You go to war with the army you have

I read the comments on Donald Trump in 2013 with some dismay. We are now down to seven people who might become President of the United States:

Jeb Bush
Hillary Clinton
Ted Cruz
John Kasich
Marco Rubio
Bernie Sanders
Donald Trump

Maybe Joe Biden might get into this at some stage, or Michael Bloomberg, or Ben Carson may come back into it, but that’s all that’s left. That’s it. No one else. It is one of the above and no other.

Then there are the problems the United States now confronts – the US being our last hope for a defence of the West – problems from open immigration, a rapidly descending economy and a clueless millennial generation who you could easily imagine voting in a Hugo Chavez. And so I said, after watching the video of Trump in 2013, that Trump is the best of the lot. He not only has sentiments that match my own [92% as it happens] but he has the force of personality that might actually bring it off. He is our Churchill circa 1940.

I can see just as easily as anyone else that he is not your standard issue highly polished product of the elite establishment in the US. He is crass and loud and bumptious and vulgar. All true, but he is also smart, and shrewd, and tuned in and hard edged. But most of all, the things he wants are the things I want, the most important ones being the preservation of the United States as the land of the free and the defender of our values. He also has the one element none of the others on the Republican side have, a fighting will that will not be pushed around by the media and the left.

And I am not even going to say something like he’s not perfect, because, for all I know, given the way things are and what now needs to be done, he may well be exactly what is needed. He may exactly suit the times we are in.

There’s the list above. If it’s not Donald Trump then who among that list should it be instead? If you think it’s any of the others, then we will just have to agree to differ. But in my view, it will be a tragedy if he does not become president because all other choices will either hasten the ruin of the US or at best delay the now almost inevitable by a year or two. He may end up unable to stem the tide of history, but given the moment we find ourselves now in, Trump is the only candidate who has even a ghost of a chance to pull it off. Why others cannot see the same is absolutely beyond me. First, though, he has to win. Then we can worry about the rest.

This entry was posted in American politics. Bookmark the permalink.

243 Responses to You go to war with the army you have

  1. A H says:

    I wonder if President Hillary will have any interns.

  2. Infidel Tiger says:

    Aren’t you forgetting Carson and Gilmore?

    Also, Biden, Warren and Romney?

  3. Infidel Tiger says:

    But in my view, it will be a tragedy if he does not become president because all other choices will either hasten the ruin of the US or at best delay the now almost inevitable by a year or two.

    You’re right Sinclair. Do it quickly. I’ll fax the form through in the next hour. Give him two weeks pay, a canoli and let him keep the Catallaxy stubby holder.

    Very sad.

  4. Quig says:

    I’d rather Cruz.

  5. Fisky says:

    Trump up to 44% nationally

    #winning

  6. Infidel Tiger says:

    Sanders and Hillary both smashing Trump in all general match ups. Absolutely caning him.

    Sanders 2016!

  7. MareeS says:

    If it isn’t Trump, and USA takes the suicide road, Steve, Darwin is a nice place for people who no longer give a flying duck.

    Just being in Sydney today has done my head in. An hour down the M1 from Newcastle 160km, nearly 2 hours from the turnoff at Wahrongah into the city for 20km in gridlock, not even peak hour. And they are adding tens of thousands every year.

    We now do all of our international flights out of Newcastle via Brisbane because it’s an hour by air and off you go, compared with about five hours to Sydney International if you are lucky and extortionate everything, impossible traffic, and a crap environment, ignorant personnel, dirty toilets, need I go on?

    I feel a bit sorry for for people who have to live in Sydney, now that we don’t have to do business here any more. It isn’t a life, it’s an endurance.

  8. BorisG says:

    An hour down the M1 from Newcastle 160km, nearly 2 hours from the turnoff at Wahrongah into the city for 20km in gridlock, not even peak hour.

    Yeh, go Trump!

  9. Harald says:

    If caning Trump was so easy that even Hillary could do it, why has not even a brilliant debater like Cruz been able to sink Trump up to this point?
    .
    Seriously: Trump would mop the floor with Hills. He may already have. Last time Hillary tried to smear Trump, he immediately took aim at Bill. That is how savvy he is. He knew he could ignore her. Bill is the obstacle. Hillary hitched her wagon to Bill, and he is the reason that there is a Hillary campaign at all. She is so disconnected, scripted and plastic, she cannot connect to any voter.
    .
    And Bernie? He is a horrible person – rude and abusive on a personal level, like Kevin Rudd: very ungracious, grumpy, snarly. I do not think he’ll go far. But I agree that he’s the real threat.
    .
    On the GOP side, I think Cruz would be my best match in theory. But this is practice. And if Trump can deliver on 30% of what he promises, of which I agree with 91%, and Cruz can deliver 20%, of which I agree with 97%… Then I guess Trump is my guy.

