    People underestimate that Donald Trump is a multidimensional talent

    those who cling to calling him a buffon, not serious about running, not really running, can never win…are in denial…

    btw…Donald’s ‘Make America Great Again’ hats have sold out…talk about Branding

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/28/donald-trumps-trucker-hat-has-sold-out-its-also-a-good-case-study-in-campaign-finance/

  28. Then why all the pearl clutching over George Soros and Charles Koch?
    ———–
    Because wealth alone may convey freedom to act, but it does not guarantee a commitment to the welfare of this country.

    Soros has the wealth, but not the commitment to the United States.

    And he has been very explicit on that point.

    One of his statements says it all: “the Democratic Party does not stand for the principles that I advocate. It it did it could not be elected.”

    He is no devotee of the United States. He hates nationalism in all its forms. He advocates world government.

  29. I just heard the dumbest political punditry I’ve ever heard. Bill O’Reily just said that he thinks Ted Cruz will take on the poll leader in the Republican race and attack him directly in the Aug 6 debate.

    That is absurd. It’s more likely that Ben Carson goes postal (or gets the first sentence of answer out before the buzzer) in the debate than Ted Cruz.

    O’Reilly is making the mistake of thinking that these candidates are even concerned with being in 1st place in August when the first ballots aren’t cast until January.

  30. Hillary Clinton Talks About Roots & Goals at Private Fundraiser
    Democratic Presidential Hopeful Spends Two Hours in City
    Published 07/29 2015 06:27PM
    …Clinton began in the home of Virginia McGregor by taking pictures and shaking hands with many of the guests. She then moved to an outdoor tent where she spoke for roughly 20 minutes…
    Several dark SUVs wisked her into the back of the home.
    Dozens of people, including parents and kids stood on the sidewalk outside the home just hoping to get a glance of her. Some were disappointed. Others took it in stride….
    Video at link.
    http://www.pahomepage.com/news/hillary-clinton-talks-about-roots-goals-at-private-fundraiser

  31. Cruz Not Backing Down From Comment About Obama Sponsoring Terrorism

    According to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran is essentially financing terrorism. And he’s not backing down after the president called his comments “outrageous.”

    “If this deal is consummated, it will make the Obama administration the world’s leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism,” Cruz said during a round table Tuesday. “Billions of dollars under control of this administration will flow into the hands of jihadists who will use that money to murder Americans, to murder Israelis, to murder Europeans.”

    Mitch McConnell currently has all seventy of his chins flapping about in a fit over Cruz and his lack of willingness to be polite to people who don’t deserve it. You will not find many examples of Senator Cruz being impolite to people who don’t deserve it, by the way.

    The prevailing sentiment among anti-Cruz Republicans is that he stirs things up simply because he has a big ego and likes the attention. In reality, he is bringing some Goldwater-esque swagger back to the Senate just in time to perhaps save the Republicans from themselves. Harry Reid wasn’t much for capitulation when he was majority leader, but Mitch McConnell’s memory seems to be nonexistent, as he wakes up every day already bent over backwards for the Democrats.

    Cruz makes people uncomfortable, and that is his real sin in a city where those in the hometown industry are more interested in getting along at the next work-related happy hour than whatever the regular Americans are worried about.

    Sometimes I wonder if it might be better for Cruz to remain in the Senate just to be a permanent thorn in the sides of idiots like McConnell, McCain and Hatch. He’s wildly popular with his constituents, because he keeps doing what they want, rather than what he wants, which is an almost unheard of modus operandi in D.C. these days.

  32. holdthemaccountable

    July 29, 2015 at 8:52 pm

    *****************************

    hold them…when I read and hear things like this it does not endear Hillary as candidate of ‘the people’…she seems so remote…I hope O’s aloofness has not worn off on her…

    what…the ‘little people’ don’t deserve a few waves and handshakes…Bill would shake every single hand before these events ended…

    I do not think her heart is in this…I don’t know…

  33. hwc
    July 29, 2015 at 8:36 pm
    ———–
    That is the last thing in the world Cruz will do on August 6.

    That comment by O’Reilly reflects a shocking degree of ignorance.

    It would be like a running back tackling the lineman who is in running front of him, clearing out the opposition.

  34. Marco Rubio is in fourth place with 10 percent” in his own state
    ————
    Can we therefore assume that his comment that this country has an painful history on race, did not produce its intended effect?

  35. S – July 29, 2015 at 9:07 pm
    I do not think her heart is in this…I don’t know…
    ————————-
    Perhaps I should not say this, but my inner mind, the one I do not control, keeps suggesting she is now an abused woman.

  36. If Hillary won’t listen to us, maybe she’ll listen to… Saint Bernard????:

    http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/28/bernie-sanders-denounces-higher-immigration/

    Bernie Sanders Denounces Higher Immigration

    Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders took a surprising line on immigration in a recent interview, denouncing higher immigration levels as a right-wing “Koch brothers proposal.”

    Sanders was being interviewed by Ezra Klein of Vox, who pointed out that Sanders’ self-proclaimed socialist beliefs typically entailed taking a more international view of politics. The implications of that point of view, Klein suggested, include “things like sharply raising the level of immigration we permit, even up to a level of open borders.”

    Absolutely not, Sanders replied.

    Open borders? No, that’s a Koch brothers proposal,” he said. “That’s a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States… What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy.

    Klein countered by saying heavier immigration would allow the global poor to become richer, but Sanders said that could only come at the expense of existing American workers.

    “You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today?” he said. “If you’re a white high school graduate, it’s 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?”

    “I think from a moral responsibility we’ve got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don’t do that by making people in this country even poorer,” he continued.

    Sanders’ frank response puts the populist left-wing candidate oddly close to the rhetoric of Donald Trump, who has surged in the Republican primary contest in large part thanks to his severe denunciations of illegal immigration.

    It also puts distance, at least rhetorically, between him and Hillary Clinton, who has distinguished herself on immigration mostly by promising to go further than President Obama on the issue.

    Sanders has shown signs in the past that he is less pro-immigration than some of his Democratic colleagues. In 2007, he was a major Democratic opponent of George W. Bush’s immigration reform bill, arguing that welcoming more guest workers would drive down wages for American workers.

    Since launching his long-shot effort against Clinton in the spring, Sanders has mostly avoided the immigration issue, though he said in a June speech he supports immigration reform that provides a path to citizenship for current illegal immigrants.

    So why is Hillary moving to the left on these issues when Sanders is moving to… wherever he is moving towards?

  37. We have a lot of LEGAL immigrants in Florida and they add a wonderful diversity to the state. We also have a lot of illegal immigrants. Not so welcome by all.

    Rubio made a bad mistake.

  38. admin
    July 29, 2015 at 9:27 pm
    ——————————

    Hillary really did herself in on the immigration issue. Her only hope is to take a strong closed border position and mush alot on the amnesty. If the courts rule against Obola on amnesty, she may get off the hook.

    You know, part of the amnesty issue is just how many people it would end up being. I have heard number from 5 million to 50 million. It is a really scarey issue. A deal breaker. I have a daughter who is coming of age with so few opportunities around.

    Any amnesty deals need to be limited and tough.

  39. Donald Trump has changed America already, getting Bernie to blame the Gopers for open borders. This is going to get interesting.

  40. That comment by O’Reilly reflects a shocking degree of ignorance.

    That’s essentially what Krauthammer said to O’Reilly in response. The only Republican Firebrand Ted Cruz ™ wants to attack in the debates is the “so called Republican leadership” and the “McConnell/Reid leadership team”.

    Take out the time for questions and commercials, each candidate will probably get under 5 minutes of speaking time. He’s not going to waste his attacking Republican opponents individually. He’ll do it in general terms, “ask which candidates have stood up to the Washington Cartel?” or “which candidates have supported amnesty”.

    He and the poll-leading candidate obviously have a deal. A mutual non-aggression treaty, if you will. They share common interests in defining the issues in ways that put the establishment candidates on the defensive.

    I expect the Fox News questioners to be extremely aggressive to the candidates. That and the clock will make it a good test of message discipline.

  41. Sanders shows some clarity, though the blame game is his own party, obama and the globalists. Both Democrats and Republicans. .

  42. Who is the one Democrat who could keep all of Hillary Clinton’s supporters and mop up all the voters dissatisfied with her — all the while remaining at least marginally acceptable to the broader American electorate?

    Give me a break! Biden “marginally acceptable to the broader American electorate?” He’s an over the hill nasty drunk.

    As I have gotten older I have come to understand that life is pretty unforgiving. If you’re fortunate enough to have an opportunity and don’t take it, you have probably missed it for ever. Christie’s moment was in 2008 and he let it pass. Now he is tarnished and done for in national politics. Hillary had her moment in 2008 and chose to give in and not fight to the end, caving at the convention. She walked away from a successful “persona” to work for a piece of sh.. and now she is barely recognizable. I think she has blown her moment and will be very surprised if this plan works for her. Its all too cute and too contrived and even stupid people get that.

    The Clintons will be visiting East Hampton again in August. I know many of the people they will visit with and have been in some of their homes. I used to be an active democrat These people are so isolated from the rest of us, so arrogant in their beliefs and so insulated from the real problems so many of us are facing and this is the milieu that Hillary lives in. There will be high priced fund raisers but no visits to other venues or other neighborhoods. After all, NY is not an early primary state and our votes don’t matter. The Clintons are always friendly and somewhat accessible to random people they meet in restaurants, stores, etc., but East Hampton is a place to come to relax with other uber wealthy people and raise money.

    Trump is clearly having his “moment”. It remains to be seen what he will do with it. Is he smart enough and tough enough to capitalize on it. I think he is. I hope he is. I’m ready for Trump. I despise Obama and what he has done to our country and I just want everything O to go away.

  43. admin
    July 29, 2015 at 6:39 pm
    Shadowfax, here’s a video of the biggest “Draft Joe Biden” rally yet:

    ——-
    I think I saw Joe and his supporter behind two big tumble weeds.

    Hark, what an impact he has made as a candidate.

  44. It’s hardly a shock when the front runner in a political race shows to be the front-runner in another poll.

    I think maybe they said “shock” because Bush and Rubio are Floridians, and Trump is whopping them in their home state….

  45. Perhaps I should not say this, but my inner mind, the one I do not control, keeps suggesting she is now an abused woman.

    Wow. Reading that, it really resonates.

    In 2008 she was strong, confident, bold, as Henry said she had a fire in her belly, and while she pulled *some* punches, she went pretty all-out on Obama. She had a vision and was on the offensive.

    Now she seemed reined in, on the defensive (Benghazi, emails, protecting Obama – the former two which may actually be related to the latter). She seems very reined in, yes, about the only way she’ll move much distance is further in O’s direction and far left views. Like if she doesn’t, something will hurt her.

    And she *has* to be too smart to alienate so many voters with this Obama III routine – so maybe the thing she is fearing isn’t actually losing the votes of the kooks – maybe it’s something worse.

    Yes, I think what you’re saying is very insightful.

  46. Lorac, as the article states, imagine if (and we know it is still a long way off and we suggest everyone including us here reserve judgement as to the GOP side of the race at least until after August 6 when we will see the candidates react to one another and reveal themselves and their strategies) Trump wins Florida and finishes both Rubio and Bush off simultaneously.

