.
.
.
I had planted a herb called rue next to my orange tree, and all of the sudden I noticed caterpillars, different from the ones in the milkweed or tomato plants, hanging around the herb and the tree. I blamed them for the funny looking oranges that the tree had yielded this year, but before putting them in the compost I took them to the arboretum to be examined by their nursery volunteers.
It turn out that they are swallowtail caterpillars, they like citrus and the rue is one of their preferred host plants. Now the monarchs share the garden with them. The swallowtail are beautiful butterflies, even if they may be responsible for making some of my oranges looking like weird human faces.
Today I read an article of a sports commentator about the influence of the “citrus-faced” man in some athletes, and this term called my attention. I thought about my oranges, which were as sweet as ever in spite of their shape. However reading about the citrus guy in the sports story left me with a bitter taste.
In a school in Iowa, Latino players were targeted with chants invoking the name and messages of Donald Trump.
Trump’s considerable popularity and his inflammatory rhetoric, widely denounced as racist, have exacerbated the divisions and anger being expressed in this presidential election . It has also presented the challenge how to correctly characterize his appeal, in order to establish a dialogue with his supporters to find civil solutions.
Is he really a racist even though some African Americans and Hispanics are supporting him?
Is he a neo-fascist when he is reinforcing anti-other people stereotypes, proposing violent solutions such as massive deportations, attracting hate groups like the KKK and other White Supremacist ones, using a Nazi like salute as a pledge to vote for him?
Or is he just an authoritarian figure embodying the frustrations or the hidden authoritarianism/fear of social change of many people? His appeal as a strongman to some of his supporters is such , that they openly or subconsciously make reference to Hitler’s Germany in positive terms.
I continue tending to my butterflies, in special the monarchs which fly across borders, going back and forth from Mexico. In the meantime, I stockpile chisels and hammers to poke holes in Trump’s wall. Most importantly I have joined the many who oppose the divisive bitter cara de naranja.
It’s pretty obvious what’s happening here.
All the big money POWER THAT BE are investing millions of dollars in negative ads on Donald Trump because he’s the only one with a shot at becoming President who is not taking legal bribes from Wall Street and the defense contractors and is not owned any special interest groups. So Trump is a HUGE threat to all those who want the status quo – which is exactly what they will get with any other candidate in the running besides Donald Trump.
As far as immigration is concerned – Trump only wants our immigration laws enforced and sovereignty returned to our country. It seems to me that anyone opposing that notion would be anti-American since national sovereignty goes hand in hand with American values and the founding of our nation.
So now there is a HUGE push to bring Trump down and maintain the status quo. All of us know that it’s a disgrace for Hillary to even have the privilege to run for President with all the baggage she carries around, particularly with the FBI investigation on the email scandal where there is a cooperating witness who has been given immunity in the case.
Trust me. Had a US government employee with a security clearance without political connections done what she did, that person would have already been indicted and charged. Yet Hillary is far in the lead for the Democrat nomination. Just goes to show how far America has fallen from grace.
Edward Snowden must be looking at all this in stupored amazement.
It is indeed obvious.
Donald Trump is an asshole.
A good number of us don’t want an asshole for President.
The end.
And for many Americans, when faced with the prospect of a Trump Presidency, the status quo suddenly becomes very, very appealing.
Anyone paying the slightest attention to news on many fronts, from Wall Street or the Mideast, would advise you to enjoy your “status quo”, since it is not sustainable by anyone in any case. When the can we are kicking, bounces back off the sign saying “Road ends here”, EVERY color toolbox I’ve seen so far is mostly empty, except for wishful thinking, hubris, and a few good sound bites (at most). Many will share Snowden’s bemusement, but he won’t envy our ringside seats.
Not sustainable? Certainly.
Preferable, in the short term, to Trump? For many, yes.
And some others have gotten used to it for two decades, but are still nervous every time hearing the question, “Oh, but how much worse could it get ?”
What an unintelligent response.
These are the ones who are trying to take Trump down because they have lots to lose if he were elected:
1. Wall Street
2. Illegal immigration supporters (Wall Street, big business, Mexico)
3. Foreign nations being subsidized by US taxpayers.
4. Those who promote “pay to play”.
5. Those who support trade agreements that hurt US workers.
6. Basically, all those who love the ‘status-quo’ and profit from it.
Ok, toss out a few more pejoratives without addressing the issues and demonstrate more of your cognitive prowess.
How about this issue?
Donald Trump’s Tax Plan Could Tack $10 Trillion onto America’s Debt
http://fortune.com/2016/03/08/donald-trumps-tax-plan-primary/
The operative word is “COULD”. The article doesn’t mention how much “COULD” be saved if we stopped supporting illegal immigrants, stopped bailing out Wall Street, stopped allowing “pay to play” in Congress, stopped trade agreements that hurts our workforce and sends more jobs overseas.
You folks aways focus on the negatives and never examine the positives.
How much “COULD” we add to our Federal Debt if Hillary moved into the White House and implemented her many programs? How much would we lose to Wall Street. Hillary has taken millions from Wall Street. Trump hasn’t taken a thin dime.
Research that.
I’m sorry, I didn’t receive the Donald Dumpf memo (perhaps it’s in the pledge) that only happy talk is allowed when examining a Dumpf policy.
But I did do some thinkin’, but remember folks the following is only to be read while humming “On the sunny side of the street”.
1. Wall Street* doesn’t like Donald Dumpf because he brings uncertainty, no one really knows what he’ll really do. He could tank the stock market or make it rain lizards. The Dumpf likes to play his cards very close to his vest.
*Remember, millions of Americans have money in “Wall Street” in the form of their 401K’s.
We do know that his tax plan is great for the wealthy, especially those inheriting money (this will very good for the Dumpf spawn).
Would his tax cutting plan do for America what Brownback did for Kansas? Oh boy, I can hardly wait.
2. You forgot to mention all the small business owners (restaurants, nurseries etc.), farmers and families who also depend on illegal immigration’s cheap labor.
Hold on to your hat’s kids when the price of goods and services rise.
And deporting 11 million people ain’t going to be cheap either!
3. I’m guessing you’re referring to our military, but what exactly does the Dumpf mean when he says:
Strengthen the military so that it’s “so big and so strong and so great” that “nobody’s going to mess with us.”
I hear that and think $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!
4. There will only be one person to pay: Donald Dumpf. Easy peasy, but probably not cheapsy.
5. Better trade policies would be “great”, but would the Dumpf just start an unnecessary trade war with Mexico and China and push the country into a recession?
Only the Walmart shopper will know for sure.
How Donald Trump could cause a recession
http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/03/news/economy/Donald-trump-economy/
6. Hmmmm, the “status-quo and those who profit from it”, even a world class mind-reader like myself can’t tell what you’re referring to. Too. Too. Vague.
“1. Wall Street* doesn’t like Donald Dumpf because he brings uncertainty, no one really knows what he’ll really do.”
Uncertainty? Oh, you bet he does. Donald Trump hasn’t taken any Wall Street legal bribes so Wall Street is very uncertain whether he’ll continue to bail them out with the taxpayer’s money like Bush and Obama have done. The rest of them are a mile deep in Wall Street’s pockets. Hillary can’t take enough Wall Street money. Cruz is married to a Goldman Sachs banksteress. So I certainly understand you comment on ‘uncertainty’. Makes perfect sense.
****************************************************************************************
“2. You forgot to mention all the small business owners (restaurants, nurseries etc.), farmers and families who also depend on illegal immigration’s cheap labor.”
You forgot that America has seasonal foreign worker visa programs to allow all the fruit pickers that farmers need. Those are legal workers. If farmers are hiring illegal workers and paying them substandard wages they are breaking the labor laws and should be fined and/or jailed.
And you’ve forgotten that most farms these days are owned by big corporations – and are not mom and pop farms. Those went away with the rotary dial phone.
America has over 90 million citizens in the working age category who do not have jobs. The BLS reports that are released monthly prove that. There is no reason for illegal foreigners to take restaurant or nursery jobs. When I was a kid I worked in a restaurant. It wasn’t easy to find that restaurant work. And everyone who worked there was an english speaking citizen. The owners of restaurants who hire illegal foreigners and pay them substandard wages are breaking our labor laws and should be fined and/or jailed.
**************************************************************************************
“I hear that and think $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!”
There are many ways to stengthen our military without spending loads of money on it.
And what is cheaper? Having a strong military or having foreign nations challenge us in war because we have a weak military. War is much more expensive than building a strong military. Ask Bush or Obama about that. Of course, the defense contractors love war. That’s the reason they give legal bribes to everybody but Trump.
**************************************************************************************
“There will only be one person to pay: Donald Dumpf. Easy peasy, but probably not cheapsy.”
Trump has self-funded his campaign. He hasn’t taken any legal bribes. So your comment lacks logic and rationale.
**************************************************************************************
“5. Better trade policies would be “great”, but would the Dumpf just start an unnecessary trade war with Mexico and China and push the country into a recession?”
China and Mexico would back down prior to any trade war. It would destroy their economies. Especially Mexico. We’ve been carrying Mexico since the NAAFTA agreement was signed. One of the worst trade agreements in US history. Thanks to Bill Clinton.
Trump would not allow foreign nations to pay off our US politicians to get huge advantages in the international trade agreements, like TPP. Anyone who is a loyal US citizen would definitely side with Trump on trade.
***************************************************************************************
“6. Hmmmm, the “status-quo and those who profit from it”, even a world class mind-reader like myself can’t tell what you’re referring to. Too. Too. Vague”
If don’t know how the ‘status-quo’ has widened the gap between the rich and the poor (and middle class), I can’t help you.
If you don’t know how the ‘status-quo’ has damaged Main Street and taken away our liberties over the last 20 years, I can’t help you.
If you don’t know how the ‘status-quo’ has promoted needless wars and killed millions of innocents out of love of money for the rich, I can’t help you.
You need to so your own research on that.
Gosh, of course he’ll fix Wall Street’s wagon, we don’t know how, but we’re sure it’ll be swell (and just ignore those huge tax cuts for the wealthy and the equally huge amount it will add to the debt). Dumpf says it will be great, great, great!
And don’t think about how he’s going to round up and deport 11 million people, cuz it’s going to be great and we need to just trust Dumpf!
The disruption to the economy, not a problem, when Dumpf negotiates everything will be grand.
Lobbyists, well they’ll be stopped dead in their tracks when Donald Dumpf gets to the White House. No need to ask how, just know you’re going to love it.
War, Dumpf is going to be so tough and he’s going to torture and just kick-the-shit out of everybody, but don’t worry our friends and enemy’s alike are going to respect us all the more for the shit-kicking. And it won’t cost a dime, cuz we’ll steal all their shit and they’ll love us for it.
Face it, life under Donald Dumpf is going to be magical, we’ll be winning and loving and shit-kicking .. it’s going to be GREAT!
You’re right Zeigfreid and super smart too!
anonster, I see you had to resort to sarcasm to hide your failed rebuttal to my comments. That’s fine. You were swimming upstream from the start. So I understand your predicament.
It was a good discussion until it deteriorated.
Thanks for your time.
Personally, I thought anonster’s soliloquy was a fairly cogent observation on the inanity of the Trump brand.
Donald Trump, on national TV, just called Ted Cruz a liar.
Minutes before, he also said “I don’t settle lawsuits.”
http://fortune.com/2016/02/11/donald-trump-univision-settle-lawsuit/
Zieg may be still processing this information, and as in the Snowden execution statements, he may accept that Trump is wrong on some issues.
Hope your milkweed is a native North American variety. The tropical varieties throw Monarch migration all out of whack.