  10. JC says:

    But this is practice. And if Trump can deliver on 30% of what he promises, of which I agree with 91%, and Cruz can deliver 20%, of which I agree with 97%… Then I guess Trump is my guy.

    Is that a polynomial equation? Brings back memories, as it so long since I tried to solve one.

    What you think is personal opinion matched with a little bias. I take the polls and the betting markets which show Hillary and the communist winning handily against Trump.

  11. Nathan says:

    Harald: Cruz hasn’t been able to sink Trump up to this point? He kicked his rear end in Iowa.

    Trump is an obvious phony and if America is really dumb enough to buy his lies, then they deserve what they get.

  12. Nanuestalker says:

    What you think is personal opinion matched with a little bias.

    Did you get that from a Xmas cracker or a self help book you bought for the m0ron?
    ___________________________________________________________

    Have to agree with Kates … Trump is the best of them but Sanders /Hillary is what the US voters deserve much like we in Oz deserve all the fucked up PM’s of the last 8yrs.

  13. Entropy says:

    The Point of that list is the USA is screwed, regardless of which of those main chancers gets the prize.

    .
    And Bernie? He is a horrible person – rude and abusive on a personal level, like Kevin Rudd: very ungracious, grumpy, snarly. I do not think he’ll go far. But I agree that he’s the real threat.
    .

    The democrat establishment will make sure their candidate Hills will get the nomination, regardless of how many popular vote delegations Bernie wins.

  14. Token says:

    What you think is personal opinion matched with a little bias. I take the polls and the betting markets which show Hillary and the communist winning handily against Trump.

    The science of the polls indicate the US will try to replicate Europe and Venezuela with Bernie, or become a subsidiary of the Clinton crime syndicate.

    Prez Hillary (between race & gender inquisitions) gets to replace SCOTUS associates with more pets like 4 lefties that act in lock step.

  15. A Lurker says:

    When your house is infested with termites, you have to call in the exterminator.
    When his job is done, then you bring in the carpenters and repairers.

    Currently America (and most of the West) needs a pest exterminator – Trump I think is the only one who has that capability – my support for him doesn’t mean that I like him (I personally prefer Huckabee) – I just think he’s the only one who can do the necessary job.

  16. Herodotus says:

    Trump is an obvious phony and if America is really dumb enough to buy his lies, then they deserve what they get.

    To me, Obama was an obvious phony – no, worse than that. But he was elected, and I thought this was the beginning of the slippery slope for the USA. Then he was elected a second time, when there was a competent if unexciting contender in Romney. That sealed the impression that the USA was damaged goods.

    As good as Cruz is, can he win? If you think he can, then I’m heartened, but not entirely convinced. The country that went for Obama again can certainly elect Hillary. I’m concerned that Cruz is not a campaigning game changer in the same way that Trump is. In the final analysis, there has to be a disruptive campaign to offset the stranglehold the left media has on so many issues, by force of numbers.

    Cruz may be the intellectual choice, but Trump has the potential to get out more voters. Winning this time is existential. So much damage has already been done. Worry about the policies later. Just win.

  17. handjive says:

    Out of the list above, who is best to deal with this:

    Mounting Evidence Putin Will Ignite WWIII
    By letting Putin get away with whatever he likes in Syria, Obama has created a deeply dangerous situation.

    “Troops were moved to full combat readiness, the last stage before a shooting war, with Sergei Shoygu, the Russian defense minister, announcing on TV: “We began our surprise check of the military preparedness in the Southwest strategic direction.”

    That would be the direction of Turkey.”

    http://observer.com/2016/02/mounting-evidence-putin-will-ignite-wwiii/

    None of the above.
    But, if I have to choose one … what a depressing choice.

  18. m0nty says:

    Trump would not be fit to clean Churchill’s boots.

  19. JC says:

    The communist and the indictee would though, right Monster?