    Up to now the assumption has been that Jeb Bush, because of greater organizational support and financial resources, would be able to beat Rubio in winner-take-all Florida. Rubio would then have to admit defeat and Jeb Bush would consolidate establishment support then romp to the nomination. Then Trump came along.

  47. Up to now the assumption has been that Jeb Bush, because of greater organizational support and financial resources, would be able to beat Rubio in winner-take-all Florida. Rubio would then have to admit defeat and Jeb Bush would consolidate establishment support then romp to the nomination.

    I’ve never thought that. And, many “establishment” Republicans have never seen a clear path to the nomination for a third Bush. The baggage of Bush 3, and the fact that it gives up the biggest contrast with Clinton 2, has made it difficult to see the Republican base ever embracing Jeb!

    The fact that there are umpteen “establishment” type candidates jumping into the race is pretty telling evidence of Jeb! weakness. This is compounded by the fact that he’s dull as dishwater on the campaign trail.

    None of this dynamic really changes with or without the current GOP front runner in the race.

  48. That’s a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States… What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy.”
    ———
    Bernie Sanders is clueless.

    The tea party is right wing, and the tea party is four square AGAINST open borders.

    https://www.teaparty.org/campaigns/no-amnesty.php

    It is the business wing of Republican Party which is for it.

    The business wing is the establishment and they are globalist, internationalist

    And it no way shape or form right wing.

    It is what used to be called the Rockerfeller wing.

    If you look at the backers of McCain, Graham, Flake and Rubio, all of them belong to that wing.

    The leading exponent within that group is McCain, since Graham and Flake are satellites of him.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/28/immigrations-gang-of-8-who-are-they/

    The Koch Brothers support immigration reform, but not the Gang of 8 bill/

    They have given humanitarian support and English lessons, etc. but they do not advocate open borders for cheap labor.

    Their main objective is to tap into a growing demographic which if frozen in amber, and give the R’s a shot at it.

    http://www.teaparty.org/koch-bros-reach-hispanics-pro-immigration-reform-initiative-51177/

  49. imagine if … Trump wins Florida and finishes both Rubio and Bush off simultaneously.

    Yes, that would certainly have a huge effect… and probably more validation of his candidacy than any previous state wins…

    (from below) Trump card – In general, something capable of making a decisive difference when used at the right moment

    I’m feeling that Trump’s candidacy may be a trump card in itself – a lot of the right messages at the right time.

    From Yahoo Answers

    Trump card definition

    Trump \Trump\, n. [A corruption of triumph, F. triomphe. See Triumph, and cf. Trump a trumpet.]
    1. A winning card; one of a particular suit (usually determined by chance for each deal) any card of which takes any card of the other suits.
    2. An old game with cards, nearly the same as whist; — called also ruff. –Decker.
    3. A good fellow; an excellent person. [Slang]

    From Dictionary.com

    Trump card definition

    In general, something capable of making a decisive difference when used at the right moment; in certain card games, trump is the suit designated as having precedence over the others: “The prosecutor was about to win the case, when the defense lawyer produced her trump card: an eyewitness who testified that the accused was nowhere near the scene of the crime.”

  50. Trump can win Florida. I live in the liberal dominated, affluent part of the state, but there are conservative areas also. That is why we have an ugly Tea Party Governor. The primary industries are tourism and real estate. A celebrity real estate mogul takes all.

  51. I took Obama’s comments about him being able to win a third term as a tacit invitation for Biden to run against Hillary.

  52. Trump is a cultural icon.

    That means what he is, is more important than what he says.

    George Clooney is a cultural icon to many, present company excepted.

    He says stupid things, and gets away with it.

    When you rise to the level of cultural icon

    The only thing you worry about is your act gets stale.

    Trump says he will not bone up for the debates.

    No Guttenberg bibles for him.

    He intends to show up and just be himself.

    If you saw the Dana Bash interview

    When she asked him about dreamers

    The text of his answer was vague.

    If you read you would see that was true.

    But there was a lot more to the answer than just the words

    The non verbal behavior projected credibility

    And that is good in one sense

    Because the question is not can he and Dana’ CNN scriptwriters solve the immigration problem

    And even if they could would the public at large be smart enough to recognize the best deal if they saw it

    And if the NYT told them it was the best deal, NYT credibility being what it is, would anyone believe them.

    Rather, the question is given who he is, and what he has accomplished, does the public at large trust him?

    Which gets back to a book that Roger Ailes wrote at the height of the Reagan Revolution

    The title of that book was “You Are The Message”.

    The most effective attack on Trump will be the ad hominum one.

    If they try to attack him because he has not been a governor, or senator that argument at this point is a non starter.

    It should be clear at this point that those people are part of the problem, rather than the solution.

    Assuming his act does not get stale, the line of attack you will see will be to suggest he is not sound.

    In corporate life, the way this is done is to acknowledge the accomplishments of the target.

    And then to lean forward with a plaintiff look and whisper, but is he sound?

    In other words, Caesar is an honest man, but . . .

    I do not think that will work however, because Trump has the microphone and the momentum.

    So long as the act does not get stale.

    And with all the problems he will be pointing out–he and Cruz.

    I see little risk that will happen.

  53. There are some complex questions where the best answer a candidate can give is I don’t know off hand, but if you look at what I have accomplished you will realize that once I have all the facts in front of me, rather than a set of political talking points, I will figure it out, and you and I will find the best solution to this problem which nobody else has been able to solve.

  54. If I were a biologist, which I am not, I would bring down fat Frank Luntz through the same methods used to take down a Cape Buffalo—a six ten nitro express with stun bullets. I would butcher his carcass, separating the body from the brain. The brain I would give to a museum as an example of a blip in the evolutionary cycle. The carcass I would give to Planned Parenthood, as they are known to make a market in tissue and body parts, and to spend the dollars derived from these commercial endeavors on pro bono public projects like buying Lamborghinis.

  55. http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/29/michael-savage-to-trump-youre-the-winston-churchill-of-our-time/

    Michael Savage To Trump: ‘You’re The Winston Churchill Of Our Time’

    Winston Churchill’s back — and this time he’s the classiest of class acts.

    At least so says radio talk show host Michael Savage, who praised Donald Trump as the “Winston Churchill of our time” during the real estate billionaire’s appearance on Savage’s radio show Wednesday.

    Savage, who said he is supporting Trump’s presidential candidacy, talked voter identification laws, immigration and the Iran nuclear deal with the man who is currently leading most Republican presidential primary polls.

    Asked about Iran, Trump said it is “inconceivable” that New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who he always “thought loved Israel,” would support the Iran deal in the Senate.

    After Savage interjected to ask whether Schumer has come out to say he is going to support the deal, Trump replied, “nobody knows what he is going to do,” before suggesting Israel might pressure him to oppose it.

    “Actually I’m surprised that Israel isn’t putting tremendous pressure on Schumer because they do have a lot of power over Schumer,” Trump said, implying a sitting U.S. senator’s vote could be swayed by the pressure of a foreign power.

    Savage also pressed Trump on whether he would establish strict voter ID laws through an executive order as president. But before Trump could answer, Savage explained why he actually shouldn’t answer the question.

    “I know I don’t want to nail you, I don’t want to get you to say ‘yes’ and then they’ll nail you for that,” Savage said. “‘Trump goes on right wing Savage Show and says’ — right away, they start screaming racism. I get it. I know what they do. I know the game.”

    Trump finally broke into Savage’s monologue to say he supports ID laws, though he didn’t say whether he would establish them nationally through executive action.

  56. Update: The “ignore Trump” strategy which replaced the “attack Trump” strategy means these two new national polls will be either underplayed or not reported. Reuters/Ipsos #1 Trump at 24.9% followed by Bush at 12. Quinnipiac #1 Trump 20%, Walker 13%, Bush 10%.

    ——————————-

  57. I am sure that Admin must be aware of this…however some here may not have seen this yet…

    yes…the Trump card phenonmenon in action…and the train has left the station…

    this is just a snippet of a much longer ‘Focus Group’ of republic and and independent voters…longer version and analysis will play on ‘With All Due Respect’ tonight at 5 pm on Bloomberg TV with Halpern and Heilemann…

    the whole insider Washington/NY establishment class has mouths open and hair on fire…

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-07-30/new-hampshire-voters-explain-the-appeal-of-donald-trump

  58. JBStonesFan, this took a while. Big Media finally reports what we’ve been reporting, um, for how long now? Via Hillary hater Monica Crowley:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/29/monica-crowley-obama-a-threat-to-hillary-clinton/

    Is Obama taking Hillary out?

    Hillary Clinton is not going to be the Democratic nominee for president.

    Yes, the conventional wisdom is that she is still the prohibitive favorite, armed with big money, big connections, and the Big Dog, Bill.

    But the so-called “wisdom” is “conventional” for a reason. [snip]

    It’s President Obama. And he just made his move.

    Here’s how it’s likely going down:

    The Clintons and the Obamas have a long history of bad blood, dating to the 2008 primary race. After Mr. Obama creamed her, he offered her the plum gig of secretary of state. Friends close, enemies closer. She tried to get her dirty tricks consigliere, Sidney Blumenthal, a top position in the State Department, which Mr. Obama pointedly denied. So she hired him anyway through the Clinton Foundation.

    Through Mr. Blumenthal, she was fed all kinds of intelligence on global hotpots such as Libya, much of it inaccurate, as she circumvented traditional government communication chains via her private email server. What was she hiding from Mr. Obama? And why? Perhaps because she trusted Mr. Obama about as much as she trusted Bill.

    Mr. Obama didn’t trust her, either. In a recently disclosed email, Mrs. Clinton complained that she heard “on the radio” that there was a “Cabinet meeting” that morning and wondered if she could attend. The secretary of state — fourth in line to the presidency — was frozen out, so she set up her own fiefdom.

    Mr. Obama needs a successor whom he can control to ensure that the “fundamental transformation of the nation” continues. He cannot control either of the Clintons. In a revealing “tell” this week, he said, “In 18 months, I’m turning over the keys. I want to make sure I’m turning over the keys to somebody who is serious about the serious problems that the country faces and the world faces.”

    He will therefore back the one person he knows will do his bidding: his vice president, Joe Biden, whom he summons to his side for every critical photo op, including the announcement of the Iran deal. There’s more going on there than just symbolism.

    So here’s the likely plan: Mr. Biden will announce that he is running for president (the reported dying wish of his late son, Beau). After a respectable amount of time, Mr. Obama will announce that while he admires all of the Democratic candidates, Mr. Biden has earned his particular loyalty.

    Following his presidential endorsement, Mr. Obama will then support Mr. Biden with the full weight of the White House, including the sophisticated technical infrastructure his campaigns used to win in 2008 and 2012. For years, Mrs. Clinton has begged Mr. Obama to turn it over to her, and he refused. He’s been saving it for someone else.

    Mr. Obama will also use his considerable influence with black and Latino voters to support Mr. Biden, which may be enough to help him significantly.

    But Mrs. Clinton is a survivor, they will say. The media protects her. True. But it will be a much different situation if she’s under criminal investigation by the Justice Department or worse, crippled by a Special Prosecutor or even an indictment.