Good point, thanks for the observation. I haven’t replaced the tropical with natives types yet. In the meantime I cut them down during the winter. A good discussion about the pro and cons of each type is in this link:
http://texasbutterflyranch.com/2015/04/30/tropical-milkweed-ok-for-monarch-butterflies-just-cut-the-dang-stuff-down/
Looks like Trump has taken both Michigan and Mississippi by wide margins. He may surpass 50% in Mississippi where the governor endorsed Rubio who ended up with about 5% of the vote.
Looks like Romney failed to bring down The Donald. No surprise to me. When he lost to Obama in 2012 it was the mark of a loser. He needs to stay out of politics. Everytime he shows up it’s another embarrassment to the pubs.
Rubio has one foot out the door and the other on a banana peel. Wonder if he’ll hang around for the winner-take-all Florida primary? If Trump trumps him in his home state it would be like a dagger through the heart. Poor little Marco.
Cruz probably hopes Rubio drops out to get some of his votes. But it seems as if Rubio’s favored votes are going in Trump’s direction – not Cruz.
Think they’ve run out of strategies yet to bring The Donald down?
If The Donald takes Florida and Ohio next Tuesday – game over!
Oh, and go research the black vote in Michigan. The Donald got a disproportional share.
Hillary beware! If Trump takes your black votes you’re done too!!!! 🙂
And don’t forget that Trump took 46% of the hispanic votes in Nevada. More than both Cruz and Rubio – who are both hispanic!!! 🙂
Getting a considerable share of the African-American vote would be a significant factor. Do you know the percentage?
Stop picking on Marco, you never know what might happen at the Cleveland convention.
Bernie winning in Michigan is another significant event. Time to send another $27.
Bernie’s too far behind now to catch up. He caught fire too late.
The dem super delegate system sunk him too. When he was ahead by 4% points in Michigan Hillary already had 10 delegates to his zero.
Not sure about what % of black votes went for Trump. But in Wayne County about 54% of turnout were for pubs and only about 45% were for dems.
In comparison, in the 2012 general election about 73% of voter turnout were for dems and only about 24% were for pubs.
I guess you could call that the Trump effect.
It’s funny, but I can’t find one article about Dumpf and his percentage of the black vote in Michigan. Perhaps you could provide that information.
I did find some breakdowns of his support among hispanics in Nevada. That “46% of the hispanic votes” … not quite.
http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2016/02/24/no-trump-you-are-not-number-one-with-hispanics-in-nevada/
1. We are only talking about the very small percent of Nevada Latinos who are Republican today. An overwhelming majority of Nevada Latinos are Democrats. In a recent poll asking about party identification, 55% of Latinos said they were Democrats, 29% said Independents and just 16% said they were Republicans. Assuming the entrance poll is correct (a very big assumption) and Trump won 44% of Latino Republicans, that means he was supported by about 7% of Latinos in Nevada (44% of 16 = 7.04). What that mean is that most likely, 93% of Latinos in Nevada did not vote for Trump.
*************
Oops.
Oh, there’s no doubt that if you combine the democrat and republican hispanics in Nevada that Trump would not win that vote. I agree.
My larger point was that both Rubio and Cruz are hispanic. Trump received more of the Republican hispanic vote than both. And I think that’s significant since it’s a generally accepted notion in this country that skin color matters in elections when people vote. All the polls divide us by race. About the importance of the black vote and the hispanic vote. But no one talks about the importance of the white vote. I find that fascinating.
“Oh, and go research the black vote in Michigan. The Donald got a disproportional share.”
Again, please share your sources on that with us.
Use your math skills.
Mississippi is about 37% black. Trump won overwhelmingly. He received 47% of the votes.
Michigan has a large population of blacks. Trump won 37% of the votes there.
It’s undeniable that Trump has been getting more black votes than the previous Republican presidential candidates.
Hillary should be worried, particularly with some of her historical anti-black rhetoric exposed in the media.
“Trump said Republican presidential candidates “usually get about 4 percent or 5 percent” of black support. That was the case in 2008 and 2012, when Barack Obama — the nation’s first black president — was on the ballot. But from 1980 to 2004, the Republican candidate received 8 percent to 12 percent, which is consistent with Trump’s support among blacks.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/trump-and-the-black-vote/
Anonster, stop using math and facts.
Play fair.
“.. no one talks about the importance of the white vote. I find that fascinating.”
Indeed …..
” But no one talks about the importance of the white vote.”
Except they do:
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/super-tuesday-how-white-working-class-voters-blacks-made-difference-n529856
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/donald-trump-needs-7-of-10-white-guys-213699
http://www.redstate.com/diary/6755mm/2015/09/04/gop-nominee-needs-64-percent-white-vote-30-percent-non-white-vote-win-16/
Here’s an update on Wayne County, Michigan which happens to be about 40% black:
The voter turnout percentages changed from their earlier posting as soon as the polls closed:
Dem turnout: 67% of voters.
Pub turnout: 33% of voters.
Still, when you consider that in 2012 that 74% of the voter turnout was Dem and only 24% was Pub – that’s a significant change. Trump effect for sure.
Also, note that Trump won 40% of the Republican vote in Wayne County. Significant.
I think the black people are disappointed in the “hope and change” message heard the Dem candidates and see Trump as more genuine and honest and straight forward than Hillary. More ‘what you see is what you get’. And I think the black people respect that. Just my opinion.
Take caution, Hillary. Trump does not roll over like Romney did in 2012.
“Oh, and go research the black vote in Michigan. The Donald got a disproportional share.”
Proof, not just what YOU “think”. You just made up up the former statement. You and Donald Dumpf, makin’ shit up, well ain’t you two-peas-in-a-pod.
Can you prove my statement to be incorrect? Waiting………
Again, Wayne County is about 40% black.
Trump got 40% of the Republican vote in Wayne County.
No doubt in my mind that Trump got a disproportional share of the black Republican vote.
Use your common sense, logic and whatever math skills you’ve acquired in life.
You made the claim, YOU need to deliver the proof!
You claimed I was wrong. I explained to you why I think I’m right. I provided you with some actual numbers.
Now it’s your turn to prove me wrong.
That’s the way debates work.
Play by the rules – or proceed to the exit.
Oh no, YOU made a claim that The Dumpf got a ” disproportional share of the black vote”, now you need to back it up with facts.
I tried to find the figures and couldn’t, “in my mind” ain’t fact!
I made the statement.
I used numbers to back up my rationale.
You said I was wrong.
Now it’s your turn to prove that I am wrong.
If you don’t want to play by the normal rules of public debate – head for the exit.
Originally, Ziegfried said;
“Oh, and go research the black vote in Michigan. The Donald got a disproportional share.”
Later, he said;
“No doubt in my mind that Trump got a disproportional share of the black Republican vote.”
That’s called moving the goal posts.
“No doubt in my mind that Trump got a disproportional share of the black Republican vote.”
Ah, but that is NOT what you claimed.
“Oh, and go research the black vote in Michigan. The Donald got a disproportional share.”
Now you’ve added the-oh-so-important “black Republican vote” qualifier.
And you still have not provided PROOF, there is that pesky “go research the black vote in Michigan” that infers that YOU have done the “research”, except you can’t point to ANY ACTUAL RESEARCH!
What you “think” in your “mind” doesn’t count as research.
“You claimed I was wrong. ”
I haven’t claimed you were “wrong”, I’ve been asking you to provide proof of your claim and lacking that, I’ve accused you of making stuff up.
Donald Dumpf getting 40% of the republican vote in a county that is 40% black leaves doesn’t prove jack. That could mean that he got anywhere from 0% -100% of the black vote.
You claimed he got a “disproportional share” of the black vote. It is on you to prove exactly what percentage of the black vote he received.
“That’s called moving the goal posts.”
Use your brain.
Only registered Republicans could vote in the Michigan GOP primary. So obviously I was referring to black Republicans who voted for Trump.
Jeez, why do I even have to explain that to you?
Except you linked that with vague, generalized exclamations about how Trump’s take of the black vote is somehow a threat Clinton in Michigan. You weren’t talking about “just” Republicans.
You might want to be more careful about the language you use…which is generally too much of it.
“Ah, but that is NOT what you claimed.”
It was understood since only Republicans could vote in the Michigan GOP primary. Duh?
You and anon should get together for a drink.
*****************************************************************************************
If Wayne County is 40% black and if Trump got 40% of the vote in Wayne County it stands to reason that it’s very likely Trump got a disproportional number of black votes. (Disclaimer for those who don’t understand the voting requirements: Only Republicans in Michigan can vote in the Republican GOP Primary).
If you disagree with my statement – prove me wrong or head for the exit.
Oh, you’re going to hate this: In Dearborn, Michigan Trump got the majority of GOP votes: 39%. Dearborn elected a majority Muslim council. Over 40% of Dearborn is Muslim. So it looks like Trump who called for a temporary ban on foreign Muslims entering the country until our broken immigration policy is fixed had no effect on his popularity with Muslim voters in America’s largest Muslim city.
Okay, start slinging!!! 🙂
“Except you linked that with vague, generalized exclamations about how Trump’s take of the black vote is somehow a threat Clinton in Michigan. You weren’t talking about “just” Republicans”
My point is that we see a trend. If Trump gets just 20-25% of the black vote in the general election Hillary is toast!!!
Don’t forget about the black independent voters. Or are you going to stereotype and claim that all blacks are Democrats?
Also, we see evidence that some Dems are leaning in favor of Trump if the other option is Hillary.
Don’t blame me! I’m just the messenger!
Mitt Romney got 6% of the black vote in 2012.
George Bush got 11% in 2004.
And you think Trump could get 20-25%?
LOL.
Tell us, how do you think Trump will do with the Hispanic vote? Better than Bush in 2004? LOL
“My point is that we see a trend. If Trump gets just 20-25% of the black vote in the general election Hillary is toast!!!”
YOU see a trend, you haven’t given one piece of verifiable evidence that Trump got a “disproportionate share” of either the overall black vote or even the Republican vote in Michigan (and now you’re even taking your made up BS and applying to the general, LOL) .
Words like “disproportional” and “research” have meaning.
We all know you got over excited and wrote some things you can’t back up with facts. Why don’t you just admit it and we can all move on?
You’re a dope.
7
See, I used numbers to back it up.
LOL
*clap* *clap* *clap*
Nicely played.
Apparently you Trump haters haven’t been paying attention. CNN, Fox and even MSNBC have been touting Trump’s ability to attract more minorities and even moderate Democrats than other Republican POTUS candidates in past elections.
Don’t forget. Like Reagan, Trump was once a Democrat. And the political commentators are mentioning the similarity of the two in their ability to attract voters outside the Republican Party.
Did you miss my previous post? Dearborn, MI is over 40% Muslim with a majority Muslim city council. Trump picked up the lion’s share of the pub vote in Dearborn – 40%. That wouldn’t happen unless Muslims (a minority) were voting for him. Remember when the Trump haters claimed that Trump alienated the Muslims after he said we should temporarily ban foreign Muslims from US soil until we fix our immigration policies? He said this after a couple Muslims in San Bernadino murdered 14 innocent people. The Muslim female involved came over on a marriage visa. She was the apparent ringleader. I suspect a fair number of Muslim-Americans support Trump. He got 40% of the vote in Dearborn, the Muslim capital of the US. Deal with it.
You folks should watch the news more often. You’d be amazed at what you could learn.
“Trump picked up the lion’s share of the pub vote in Dearborn – 40%. That wouldn’t happen unless Muslims (a minority) were voting for him.”
Oh my. The force is strong with this one.
Gee, didn’t take you long to respond.
Hope I’m not keeping you up tonight. 🙂
My point is that Trump has the ability to attract minority voters – moreso than most other GOP POTUS candidates in the past.