  20. Aynsley Kellow says:

    Government is the art of the possible. A Trump presidency is rather improbable, if not impossible. He trails Sander by almost 10 points and Clinton by about 5 in head-to-head polls. Angry, ‘get off my lawn’ sentiment might get The Donald close to the Republican nomination, but it will not get him into the White House. HIs Angry Army is unlikely to actually turn out in sufficient numbers, standing in those long queues on the first Tuesday in November, to get him close. And if he did (by some miracle) get elected, we might add Voltaire to Bismarck. Voltaire once described the French revolutionaries in the following terms: as they graduated from ‘oratory to administration’ they found they owed their power to precisely the kind of rhetoric that made subsequent governance impossible.

  21. boy on a bike says:

    It’s worth remembering that most of the Tory establishment viewed Winston as a complete nutter in the late 1930s.

  22. m0nty says:

    Bernie is old enough to have probably shone some shoes to make a quid back in the old days.

    Hillary is a warhawk and an expert at international diplomacy, she and Winston could discuss the finer points over a nice cognac.

  23. scotty says:

    I agree, he’s the only one who might actually get something done.

  24. Notafan says:

    The angry army are turning out in the middle of winter to hear Trump speak.
    If perpetual all right thinking people agree college students and intergenerational welfare recipients think the solution to everything is confiscating the property of the rich, well they should go for it.
    It worked brilliantly in Venezuela under Chavez and is still working extraordinary well under Maduro.
    I still think a Trump /Cruz presidency is the best option.
    Cruz doesn’t seem to have the personality to get people to turn out.
    I laugh when the perfected generation go on about the superiority of the ‘college educated ‘ . The first couple of years are basically a repeat of high school and the thinking and behavior of so many students we see in the media ?

    Spare us from the new elite.

    Working is also educational.

  25. JC says:

    Hillary is a warhawk and an expert at international diplomacy, she and Winston could discuss the finer points over a nice cognac.

    Are you on heroin?She’s likely to be indicted and her foreign policy fuck ups make her the worst secretary of state in the nation’s history.

    (Sinc, please ban fatboy until after the elections)

  26. JC says:

    I agree, he’s the only one who might actually get something done.

    Interesting, so the Republican congress is going to go for huge increases in tariffs, force Mexico to pay for a wall and enact a one off wealth tax without any cuts in spending.

    Yea, the Trumpster is going to be a real doer.

  27. m0nty says:

    I think a nice merlot would go well with that steak you are buying me, JC.

  28. JC says:

    boy on a bike

    It’s worth remembering that most of the Tory establishment viewed Winston as a complete nutter in the late 1930s.

    They were wrong. In Trump’s case the establishment is right to call him out. His policies are nuts on the economic front.

    The funniest one I’ve seen is that he wants to tighten monetary policy and would like to see a weaker dollar.
    That’s about the stupidest thing said on the GOP side, although admittedly it doesn’t match the stupids from the D’rats, but it’s getting there.

  29. JC says:

    I think a nice merlot would go well with that steak you are buying me, JC.

    Cheapskate, you should only have Burgundy with steak. 🙂

    Monst, if I’m wrong well I’ll unhappily buy you a steak.

  30. JC says:

    You buy your own desserts too, as I’m not springing for the entire dessert menu for you, Fatboy.

  31. Baldrick says:

    m0nty
    #1944092, posted on February 13, 2016 at 7:36 am
    Bernie is old enough to have probably shone some shoes to make a quid back in the old days.
    Hillary is a warhawk and an expert at international diplomacy, she and Winston could discuss the finer points over a nice cognac.

    Twenty three million inhabitants and we get him at Catallaxy.
    What are the odds?

  32. JC says:

    Twenty three million inhabitants and we get him at Catallaxy.
    What are the odds?

    Catallaxy once resided next to a donut shop and fatboy came in uninvited.

  33. Crossie says:

    “Troops were moved to full combat readiness, the last stage before a shooting war, with Sergei Shoygu, the Russian defense minister, announcing on TV: “We began our surprise check of the military preparedness in the Southwest strategic direction.”

    That would be the direction of Turkey.”

    And?

    Putin can have them.

  34. slow&easy says:

    m0nty

    Hillary is a warhawk and an expert at international diplomacy, she and Winston could discuss the finer points over a nice cognac.

    Now you have convinced me that you are only here to have some fun and troll.
    Hillary could be an expert on many things but not in international diplomacy.

  35. Michaelc58 says:

    Of 300 million in the USA, the Dems offer up Sanders and Hillary?
    A geriatric communist follower of Chaves and Castro and graduate of a Stalinist Kibbutz and a sociopathic rapist husband enabler, lifelong compulsive liar and criminal about to be indicted by the FBI for tossing US security under a bus to avoid FOI laws, not to mention the new depths of depravity in crying over Bengazi’s / Stevens body.
    Obama dragged USA down to Europe and either of these two will make US into a Latin America.