    Don’t think Mr. Obama will go there? He already has. Last week, the New York Times reported that two inspectors general from his administration recommended that the Justice Department open a “criminal” inquiry into her handling of classified material. The leak to the Times came from a “senior administration official,” which some have speculated was Mr. Obama’s own consigliere, Valerie Jarrett. The Times walked back some of the details, but the damage was done. If Mr. Obama did not want a DOJ criminal investigation of Mrs. Clinton to go forward, he would not have let it go this far.

    He wants the investigation, wants her nailed, wants her out. And he’s doing it, slowly, steadily.

    The Clintons used to be champion Machiavellians. But in Mr. Obama, they look like they are being outmaneuvered — again — by the ultimate take-no-prisoners master.

    Hillary is being given the Judas kiss by her former boss, a man loyal to no one but himself.

    Will Hillary wake up? The situation, as we have stated before, is much more dire than when we began to publish in 2007 because we saw what was happening in regards to Obama with clearer eyes than the official campaign.

  59. this is written by, of all people, John Heileman and is further down at the focus group link i posted above…

    snip

    To take a stab at answering those questions, we asked our partners at Purple Strategies to help us convene a focus group of Trump supporters at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire. The group was made up of six Republicans and six Republican-leaning independents, six women and six men. Culturally and economically, they were a diverse lot, ranging from working- to upper-middle-class, from unemployed to blue-collar to professional. Five called themselves adherents to the Tea Party and the others were at least mildly sympathetic to that movement. But their second choices in the Republican field ran the gamut from Jeb Bush and John Kasich to Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.

    The hundred minutes or so I spent with them were fascinating, informative, and fun. I learned a ton. The main five takeaways are these:

    1. Trump appears to be no summer fling

    According to the latest polling, Trump commands the support of roughly 20 percent of Republican voters nationally and in New Hampshire (and a little shy of that in Iowa). That may prove to be his ceiling; we shall see. But judging from our focus group, anyone who believes Trump is merely this cycle’s incarnation of Michele Bachmann or Herman Cain—a shooting star destined to fall to earth as rapidly as he rocketed skyward—is out to lunch.

    The support for The Donald on display among the supporters I met was striking for its depth and intensity. They like him, admire him, rise to his defense quickly and instinctively, and speak of him in terms (truth-teller, Reaganesque) that would be the envy of any candidate for any office. When confronted with facts about him that they might find discomfiting, their reflex was to bat those facts away or explain why they don’t matter. None of these Trump supporters are just discovering him now; they’ve looked up to him for years, and when he flirted with a run in 2012, wanted him to dive in then. These folks are not in kicking-the-tires mode. They give every appearance of being with Trump for the long haul.
    2. Trump is synonymous with success

    In trying to suss out the sources of Trump’s support, many analysts point to his controversial statements about and stances on the topic of immigration. Others point to his anti-Establishmentarianism, his take-no-prisoners style and apparent inclination to flout every diktat in the presidential candidate rule book. No doubt both of those factors are big parts of what is fueling Trump’s ascent. But what struck me more was the degree to which the voters in our group were familiar with and impressed by Trump’s business exploits—how enamored they were of his tycoonhood.

    I wondered how many of them first became aware of Trump through The Apprentice. To a person, they said they has been acquainted with the The Donald’s mythos—Trump Towers, his casinos and golf courses, the glam-life melodramas swirling around him and Ivana and Marla Maples—for years before that. One young woman spoke about reading The Art of the Deal on the beach as a little girl; another recounted asking her mother if she could write Trump a letter asking for advice about how to be as successful as him. While Trump’s brash persona is a big part of why his proponents like him, his career as a capitalist is for them the main credential he presents that qualifies him for the presidency.

    3. Trump is that rare billionaire who is also “one of us”

    The central paradox of Trump’s appeal to his fans is this: They see him as vastly richer, more successful, and more powerful than them, but also as being uniquely attuned to their concerns, values, and needs. When I pressed on this apparent conundrum, it resolved itself quite cleanly: Trump may be a billionaire, but he is “one of us” because he isn’t “one of them”—with “them” defined as the loathsome creatures of the political class. Again and again, the members of our group derided and denounced professional politicians as out of touch, persistently posturing, and utterly craven. Afraid to speak their minds. Only interested in feathering their own nests. Afflicted by, as one our group’s members put it succinctly, “Washingtonitis.”

    That Trump possesses (and is possessed by) none of those qualities is, again, a huge part of what makes him attractive to his supporters. But more than that, it helps explain how someone who lives in such a rarefied air can play the populist card so adroitly and effectively.

    4. Trump’s Teflon is very, very thick

    Partway through the focus group, we played video clips featuring two of Trump’s rivals—Jeb Bush and Rick Perry—laying into him. When I asked the participants what they thought of the criticisms, their response was telling. To a person, they flayed Bush and Perry, dismissing them as defensive, even scared, of what Trump represented: both a threat to their candidacies and to the established order in the Republican Party of which they are a part. When I pressed them on the substance of what Bush and Perry were saying about Trump, they dismissed it out of hand. The criticisms didn’t make Trump supporters think less of The Donald; it made them think less of Bush and Perry.

    The lesson for Trump’s rivals? Attacking him in conventional ways isn’t merely likely to be ineffective, doing little or nothing to chip away at his support. It may backfire.

    5. Trump’s Kryptonite may be…Trump

    For all their ardor for Trump and knowledge of his business background, his supporters admit they are a bit sketchy about other aspects of his past—in particular, his political past—and his views about many areas of policy. Toward the end of my time with our group, I ran through some potentially uncomfortable elements of Trump’s history with them: that for many years he declared himself supportive of abortion rights; that he has donated many tens of thousands of dollars to standard-issue politicians, including Democrats; that one of those Democrats is Hillary Clinton, of whom he has long spoken fondly and with whose family he has long been friendly; and that he has repeatedly described himself as a supporter of a single-payer health care system. I also brought up the bankruptcies of some Trump-linked companies, as well as the recent stories in the press regarding the past “marital rape” allegations of his ex-wife Ivana (which she later walked back).

    Taken individually, none of the items of this bill of attainder (except one, of which more in a moment) fazed the Trumpistas. But taken collectively, they seemed to induce a slight, creeping sense of unease as the group members grappled with an array of unfamiliar data points about Trump. The one piece of information that unequivocally troubled many of them was his onetime support for single-payer. They all wanted to know more about that—and how it squared with Trump’s broadsides against Obamacare. For the first time all night, the specter of “flip-flopping” was raised. Given the nature of Trump’s appeal, if that epithet were to stick to him, it could do grave damage with his core supporters.

    But Trump’s political and ideological promiscuity may not be the only way in which he could prove to be his own worst enemy. As much as Trump’s devotees thrill at his serial violations of the precepts of political correctness—at his willingness, as one supporter put it, to say what many people really think but are simply too cowardly to say out loud—they are also keenly aware of the potential political cost of those outbursts. More than once, members of the group expressed worry that Trump might cross so far over the line that he would render himself unelectable. That the thing they find most compelling about him could be his undoing. And that it might, in the process, ensure Clinton’s reoccupation of the White House.

    Such worries, along with those raised by the prospect of an independent bid should he fail to claim the nomination, are real enough for his supporters. But they also seem distant and remote. For now, his fans are content to revel in a phenomenon they thought they would never, ever see: a Republican presidential candidate who talks like them, who expresses their anger and frustration, extending a stiff middle finger at everything they detest—and not just getting away with it, but seeing it pay off big-time. For if Trump can do it, hey, who knows? Maybe, through him, they can, too.

  60. admin

    July 30, 2015 at 10:54 am

    ********************************

    Admin…knocking Hillary out and installing Biden as the Democratic nominee just about guarantees, barring an unexpected Act of God, that Donald Trump, as the republican nominee, will be the next President of the USA

  61. So now you see CNN put its best interviewer in Donald, trying to trap him with an outburst he had at his divorce trial over a breast pump at a deposition. And Donald reacts the same way he would if he was in his office with his cronies–she is a liar, a terrible person, a loser.

    Mind you, I don’t mind him saying these things. They may all be true. But when he projects anger, the best interviewer CNN has, hits him with that time honored bromide if you lose your cool with a divorce attorney, what will you do when you have to confront Putin. He has got to have seen that one coming. Oh well, he says, that is different. I will behave and he will behave and he will ask for my permission to give me what I want. Which goes to Camile Paglia’s point.

    Compare and contrast how Ted Cruz did when he went in the ring with CNN’s best interviewer. He did not lose his cool, injected passion plus humor, and he gave her an answer that made her sorry she asked the question. Lesson: a good cross examiner can destroy a weak witness, an emotional one, or an arrogant one. Whereas, a good cross examiner, and whether you like her or not, Dana Bash is at least that, cannot make much headway with a witness who is in full command of the facts, handles confrontation well, and makes his own points while he is answering and negating those of th cross examiner. This is why Cruz, who is in full attack mode against the establishment with panache rather than bombast is sitting in the catbird position.

  62. wbboei…I saw that CNN interview yesterday with Dana Bash…while I do not dispute your analysis and observation of how Trump is different from Cruz…

    I came away from that interview thinking Trump pretty much took the air out of the balloon Dana was trying to launch…

    Donald was Donald and he stood up for himself…and if you recall he said not only did he win that case but she had to pay legal fees…

    I think he said she is an hard core democratic attorney in Miami…or I read that?

    maybe JBStones knows her…or of her?

  63. Admin, is it a matter of Hillary “waking up”? Do you think she has ever trusted Obama to support her, or the Liberal Kooks to vote for her? This is where there is a serious disconnect and has been all along. Why would Bill and/or Hillary have ever trusted O not to throw her under the bus. He has hinted at it all along. He’s not someone who can be trusted.

    I’m asking – not being rhetorical. WTH is going on? How many times does someone have to spit on you before you start to feel a little damp? The Kooks have never had a decent thing to say about Hillary. And any support O has given her has always appeared to be very tentative – often attacking with the velvet blade. Why is she buying the BS she is apparently being fed by the Progs in her campaign team? Common sense would seem to preclude that.

  64. If you are on deck of a crab vessel in the Bering Sea, locked out of the cabin, and trying to not be swept overboard, you have two options. You can grab hold of something on deck that is secure. Or you can run from port to starboard amidships, like a chicken with you head cut off. Big media is doing the latter. Rather than asking the right question–why is he catching fire, and what does it say about the Washington cartel, they stagger and sway on deck between the port rail where he is not a serious candidate, to the starboard rail where he is feted–not just a summer fling.

    I think what you saw in the Dana Bash interview is the inevitable line of attack that they will eventually settle on. Meanwhile the elites are in a state of panic, and some are now suggesting that this helps Bush because it will force the elites to look for a safe candidate like him who will protect their interests at all cost. That is Roger Kimbal’s take at PJ Media.