This is why many political analyists are comparing him to Reagan.
Do a little research. You’d be amazed at what you might learn.
Oh, I’m doing some research.
Don’t you worry.
Oh, I’m skeeerd. 🙂
You will be.
You will be.
Wah.
If you take politics so personally maybe you should go on vacation and relax. Maybe you’re wrapped just a little too tight.
Wah.
“CNN, Fox and even MSNBC have been touting Trump’s ability to attract more minorities and even moderate Democrats than other Republican POTUS candidates in past elections.”
With reliable news sources like that, who could ever be mistaken about anything?
Do you prefer Brian Williams?
Dude, really?
I thought that was a pretty obvious movie quote.
It’s appalling how the Dems use their ‘superdelegate’ system to enable the political insiders (to include lobbyists) to throw the Party’s nomination to their political rulers and owners in typical ‘quid-pro-quo’ style. If I were a Dem I’d be vigorously protesting this very UNdemocratic way to nominate a candidate for the highest office in the land.
“In non-political speak, “distinguished members” are really Democrat political insiders and D.C. powerbrokers, not the everyday voters Democrats claim to represent. ABC News recently reported that, “dozens of the 437 delegates in the DNC member category are registered federal and state lobbyists, according to an ABC News analysis. In fact, when you remove elected officials from the superdelegate pool, at least one in seven of the remainder are former or current lobbyists.”
https://medium.com/america-rising-pac/the-undemocratic-democratic-primary-6f0a4e3d0976
The fact is that Trump can’t get 50% of the delegates. And the ones assigned to him will not stick around after the first ballot. After that the “establishment” party loyalists will take over. There may be a huge rupture in the party but the standard bearer of whatever there is left to bear a standard for won’t be Trump. It could be like the Whigs in 1852, or like the Democratic Party in 1844.
Dems in 1848 – when the conscience Free Soil Dems bolted the party and nominated Martin Van Buren.
Well, that worked out well.
Hard to see that happening without Drumpf and his followers bolting the Grand Old Party. I like it!
Lots will – at least for a while. That’s how Clinton got elected in ’92.
If Trump takes both Florida and Ohio – and the other imminent pending states that generally follow the trend of Florida – Trump could certainly run the table and get the 1,300 delegates needed to outright win the GOP nomination so the RNC can’t steal it from him and give it to an establishment puppet.
And you have to understand – Trump has run against as many as 17 GOP competitors. With that many in the race it’s not easy to wrap up over 50% right away. But the field is now down to 4 – and Rubio is toast after Florida with Trump ahead in the polls by 16 percentage points.
Trump is leading Kasich in Ohio by about 6 percentage points. That should indicate his popularity to you. He’s beating Rubio and Kasich in their home states!!!
I think the Republicans will regain their senses as Trump wraps it up and jump in to support him. The alternative would be Hillary becoming the next POTUS. I think most of us would agree that would be a total disaster.
If the Republicans don’t fall in behind Trump and support him they will destroy their own political party.
All of them know this. Either support Trump or commit political suicide.
Not brain science.
He has to win the all the big winner-take all states – Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvanis and California. I can’t see it. Maybe he can do it. And if so the party would be rightly finished. Trump doesn’t stand for any core beliefs the Party claims to hold. That’s the death knell. The Big Tent would split into the principled conservatives and the reality show Republicans. The Dems are in a similar boat – just like in 1848 when the “liberal” wing finally split from the corrupt Marcy Business Democrats.
Sometime things have to get worse before they get better. Like when you’re running a fever.
The Dems are not in a similar boat. We have two very qualified and rational candidates. Most Dems might prefer one candidate over the other, but would be happy with either. The media wants us all to think that the Dems will splinter and fall apart, but I don’t see that happening. In 2008 they pushed the story that Hillary’s middle-aged female supporters wouldn’t turn out for Obama and yet they did.
The Republicans on the other hand are having to choose between an out and out charlatan and someone who’s far to the right of Barry Goldwater.
“Most Dems might prefer one candidate over the other, but would be happy with either.”
I have more faith in the average Democrat than that. Hillary has already proven her dishonesty at many levels. With the classified email scandal, with Benghazi, with being in Wall Street’s back pockets, with her lack of transparency. And on and on and on.
After being hoodwinked by Obama for 8 years I think the average Democrat is smarter than to support Clinton. I think the average Democrat will refuse to be fooled again. I hope I’m not wrong about that.
***************************************************************************************
“We have two very qualified and rational candidates.”
Bernie has already washed out. He has no chance of the nomination. Have you looked at the delegate count? Don’t live in denial.
I don’t think you have any qualified candidates, but they sure seem different.
Read ’em and weep.
Latest polls from Real Clear Politics:
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Clinton 51, Trump 38 Clinton +13
General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Cruz 45, Clinton 47 Clinton +2
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Sanders 55, Trump 37 Sanders +18
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton ABC News/Wash Post Clinton 50, Trump 41 Clinton +9
Zenger,
Ever the cynic, could any one measure up to your oh-so-high standards, (other than you, of course)?
Don’t blame me because you have a cranky old socialist redistributionist and a sleazy old Wall Street bought-and-paid-for hack running to represent your party.
But they sure do seem to represent polar opposites, don’t they? I wonder which candidate profile will win the hearts and minds of future Democrats.
Actually, their policies are pretty similar, Sander’s of course (who by the way is a cranky “democratic” socialist, I would think that a sophisticated political animal like yourself would know the difference, guess not) is more progressive, but Hillary has been tacking to the left.
Also, having Republicans criticizing Hillary’s ties to Wall Street is really rich. The Republicans have always had their heads so far up Wall Street’s ass it’s a wonder they could breathe. One word for those of you appalled by Hillary’s “ties” to Wall Street: deregulation. The Republican party’s mantra.
Go peddle your “I’m so above it all” BS to some one who will buy it Zenger.
As usual your sad little partisan politics results in cerebral consternation.
I point out the brutal hypocrisy of a representative of a “social justice” party pocketing hundreds of thousands from Wall Street banks for 45 minutes each of inanne drivel that nobody is permitted to know about.
I’m not “peddling” anything, and although the temptation is great to engage in swapping insults with some anonymous fool on a blog. I think I’ll pass at this time.
LOL , yes, aren’t you so above it all.
I don’t pretend to be non-partisan like so many others on this blog.
That Hillary got paid to give speeches to Wall Street doesn’t mean shit. Anybody who’s mildly famous gets paid to give speeches, it’s virtually free money. She’s had a more interesting life than most (hence bigger fee) and probably delivers the same canned speech to all.
What I do find partisan is the call for Hillary to release the transcripts of her speeches when no one else past or present has been asked to do so. Here’s a list of other candidates who gave speeches to financial institutions (some while even running for office):
Mike Huckabee
Donald Trump
Ben Carson
Jeb Bush
Carly Fiorina
Mitt Romney
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich
Rudy Giuliani
Where is the call for their transcripts? Yeah, crickets.
Also my anonymity is a really a non-issue. I don’t know you from Adam, nor could I care less about you personally. I do judge you by what you’ve written, same as Zeigfried. If you were called Tippee Canoe I’d have the same response.
Trump acts more like a traditional Republican than all the other Republican candidates. On immigration, on law and order, on trade, on foreign affairs, on cutting deficit spending and the national debt (fiscal responsibility), on being tax friendly, on creating more jobs, etc….
Real traditional Republicans should like Trump. The only Republicans who don’t like Trump are those who promote the status quo….giving corporate welfare to Wall Street, promoting open borders, approving huge budgets and more deficit spending, allowing China to have their way with us w/regard to trade, fomenting more war and disarray in the Middle East, etc…
If the Republicans aren’t going to act like Republicans maybe it’s time to disband the Party and start over anyway.
But my guess is that after Trump is nominated that the Republicans will fully support him. Why? Because the only other alternative is to allow Hillary to be the next President.
Most of us agree that the status quo is not working. It’s time to throw the establishment pols overboard and try to turn the ship around. Otherwise the future of the County is in peril.
“The only Republicans who don’t like Trump are those who promote the status quo….giving corporate welfare to Wall Street, promoting open borders, approving huge budgets and more deficit spending, allowing China to have their way with us w/regard to trade, fomenting more war and disarray in the Middle East, etc…”
That got teed up beautifully for you, Mr. Cantor!
This is quite possibly the most ignorant thing you’ve ever written.
Yet another typical personalized derogatory comment w/o any rational counterargument challenging the opposing view.
Is this sort of caustic drivel generally permitted on this board?
Apparently so.
“This is quite possibly the most ignorant thing you’ve ever written.”
Actually, Mr. Ziegfried, what Ryan wrote is an opinion, which is no different than 99.9% of the overbearing bloviations emanating from your keyboard.
It’s not personal, Z.
The premises you rely on are patently false. You rely on them because you don’t know any better.
That’s ignorance, sorry.
I understand you feel passionately about your positions. I get that, I truly do, but your passion is not a legitimate excuse to insist that anyone rebutting your positions must provide bullet proof arguments before you allow them to speak.
I’ll be direct. You have a casual relationship with both the word “fact” and “truth”. The tone of the comments directed your way reflects the completeness of your thought.
The Dumpf is not a “traditional Republican”, he’s a reckless, dissembling, huckster.
Fools like you looove Dumpf’s easy, swaggering answers to complex problems. Unfortunately, his “easy” answers have real life ramifications. Rounding up and deporting 11 million people may appeal to the jingoistic and simplistic yahoo’s like yourself, but any attempt to do so would wreak havoc on our economy.
Ditto with his hyper-aggressive foreign policy, his position on trade, even the uncertainty he would bring to Wall Street.
It’s very easy to brag about radical changes and upending the status quo, but very real lives are at stake. Most of us can’t turn on a dime, that’s why our democracy generally produces slow moving change. We try to minimize peoples lives being upended by reckless policy.
Governing 300+ million people is extremely complicated. Immigration reform is extremely complicated, there are no easy answers. If it was as easy as deporting 11 million people (ludicrous idea in itself) it would have been done.
Dumpf is the antithesis of conservatism. I’m not a Republican, but I realize that we need at least two rational parties to keep things in check and unfortunately the Republicans have abdicated responsible governance.
I’ve always gotten a chuckle out of Drumpf’s insistence on building a wall on our Southern border.
Have people that think this is a viable solution to ANYTHING ever heard of a little thing called a…
…wait for it…
…tunnel?
It’ll be swiss cheese out there in the desert, à la El Chapo.
“It’s not personal, Z.”
After you wrote:
“This is quite possibly the most ignorant thing you’ve ever written”.
🙂
It’d be nice if the moderator would clear the boards of those who are more interested in personal attacks than debating the issues.
I am a moderator, you nut job. (That’s personal.)
Stating that what you wrote is ignorant isn’t personal.
I hope you eventually discover the irony of being ignorant of the word ignorant.
I’m not going to fight with you.
I don’t come here to fight. I come here to discuss political news.
Go fight with somebody else.
Better yet, run in circles and bite your tail. 🙂
I have a feeling you can’t remember how you got here.
But, I digress. Keep making friends!
Oh, and I think many of you are discounting the numbers of Independent voters who support Trump. Many Independents are former Republicans who got fed up with the weak-kneed GOP and booked. Trump will get most of those votes for sure. Cruz is looked upon with suspicion. His wife is a Goldman Sachs bankster! 🙂 How many want a Goldman Sachs bankster as our First Lady? Teddy is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Once you get past the facade he’s likely more establishment than John McCain or Mittster Romney!
You will be amazed at the variety and numbers of voters that Trump attracts from outside the GOP. Watch and learn.