    And Republicans have done nothing for America for 20 years.
    Definition of insanity is electing the same old people over and over and expecting a different result.
    Trump is a necessary risk.

  36. Jim says:

    Looking at the list of possibilities, I’m glad I live in Australia. The US deserves more….

  37. Tel says:

    Hillary hitched her wagon to Bill, and he is the reason that there is a Hillary campaign at all. She is so disconnected, scripted and plastic, she cannot connect to any voter.

    There’s a reason she hitched her wagon to Bill.

    Name one GOOD thing that Hillary has achieved in government. Anything. Just one item.

  38. JC says:

    Name one GOOD thing that Hillary has achieved in government. Anything. Just one item.

    One good thing she did was fail the DC bar exam.

  39. Entropy says:

    Yes Jim, maybe the ability to turf a non performing PM ain’t all that bad.

  40. Tel says:

    Here’s a typical article trying desperately to support Hillary.

    http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/05/12/judging-hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/hillary-clinton-was-a-champion-of-public-diplomacy

    In the entire article, he cannot find anything that she achieved… nothing. He just waffles around a few broad aspirational feel good issues, but comes up with zilch. And that’s the best reporting PAC money can buy.

  41. JohnA says:

    Quig #1944046, posted on February 13, 2016 at 1:30 am

    I’d rather Cruz.

    I think a Cruz-Trump ticket might be the way to go.

    Trump for Air Force One, and Cruz in the background doing the detailed negotiating.

    Then Cruz in either 20 or 24.

  42. Struth says:

    Obvious.
    Well said Steve Kates.

  43. Tel says:

    You have to chuckle, this is her own website… this is the best they can come up with:

    https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factchecks/2016/01/25/countering-iranian-threats-with-toughness-and-diplomacy/

    As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton twisted a lot of arms to build a global coalition to impose crippling sanctions and apply unprecedented pressure on Iran. And she secretly sent senior aides to engage in back-channel diplomacy with Iran, ultimately bring them to the negotiating table and paving the way for the historic deal that blocks Iran’s pathways to a nuclear weapon.

    Except for the problem that sanctions against Iran have been going on since the 1980’s and they were never “crippling”. They fact that Iran never capitulated was the reason the US finally came around to a deal. The Iranians were always at the negotiating table, it was the US banging on all the time about “shall not negotiate with terrorists”.

  44. Yohan says:

    I would vote for Cruz, and he is intelligent for sure. But he has no appeal outside the hard right. Trump has appeal across the working class, with so called Reagan democrats.

    If you saw the breakdown of voter classes in New Hampshire, Trump has a broad coalition across every class. The other Republican candidates do not.

    The voter matchups and betting markets do not mean anything at this point, especially as Trumps candidacy has been viewed as not serious so far.

  45. Sinclair Davidson says:

    The only good thing about a Trump presidency is that there would be nothing done. The US constitution is expressly designed to restrain lunatics from doing too much damage.

    The fact is that our civilisation is not under attack from without. We do not need to elect a dictator to preserve the republic. The Romans learned that lesson.

  46. Yohan says:

    The only good thing about a Trump presidency is that there would be nothing done. The US constitution is expressly designed to restrain lunatics from doing too much damage.

    What planet have you been living on? US presidents expressly ignore the constitution, especially since Obama and Bush.

    If Hillary gets elected the Supreme Court will be further stacked by judges who view the constitution as a ‘living document’.

  47. slow&easy says:

    The US constitution is expressly designed to restrain lunatics from doing too much damage.

    I don’t know, Obama managed OK.

  48. johanna says:

    Yep, Trump for Prez (to set the agenda) and Cruz for VP (to do the work) would be the optimum solution.

    Cruz is exceptionally smart and capable, but simply doesn’t have the oomph required to win over undecided voters. Presidential races in the US are showbiz, first and foremost, and we all know who has the runs on the board in that department.

    No point in losing the lot because of misplaced notions of ideological purity. In particular, the need to prevent the Supreme Court from being stacked for at least the next 20 years with Democrat SJWs alone is a reason to go with whoever has the best chance of winning.

  49. H B Bear says:

    Democracy is now the best of the worst. Better get used to it.

  50. daggers says:

    “We began our surprise check of the military preparedness in the Southwest strategic direction.”

    Winter is almost over. Campaign season everywhere.

  51. Ant says:

    Trump’s most comfortable in showbiz. He would be a re-enactment of Schwarzenegger’s governorship in California.