    Here is the link to the interview which suggests the problem, in case you are interested:

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/29/politics/donald-trump-interview-dana-bash/

  65. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-kasich-trump-rape_55b7f59ce4b0074ba5a6aa25?utm_hp_ref=entertainment&ir=Entertainment&section=entertainment

    “Just Let it go…”

    ***********

    in my opinion this is in the category of the media and the attorney complaining about pumping breast milk during a deposition…

    btw…I saw that democratic attorney on tv…and she was pretty nasty…i would say she is a dem political operative and the media used that story to attack T

    this stuff is not going to stick…can we say ‘backfires’?

  66. admin
    July 30, 2015 at 12:29 am
    “….Rubio would then have to admit defeat and Jeb Bush would consolidate establishment support then romp to the nomination. Then Trump came along.” This is called outsmarting yourself. Manipulations (I call them stunts) to primaries are seldom up to any good. I hope whoever came up with the winner-take-all stunt in Florida understands that they may have handed the nomination to Trump. Trying to favor one of the two favorite sons they may have handed it to the son-in-law of the state who is Trump with his commercial connections.

  67. Agreed administrator. What is disconcerting is that again she was not prepared for this type of campaign, made some deal with Obama who cannot be trusted, and is getting terrible advice as her multiple roll outs have been a disaster. Hillary is fortunate that the republicans will implode and while Bernie may upset her in the early primaries, she should be able to withstand the initial onslaught. However, with Obama and company working very hard to defeat her in the primary, she better get with it fast or this will be 2008 all over again.

  68. admin
    July 30, 2015 at 10:54 am
    —————————–

    The only plus I see in Hillary announcing her candidacy so soon in this election cycle is that her enemies in the Obola administration can’t help but also show their fangs early. Better to see what your enemies are plotting early on and prepare for it than to have them stab you from behind late in the campaign.

  69. admin
    July 30, 2015 at 10:54 am

    Big Media finally reports what we’ve been reporting, um, for how long now? Via Hillary hater Monica Crowley:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/29/monica-crowley-obama-a-threat-to-hillary-clinton/

    Is Obama taking Hillary out?

    —–

    Well Admin, you have been putting the pieces together for awhile now, and if all of this is true…it would make sense why Hillary seems to not ‘be herself’.

    Are the Clinton’s waiting to see the tip of Obama’s knife in their face before Hillary goes on the attack?

    All was never forgiven nor forgotten by the Clinton’s when it comes to 2008 and Hillary’s muzzling as SOS…so what will be the last straw for Hillary, before she goes into attack mode? Is she waiting until just before the primary?

    She decided to run, so the Clinton’s must have a plan. First play nice to Barry until what? The media turns on him, leak info to the media? That’s been happening for awhile now.

    I can’t believe the Clinton’s didn’t know this would happen if Hillary ran again, so those two very smart people must have some sort of plan.

    The last thing Obama wants is for Hillary to become President, work her fingers to the bone and outshine his horrible presidency. Someone like ol’ gaff machine Joe wouldn’t make Obama look as bad.

    This drama is worse than the length of War and Peace…8 years and counting.

  70. I keep remembering when it was reported that Bill called in his long time lawyers to get advice on an/or some emails that Hillary received while she was SOS.

  71. This, reminiscent of beer parties talked of for Oh speeches circa early 2008. But now there’s jubilation.

    A Trump fan tweets
    i’m planning a viewing party for the 3 ring circus!! Thanks Donald Trump
    http://twitter.com/chetanadc/status/626767676468137984

    & ICYMI earlier (Wednesday) Getting ready to leave for my GREAT resort, Turnberry, in Scotland. Hosting The Women’s British Open (biggest tournament). Will be back Sat.

  72. hwc
    July 30, 2015 at 1:42 pm
    Policy wonk? Who knew?

    GOP front runner dives deep into the weeds on policy:
    —–
    I think he has got this part right.

    He is speaking the way any CEO would handle a complex problem.

    He is not going to sit there and give a magic answer.

    Even if there is one.

    I used to think it depended on one’s ability to reach an accord with Congress.

    Whereas as Obama has demonstrated, what it really depends on now is your ability to steam roll them.

    It depends on having a sound plan, disciplined execution, and accountability at all level.

    That last point would be an excellent point of departure for Donald using Lois Lerner as the example.

    That is what he will insist on, the same way he has done in his business life.

    Businesses have bottom lines and accounting standards.

    Politics has polls and speeches.

    Donald could say he will introduce business standards into government so it works for all strata of society

    Rather than just for the elites.

  73. policy wonk, who knew?

    …a lot of us know…myself included…

    again, Donald is a multidemensional person

    he is a very smart man…and most important, Donald is STREET SMART…

    he can be tough, loud, coarse but the guy has a big heart

    he is an independent thinker

    …as I mentioned, i believe he is going to play his campaign right down the middle, taking the best from each party…he is already stealing the best of the issues from the democrats…immigration, social security, health care…bing, bang, boom…

    right now he speaks in ‘big picture’ terms, but will fill in the blanks as time goes on…he is starting to lay it all out there…

    …the man has given so much to charity and to help others out when there are no cameras…he doesn’t broadcast his generosity…

    …He is going to work on the principles of FAIRNESS…and incorporate and manage “systems” to instill order and common sense to resolving our problems…not this continued free for all we have for the last 8 years…and the 8 years before that…(btw…he was against invading Iraq and said it would destabalize the area…right again)

    Donald Trump is going to focus on POSITIVE SOLUTIONS and project a Reagan like persona
    watch for it…POSITIVE SOLUTIONS…filled with hope and change for the good…

    Donald Trump is nobody’s fool…he may not speak with the learned eloquence of a Ted Cruz…and he may be bombastic…but there is a distinct method to his form of his madness…

    …and the voters are catching on to it…and like it…

    *******************

    in fact, i believe that second clip posted of donald with dana is the same interview that Wbboei posted that began with the breast pumping attack issue…

    this is why i say…Donald took the air right out of that silly issue and I will bet by the time Dana finished that interview she was impressed with Donald…

    Donald…the teacher…the mentor…

    sorry, he just is not the buffoon, bla, bla, bla…the media want to make him out to be…

  74. Do you get the sense that the presumptive GOP nominee knows what Medicaid is? Is he proposing scrapping it an replacing it with something new? What do you think he means by “some kind of help for hospitals to take care of poor people”? Would this be a federal program?

  75. S
    July 30, 2015 at 11:19 am

    I hope people read his comments your way, and no as the Republican war on women.

    I would not relish being his public relations man the day after–answering the follow up questions that Dana did not ask.

    How much better would it be to have said something like: Hey Dana, my little chickadee, you know what divorces can be like, you have had twice as many of them as I have, and they are not always nice. When she starts to intervene to get a word in edgewise he can stick his hand up and say please Dana let me finish. As I was saying, you know what it is like, and even if yours went smoothly, many do not. And too often the fault lies not with the parties, but with the goddamned lawyers. You and John probably had good lawyers when you split the sheets, and my personal lawyer was a good one the best money can buy I hire only the best, but that damned shrew on the other side, it wasn’t the breast pump that made me call her a terrible person, it was the fact that she would interrupt my deposition with that nonsense. When the judge awarded me attorney fees, I got even.

    What would Cruz do with that hypothetical? He would laugh slightly, look her in the eye, and say, hey Dana, I have a friend who is a divorce lawyer, and the stories he tells leave no doubt in my mind that tempers do flare, people say things the do not mean, and much as it pains me to say this, some members of my profession–like for example the American Trial Lawyers Association which just happens to be the largest contributor to the democratic party talk about helping people, when they are mostly helping themselves. If my friend Donald faced this situation, I can understand his anger. He has his own way of expressing himself, and will not play the role of Nemesis and sit in judgement, because firstly I wasn’t there, and second, I think the problems of the country are more important than a domestic dispute which happened ten years ago and was ultimately resolve in a way that they are now friends again. How many divorcees can say that much. I am delighted that Donald and his ex can.

  76. hwc
    “Policy wonk? Who knew?”
    Really? He has flirted with running for 20 years. He is a billionaire not by mistake. He does his homework. His ego is too big to throw his hat in the rink if he did not have substance behind it. I ache to see him throw out Wollman Rink. I have also heard him on education. I forget where as it was a few years ago but there was some claim that homework was racist. He responded with a very smart answer that homework serves to solidify what was learned at school. Goes back to the old use a new word three times and it is yours. Common Core approaches education where the parent is often at a loss even in third grade. I care very much for a what will be a fourth grader and I was confused by the implementation of Common Core. I had to reread the instructions over and over again to comprehend the question. This was math I am no genius but I did study engineering for one semester at Purdue. I ended up taking the kid to the dollar store and giving her twenty and had her calculate what she could buy what was taxed what was not. I made it real and she was able to grasp mental math. She got straight A’s, but many kids got lost. They are 7/8 and they hate math. Everyone got pushed into this middle ground. How does that serve the country? Math is the key to everything else. Singing is math art is math. We all do mental math all the time but it is an organic process. Some kids at 7 are not ready for that. You can explain that 19-17 equals 2 but common core common core makes it 20 minus (10 plus 7) less 1. WTF? Again my baby girl got through it but when you send your kids off to school you as a parent should be able to understand the homework. I was at a loss trying to see where it was the math was going I bought everything I could find on Common Core. My feeling is that it is designed to lump everyone in the middle. Like how every kid gets a trophy. Nobody feels good or bad. Feelings are more important than achieving. PA has standard tests that the public school kids endure. Fine evaluate see how they are doing, but the results for third graders are not available until October of fourth grade. What a crock of shit. They have a week of tests in April and no results for 6 months. I would if I saw a deficiency use the summer to rectify any shortcomings. What is the point of testing kids if the parents cannot identify and address? Another thing the claims that unfettered immigration has no effect on education is bullshit. My community has been settled by the feds with refugees from Nepal. Twice a day the kids struggling with learning go to a special class. The regular students get free time so as not to leave the other students behind. Almost all of the kids are foreign born who get one on one special ed tell me how does this not effect the native born students. My community had to let go of two music teachers but has hired three ESL teachers. Again tell me immigration policies do not effect our schools.

  77. When Dana demands Donald give her precise answers to complex problems which, by her own admission, experts in the field have been unable to answer, I would have advise Trump to say something like this:

    Dana, I know you would like me to say something pithy like, I will find the right experts, and if I did say something then you could hand it over to your pollster Howling Mad Carter Howling, so he could start push polling, but I will not play that game. It is politics as usual, and politics as usual is what is sinking our nation. I reject it root and branch, and if that offends some people I would be suspicious of their motives. The value proposition which I bring to the party is this: a commitment to the American people, one that is unblemished by the usual conflicts of interest. And real world solutions + execution. The particulars will vary problem by problem, and what I might say about them now might not mean anything later if the problem has changed. I have said this before, and it bears repeating. I will bring in the best people in the world to solve our problems, I will tell them forget about politics, pressure groups, the media, and give me the optimal solution, and a pathway to its achievement and metrics which will allow me to stay on top of it. One of the worst things you can say about a president is that he is a bad manager. Obama is a bad manager and that is part of the reason hte country is failing. I on the other hand am a superb manager, and the real world results I have achieved–speak for themselves.

  78. hwc
    July 30, 2015 at 2:33 pm
    Do you get the sense that the presumptive GOP nominee knows what Medicaid is? Is he proposing scrapping it an replacing it with something new? What do you think he means by “some kind of help for hospitals to take care of poor people”? Would this be a federal program?
    —-
    No, silly goose.