Oh, and if I recall correctly Trump won 42% of the GOP vote (the lion’s share) in Hawaii where many of the residents are minorities. In fact whites only account for about 24% of Hawaii’s population. IOW’s 76% of the population is non-white. Trump took 42% of the GOP votes.
More minority votes for Trump.
Hello? Am I breaking through yet?
Keep pushing! Almost there!
Ever tried Yoga?
Gee, Bernie is really talking tough now. Why didn’t he do this months ago? I remember when he gave Clinton a pass on the classified email scandal during a previous debate then yesterday he called her out. What’s up with that? It’s a little late now, Bernie.
Oh, Clinton lied too. None of the former Secretary of States used a private home server to receive and send highly classified documents. Private home servers are easily hacked. The Federal government has about 7 different layers of security to protect against those intrusions. In fact, one foreigner who apparently hacked into Clinton’s emails is currently being extradited from Romania to face charges for the hacking.
And Bernie called her out for taking $225,000 per speech to the Too Big To Fails (eg. Goldman Sachs) and refusing to release the transcripts to the public.
Bernie’s talking tough when he’s about 700 delegate points behind with virtually zero chance of mounting a realistic challenge. What’s the use now, Bernie?
I supported Bernie too. But I found his campaign strategy disappointing and suspect. It’s pathetic that the dems are on track to nominate a POTUS candidate with so much taint and dirty baggage.
Anyone who think Hillary is not status-quo should get a neuro workup.
Besides Obama, Hillary, Samantha Powers and Susan RIce were the driving forces behind the illegal invasions of Libya and Syria. The 3 witches of MacBeth. Don’t you ever let anyone tell you that it’s only men who foment wars and massive orchestrated killings.
If Hillary is elected expect more wars. Maybe even the big one.
Expect more secrecy from Hillary. She won’t release the transcripts from her $225,000 Too Big To Fail Wall Street Bankster speeches. What does that tell you?
Expect more “pay to play” politics if you vote for Hillary. And she’s Exhibit #1. Her campaign chest is filled with tens of millions of legal bribes from Wall Street and Big Business and Special Interests. You don’t think there’s a payback coming? 🙂
Hillary represents most everything most Democrats I know despise: Big money; Pay to Play; War; Offshoring US jobs through TPP and other job-killing trade agreements with the multi-national corporations; Secrecy; Chastising female victims that her husband sexually abused; etc….
Why would anyone of a progressive bent promote that?
Zieg, how were the four mentioned US officials the driving forces behind the illegal invasion of Syria? Has a legal invasion taken place?
Launching air attacks on a sovereign nation without international (UN) approval or imminent threat of an attack on the US is a violation of international law, per the Geneva Protocol. Air attacks = Invasion. If an unfriendly nation lauched air attacks on our cities most Americans would probably say that we’ve been “invaded”.
It was certainly an action that we wouldn’t expect from the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize.
Of course, our mission in Syria was to take out Assad similar to how we took out Ghadaffi in Libya. I think they call it ‘regime change’. However, Putin pooped in Obama’s punchbowl.
Clinton, Powers and Rice supported the air attacks on Syria just like they supported the attack on Libya.
Now, of course, Libya is in the midst of a bloody civil war brought on by the instability that we perpetrated. (Sound familiar? cough, cough….Iraq)
And the war in Syria has mushroomed and now involves Turkey, Russia, Saudi, etc… and could easily derail into something much bigger.
Enjoy the rest of your evening.
The more political connotation of the “F” word has taken off: ” I’ve been reluctant to use the “f” word to describe Donald Trump because it’s especially harsh, and it’s too often used carelessly.
….Viewing Donald Trump in light of the fascists of the first half of the twentieth century – who used economic stresses to scapegoat others, created cults of personality, intimidated opponents, incited violence, glorified their nations and disregarded international law, and connected directly with the masses – helps explain what Trump is doing and how he is succeeding” . Robert Reich.
Trump did well in the debate tonight.
I suspect his numbers will grow in both Florida and Ohio, despite the tremendous amount of funds that Big Money (Wall Street, medical industry, foreign interests, etc…) is pouring in to slow him down and promote an establishment pol who supports the status quo.
But that’s just a guess. We’ll learn more as Tuesday approaches.
The Dalai Lama has joined the Pope in expressing reservations about Trump. He could use some kindness, and disavow the violence used by his supporters, like the alleged attack against the Breibart reporter by one of his campaign managers.
The Dalai Lama and the Pope express reservations about Trump? Good. That solidifies my confidence in Trump as the best choice we have for the job of President.
Thanks for the update.
Right. Because, you know, it’s better to be endorsed by white supremacists and former KKK members than strive for the support of those who promote peace.
^^^ That’s why we love you, Z.
Lacking any citation, is this the expression you are referring to ? Selective perception is certainly pandemic on the issue of Mr. Trump.
Tonight I saw that the candidates were nice to Trump. I guess after they connected Rubio’s plummeting numbers to his attacks on Trump at the last debate everyone was on their best behavior.
Also, I noted the other candidates seem to be coalescing behind Trump’s positions on immigration, etc… Now even Kasich seems to support Trump’s wall. Truth is stranger than fiction at times.
Well, I’m glad they seem to be getting along now.
Oh, did you see that Ben Carson is endorsing Trump? Dr. Carson seems to be a nice man. I would love to see Trump select him as his VP running mate.
Isn’t he also considering Rubio as VP? Marco could pull a Bernie’s Michigan on Tuesday, and it could be a game changer.
Oh, I agree, The Dumpf should absolutely select Dr. Carson as his running mate.
That would be so great, as the Dr. has proven time and again his razor-sharp grasp of foreign affairs and domestic policy.
He’s one of the best people and The Dumpf only wants the best people around him (he could always use some golden toothpicks to prop open the good doctor’s eyelids in case he falls asleep during appearances, really no one would notice).
In 2000, the country fell for a man whom it would be “fun to have a drink with at a bar.” We all know how THAT turned out.
Today, some folks believe a person like Dr. Ben Carson would make a good VP candidate because he “seems to be a nice man.”
Way to shoot for the stars, America!
“…as the Dr. has proven time and again his razor-sharp grasp of foreign affairs and domestic policy.”
And pyramids.
The polls show Trump in the lead in Florida (big lead), Illinois, N. Carolina, Missouri and Maryland. One poll shows Kasich w/ a 5% point lead in Ohio but other polls indicate Trump has a 6% lead over Kasich.
I bet the near riots in Chicago tonight at Trump’s rally accelerate Trump’s numbers. Americans don’t like it when hooligans interfere with the political process and perpetrate violence on civic minded citizens who show up to listen to the featured speaker.
Imagine if a bunch of conservatives showed up to a Hillary rally and used violence to shut down the rally. All the major news networks would be calling them terrorists. There were reports that the hooligans intended to storm the stage at Trump’s rally. Bring in the National Guard if necessary. The political process must be allowed to resume in a real democracy and free society.
But I suspect all this nonsense will help Trump win big next Tuesday. If Trump takes both Florida and Ohio the other 3 might as well grab their towels and head for the political showers.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
“Knock the crap out of him, would you? Seriously, OK, just knock the hell. I promise you I will pay for the legal fees, I promise, I promise,”
From The Dumpf’s speech in St. Louis last night:
“Part of the problem and part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, right?” he said, as quoted by the River Front Times. “And they’re being politically correct the way they take them out. So it takes a little bit longer.”
Yeah, it’s a real “problem” that “nobody wants to hurt each other anymore”.
The Dumpf is a sick, sick individual and you have to wonder/worry about the mental health of many of his supporters.
anonster, it isn’t a mental health problem.
It’s simply willful ignorance.
And who exactly were the aggressors in Chicago? The ones who legally assembled to listen to the featured speaker at a political rally, or the intruders who arrived and used force to shut the political rally down?
If a group of conservatives pulled that stunt at a Bernie or a Hillary rally, what would you say?
Which party would a rational and reasonable person defend? Those legally assembled to listen to the featured speaker or the aggressors who crashed the event and shut the rally down?
And of course, Ziegfreid conveniently ignores MONTHS of inflammatory speech by Drumpf and actual violence perpetrated by some of those legally assembled supporters. It’s as if “poof” what happened in Chicago exists in a complete vacuum.
Violence and aggressive behavior to counter constitutionally protected speech is not permitted in civilized societies.
What happened in Chicago was in complete defiance of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Thousands of innocent people came to the event to listen to the featured speaker. Uncivilized intruders and thugs ruined their right to partake in the political process.
Either one believes in Constitutional law or one does not.
I happen to be a proponent of civilization. But I realize my viewpoints are not always shared by others. And I champion their right to disagree with me. But they have no right to disrupt the rights of those wishing to participate in the political process.
I believe what happened yesterday in Chicago will result in higher primary numbers for Trump come Tuesday. I could be wrong. But I have faith in the American people. I believe many people are tired of little factions of thugs disrupting the lives of average Americans who wish to engage in the political process.
“If a group of conservatives pulled that stunt at a Bernie or a Hillary rally, what would you say?”
The problem ain’t the protestors (every campaign deals with that) it’s The Dumpf’s reckless, stupid comment’s egging on the violence.
“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them. Just knock the hell out of them. I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”
“I’d like to punch him in the face” before he began reminiscing about the “old days” where guys like that would be “carried out on a stretcher.”
“See, in the good old days this didn’t use to happen, because they used to treat them very rough. We’ve become very weak.”
“In the good ol’ days, they’d have ripped him out of that seat so fast.”
“Maybe he should have been roughed up because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,”
“I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself, or if other people will,”
“The problem ain’t the protestors (every campaign deals with that) it’s The Dumpf’s reckless, stupid comment’s egging on the violence.”
Wow. What a strange comment.
You don’t blame the ones who actively organized with the intent to foment aggression and disrupt and shut down a political event that thousands of innocent people came to witness.
You blame the one holding the political event?
So let’s say that someone held a neighborhood party at their home. An unwelcomed neighbor who the host had harsh words with in the past showed up and disrupted the party, causing it to be cancelled. You’d blame the host for the disruption and cancellation?
What else can I say? The viewpoint speaks for itself.
LOL. It’s as if Drumpf’s supporters are completely ignorant of ANY historical precedent with regard to inflammatory rhetoric by political leaders that incites their supporters to act violently.
It’s as if the John McGraw incident (and others) never happened and shouldn’t be cause for concern. No big deal.
Lame.
EVERY campaign has protestors.
Not every campaign has the candidate urging a violent response to the protestors.
The Dumpf has been using inflammatory, violent language and now his rallies have taken a violent turn.
If you can’t follow the progression, then that’s your problem.
Perhaps you should bone-up on your high-school civics material.
The dividing line between constitutionally protected speech and violence in aggressive physical action.
Again, either one believes in civilization or one does not. I happen to believe in it.
Then why don’t you demand CIVILITY from your candidate?
The US Constitution defines what is considered acceptable behavior in our society and what is not.
Has any presidential candidate violated the US Constitution? When? Where?
Is organizing a band of thugs to foment physical violence with intent to shut down a scheduled political event a violation of the US Constitution?
You bet it is.
Again, I believe in civilization.
So, you “believe in civilization” just not civility.LOL
*************************************************************
“The US Constitution defines what is considered acceptable behavior in our society and what is not.”
Really? Please quote me that part of the Constitution.
“The US Constitution defines what is considered acceptable behavior in our society and what is not.”
Actually, the American voters will have a say on that come November. It’s looking like they would likely reject the inflammatory rhetoric of Drumpf.
If you haven’t figured it out on your own yet, I can’t help you.