    All tough guy talking big and kicking ass while campaigning, he soon resorted into a meek pussy cat in government with the liberal state legislature running rings around him and serial capitulation to the most idiotic leftist causes, such as Global Warming.

    Arnie’s focus became what he’s only really good at and what he cherishes most: Applause and adoring fans. He had little in the way of guiding principle. Power and money lust might guide you, but it usually screws everybody else.

    Trump is a loose cannon and will most likely be the same kind of leader.

    We all have these ‘defects’, I suppose you could call them, and the US’s founders understood this. Hence their Constitution’s core focus on limited government, separation of powers, checks and balances, and so on.

    What has Trump said about the Constitution, which he’s probably never read or sworn an oath to? What would he say if asked to explain its meaning? Would he say the kind of thing he said when asked to define conservativism? “Ah…well…I guess I’d say that it means to conserve…” (I really thought his next word was going to be “…peaches!”

    Principles are the key. What are his? Look at his history – business and personal – for clues.

    Mark these words, Steve, because I’ll remind you of them in 4 years.

    There’s only one Constitutionalist running.

  52. Boambee John says:

    The field is not encouraging, but if someone, either Trump or another, cannot destroy politically PC and the SJWs, and bring uncontrolled immigration under control, then the only solution I can see is (to paraprase), for two peoples to decide to take their separate ways.

    Shrillary or Sanders will take the US along a path that around half of the US population will not accept. The only question will be whether the separation will be by consent or not.

  53. alexnoaholdmate says:

    First of all, let’s get one thing out of the way. Whoever wins the Republican nomination will win the election (with one exception that I will come to later). Even Donald Trump, who will tack hard to the centre if he gets the nod, will take the prize. He’s engaging enough, there’s no problem there.

    This is the year the Democrats lose. Look at their options. When the public is asked to describe Hillary, the first words that are always mentioned are ‘untrustworthy’, ‘liar’, and ‘corrupt.’ The public doesn’t want her – Sanders entering the race has created a nasty comparison between a timeserver just out for power because it’s ‘her turn’, and someone who at least believes what he says and speaks with passion. There is also a real danger now – it’s no longer just scaremongering – that she will be indicted, or damaged enough by the allegations that she is forced to withdraw.

    As to Sanders – there is no way the American people will elect a 74-year-old Communist, and there is no way the Democratic Party will allow him to win the nomination. It just won’t happen.

    So which ever Republican wins the nomination will be facing a badly damaged Hillary – or possibly a last-minute Hail Mary run from Joe Biden, which I doubt – and they will thrash her.

    The only way the Republicans will lose this election is if Trump fails to gain the nomination and then sets out for an independent run of his own. If that happened he would split the party and ensure that the Democrats win by default.

    And that – knowing Trump – seems a very real possibility. The GOP knows it. It’s a real blackmail opportunity he has hanging over their heads. He can bring the whole place down like Samson.

    N.B. I sincerely hope Trump is not the nominee – but if he was, I would vote for him. With all his faults, he is much better than the Democratic alternatives. I just pray it isn’t him.

  54. johanna says:

    Ant prefers an honorable defeat to a kick-ass victory.

    As for Arnie, he is a meathead who was married to a Kennedy, FFS. No comparison at all.

  55. Ant says:

    Speaking of nuptials, Donald invited Hill and Bill to his.

    See how easy it is shoot you down in a flaming heap.

  56. JC says:

    Alex

    Can you please explain to us what predictive gift you have that gives you more insight than the betting markets and polls a Republican will win.

    Thanks

  57. JC says:

    See how easy it is shoot you down in a flaming heap.

    And she’s soberish at this hour.

  58. johanna says:

    The Donald freely admits that he sucked up to Billary and whoever else he had to in order to do business. As he points out, in an utterly corrupt environment, it’s the price of doing business.

    Shock, horror, go the purists, who think that it is better to lose while feeling virtuous than to win and smite your enemies.

    Eunuchs.

  59. Fisky says:

    This is the year the Democrats lose.

    The only thing keeping them alive is a so-so economy. Once that’s gone, they’ve got nothing. Not economy, foreign policy, Obamacare. They’ll get flogged even by Trump.

  60. When your house is infested with termites, you have to call in the exterminator.
    When his job is done, then you bring in the carpenters and repairers.

    +1 Lurker.

  61. Yohan says:

    Can you please explain to us what predictive gift you have that gives you more insight than the betting markets and polls a Republican will win.