    He is a humanitarian.

    He will ensure that the Mexican government pays for it.

    If they have anything left after paying for the 4000 mile fence.

    After all, the majority of these poor will be Mexican nationals.

    Don’t worry. I am still on board.

    But he needs to adopt the approach set forth above.

    Rather than playing big media’s game of multiple choice.

  79. admin
    July 30, 2015 at 10:54 am
    ——————————–
    There is no way Hillary and Bill are unaware of Obola’s bad intentions towards them. I have to wonder if the Hillary’s behavior as an “abused woman” is not about her realizations, but the realizations of the Party. The objective is to demonstrate that she tried to make nice and it just does not work. Obola is poison.

    Monica Crowley’s piece is just what is needed. After August 6th, when she should have announced her campaign, maybe, we will finally see Hillary again instead of the Pod Person who has taken her place.

  80. henry

    July 30, 2015 at 3:09 pm

    ********************************

    Henry…your comments re: what passes for education these days in the USA are spot on…

    and your connecting it to the immigration issue illuminates why the once great USA has now fallen to 25th in education in the world…hard to believe…and sad…

    instead of setting higher goals, we are now babysitting the world, paying for their education, housing and health and depriving US kids of an well rounded education, eliminating music, art, after school programs, school supplies, etc…

    why don’t we take care of our own problems first…our inner city kids and schools before taking on undocumented kids who walk into our country in droves…there is no sense of balance or priorities anymore…so everything ends up a mess…

    instead of motivating higher achievement we are in a race to the bottom…

  81. What do you think the presumptive GOP nominee means when he says this, referring to Mexican illegal immigrants:

    Now, a lot of these people are helping us…. whether it’s the grapes….

  82. New polls: Trump in the lead nationwide and Trump beats Bush in Florida

    By: streiff (Diary) | July 30th, 2015 at 11:00 AM | 61

    New polls: Trump in the lead nationwide and Trump beats Bush in Florida
    By: streiff (Diary) | July 30th, 2015 at 11:00 AM | 61

    RESIZE: AAA

    Share on Facebook 1K 1K SHARES
    A couple of new polls have been released that are significant for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, they both have reputable sample sizes and are actual surveys, not the trash you get from You.gov and Zogby Interactive. Second they show Donald Trump with a substantial lead over any of his rivals.

    First up, and the juiciest, is one by the Saint Petersburg Times. It shows Donald Trump leading field and beating Jeb Bush 26% to 20% in FLORIDA. The poll has a very robust sample of over 1900 respondents — likely primary voters — encompassing all major Florida media markets which makes it as reliable (MOE 2.2%) as any poll you are going to get.

    st pete poll

    Today, Quinnipiac released a poll showing similar results. There’s was a national poll of registered voters with a much smaller sample (710 GOP respondents) and an MOE (3.7%) that puts it toward the outer bounds of credibility. This polls puts Trump in front with 20%, followed by Scott Walker (13%) and Jeb Bush (10%).

    quinnipiac poll

    The consistency in the polls underscores two salient facts. First, the first tier of candidates is Trump, Walker, and Bush. The second is that, at this stage of the race, Trump is the clear leader. The GOP Establishment, the donor class, and some of my colleagues don’t like that, but the facts are inescapable. Will that remain the case? Because in 1992 the GOP was swooning over Ross Perot and in 2008 Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson were kicking ass at this stage of the game. Why Trump is in the lead is much more clear. Earlier in the week, Dallas Maverick’s owner Mark Cuban had this to say:

    “I don’t care what his actual positions are,” Cuban wrote. “I don’t care if he says the wrong thing. He says what’s on his mind. He gives honest answers rather than prepared answers. This is more important than anything any candidate has done in years.”

    Indeed, the outspoken investor said Trump “changed the game.”

    “Up until Trump announced his candidacy the conventional wisdom was that you had to be a professional politician in order to run,” Cuban continued. “You had to have a background that was politically scrubbed. In other words, smart people who didn’t live perfect lives could never run. Smart people who didn’t want their families put under the media spotlight wouldn’t run. The Donald is changing all of that. He has changed the game and for that he deserves a lot of credit.

    “Now maybe we will accept candidates warts and all and look at what they can do rather than what headlines they create,” Cuban concluded. “Congrats Donald.”

    As Erick has observed twice, the GOP actually created Donald Trump.

    The number one thing you hear when you ask any Republican about Donald Trump is this — he fights. You hear it from Rush Limbaugh. You hear it from other talk radio show hosts. You hear it from the base. You hear it even from some Democrats. And in all cases, you hear it somewhat admirably. They may not like or endorse Trump, but they respect that he just doesn’t give a crap and fights.

    Now, consider what the Republican Party has done in that time.

    They’ve refused to pass a late-term abortion bill in the House because a handful of members objected.
    They gave Barack Obama a blank check to raise the debt limit.
    They punted on Obamacare fights.
    They’ve refused to defund Planned Parenthood.
    They’ve taken retaliatory actions against conservative members who’ve stood up for Republican Party principles.
    They’ve worked to fund the Export-Import Bank.
    They have refused to stop Barack Obama’s ongoing assault against the free market.
    They have passed the buck to courts to stop Obama on immigration, etc.
    In short, the GOP has not fought. They have not been aggressive. They have been so scared of being disliked that they have become disliked. That is the reality.

    When criticism are made of Trump that he gave money to Democrats, etc, one only has to look at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) 100%‘s speech on the floor of the Senate last week:

    “We’ve had a Republican majority in both houses of Congresses now for about six months. What has that majority done? First thing we did, in December, we passed a $1 trillion crominbus plan filled with pork and corporate welfare. Then this Republican majority voted to fund Obamacare, voted to fund President Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty. And then the leadership rammed through the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as attorney general.”

    Cruz added: “Madam President, which of those decisions would be one iota different if Harry Reid were still majority leader? Not a one. Not a one.”

    When the GOP points out the Democrat leaning programs that Trump has supported, you have to ask “okay, how are his positions different from the actual actions you have taken?”

    The GOP claims Trump is a fraud and huckster. How can any sane person look at Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 61% or Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 47% or Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) 56% and not come to the same conclusion about them?

    I don’t think Trump will be the nominee for a lot of reasons but the GOP candidates had better start looking seriously at what is putting the wind at his back if they want to win.

    A couple of new polls have been released that are significant for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, they both have reputable sample sizes and are actual surveys, not the trash you get from You.gov and Zogby Interactive. Second they show Donald Trump with a substantial lead over any of his rivals.

    First up, and the juiciest, is one by the Saint Petersburg Times. It shows Donald Trump leading field and beating Jeb Bush 26% to 20% in FLORIDA. The poll has a very robust sample of over 1900 respondents — likely primary voters — encompassing all major Florida media markets which makes it as reliable (MOE 2.2%) as any poll you are going to get.

    st pete poll

    Today, Quinnipiac released a poll showing similar results. There’s was a national poll of registered voters with a much smaller sample (710 GOP respondents) and an MOE (3.7%) that puts it toward the outer bounds of credibility. This polls puts Trump in front with 20%, followed by Scott Walker (13%) and Jeb Bush (10%).

    quinnipiac poll

    The consistency in the polls underscores two salient facts. First, the first tier of candidates is Trump, Walker, and Bush. The second is that, at this stage of the race, Trump is the clear leader. The GOP Establishment, the donor class, and some of my colleagues don’t like that, but the facts are inescapable. Will that remain the case? Because in 1992 the GOP was swooning over Ross Perot and in 2008 Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson were kicking ass at this stage of the game. Why Trump is in the lead is much more clear. Earlier in the week, Dallas Maverick’s owner Mark Cuban had this to say:

    “I don’t care what his actual positions are,” Cuban wrote. “I don’t care if he says the wrong thing. He says what’s on his mind. He gives honest answers rather than prepared answers. This is more important than anything any candidate has done in years.”

    Indeed, the outspoken investor said Trump “changed the game.”

    “Up until Trump announced his candidacy the conventional wisdom was that you had to be a professional politician in order to run,” Cuban continued. “You had to have a background that was politically scrubbed. In other words, smart people who didn’t live perfect lives could never run. Smart people who didn’t want their families put under the media spotlight wouldn’t run. The Donald is changing all of that. He has changed the game and for that he deserves a lot of credit.

    “Now maybe we will accept candidates warts and all and look at what they can do rather than what headlines they create,” Cuban concluded. “Congrats Donald.”

    As Erick has observed twice, the GOP actually created Donald Trump.

    The number one thing you hear when you ask any Republican about Donald Trump is this — he fights. You hear it from Rush Limbaugh. You hear it from other talk radio show hosts. You hear it from the base. You hear it even from some Democrats. And in all cases, you hear it somewhat admirably. They may not like or endorse Trump, but they respect that he just doesn’t give a crap and fights.

    Now, consider what the Republican Party has done in that time.

    They’ve refused to pass a late-term abortion bill in the House because a handful of members objected.
    They gave Barack Obama a blank check to raise the debt limit.
    They punted on Obamacare fights.
    They’ve refused to defund Planned Parenthood.
    They’ve taken retaliatory actions against conservative members who’ve stood up for Republican Party principles.
    They’ve worked to fund the Export-Import Bank.
    They have refused to stop Barack Obama’s ongoing assault against the free market.
    They have passed the buck to courts to stop Obama on immigration, etc.
    In short, the GOP has not fought. They have not been aggressive. They have been so scared of being disliked that they have become disliked. That is the reality.

    When criticism are made of Trump that he gave money to Democrats, etc, one only has to look at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) 100%‘s speech on the floor of the Senate last week:

    “We’ve had a Republican majority in both houses of Congresses now for about six months. What has that majority done? First thing we did, in December, we passed a $1 trillion crominbus plan filled with pork and corporate welfare. Then this Republican majority voted to fund Obamacare, voted to fund President Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty. And then the leadership rammed through the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as attorney general.”

    Cruz added: “Madam President, which of those decisions would be one iota different if Harry Reid were still majority leader? Not a one. Not a one.”

    When the GOP points out the Democrat leaning programs that Trump has supported, you have to ask “okay, how are his positions different from the actual actions you have taken?”

    The GOP claims Trump is a fraud and huckster. How can any sane person look at Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 61% or Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 47% or Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) 56% and not come to the same conclusion about them? (snip)

  83. I think “abused woman” is another of those terms that has been so diluted it means almost nothing.
    My sister fell for a bad boy. He was on a fast track to nowhere but she was smitten. So many times over the years my parents would drive all night to pick her up. He’d then cry and threaten suicide and she would go back. Too many times to count. I have heard all the excuses. Guy was/is a sociopath. Suicide was his manipulation. I offered to buy him bullets or a noose. He has checked himself into rehab a dozen times on the i am gonna hurt myself lie. He manipulates non stop. I don’t even think he can help himself. MY sister fell for that. Took almost 20 years for my whole family to say enough. I know being physically hit can break a person down but after twenty years I have to look at what role my sister played in it. She allowed her kids to watch as she was abused. She never had to fear being homeless with kids. We were more than ready to set her up on her own. Without fail everytime she went back to him. Eventually she left him but she married another control freak. I cannot understand how my sister allows men to treat her like trash. My dad is not abusive and the bitch(said with genuine love and respect my mom) takes no shit from anybody. My sister is one of the most capacious persons I have ever met. Perhaps his never ending suicide threats controlled her heart. Sorry to sound cold but when I hear talk of abuse I am forced to think what role in the saga is the abused playing. Hillary is married to a man that did disgrace her in many eyes, then she went to work for obama and she seems to look like the fall guy. I did not make the connection to abused until I read it here. I looked back from that vista and I sense a lot of what I saw in my sister. Be honest getting a blow job in the Oval Office is abusive to your wife.