Oh and Hillary sending and receiving highly classified documents on her home server set up by a private company without the layers of protection needed to safeguard them from compromise is ‘acceptable behavior’?
And Hillary lying about what prompted the Benghazi murderous attacks and blaming an innocent man is ‘acceptable behavior’.
And the Clinton Foundation accepting millions of contributions from unfriendly nations while Hillary was SOS is ‘acceptable behavior’.
🙂
Yes, we’ll certainly find out come November, won’t we???
“If you haven’t figured it out on your own yet, I can’t help you.”
In other words, you don’t know.
Kiss the Presidency goodbye, Drumpf!
http://www.gallup.com/poll/189887/trump-major-image-problem-hispanics.aspx?g_source=Election%202016&g_medium=lead&g_campaign=tiles
Oops, somebody has thrown out a red-herring.
Sorry, Zeigfried the subject right now is The Dumpf’s use of violent and inflammatory rhetoric at his rallies.
Funny, how none of the other candidates use that kind of language and none of their rallies have turned violent.
Coincidence? I think not.
Best thing today:
Courtesy of the Sun Times:
“It seems like a lot of people have been talking about the size of Donald Trump’s manhood following last week’s GOP debate, and now The Wiener’s Circle in Chicago is getting in on the meaty action.
It has rolled out “The Trump Art of the Meal” featuring the “Trump Footlong.” The only problem? The “footlong” comes up really, really short. In fact, it’s only a 3-inch mini dog.”
Still that’s longer than his stubby, stubby fingers.
Guess the big, tough, swaggering Dumpf is nothin’ but a widdle bitty chicken:
Bwak, bwak, bwak LOL!
More belligerent thugs at Trump rallies, huh?
I suspect Donald’s number will soar on Tuesday. Florida and Ohio are likely in the bag.
The more these acts of aggression happen the more popular Donald becomes.
They won’t be able to chase Donald away like they chased Ross Perot away.
Donald won’t be intimidated.
The American people will have the final word.
Bernie seems like a nice man. I support some of his platform. He has much more class than Hillary. I think he will call off the dogs who are perpetrating acts of aggression and violence at Trump’s rallies. It would be the smart thing to do both humanistically and politically. The political process must be able to run it’s course in a free society without interference from factions of violent hooligans. This is not Zimbabwe. It’s the United States of America, a first world nation.
“This is not Zimbabwe. It’s the United States of America, a first world nation.”
Nice summation on why Donald Trump should not be running for despot in chief.
If you propose to identify a US politician with Zimbabwe politics you’d be incredibly remiss if you failed to mention Hillary Clinton’s name.
Hillary’s the one taking many millions in legal bribe dollar from Wall Street in her ‘pay to play’ scheme.
She won’t even release the transcripts that go with her $225,000 speeches to the Wall Street pigs.
Wasn’t it the liberals who were so hot and bothered over Wall Street and promoting Occupy Wall Street?
And now they’re supporting the biggest pig of all who stands at the Wall Street trough??
My, my. How the worm turns.
The Daily Show with Trevor Noah – Donald Trump …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FPrJxTvgdQ
It’s a shame that the POTUS political race has turned vitriolic with one party at the other party’s throat.
Those with insight understand that this is not really about party politics at all. It’s about the establishment versus the non-establishment.
Americans are simply fed-up with business as usual and ‘pay to play’ at the upper echelon of government.
A vote for Donald Trump is not really about a vote for the Republican Party. If you truly examine what makes Donald Trump tick you would understand that Trump is not an authentic representative of current Republican values. Why do you think so many elites inside his own party despise him and want to take him down? The answer is crystal clear. Trump threatens quid-pro-quo politico-corporatism that foments war, anti-American foreign entanglements, disadvantageous trade agreements, the offshoring of US jobs, low wages for blue-collar US workers, anti-consumer sentiment, escalating health care costs, immigration practices that harm national sovereignty and our US workforce, etc….
OTOH, Hillary represents more of the same. The status-quo. Look at her deep financial connections with the very ones who took down the world’s economy. You don’t think she’s beholden to their best interests going forward? Hillary has pocketed $10’s of millions of dollars from Wall Street. The only POTUS candidate who accepted more was Jeb Bush. And let’s all thank our lucky stars that he got washed out early in the running.
You see, I don’t wave a banner for the Republicans or the Democrats. I want someone in charge with genuine convictions who doesn’t fool us with more fraudulent ‘hope and change’ promises. Someone who isn’t owned by Wall Street, the defense industry or the health care corporations.
No wonder the elites on Capital Hill and Wall Street hate him.
Ross Perot gave us hope in 1992 but they scared him away.
This is our final opportunity for any hope to turn the ship around. Throw away your political banners. Use your God-given common sense. The status-quo is destroying your nation and the future for your children. Vote for change.
Trump manufacturing his clothing line in China and Mexico, while US jobs were lost due to trade agreements, sounds like demagoguery to me. Mixing his racist rhetoric into the bread and butter problems leads to uncivilized solutions. The atmosphere he has created at his rallies, and the violent incidents, is an expression of the slippery and toxic road that hopefully will be rejected at the Cleveland convention.
The status quo will remain as long as the current obscene income inequality is not addressed. I am waiting for you to blame the low wages of US blue collar workers solely on immigrants. Trump is not a vote for a change, not for a positive one, even if he doesn’t run as a Republican.
I know Hitler comparisons are usually verboten, but after reading Ziegfried’s caca I just couldn’t help myself. This is just to damn similar to be ignored.
“You see, I don’t wave a banner for the Republicans or the Democrats. I want someone in charge with genuine convictions who doesn’t fool us with more fraudulent ‘hope and change’ promises. Someone who isn’t owned by Wall Street, the defense industry or the health care corporations.”
…”Hitler wasn’t seen as a socialist, a monarchist, a democrat, like many rivals, instead he was portrayed and accepted as being Germany itself, the one man who’d cut across the many sources of anger and discontent in Germany and cure them all.
He wasn’t widely seen as a power hungry racist, but someone putting Germany and ‘Germans’ first.” …
From:
http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/germanyandprussia/fl/Who-Supported-Hitler-and-Why.htm
Hitler? 🙂
What a stretch.
When Hitler enters the debate it generally indicates that the other side is losing the argument.
Let’s not focus on wild eyed assumptions for special effects.
Let’s focus on the actual history of the candidates that expose what they truly represent.
Let’s focus on Hillary and the status-quo and put Hitler back to bed.
Fortunately, you don’t get to control what people focus on within these pages. Save that strategy for your “Democrat friends.”
“Let’s focus on the actual history of the candidates that expose what they truly represent.”
Spend a little time understanding how Hitler got elected.
Is your comment an endorsement of the status-quo?
It was my understanding that those who swung to the left were Wall Street aversive.
What happened to all those good citizens who marched in our streets during the days of Occupy Wall Street?
Where have all the flowers gone?
Ziegfried, what you apparently fail to comprehend (or are just willfully ignorant of) is the fact that many people would like to see major changes, but it also matters, truly matters, HOW that change is accomplished, and by WHOM. Many people are not prepared to blindly support just anything with two legs and a pulse who says they want to upend the status quo. It actually MATTERS to those folks WHO does it, HOW they will do it, WHAT they believe, and the deportment with which they carry themselves and relate to others.
Many of those people aren’t particularly thrilled with ANY of the Presidential candidates, but ESPECIALLY not thrilled with placing their hopes for change with an egomaniacal buffoon like Donald Drumpf.
They may be too busy organizing for change, of have become dilettantes like us…
No, it’s not.
It’s yet another condemnation of your willful ignorance.
A vote for Hillary would be a vote for the status-quo.
I’ve already told you why.
Those who aren’t open to common sense and opt to remain in pertetual denial have no one to blame but themselves when they end up eating the same crap sandwich over again that Obama fed them.
Hillary is a Wall Street harlot. Even Bernie Sanders understands it.
Denial is like a cancer. It grows and grows and grows until it finally consumes it’s host.
“Those who aren’t open to common sense…”
You call a vote for Donald Drumpf a vote based on common sense.
Many others call it something else entirely.
With all the dirty baggage that Hitlery carries with her – no one who votes for her could with a straight face claim ignorance.
That argument may have flown with con-artist Obama in 2008.
But it won’t hold water with Hitlery. She’s shown her true colors over and over again.
Whoever votes for Hitlery can own being part of the problem – certainly not part of the solution.
“Hitlery”
But didn’t you just write:
“When Hitler enters the debate it generally indicates that the other side is losing the argument.”
Oh well, Ziegfried likes to accuse and make specious claims and then moves on.
Just never mind what he wrote before, accountability, that’s for everyone else.
And speaking of “con-artists”, how do you feel about Dumpf’s speaking fees?
“Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was paid $1.35 million since last May for three speaking engagements for a network marketing company that has been accused of being nothing more than a pyramid scheme.
Trump’s presidential financial disclosure, which was released on Wednesday by the Federal Election Commission, shows that he has been paid $450,000 each for three speeches given on behalf of ACN Inc., a North Carolina-based “multi-level marketing” company.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/22/donald-trump-earned-huge-speaking-fees-from-company-alleged-to-be-a-pyramid-scheme-video/#ixzz42owjL6uC
“Much has been made of the fact that the two leading contenders in the Republican presidential primary, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, lack any experience in elected office. Much less attention has gone to something else the two men share: a history of entanglements with companies that have been rightly criticized for hawking get-rich-quick schemes to the broke and desperate. The business model, which is perfectly legal, is called multilevel marketing.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_bills/2015/10/trump_carson_bush_all_benefited_from_multilevel_marketing_schemes.html
Donald Trump declared his candidacy for POTUS on June 16, 2015.
Can you point to any paid speech that Trump have given subsequent to declaring his candidacy?
Can you point to any million dollar political campaign contributions given to Trump by the Wall Street banksters or special interests?
How much has Hillary taken?
Do you know that Trump turned down contribution offers of $5 million or more?
How many campaign contributions has Hillary turned down?
Obviously, as a businessman Trump had the right to speak and garner whatever amount the host was willing to pay in a free market.
Has Trump given even one paid speech before the Wall Street bankersters subsequent (or even before) his candidacy? When, where and for how much?
In comparison how many has Hillary given?
Let’s start there.
“Obviously, as a businessman Trump had the right to speak and garner whatever amount the host was willing to pay in a free market.”
So, only Hillary is held to a higher standard, she doesn’t have the right to “garner whatever amount the host was willing to pay in a free market”.
Hypocrisy, much?
The purity, it burns:
“Goldman Sachs once gave Ted Cruz’s campaign a $1.43 million loan. His campaign also got a loan of less than $500,000 from Citibank. According to Donald Trump, in a claim that has been repeated roughly a billion times, that means THEY OWN HIM. Even though, as far as I can tell, all or part of these loans have been repaid.
As I reported yesterday, at various times Donald Trump has had hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from Citibank and Goldman, some of which have been repaid, some of which were discharged in bankruptcy when Trump’s Altantic City casino went belly up. By Trump’s own standard, Citibank and Goldman own him, too.
But of course, it’s much worse than that for Trump. As a twitter user pointed out, according to Trump’s most recent financial disclosures, he has hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from virtually every bank on Wall Street.”
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/01/22/every-bank-wall-street-owns-donald-trump/
“Donald probably has had more extensive dealings with Wall Street than any of the others,” said Wilbur Ross, the billionaire investor who advised bondholders in Mr Trump’s first bankruptcy. “But so far there have not been any novel points of view from him on the topic, except that at one point he indicated he might appoint Carl Icahn as Secretary of the Treasury.”
“Carl is certainly one of the most successful hedge fund operators, so I would guess that Donald is not condemning the whole breed.”