  84. hwc
    July 30, 2015 at 7:04 pm
    What do you think the presumptive GOP nominee means when he says this, referring to Mexican illegal immigrants:

    Now, a lot of these people are helping us…. whether it’s the grapes….
    ———-
    I assume he means wine, and on that point I have to agree with him. First, its an ill wind that doesn’t bring us some good, but the operative question is does the bad outweigh the good. Wine is good, collapsing the safety nets and bankrupting the country is . . ah.. . er. . . not so good. Second, if there is indeed a labor shortage, one not caused by artificially depressed wages and nobody to pick the grapes, then I say bring in a billion of them. Anything to relieve us of that agonizing condition known as sobriety.

  85. just got a call from gallop spent almost 10 mins on phone, no questions on trump…. asked about favorably for walker, webb, hillary, and lindsay graham, nothing on bush or rubio.

  86. Pelosi describes the Iran deal as “a masterpiece of negotiation” and commends Kerry and his team rather profusely on their excellent work to achieve this remarkable milestone.

    I agree. It is a masterpiece of negotiation. But the party who she should be commending for it is the Ayotolla.

    Hot air has a similar take, albeit racist, ignorant, and all the other pejoratives marshaled by the leftist scum against critical thinking.

    Which makes me wonder whether my response to Herb wasn’t overly optimist. One fool like Wendy Sherman, Kerry or god forbid the asshole in the White House than two four star marine generals were able to save 74 years ago on the Korean Peninsula.

    ——-
    Tom Cotton dismantles Kerry on Iran deal secrecy, regime’s ongoing terrorism

    A tough, focused, relentless cross-examination of the Secretary of State by freshman Sen. Tom Cotton — an Iraq war veteran and a graduate of Harvard Law School. The clip is relatively short, and the whole thing is worth your time:

    Cotton makes the most of his frustratingly limited time, zeroing in on a handful of key points:

    (1) Cotton makes clear that the Corker/Cardin legislation, which was signed into law by President Obama, requires that Congress receive every single word of the finalized Iran deal. Having discovered and confirmed the existence of secret side agreements within the overall accord, Cotton wonders whether or how the administration will adhere to that provision of the law. Kerry responds that such matters must be classified in order to respect the privacy of the IAEA. Cotton’s framing is stark and outstanding: “The Ayatollahs will know what they agreed to, but not the American people.” Brutal.

    (2) The Arkansas Senator drills down on reports that Iran may be permitted to provide its own soil samples as part of an important nuclear “inspection,” likening this alleged concession to allowing an athlete to submit a urine sample for a drug test without supervision. Kerry says that the US government is “satisfied” that this arrangement — which he’ll neither confirm nor deny — will “provide the answers we need.” The Associated Press quoted a nuclear expert casting doubt on that claim yesterday, arguing that the process in question may not prevent Iran from tampering with the sample they turn over.

    (3) With Gen. Dempsey’s help, Cotton demonstrates that Iran is chiefly responsible for providing specialized IEDs to terrorist insurgents in Iraq, who have used the deadly devices to kill hundreds of American soldiers. Cotton’s point is obvious: This is a regime with a great deal of American blood on its hands and whose leaders still chant “death to America.” This deal rewards those very people with a huge cash injection that can and will be used to promulgate terrorism. The agreement does not require Iran to cease or even diminish its terrorist activities, regional meddling, and human rights abuses. Kerry serves up a word salad about pressuring Iran on these other fronts in the future, and notes that American sanctions won’t be lifted against certain American-murdering criminals within the regime. But other Western sanctions are lifted against those individuals as part of the deal, to which the Obama administration has agreed. Kerry’s distinction is meaningless.

    The ground Cotton powerfully covers over his seven minutes barely scratches the surface of the Iran deal’s irreparable flaws. The accord is opposed by a majority of Americans.

  87. jtjames
    July 30, 2015 at 8:00 pm
    ————————

    Wbboei has long been aggravated by Obola’s approval rating. Pollsters of the Age of Fake prove that statistics can lie. It is all in the questions being asked.

    Gallop lost all credibility with me when they changed their polling methods in the middle of the 2008 Presidential Campaigns to favor Obola.

    You can bet your a$$ that the numbers you are hearing for Trump are conservative.

  88. Cruz on the lefty moonbat Alan Colmes radio show today. He talks about running against Hillary at the end, starting at about the 24:00 mark. He essentially makes “reverse-Romney” 1%-er attack on her.

  89. That Monica Crowley article is chilling. If Obama wants Biden he will get Biden by hook or crook, and mostly crook. I have not kept up but appears to me that none of the GoP contenders are coming down harsh on Obama or the media, why is that? My hunch is that they are afraid of him; they are afraid what he has on each one of them and I bet he does have something on all of them, especially if it is his plan to install Biden. God help us.

  90. I don’t know. Firebrand Ted Cruz ™ called Obama the world’s biggest financier of radical islamic terrorism. That’s coming down pretty hard on him, I would think…. 🙂

  91. Corker.

    A MAJOR LEAGUE FUCK UP.

    Used to be it required a 2/3 vote to ratify a treaty and a failure to do so meant the treaty died, with no veto power. That was what the constitution required. But Corker, a McConnell lieutenant and RINO has sponsored and passes a bill which abrogates that requirement and instead treats that treaty as presumptively valid, and can only be rejected by a 2/3 vote subject to an Obama veto. Thereater he did laps around the capital and the elites threw garlands at him. Obama signed the bill and patted him on the head like a dog. Then Obama fucked him by taking the agreement to the UN rather than Congress. And now Corker has decried this action and is trying to get signatures to undo the collateral damage produced by his poor strategy and improvident legislative act. And now Congress is being asked to buy a pig in a poke–because the enforcement procedure is between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) and nobody in the administration has seen it, except maybe Wendy Sherman –Kerry isn’t sure, but its all good as far as the imbecile is concerned. But when it comes to imbeciles nobody can compete with that riverboat gambler with the diamond stick pin Bob Corker. Mendendez is the opposite of Corker. He says trust all men but cut the cards. He says the key to controlling Irans nuclear ambitions is the enforcement mechanism and if no one in the administration knows what is in those side letters pertaining to that subject, then how can he and his colleagues possibly discharge their constitutional authority to advise and consent, to the extent that Corker has not invalidated that role entirely through his sheer stupidity.

    https://youtu.be/JE0LmIa7pic

  92. Both Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush chided Firebrand Ted Cruz(tm) to soften his rhetoric in attacking Obama.

    Firebrand Ted Cruz(tm) replied:

    One of the reasons Republicans keep getting clobbered is that we have leaders like Mitt Romney or like Jeb Bush who are afraid.”

    He went on to describe Romney’s debates where he was afraid to attack Obama and just rearranged the pencil on his podium when given the opportunity…

  93. Ted Cruz ™ called Obama the world’s biggest financier of radical islamic terrorism. That’s coming down pretty hard on him, I would think
    ———-
    Too hard?

    Take a look at the link I posted of the Tom Cotton grilling of Kerry, and the illustrative exhibit showing what Iranian weapons are doing to people across the region. Look at the terror groups they finance. As Yankee manager Casey Stengel said look it up.

    And then apply the theory of intent which applies to the criminal law: the defendant may not have intended the specific killing, but he is still liable on the theory that he intended the logical and probable consequences of his actions, and this was one of them. At a minimum, he can be charged the crime of depraved indifference.

  94. He went on to describe Romney’s debates where he was afraid to attack Obama and just rearranged the pencil on his podium when given the opportunity…
    —-
    Actually, he did more than that.

    He re arranged the deck chairs on the Titanic.

  95. Looks like Menendez is getting the ol’ okie doke. As Barry would say, ya’ll know about the ol’ okie doke? Right?

  96. Hillary HQ blog posted a letter sent from Hillary’s campaign to the NY Times, calling them out for publishing false information about her. The Times still has not published the letter. It’s posted on Hillary.com.
    ____________

    The Times’ readers rightfully expect the paper to adhere to the most rigorous journalistic standards. To state the obvious, it is hard to imagine a situation more fitting for those standards to be applied than when a newspaper is preparing to allege that a major party candidate for President of the United States is the target of a criminal referral received by federal law enforcement.

    This allegation, however, was reported hastily and without affording the campaign adequate opportunity to respond. It was not even mentioned by your reporter when our campaign was first contacted late Thursday afternoon. Initially, it was stated as reporting only on a memo – provided to Congress by the Inspectors General from the State Department and Intelligence Community – that raised the possibility of classified material traversing Secretary Clinton’s email system. This memo — which was subsequently released publicly — did not reference a criminal referral at all. It was not until late Thursday night – at 8:36 pm – that your paper hurriedly followed up with our staff to explain that it had received a separate tip that the Inspectors General had additionally made a criminal referral to the Justice Department concerning Clinton’s email use. Our staff indicated that we had no knowledge of any such referral – understandably, of course, since none actually existed – and further indicated that, for a variety of reasons, the reporter’s allegation seemed implausible. Our campaign declined any immediate comment, but asked for additional time to attempt to investigate the allegation raised. In response, it was indicated that the campaign “had time,” suggesting the publication of the report was not imminent.

    Despite the late hour, our campaign quickly conferred and confirmed that we had no knowledge whatsoever of any criminal referral involving the Secretary. At 10:36 pm, our staff attempted to reach your reporters on the phone to reiterate this fact and ensure the paper would not be going forward with any such report. There was no answer. At 10:54 pm, our staff again attempted calling. Again, no answer. Minutes later, we received a call back. We sought to confirm that no story was imminent and were shocked at the reply: the story had just published on the Times’ website.

    This was, to put it mildly, an egregious breach of the process that should occur when a major newspaper like the Times is pursuing a story of this magnitude. Not only did the Times fail to engage in a proper discussion with the campaign ahead of publication; given the exceedingly short window of time between when the Times received the tip and rushed to publish, it hardly seems possible that the Times conducted sufficient deliberations within its own ranks before going ahead with the story.

    http://www.hillaryhq.com/2015/07/clinton-campaign-releases-epic-letter.html

  97. Hillary’s real beef is with the “senior government official” from the Obama administration who told the NYTIMES that there was a referral for a criminal investigation into her hiding classified e-mail on a private server.

  98. it hardly seems possible that the Times conducted sufficient deliberations within its own ranks before going ahead with the story.
    ——–
    I suspect there are a few Clinton supporters at that newspaper, but far more young maniacal Obama bots. If so, then the point about insufficient internal deliberations before the false story was published means these internal supporters were blindsided by this as much as her campaign was. The whole purpose of having these supporters inside the Times is to make sure that eggregious errors like this which poison the well are nipped in the bud. I suspect the fault here lies with the Executive editor who we later learn blessed the story and the lie it embodied. That paper is invested in Obama and the Obama legacy. My suspicion is that they are angling to install Warren as the nominee, and Obama as president of the United Nations. I am reasonably certain that even if this is true, it will not happen.

  99. hwc
    July 30, 2015 at 11:15 pm
    Looks like Menendez is getting the ol’ okie doke. As Barry would say, ya’ll know about the ol’ okie doke? Right?
    ——
    I think he is saying this to the Douchbag in chief:

    You are not the only one who wants to have a positive legacy.

    So when you fuck with my legacy, turn about is fair play.

    If Congress summons a veto proof majority against this deal, your ass is grass Barry.

    And then, in your golden years you can tell all your sychopants

    I could have been a contender.

  100. The agony of the Iran deal must be exquisite for that vile, backstabbing and revolting Chuck Schumer, aka rat man.

    Camile Paglia was listing the requirements to be a politician–the ability to communicate, to roll with the punches, to lie credibly, etc.

    But in doing so, she neglected to mention the most important criterion of all—the ability to survive even in the darkest hour.

    And just as the superstitious lives with fear and hates the legend of the dead man’s hand—aces and eights

    The politician fears Hobson’s choice between the brass ring on the one hand, and public betrayal of those who trusted him.

    And that is what this Iran deal represents to rat man.

    For years he has been conniving, backstabbing, and sliding on his belly to become senate leader for his party.

    You might even say this has been his life’s work.

    Its like that fine speech by Paul Newman in the John O’Hara novel View From The Terrace when he becomes the first member of the premier investment bank on Wall Street on the Sunny side of 40 to have a partnership bestowed upon him, realizes what it has cost him in terms of personal, happiness, peace of mind, and gives them an acceptance speech which is the long hand version of take this job and shove it. No one–not even Arthur Miller captured the pulse of the upper crust of society that made its fortunes on Wall Street at mid century than John O’Hara. And no one ever portrayed them in film more convincingly than Paul Newman.

    But what if you are a phony baloney like Schumer? What if you see before you the brass ring, and just as you are about to reach for it and grab what you so richly deserve, the Iran deal comes forward like a bat out of Translyvania flying across your bow jeopardizing all you have worked for, and most especially the bond you have had with your constituents, for whom this is not just another treaty but an existential matter with overtones of the Holoucaust. Come on now. For one brief shining moment you are rat man, sitting in your foxhole wondering what to do what to do. So, tell me, what would you do?

    Normally, you would sweep it under the rug, but here you can’t because everyone from the shoe shine boy to the green grocer to the drug addict on the lower west side of Manhattan, to the opera diva, to the bank president–all of them are asking what will Senator Schumer? Subtext to read, who will he fuck–and who can he fuck without fucking himself: Obama or his constituents? His political future hinges on how he answers that question, and the agony must be exquisite, even though the will move heaven and earth not to show it. It is not easy being Chuck Schumer at this particular time. And believe me he is no Paul Newman.

  101. I have an idea.

    He should find that fataw which no one else has been able to find, but we are told exists, stating that the Muslim religion renounces nuclear war.

    That should give great comfort to his constituents.

    And if he cannot find it, perhaps he can find the forger who produced Obama’s birth certificate and dummy one up.

    If that does not work then he could assume the superior airs of Neville Chamberlain go to Iran and come back waving a piece of paper.

    I have gone to Iran, met with the Ayotolla and I have his solemn promise not to destroy Israel.

    I asked him about his death to America statement and he gave me his personal assurances that that was just campaign talk.

    He pointed out that this statement was really no different than Obama’s campaign promise to protect the working class against NAFTA, just before he sent Austin Goolsbee to Canada to assure our trade partner that his statement was pure unadulterated bullshit.

    Well, like George Bush to Putin, I looked him in the eye and knew I could trust him.

    So now, if you don’t mind, I will sign the treaty and collect my reward–as head of the democrat senate delegation.

    There are no Hobson’s choice problems when you are as deft and disingenuous as I am.

    And the real kicker? I got the Supreme Leader to pony up campaign contributions for me and Obama.

  102. foxyladi14
    July 31, 2015 at 8:56 am
    —-
    Since Schultz cannot answer questions, but merely reiterate talking points, they would be better off producing a robot for these so called interviews.

  103. foxyladi14
    July 31, 2015 at 9:09 am
    ——-
    Romney is as relevant to the party today as Herbert Hoover was to the party in the 1960 convention. He showed up but nobody listened to him. Success has many fathers. Failure is an orphan.

  104. As we have known for years, MSNBC sucks

    ______________________

    SUNDAY, JULY 26, 2015
    TV: The train wreck known as MSNBC

    To term MSNBC “troubled” is to put it mildly.

    Headlines like “MSNBC Finishes 5th Place in Demo, Behind CNBC and HLN” and “MSNBC Hits 8 Year Low” have become common place.

    And last week, more cancellations were announced: Ed Schultz lost his show, Alex Wagner lost her show and The Cycle is no more

    This followed earlier cancellations this year of Joy Reid and Ronan Farrow’s programs.

    In fact, there’s a long, long list of MSNBC departures and cancellations over the last few years including Contessa Brewer, Martin Bashir, Alec Baldwin, Cenk Uygur and, most infamously, Keith Olbermann.

    Two things specifically do not speak well for MSNBC today.

    First, the trickle of cancellations.

    Nothing is working.

    Revamp or die.

    The cable chat network is said to be moving back towards news.

    That would be a huge improvement.

    But they can’t do that with the current evening programs.

    Rachel Maddow is not a hit.

    She is not a success.

    What is she?

    7th Heaven in season nine.

    The ratings are sliding and the best days are gone.

    Maddow is only a success in a ‘by comparison’ manner.

    Her show, more and more, has become televised radio.

    She blathers on endlessly as if she’s Rush Limbaugh.

    Chris Hayes?

    He’s an analyst.

    He’s not a talk show host.

    He should be a regular on Morning Joe.

    Al Sharpton has no place on the network though he might argue with the disgraced Brian Williams rejoining MSNBC shortly, he has a right to be there.

    The reality is that the same NBC News insiders objecting to Brian Williams over the last few years have also objected to activist Sharpton being able to use his talk show to promote various causes he’s is involved in.

    It’s that sort of thing that’s really harmed MSNBC.

    Cenk could have been a way forward for the network.

    He offered a point of view and it was consistent.

    If he was opposed to spying on Americans, he was opposed to it regardless of who was in the White House.

    But too many MSNBC hosts, not just Al Sharpton, based their right and wrong judgments based upon whether Democrats (specifically Barack Obama) were supporting something or not.

    On something as basic as TPP, the hideous trade pact, Rachel Maddow, for example, was against it repeatedly until it was hailed as a victory for Barack at which point she was slobbering over the deal as something wonderful and amazing.

    Viewers noticed this nonsense long ago and have fled.

    (snip)

    http://thirdestatesundayreview.blogspot.com/2015/07/tv-train-wreck-known-as-msnbc.html

  105. Admin:

    What Voters See in Donald Trump

    His rise is not due to anger at government. It is a gesture of contempt for government.

    By
    Peggy Noonan

    July 30, 2015 8:14 p.m. ET

    I had a conversation this week with a longtime acquaintance who supports Donald Trump. She’s in her 60s, resides in north Georgia near the Tennessee line, lives on Social Security. She voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and was in fact the first person who alerted me to the breadth of his support. In 2012 she voted Republican, disappointed in Mr. Obama not from the left or the right but the center: He couldn’t make anything work or get anything done.

    So, why Trump? “The whole country will be in better shape. And ISIS won’t like it that he’s in charge. He’s very wealthy and can turn around the economy. He’ll get things moving. The Donald will kick a—.” She knows other supporters locally and among friends of her son, an Iraq vet. “They’re completely disgusted and just furious, and he’s igniting their passion. He’s telling them ‘I will make this country great again,’ and they believe him.” Mr. Trump is dismissed as exciting, but “we have to get excited to get up out of the chair to vote.”

    Does he strike her as a serious man, a patriot? Yes. “All he does is talk about how great this country is and how greater he can make it, how he wants to get good trade deals and take care of veterans. . . . He doesn’t need this job, he’s already got everything, it’s a pay cut. He doesn’t need the stature. I think he wants the job because he wants to do it.”

    Does he have common sense? Yes, she says, he is concerned about what everyone is concerned about, except politicians. “A lot of deals have to be made and he knows the art of the deal. The biggest problem is all the illegal immigrants.”

    Is it OK with you that the next president could be a reality star who plays the part of himself, who acts out indignation and fires people on TV? “It doesn’t bother me and it doesn’t bother the American people. And if you asked the people down South here, they don’t care either. They just want somebody in who’s plain and simple who can get the job done.” Otherwise, she worries, “we’re gonna be Greece in another four, five years.”

    Does it bother her that Mr. Trump has never held elective office? She paused half a second. “It bothers me a little bit. But I think we need a very tough businessman with great business acumen. We can restore the highways and tunnels and airports, he’ll rebuild them. He’ll build a wall with Mexico. If he was a reality TV show guy that’s OK. Get it done.”

    Afterward, a longtime GOP operative underlined her comments on infrastructure, but from a different angle: “Trump intuits that the Republican base loves this country and yearns for an American restoration. The GOP once was a party of industry—bricks and steel—and Trump, the builder, connects with that narrative.”

    Some Trump anomalies that have to do with the tropes people use to categorize others:

    He was born to wealth and went to Wharton, yet gives off a working-class vibe his supporters admire. He’s like Broderick Crawford in “Born Yesterday”: He comes across as self-made. In spite of his wealth he never made himself smooth, polite. He’s like someone you know. This is part of his power.

    His father, a buyer and builder of real estate, was wired into New York’s Democratic machine and its grubby deal making. Donald knew the machine and its players and went on to give political donations based on power, not party. Yet his supporters experience him as outside the system, unsullied by it. He’s a practical man who did what practical men have to do.

    He never served in the military yet connects with grunts. He has lived a life of the most rarefied material splendor—gold gilt, penthouse suites—and made the high life part of his brand. Yet he doesn’t come across as snooty or fancy—he’s a regular guy. A glitzy Manhattan billionaire is doing well with Evangelicals. That’s a first.

    His rise is not due to his supporters’ anger at government. It is a gesture of contempt for government, for the men and women in Congress, the White House, the agencies. It is precisely because people have lost their awe for the presidency that they imagine Mr. Trump as a viable president. American political establishment, take note: In the past 20 years you have turned America into a nation a third of whose people would make Donald Trump their president. Look on your wonders and despair.

    Mr. Trump’s supporters like that he doesn’t in the least fear the press, doesn’t get the dart-eyed, anxious look candidates get. He treats reporters with courtesy until he feels they’re out of line, at which point he calls them stupid. They think he’ll do that with Putin. His insult of John McCain didn’t hurt him, and not because his supporters have any animus for Mr. McCain. They just saw it as more proof Mr. Trump will take the bark off anyone.