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/28/trumps-attacks-raise-eyebrows-on-wall-street.html
Obviously, you know next to nothing how financing works in the real world.
High-end businessmen must work with banks. That’s the way our financial system is designed. LOANS are not free money or donations. The loans must be paid back. The banks make a tremendous amount of profit off their loans. It’s their livelihood.
Trump has culminated literally thousands of business deals. His construction projects are individually worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The banks are parasites living off Trump’s business acumen. The banks don’t build the structures. All they do is provide the loan and charge interest on their money – which is paid off over time. The banks don’t own Trump. Trump owns the banks. The banks are the parasites.
When a businessman transacts thousands of business deals a handful are bound to fail often due to factors outside the control of the businessman (eg. economy). Anybody with common sense should understand that.
In a bankrupcy the bank has to eat most of the loss. How would that make Trump the bank’s pawn?
Can you point to any donations or free money the Wall Street banks have given to Trump? So far you’ve provided zero evidence of that.
What about Clinton?
Here, let me help you out. You want to know what Hillary told the Wall Street banksters at her $225,000 speeches?
FYI:
“What the bankers heard her to say was just what they would hope for from a prospective presidential candidate: Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop.”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-02-06/what-hillary-told-wall-street-behind-closed-doors
Have a nice evening.
Obviously, you missed the part where your boy Dumpf said that Cruz was owned by the banks because of his loans.
How long will The Dumpf stand up to Wall Street banks when they pull his line of credit (an absolute necessity for real estate developers) and his spawn (running the company) start whining?
Cruz’ loans were campaign related.
Cruz got a huge loan from Goldman Sachs, the same bank where his wife works as a manager.
Trump’s loans were business related for his construction projects that were initiated long before he declared his candidacy for POTUS.
Do you see the difference yet?
No actually, I don’t.
Loans are loans, money borrowed, money paid back. It’s Dumpf with the outstanding balances.
You seem to have an entirely different set of standards where The Dumpf is concerned, one for him, another for everyone else.
Of course, YOU don’t “see the difference”.
“Authoritarian personality, a mentality closely associated with fascism and even nazism, plays a strong factor in the support for Donald Trump, according to some researchers….
In a recent column for Politico, MacWilliams reported that in December he did a national poll of 1,800 voters to explain the support for Trump.
“Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology, and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate,” wrote MacWilliams.
“Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, follow by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.”…
… that traits which define authoritarian personality include “rigid adherence to traditional values; the tendency to condemn, reject, and punish people who violate those values; and having a submissive, uncritical attitude toward powerful authorities who support and defend one’s values and views.”
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/donald-trump-supporters-display-authoritarian-personality-psychologists-say-159098/#ZjRjdHzQxtZlfP78.99
In case you didn’t notice it, I had linked this article in the post:
” For years now, before anyone thought a person like Donald Trump could possibly lead a presidential primary, a small but respected niche of academic research has been laboring over a question, part political science and part psychology, that had captivated political scientists since the rise of the Nazis.
How do people come to adopt, in such large numbers and so rapidly, extreme political views that seem to coincide with fear of minorities and with the desire for a strongman leader?”
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/trump-authoritarianism
Sorry, read the post a few days back.
That’s fine. I wanted to make sure that the Vox link was not being overlooked. Another take on “Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics.” , in ianmasters.com radio program.
I see that there is a concerted effort on part of the mainstream media to bring Trump down. Anything Trump does is now turned into a negative. It’s opposite day again!
For instance, the hooligan intruders who crash his rallies and commit acts of violence and disruption to shut his rallies down are not to blame. Trump is to blame.
Again, this would be like the host of a party being blamed for some neighborhood hooligans who the host does not get along with crashing his private party and forcing him to cancel the event.
That would be called a violation of law.
No one who has the capability to distinguish between the concepts of right and wrong would approve of such hooliganism or outright violations of private property rights.
Trump pays good money to rent the facility where he holds his private rallys. Just like the party host pays rent or a mortgage on his private property.
The Wall Street financed media is actually blaming the host of the political rally, Trump, for the hooligan intruders who crash his private event and disrupt his event for many thousands of innocent attendees who desire to participate in the American political process.
Jeez Louise. Has this society fallen from grace, or what?
But I have faith in the American people. I think the American people will be able to see past the smoke and mirrors and understand how Wall Street, the defense industry, health care, the political Powers That Be and the media are attempting to manipulate and brainwash the commoners into electing another establishment politician who maintains the status-quo.
Look at the ones making easy money off the current ‘pay to play’ status-quo in the politico-corporate world and you will witness them trying to sabotage Donald Trump.
So far it hasn’t worked. Trump’s numbers continue to accelerate. But that hasn’t deterred them. When one strategy fails – they move on to the next.
This is clearly not a battle between the Republicans and Democrats. It is a fierce battle between the Establishment and the Non-Establishment.
Which side are you on? Where are your loyalities?
“It is a fierce battle between the Establishment and the Non-Establishment.”
That’s one of your problems…you see everything is these kinds of simplistic terms.
Ever heard of the phrase “the devil is in the details”?
That’s a dodge.
If you don’t think Hillary is entrenched in Status-Quo and Establishment, I can’t help you.
If you don’t think Hillary offers ‘more of the same’, I can’t help you.
Those facts just aren’t debatable.
That’s not a dodge at all. It’s a realistic assessment of how you approach complicated issues. You reduce them to simplistic terms.
And I noticed you avoided my questions about Hillary.
You bet it was a dodge.
Do you seriously think that anyone could enter into a meaningful dialogue with you about Hillary Clinton? Seriously?
Sorry, Ziegfried, you’ve shattered any possibility of that ever happening on this blog.
A meaningful dialogue on Hillary?
Absolutely.
As long as we stick to the documented facts like I’ve done.
I guess the only reason not to engage in a meaningful dialogue on Hillary would be fear of the truth for those who support her.
*Told you guys that Trump was dangerous. Told you this could happen. Told you also that Trump will lose in November. Why? Because Hillary and the Donald are both on the same team. This is strict theater folks…..and as we all watch with baited breath whether or not the next ignorant 78 year old rednecks hits some poor black or brown kid carrying a sign ……oh heck……nevermind…..we don’t want to burst your bubbles that our whole society is just a total fraud. The Bilderbergers, the Rosicrucians, The Rothchilds, The Night of Columbus, The Masons, The Santa Hermandad, the White Knights of the KKK, the Egyptians, the Etruscans, The Knights of the Templar and all the knowldege in Bluffdale as well as our Aliens in Area 51…
Can’t put Humpty Dumpty together again……..We have the One World Order and now we are responsible for all banking in the world…..too late….could have done something about in 1968….but they dusted everyone that could have changed it.
I partially agree with you. The circle is closed. The ones behind the scenes who you never see and probably wouldn’t recognize even if you saw them call the global shots. Oh, and they don’t live in America either.
Most politicians are pawns for the super elite. They follow orders from above like an enlisted grunt in the military. And that goes for both Republicans and Democrats. And their marching orders do not include representing the interests of the common man. And that goes for both Democrats and Republicans.
The reason I like Trump is because he asks all those verboten questions on . taboo subject matter that make politicians squirm on the debate stage. He’s been the only one with the gonads to do it. Trump dragged the others into it. And after he dragged them into it they’ve changed many of their positions to align themselves with Trump.
Trump made a huge issue out of illegal immigration that would have largely been ignored otherwise. And his popularity soared as a result.
Trump made a huge issue out of international trade agreements that have devastated the economic competitive advantage that America once enjoyed.
Trump made a huge issue out of the corrupt “pay to play” business as usual schemes that have turned Wash DC into a financial house of Ill repute.
Trump made a huge issue out of the perpetual state of war instigated by the leaders of our country. As a Republican candidate he trash talked George W. Bush for leading America into a costly war that sacrificed 5000 young American lives and now has erupted into a civil war w/ terrorist takeovers. That took tremendous courage for a Republican candidate.
Trump challenged the pharma companies that have hyjacked the health care system for influencing the pols to ban reimportation of US made drugs from foreign lands which effectively force American consumers to heavily subsidize health care across the globe.
Trump criticized ObamaCare which has escalated health care costs, the exact opposite of the primary mission of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). And Trump made it clear that the law was written by the very corporations that had the most to gain in the ‘pay to play’ system.
Without Trump most of this would have been glossed over. Will it matter in the end? Probably not. Trump is only one man. One man is very limited in what he can do. But at least Trump has rocked the status-quo’s boat. Something no other candidate has done.
Trump had the gonads to put all these taboo topics on the table and the establishment pols (Hillary) hate him for it.
No way do I believe that Hillary and Trump are in cahoots.
But I do believe that we have crossed beyond the point of no return and it only gets worse for the common man from here on in.
Anyone who does not see all the symptoms of the New World Order is either mind-numbed or intentionally blind
*Ziggy,
Go to the replay of the Nancy Funeral. Watch the entire thing…..from beginning to end from the C-Span files. It is about four hours, but certainly shows lots and lots and lots of people….you do not recognize. Having the temerity to consider ourselves semi-versed in Reagan World….we were sharply surprised to identify about 200 of the 1000 folks that showed up, invited. Tom Sellech and Johnny Mathis were certainly surprise guests along with Mr. T. We felt very sorry for Michelle who was only one of the three people of color that were invited. The US Power brokers were there and your input might be very enlightening. What did Yogi say: “You can’t tell who the players are – without their uniforms and a program!”
I get the warm and fuzzies thinking about you three finding each other through our little blog.
#meanttobe
Like minds, LOL.
R & A, I was never a huge fan of the Reagans. Like I said before, I don’t champion politicians just because they happen to have an “R” or “D” after their names.
So I’ll pass on spending 4 hours of my life watching who showed up to Nancy’s funeral. Personally, I never had much love for her.
But I heard that Hillary showed up to honor Nancy. Likely for the PR. And I also heard that Hillary stuck her foot in her mouth by publicly approving of Nancy as a “very effective, low-key” advocate on AIDS/HIV before she figured out that she was on the wrong side of the issue politically and disapproved of Nancy as a “very effective, low-key” advocate on AIDS/HIV.
But apparently Hillary’s supporters will overlook her two-faced phoniness.
*Yep, right you are …Hillary was there sitting nexr to Roslyn Carter on her left and George and Laura on her right. So, as we can see….when Donald Trump “mis-speaks”…no biggie. If Hillary says Nancy’s shoes were black – she is accused of racism! The great Media Double Standard. OK….don’t look at the Power People behind the throne! They will all be at the next Funeral too. Maybe some will strike your fancy enough to reveal “who the hell they are!” – as Donald Trump might say.
As an added note: When the AIDS factor broke in 1985….the Bath Houses in SF were losing two or three folks a day. It was targeted by the media as a “Strictly GAY Phenomena. It wasn’t until Magic Johnson came out along with other sports figures that the AID identification program got to start the mass panic in our society. The Reagans did cursory work on bringing AIDS to the attention of the public….but offered no major Government Programs other that some grants to the NIH for research. Picking on Hillary regarding her remarks about Nancy……is giant knit-picking. Nancy’s role throughout the Reagan Administration was “Just say NO to any drugs!” Still very good advice….
The latest: More Latino Immigrants are Rushing to Apply for Citizenship, Just to Vote Against Trump.
http://fusion.net/story/279054/possibility-of-trump-presidency-is-pushing-latino-immigrants-to-get-citizenship/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fusion
I’m sure this was his secret aim, that … that Stealth Democrat!
PS. Ricardo asked me to put up this video from Rachel:
Perhaps, as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for ?
How does that make sense? Weren’t Obama’s executive actions on immigration in contrast to large outcry about the delays for applicants under a broken naturalization system ? How are the “Trump-opposers” then to expect a mere 7 month turnaround, in time to vote, or has the quest for “increased participation” now made only “application” sufficient voting qualification? What gives ? Please clarify.
Here’s the confusion I think: There are at least three categories, not two – illegal; here legally on a green card or visa; and citizen. I think what this story is describing is folks who are here LEGALLY and were maybe taking their time getting citizenship, now pressing pedal to metal to get it quickly.
My point exactly – aren’t the pedal and metal connected by STRING, which cares not how hard you press, or else what is everyone calling “broken” in the system ? And can only group # 3 vote ?
Only group 3 can vote.
And the system is broken in getting from group 1 to group 2. From illegally here to legally here. That’s what the majority of them aspire to (I think.)
The Chinese government uses Trump as proof that democracy doesn’t work:
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/14/the-chinese-government-is-now-using-donald-trump-as-proof-that-d/21327409/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-1900657793_htmlws-main-bb
Gee, I wonder why China is mad at Trump?
Couldn’t be because Trump says he’s going to teach China a lesson for manipulating the yuan to create trade imbalances in its favor or because China ignores the incredible damage it’s does to the global environment by refusing to abide by generally accepted pollution control standards, giving it a competitive advantage in the global economy. Trump wants to end these practices and is the only candidate with the gonads to talk about it.
China doesn’t have citizens. It has slaves.
Who give a frig or a frack what China says about what constitutes a democracy? 🙂
Z, consider writing something for Vern to publish.
Would anything he writes in a formal post be news to anyone?
Well, it’s original.
As annoying as Z is, his or her perspective is not represented by anyone who contributes here. We value that.
A fortunate side effect might be a completely articulated thought. Or perhaps just fewer comments.
These threads are largely becoming unreadable. Confining, errrr um, … Focusing that energy into its own dedicated space might be worthwhile.
Z, write me at chezvern@aol.com
Ryan, there’s nothing quite as dangerous as collectivism of thought.
World history has proven that time and time again.
I don’t come here to be a pain in the ass. I come here to consume and share ideas. I keep an open mind. And I’m more than willing to change a long held belief when the facts dictate me to do so.
Example: I used to be a loyal Republican. But the facts changed so I abandoned the GOP.
But that won’t deter me from voting Republican given the right circumstances.
I want to be free of ideological ownership.
Lapdog loyalty to anything other than family IMO is a flawed personal philosophy.
Great, you’ll be much more effective writing your own pieces!
Give it a shot before you write it off.
I have no interest in being effective.
I’ll leave that to you.
^^^ nicely played, Z. Nicely played.
played?
Not sure what you mean. Are you projecting?
I outgrew one upmanship on comment boards years ago.
Again, well played!
Thanks for the pity, Vern.
Ryan, thanks for the compliment. But I have no interest in writing op-ed pieces. You folks do a fine job of it and touch on many interesting political topics that aren’t discussed elsewhere. I like to share ideas with other commenters. That’s why I come here.
Your choice, but people would read what you write.
As expected, the refugee crisis was reflected in the recent German election. The forces questioning Angela Merkel’s policies gained some ground but most significant was that the majority of the votes went to the parties supporting Merkel’s refugee policies.
Europe has produced extreme anti-immigrant movements and leaders such as France’s Jean- Marie Le Penn. Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi is another character who preceded the Trump’s phenomenon :
“AS A WRITER who has covered Silvio Berlusconi since he became Italy’s prime minister in 1994, it has been difficult not to be overcome with a powerful sense of déjà vu all over again watching the presidential campaign of Donald Trump
Some of the resemblances are obvious as well as uncanny. Both are billionaires who made their initial fortunes in real estate, whose wealth and playboy lifestyles turned them into celebrities…
Both are deliberately transgressive, breaking through the tedium of politics-as-usual by using vulgar language, insulting and shouting down opponents, adopting simple catchy slogans, and making off-color jokes and misogynistic remarks…
They have an improbable inter-class appeal, very rich men who pursue policies that benefit the very rich (see the proposed Trump tax cut) while making effective rhetorical appeals, in a beerhall idiom, to the grievances of the struggling members of the middle and working classes…
Neither Trump nor Berlusconi has a real political program; what they are selling is themselves…”
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/07/what-the-past-of-silvio-berlusconi-tells-us-about-the-future-of-donald-trump/
Nice piece!
“what they are selling is themselves”
And from an enterntainment staandpoint that is at the very core of the reality TV phenomenon: My life is so fascinating and exciting that you must watch me pretend NOT to be on camera. But I can’t have a reality show about me without lots of people who know, or suspect, that their own lives are so bereft of meaning that they will get some sort of crude fulfillment watching me pretending to be living mine.
This is the bottom line:
Trump is really the only candidate who offers something other than more of the same.
If you want more of the same – don’t vote for Trump.
If you are satisfied with the direction (socially and financially) America has taken for the last 20 years – don’t vote for Trump.
If you support the ‘pay to play’ system that has been endorsed by the last 3 POTUS – don’t vote for Trump.
If you want more jobs leaving the country and more foreigners allowed to come to America and take jobs from US citizens – don’t vote for Trump.
It’s your choice. You still have the freedom to choose – even though that freedom has been somewhat compromised to one extent or the other as well.
If you want Hillary and all her dirty baggage that no one here seems to be interested in discussing – then vote for her like you voted for Obama.
But don’t complain afterwards.
How about if we want to vote for someone who isn’t a belligerent, egomaniacal, crude, boorish asswipe? Then who should we vote for?
Churchill fit your description to a Tee.
He went down in history as one of the most effective and respected leaders in world history.
You have a choice to vote based on personality over substance.
Your choice.
But don’t complain afterwards if it doesn’t work out.
I don’t put personality over substance. But neither do I ignore it, like you.
And I happen to call it “deportment.”
Actually, Churchill was always more respected in America than he was in Britain. You may recall that he was sent packing in the Summer of 1945 election and was replaced by the Labour Party leader, Clement Atlee.
P.S. Churchill was not crude or boorish. He was a good writer, an okay painter, and a sound, if somewhat pedantic historian.
Churchill was abrupt and direct. He was not shy about publicly offending his political enemies or those who got under his skin.
Churchill had commonalities with Trump.
“Churchill was abrupt and direct. He was not shy about publicly offending his political enemies or those who got under his skin.”
Um, well okay. And I’d have to say that’s where any comparison ends. Churchill wrote books on history; I seriously doubt if Trump has ever read one.
I don’t believe authoring history books is a prerequisite to becoming a US President.
I don’t believe Churchill ever built billion dollar structures either.
My point was that both Churchill and Trump have some similar personality traits.
“I don’t believe authoring history books is a prerequisite to becoming a US President”
No, but I sure would like one who has read some.
You should be more concerned with Trump’s shared personality traits of non-Churchhill WWII leaders.
You can take Roosevelt out of that analysis, too.
Let us know your results.
“You should be more concerned with Trump’s shared personality traits of non-Churchhill WWII leaders.”
You mean like w/ General Patton?
Yeah, I agree.
Yeah. The guy whose career ended for slapping a guy?
Great comparison. They both lack the self control necessary to be President.
*Progeny is the word. In the old days……worry about what would happen to the younger generation was important. Today….not so much. FEFEFish…….we believe is the concept. At any rate, Trump can stomp on women, mexicans, arabs and po folks…ripping off the system. (Yes, that will soon become a campaign slogan too!)
Well apparently SOMEBODY likes Trump.
Trump won Florida with 45% of the votes. The Florida Senator Rubio got 27%. 🙂 How embarrassing must that be? Very. Rubio has dropped out of the race! 🙂
Governor of Ohio Kasich won Ohio. Trump placed 2nd.
Trump is leading in Illinois, N. Carolina and Missouri.
Gee. SOMEBODY must like Trump.
Despite what the naysayers say.
“Gee. SOMEBODY must like Trump.”
Yeah, about 40% of the Republican voters.
You know, the crazies.
Trump will capture the bulk of the independents and a few stray dems too. Moreso than any other GOP POTUS candidate in decades.
I’ve heard that a sizable number of Sander’s supporters are leaning toward Trump in a Hillary showdown.
More dems despise Hillary than you could imagine. And for darn good reason too!
Watch and learn.
My home State of Ohio did me proud and rejected extremism.
Ha, you’re from there? I remember when I wrote a story, years ago, about Ohio rejecting some shitty law or proposition numbered “5”… and that you enjoyed my title, “Five Dead in Ohio.”
Good stuff.
Drumpf’s loss in Ohio is a significant bellwether. Wake up, GOP, wake up!
Oh, we’re up, but it may be too late to stop the zombie apocalypse.
Do you have a sense of the position of the OC elected officials? Are they represented by the California Republican Assembly, which is supporting Cruz?
The CRA is its own animal.
If I had to make a wild ass guess, I’d bet the majority of OC elected reeps favor Cruz.
I’m not sure how many will join me in #nevertrump
Bellwether?
Are you predicting a GOP nomination for the longshot Kasich now? 🙂
I’m afraid Kasich is about ready for the glue factory.
Trump is so far ahead of Kasich that he’s in a different zip code! 🙂
Actually, Kasich is looking pretty good to a lot of people as the only non-wacko Republican. True Trump and Cruz might be able to manipulate the rules to box him out at the convention, but the fact remains that Cruz is unelectable in any scenario and he has pretty much run out of states willing to support a yahoo Bible-beater.
“Are you predicting a GOP nomination for the longshot Kasich now?”
No, I’m taking note of the level of Drumpf’s support in a State that…well, you know the rest.
No, quite honestly I don’t follow your connection.
So Trump lost the Ohio primary to the Governor of Ohio who has an 80% approval rating in the Ohio by about 9 percentage points. Trump placed second by a fair margin.
There is absolutely zero correlation between the Kasich-Trump primary race in Ohio and how Trump would perform against Hillary in the same state in a general election.
Trump is attracting lots of Independents and even some Dems who despise Hillary.
So I don’t know what point you were trying to make. But it made no sense to me.
What about the 28% or so of Republicans who say they’ll never support The Dumpf?
Only 28%
The zombies are winning . . .
*In the words of Dandy Don Meredith: “Turn out the lights….the party’s
over…….cause all good things have to come to an end…..”
Trump/Kasich vs. Hillary/Bernie? No, the dark horses have not even
left the gate just yet. Trump is going to ask Rand Paul or the current Speaker of the House….knowing, both will refuse his offer.
“What about the 28% or so of Republicans who say they’ll never support The Dumpf?”
Given a choice between Donald and Hillary that 28% will jump aboard the Trump train with bells and whistles on.
You’d be amazed at what a starving man would eat to stay alive.
^^^ No, they won’t.
Well, we’re about 8 months away from finding out.
I just can’t imagine 28% of the GOP voters sitting on the sidelines in a Clinton/Trump POTUS election.
No chance they vote for Hil.
There’s a better chance of a dem voting for Trump than a pub voting for Hil.
Eight more months of America getting to know The Dumpf, maybe we’ll learn just like his underlings, that when he’s wearing his red “make America great again” hat, that he’s mad, real, real mad and when he’s wearing his white hat he’s in a good mood.
The Dumpf is so complex and all, we’ll need eight months just so we can read his moods and learn to grovel and stroke his ego appropriately so as not to cause a full blown tantrum.
Yes, I’m sure the more we get to know The Dumpf the better his chances at becoming POTUS will be. LOL
A preview of how a Dumpf administration would run from an MSNBC interview on foreign policy:
“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I said a lot of things,” Trump replied.
“I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people,” he continued. “And at the appropriate time, I’ll tell you who the people are. But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff.”