    They’re not nihilists, they’re patriots, and don’t experience themselves as off on a toot but pragmatic in a way the establishment is not. The country is in crisis, we can’t keep doing more of the same. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” We have to do something different. He’s different. If it doesn’t work we’ll fire him.

    Trump’s power is not name ID. He didn’t make his name in this cycle or the last, he’s been around 35 years. He’s made an impression.

    His ideological incoherence will not hurt him. His core supporters don’t prize him for his intellectual consistency. He has called himself pro-choice but so are some of his supporters, and no one sees him as a ponderer of great moral issues. In the past he has described himself as “quite liberal” on health care. That won’t hurt either. An untold story right now is that everyone was “right” about health care. The Republicans were right that ObamaCare would not and will never work. Democrats—though they haven’t noticed because they’re so busy clinging to and defending ObamaCare—were right that America would support national health care, but not as they devised it. We’ll get out of ObamaCare by expanding Medicare. Most of America, after the trauma of the past five years, won’t mind.

    The GOP is waiting for Mr. Trump to do himself in—he’s a self-puncturing balloon. True, but he’s a balloon held aloft by a lot of people; they won’t let it fall so easy.

    The first GOP debate looms, next Thursday in Cleveland. If Mr. Trump were on the stage with the second tier, who have nothing to lose, one or two would go at him. But he’ll be with the first tier, who will treat him gingerly. A guess: He will come out with friendly dignity, shake hands, wait quietly for a question, attempt to demonstrate a statesmanlike bearing to anxious and opposed Republican viewers. But he won’t be able to sustain it. And his supporters won’t really want him to. They’ll want him to be The Donald. Bombast will commence.

  106. On something as basic as TPP, the hideous trade pact, Rachel Maddow, for example, was against it repeatedly until it was hailed as a victory for Barack at which point she was slobbering over the deal as something wonderful and amazing.
    ———–
    This reminds me of the old saw:

    Q-1: will you go to bed with me for $1 million?

    A-1: show me the money!

    Q-2: will you go to bed with me for $20?

    A-2: absolutely not! What the hell do you think I am???

    Q-3: we have already established what you are.

    We are merely negotiating the price.

  107. Hello All! And THANK YOU ADMIN for helping me return! It’s fun to be back “home!” I’ve almost never stopped reading daily, but over the last four years in particular have not had a great urge to comment – until now. Obola is on his way towards the door, HRC is stumbling BADLY, and Trump is comin’-a-knockin’! Althought I am STILL a registered Democrat and as such, unable (right now) to vote in the Florida Primaries on the “other side” we’ll see how long that lasts.

    As with here, I want to watch and see how things shake out, but you can count me in with those who see something different in Trump’s candidacy. It’s what Admin rightly pointed out – HOPE AND CHANGE.

    I probably still won’t comment a LOT, but I do enjoy the read and get a great deal of my political news here from both Admin’s great posts and the interesting comments of all.

    So – it’s great to be back. And again, thanks Admin! You are the best!

  108. When Romney says Cruz went way over the line in his comment that the Iran deal makes Obama the largest financial supporter of terrorism in the world because it releases $150 billion to a nation which is the leading sponsor of terrorism, you have to wonder which line he is talking about: the blue line that runs from his mansion to the country club in the gated community he lives in; or the red line which marked the “path to heaven” in the concentration camp of Auschwitz. If he means the former, then he crossed the line by showing honesty as opposed to political correctness. But if he means the latter, then then his comment barely scratched the surface.

  109. Cruz to Obama: Let’s Settle This Like Men
    “I would be happy to debate him … anywhere in the country in the next 60 days,”
    by Michael Walsh
    July 31, 2015 – 4:43 am
    (0) Print Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size
    One of the reasons for Donald Trump’s continuing high standing in the early polls is his perceived willingness to stand up to PC bullies and speak his mind. Now along comes Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, standing up to the man who put the “bully” back into the bully pulpit:

    According to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran is essentially financing terrorism. And he’s not backing down after the president called his comments “outrageous.”

    “If this deal is consummated, it will make the Obama administration the world’s leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism,” Cruz said during a round table Tuesday. “Billions of dollars under control of this administration will flow into the hands of jihadists who will use that money to murder Americans, to murder Israelis, to murder Europeans.” Cruz has said the remarks before.

    On Monday, Obama responded to criticism of the deal. He also addressed Cruz’s comments, and others from members of GOP lawmakers, calling them “outrageous attacks” that crossed the line. “We’ve had a sitting senator, who also happens to be running for president, suggest that I’m the leading state sponsor of terrorism,” Obama said during a press conference from Ethiopia. “Maybe this is just an effort to push Mr. Trump out of the headlines, but it’s not the kind of leadership that is needed for America right now.”

    Crossed what line? Vigorous give-and-take between independent branches of government, each member of which is sworn to uphold the Constitution, has long been a hallmark of American republican democracy. If you can’t take the heat, as another Democrat president famously said, get out of the kitchen.

    In fact, a debate on Obama’s latest vengeful attempt to shove bad policy down the throats of a people he so obviously holds in contempt is very much what we do need. So Cruz has called Obama to take it outside:

    “Yesterday, I invited President Obama to participate in a debate, I would be happy to debate him … anywhere in the country in the next 60 days, to discuss the substance of this deal. If he believes that this deal can be defended, I would encourage him to defend it in front of the American people,” Cruz said. “If he’s unwilling to do so, then he can send as his proxy Secretary of State John Kerry because on the merits, this deal is catastrophic for the American people.”

    What fun it would be to see that on Pay Per View. Don’t hold your breath, though.

  110. Taking on McConnell was no stunt. It was the summation and culmination of everything he believes in. But calling out Obama is different. That is a stunt. Why? Because he knows Obama and Kerry know that what we have given up here in order to give Obama a legacy is indefensible. Even so, thanks to the way Corker and McConnell have trapped themselves, it will it will be rejected, vetoed, and because of the presumption of legitimacy Corker gave it in defiance of the Constitution it will become law pursuant to the principle of negative ratification—a concept I am intimately acquainted with in past dealings with the Teamsters. Therefore, it is safe to assume that Schumer will cast a show vote against the Treaty while whipping his delegation to vote for it, in collusion with the White House.

  111. policy wonk, who knew?

    ***************************************

    DT loves the element of surprise…book to be released on the day of the debate

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/12/time-to-get-tough-trumps-blockbuster-policy-manifesto/

    TIME TO GET TOUGH: Trump’s Blockbuster Policy Manifesto

    The Washington Establishment’s increasing angst and opposition to billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy is predicated on the notion that his highly-quotable catchphrases—“Take the oil!” or “Build a wall!”—lack substantive policy prescriptions to back them up. In short, the RINO caucus’ knock on Trump is that his solutions are unserious, unmeasured, quixotic.

    Yet if the chattering class fears Trump’s recent surge in the polls, they will go into panic-filled paroxysms when they read Trump’s smart and serious bestseller, Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again.

    Among Trump’s many bestselling, anecdote-filled books, Time to Get Tough (originally published in 2011) stands out as his most penetrating, serious, and detailed enunciation of his political philosophy and policy views. Trump says it’s the “best book I’ve ever written” and is “better than The Art of the Deal.” Trump added, “It’s the hardest I’ve ever worked on a book. And it’s the most thought I’ve ever put into a book.”

    It’s easy to see why. Backed up with nearly 250 endnotes, citing everything from Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports to Sherman Antitrust Act amendments to the Theory of Moral Sentiments, Trump’s book clearly lays out serious policy solutions to vexing U.S. problems. Welfare reform, cyberwarfare, energy, illegal immigration and crime, taxes, healthcare, national defense—you name it, Trump offers his plans, often including specific bills and amendments. Best of all, Trump does it all in his refreshingly blunt and authentic voice—the very voice now resonating with a citizenry fed up with the Political Class and its conceits.

    Indeed, vestiges of the GOP Establishment, like Karl Rove aide Peter Wehner, have slyly chosen to aim the bulk of their barbs against Trump at his bumpersticker-style catchphrases or decades-old statements, not the factual policy discussions he offers in Time to Get Tough.

    Detailed, innovative, and smart, Time to Get Tough rivals all other GOP presidential candidates’ books in both specificity and serious policy proposals. It’s a book to be read by conservatives and feared by Trump’s detractors.

  112. New PPP poll data:

    Herman Cain 30%
    Mitt Romney 22%
    Newt Gingrich 15%
    Rick Perry 14%
    Michele Bachmann 5%
    Ron Paul 5%
    Jon Huntsman 2%
    Rick Santorum 1%
    Gary Johnson 0%
    Someone else/Not sure 6%

  113. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/michael-steele-to-joan-walsh-your-condescending-attitude-is-why-trumps-popular/

    After reviewing a brief video of a middle-class voter focus group raving about a potential Trump presidency, Walsh said, “I look at those people and I feel sad. That is really such a low common denominator. They’re all Republicans, they’re not all going to vote for him.”

    Asked by Chris Matthews to explain what she meant by “low common denominator,” Walsh elaborated, “They’re really, they really don’t have a firm grasp on reality, on what it’s going to take to solve the country’s problems.” She later exclaimed that she would be “fine” with Trump using her quotes to bash “elite” media.

    “I’m not fine with it,” Steele shot back, in the clip first flagged by NewsBusters reporter Ken Shepherd. “You want to know why Trump is doing what Trump is doing and the way he’s doing it? It’s because of comments like that. Because of attitudes like that.”

    And then the key back-and-forth:

    WALSH: Oh, sure!

    STEELE: Your highbrow is looking down on my lowbrow. You are somehow better than me.

    WALSH: No, I don’t think I’m better than them. No, I don’t. But they’re not thinking; they want to be entertained.

    STEELE: But whether you said it or not, your comments relate that way and that’s the problem. And so — when people hear that, whether it’s from the media or Republicans in the party — they go, “This guy,” as the woman said, “he’s speaking to me. I may not agree with everything he’s saying, but he’s one of us. He’s a billionaire, but he’s one of us.”

    Your comment, Joan, does not come off as, you’re one of us. And as long as they hear that, they’re not going to blame him.

    WALSH: I’m so much more one of them than he is. I was not born to wealth, for God’s sake, Michael Steele.

    ***************************

    the dem elite attitude speaks for itself…

  114. Here’s the average for the three latest polls in the RCP list. These are the only national polls with data from the last week (Wed 22nd through Tues 28th)

    Trump 21.3
    Walker 12.3
    Bush 11.7
    Cruz 6.3
    Huckabee 6.0
    Rubio 5.7
    Carson 5.0
    Paul 5.0
    Kasich 4.7
    Christie 3.0
    Perry 2.3
    Jindal 2.0
    Santorum 1.7
    Fiorina 1.0
    Pataki 1.0

  115. I don’t really pay much attention to Joan Walsh OR Michael Steele. Both are card carrying members of the Washington cartel.

    Steele, former head of the RNC, was Boehner’s press secretary until he left to take an advisory position with the Jeb! SuperPac.

  116. Hi Norma Desmond…

    …it is so great to see some of the old gang coming back…pm317, henry, Dot…

    I enjoy hearing what all of you have to say and your take on our current ‘fast forward’ from the ‘old’ days…

Comments are closed.