Trump has been dangling the promise of releasing the names of people on his foreign policy team since February. On Feb. 9, he said the list of advisors would be released “in about two weeks,” which he then revised to “about a week” on Feb. 17. Trump then said on March 3 that the list would come out “very shortly” before admitting on “Morning Joe” on March 8 that “there’s no team” yet.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-consults-himself-foreign-policy
Himself is his penis.
We all know that, right?
His penis went to a military academy.
That’s why he calls it the little general.
Too funny!
More super-duper presidential behavior from The Dumpf:
Trump Appears To Have Heavily Plagiarized Op-Ed From Carson
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/16/trump-appears-to-have-heavily-plagiarized-op-ed-from-carson/#ixzz4372FAzR3
Carson does not seem to have a problem with Trump’s threat of riots. Although “there are no consequences anymore,” the Cleveland police is getting ready for Trump’s delegates.
The math is on Trump’s side. He has a clear path to achieving the 1237 delegates needed to put him over the top. That is not true for any other GOP candidate. But Trump will need to win the big ones like California. Looks like I may have to pinch my nose and reregister as a Republican to do my part to make America great again. Sometimes severity is the price we pay for freedom.
From somewhere on Facebook:
Reporter: What is 2+2?
Donald Trump answers the question: “I have to say a lot of people have been asking this question. No, really. A lot of people come up to me and they ask me. They say, ‘What’s 2+2’? And I tell them look, we know what 2+2 is. We’ve had almost eight years of the worst kind of math you can imagine. Oh my God, I can’t believe it. Addition and subtraction of the 1s the 2s and the 3s. It’s terrible. It’s just terrible. Look, if you want to know what 2+2 is, do you want to know what 2+2 is? I’ll tell you. First of all the number 2, by the way, I love the number 2. It’s probably my favorite number, no it is my favorite number. You know what, it’s probably more like the number two but with a lot of zeros behind it. A lot. If I’m being honest, I mean, if I’m being honest. I like a lot of zeros. Except for Marco Rubio, now he’s a zero that I don’t like. Though, I probably shouldn’t say that. He’s a nice guy but he’s like, ‘10101000101,’ on and on, like that. He’s like a computer! You know what I mean? He’s like a computer. I don’t know. I mean, you know. So, we have all these numbers, and we can add them and subtract them and add them. TIMES them even. Did you know that? We can times them OR divide them, they don’t tell you that, and I’ll tell you, no one is better at the order of operations than me. You wouldn’t believe it. So, we’re gonna be the best on 2+2, believe me.”
Lightening strikes twice, blue moons and The Dumpf speaks the truth!
From 2014:
Donald J. TrumpVerified account
@realDonaldTrump
I wonder if I run for PRESIDENT, will the haters and losers vote for me knowing that I will MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN? I say they will!
Let me add David Brooks to the reference of articles :
“Donald Trump is epically unprepared to be president. He has no realistic policies, no advisers, no capacity to learn. His vast narcissism makes him a closed fortress. He doesn’t know what he doesn’t know and he’s uninterested in finding out. He insults the office Abraham Lincoln once occupied by running for it with less preparation than most of us would undertake to buy a sofa.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/opinion/no-not-trump-not-ever.html
What a bunch of biased generalized nonsense. Any journalist who spouts such vitriolic claptrap with agendas should be ignored.
Trump has released detailed proposed policies on health care, trade, immigration. education, foreign relations, taxes, etc…with much more detail than most other candidates.
Trump has popular policies that many people like, many advisors and lots of capacity to learn. He’s a Wharton grad and has a proven record of success in the business world. His success is illustrated by his accomplishments in the building industry and his multi-billions in net worth. To say that Trump has no capacity to learn is totally moronic.
Less preparation than most of us would undertake to buy a sofa? Another really stupid comment. If Trump were a poor planner and not ready for prime time he wouldn’t be leading all other GOP candidates by a wide margin in primary wins and delegate count.
So please, I know some just love to hate Trump. But let’s evaluate the man with a realistic tone instead of swinging wildly to knock out the opponent yet never land a punch.
I realize the Trump haters feel threatened by Trump as the expected GOP nominee. But we’ll never make any progress as a civilation until we can have realistic and civil discussions on the election issues.
Oh, and please….condemn all those protesters who are thwarting the political process by shutting down political events and blocking roads. It’s unconstitutional No one does that at Hillary’s events. It’s something I would expect to see in the 3rd world. Give the political process the freedom it needs to promote democracy and liberty for all.
“But we’ll never make any progress as a civilation until we can have realistic and civil discussions on the election issues.”
Great summary of what’s wrong with Trump and those who support him.
Brooks’ main characterization of Trump’s supporters is mostly based on the impact of the economy on them:
” Trump voters are a coalition of the dispossessed. They have suffered lost jobs, lost wages, lost dreams. The American system is not working for them, so naturally they are looking for something else.”
He ends up his analysis saying : “Trump’s supporters deserve respect. They are left out of this economy. But Trump himself? No, not Trump, not ever.”
Another interpretation of Trump’s coalition is presented here:
” National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru has wisely counseled against strong single-factor explanations for his success, but the view that economic anxiety explains the rise of Trump has become prevalent on both the left and the right. There is, however, little evidence that points to that conclusion.”
His analysis of the results of the primaries make him to state that :” Another reason to think that Trump’s success does not primarily reflect economic anxiety is that the economy is doing quite well. The unemployment rate is below 5 percent, not far from where it was in 2007, before the recession started. Median hourly wages are back to the peak they reached in 2007. Median annual household income is also nearly at its historical high.”
“….Many argue that Trump’s signature issue, immigration, has resonated because of the economic threat posed by immigrants to the white working class. But immigration is not necessarily first an economic issue. For many, it is about national security, as reflected in the draconian suggestion that Muslims be barred from coming to the United States. For others, immigration is simply about the rule of law. Those who have entered the country illegally should not be allowed to flout the law while others who play by the rules must wait their turn until they can enter the country lawfully.
….I believe that Trumpism is being driven primarily by cultural anxiety — by dissatisfaction with cultural change and perceived cultural decline. “Make America Great Again” is clearly about fear of national decline, but it is not primarily about economic decline. Trump’s complaint is that “we never win anymore,” not a narrow protest that other nations are taking away our jobs or that wages are stagnant. It taps into fears that something has gone wrong — with our economy but also with our position on the international stage, with our values, with our families, and with the maintenance of law and order.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432822/donald-trump-culture-not-economy
1. There are a multitude of issues that are responsible for Trump’s popularity. Claiming that the economy is the only reason is overly simplistic and ignorant. But people do tend to vote with their pocketbooks. This has been true since the ballot box was invented.
2. Is Trump supposed to feel guilty for being a very successful businessman? Anyone who holds that belief is IMO unamerican.
3. The real unemployment rate is far, far higher than 5%. The BLS reports monthly that over 90M Americans in the working age category do not have jobs. Those who truly understand the economy understand that it’s in bad shape. A stock market does not an economy make when it’s driven by fake stimului other than growth and productivity. We have about as many people on food stamps today than we had at the peak of the economic meltdown in 2008-09. About 46M Americans remain on food stamps. Go track the history of that number if you think all is well.
4. “….Many argue that Trump’s signature issue, immigration, has resonated because of the economic threat posed by immigrants to the white working class.”
Another untruth. The ones mostly impacted by illegal foreigners who violate US labor laws are the US underclass – legal hispanics and black Americans. The median black income has gone down since Obama took office in 2009. Obama played the black population like a fiddle. He has been instrumental in keeping blacks in poverty.
5. Trump’s popularity soars because American are tired of being lied to by the politicians we elect to office. The GOP has betrayed their electorate. The GOP establishment approved Obama’s budgets, increased the debt ceilings, increased the national debt, continued to deficit spend, did nothing to stop illegal foreigners invading America, stealing jobs and forcing us to spend tremendous sums on their medical care and education – while about 25% of our prison beds are occupied by illegal foreigners, start wars overseas that we must pay for, etc….
6. What you are witnessing is real government (the people) in action. This is the way we should push for change – at the ballot box – not in the streets. So don’t fret. Things are progressing by virtue of the way our nation was designed. This is how democracies work.
So you’re going back to basically blaming immigration, and now Obama for Trump’s popularity. We continue to disagree, but let me highlight what you seem to have agreed at certain points of this long exchange :
1. You no longer support the need to build the wall.
2. Threatening Snowden with torture was unacceptable.
3. The economy is not the main driver behind Trump’s phenomenon,
1. My first choice would be for Mexico to take care of its own citizens and not to encourage them to illegally cross the border and become our problems. If Mexico is unwilling to to cooperate then I would be in favor of building a 25 foot wall along our southern border. Americans have the right to live in a sovereign nation.
2. I don’t recall anyone threatening Snowden with torture. You must have me mixed up with someone else. I think Snowden should be nominated as Director of Intelligence. He would be an improvement over the guy who Obama appointed who got caught lying under sworn oath about NSA to Congress (w/ zero negative consequences as a result).
3. The economy should be a very important issue in the upcoming election – but other issues IMO are equally important.
To refresh your memory on the torture issue, when you brought up that Snowden may have been supporting Trump. I said:
Snowden may have been thinking about this 2013 statement: “”This guy is a bad guy,” Trump said. “You know there is still a thing called execution. You really have thousands of people with access to the kind of material like this. We’re not going to have a country any longer.”
Ziegfried
Posted February 28, 2016 at 3:20 PM
I don’t know if Trump said that. And if he did say it I don’t know if he said it about Snowden. And those 3 consecutive sentences are disjointed and doesn’t really complete a full thought. So I question whether it was said exactly the way you quoted it.
However, in the event that Trump did make this statement about Snowden in the way that he did (hinting that Snowden would be a candidate for execution) I completely disagree with him on this issue.
That said, I disagree with people who I like or even admire quite often. But the disagreement does not prohibit me from liking or admiring them.
It’s the level of disagreement on a multitude of issues that determines whether I would give someone my vote or not.”
The quote I mentioned was included in this link :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/donald-trump-edward-snowden-execution_n_3489944.html
Oh, so you initially claimed that I was in agreement with you on 3 matters – and when I explained I wasn’t – you only focused on one?
Man, talk about throwing some at the wall and hoping it sticks! Why not address the other 2 issues that you originally mentioned as well?
Anyway, I’d have to listen to Trump’s full statement on Snowden so I get the full context of what he said. Snippets here and there are very misleading.
Snowden exposed a lot of illegal eavesdropping and data collection going on in our government. Snowden tried to resolve it internally – but was rebuffed. So he felt he had no other options left than to take it public. For doing so he lost his country. A huge sacrifice. Considering the seriousness of the government transgressions it’s hard not to understand Snowden’s position. Few of us want to live in a nation where the government feels it can violate civil liberties with impunity.
I may disagree with Trump on this particular subject. I expect to disagree with him every once in awhile. I’m not a lapdog political supporter of anyone like many I come across. But overall, I think he’s the best choice given the state of our nation.
Zieg, I don’t expect that we will change our positions or the course of events by just chatting in a blog. It helps though to clarify where we are coming from and what we can take back when we talk to other voters during the November election.
Reasonable minds, for example, will see that there is yuge difference between exploring with other govt’s policies preventing mass immigration or just building walls and promoting massive deportations.
There is a difference between scapegoating minorities for the economic problems of the middle and working class rather than addressing the trade’s manipulation by corporations and the resulting obscene income inequality.
As the wide spectrum of the public opinion indicates, including many from your own political tradition, Trump is not the best choice, he could take us towards an intolerant and uncivilized world.
I posted the link in my previous response to you on Trump’s justifying executions of dissidents like Snowden.