    Betting markets mean nothing this far out from an election, and you know it. Stop being so biased again the Trumpenfuhrer.

  62. JC says:

    Shut up Yohan.

    They are a better predictor than some anonymous dude on katterlaxy.

  63. Twenty three million inhabitants and we get him at Catallaxy.
    What are the odds?

    Hey! I can do this, Baldrick!
    Ummm. 23 million to 1?
    Do you want to see my working?

  64. JC says:

    Can someone explain this.

    Besides Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, a big winner in this week’s New Hampshire primary was Mike Bloomberg. Many primaries remain, of course, but a fall race between Messrs. Trump and Sanders is exactly the circumstance likely to propel the former New York mayor into the race as an independent candidate.

    Mr. Bloomberg wants to be president. He’s not interested in making a rhetorical point. In an antic year, it’s not inconceivable he could win outright, though it’s mostly inconceivable. But winning outright has never been the plan. Mr. Bloomberg has been polling for years. For as long as he has indulged presidential fantasies, he has likely understood his path to the White House lies through the House of Representatives, only partly because of all the congressmen he could afford to buy.

    He would only have to win enough general-election support to deny an electoral college victory to either major-party candidate. Not necessarily accurate is the assumption that whichever party controls the House would automatically elect its own nominee. Republicans control the House; presumably Donald Trump or Ted Cruz would be our next president, the two potential GOP nominees who would bring Mr. Bloomberg into the race.

    Is he saying that the election could go to the Congress? How, as it’s a two horse race with an odd number of electoral votes. Or not?

  65. JC says:

    Shock, horror, go the purists, who think that it is better to lose while feeling virtuous than to win and smite your enemies.

    Eunuchs.

    You’re the moron who brought up the marriage angle. Ant just showed you up for being a fatmouth moron.

    Eunuchs?

    Barrenness!

  66. johanna says:

    JC’s stylish, well-read, and courteous form of discourse, especially on subjects he knows nothing about, never fails in its consistency.

    He particularly focuses on Kittehs, on the mistaken assumption that they are soft targets.

    Go iron your jeans and polish your loafer tassels, you ignorant thug.

  67. JC says:

    You started the stylish prose by referring to those of us who disagreed with your stupid opinion as eunuchs. Fact is, you frequently post stupid shit and when you’re called out you go fucking crazy with rage.

    There are two solutions.

    1. Stop posting stupid shit

    2. Accept the criticism

    Go fantasise about a horse, Johanna.

  68. Rob MW says:

    Steve – I think that you can remove Sanders from the list. The reason is because, by all accounts, the DNC Superdelegates have already parked their votes behind Clinton. Even the Sanders camp admits that they are well behind Clinton for nomination votes, all because of the Superdelegates.

    It seems that the DNC regards popular voting – caucus – as something quite quaint. Sanders’s only hope of becoming President is by running as an independent communist, which seems quite appealing to the university and elite crowd, probably even CNN and the like.

  69. Ant says:

    When your house is infested with termites, you have to call in the exterminator:

    Arnie?

    When his job is done, then you bring in the carpenters and repairers:

    Jerry Brown??

    No, I don’t think so.

    There’s lots of precedent here. Most infamously Hitler would have argued that he was given the same brief.

    And, BTW, is this not the essence of implementing communism?

  70. Rob MW says:

    We do not need to elect a dictator to preserve the republic. The Romans learned that lesson.

    Do you have a copy of the election result for that Roman election, or will you have to ask Anthony Green for that 🙂

  71. JC says:

    One part of Bernie’s core demographic are the young college educated whites.
    As the Wall Street Journal suggested
    They witnessed the GFC which is blamed on capitalism, have low paying jobs, choked with student loans and no real memory of socialism and its failure.

    It’s a problem because in a fair world Bernie should be in a mental asylum.

  72. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Is he saying that the election could go to the Congress? How, as it’s a two horse race with an odd number of electoral votes. Or not?

    If a third party enters the race – and this is a concern to Republicans, in case Trump decides to take the Samson option if he doesn’t win the nomination – enough votes can be siphoned away that neither party wins a majority of electoral college votes. If that’s the case – it has happened before – Congress decides who the winner is after weeks of negotiating and backroom dealings.

    It’s highly unlikely today, of course. Ross Perot was the most successful third party candidate since Teddy Roosevelt, and even he couldn’t make much of a dent on the two-party system. All he did was siphon conservative votes from Bush, which meant Clinton was able to take the White House despite winning only 43% of the popular vote (the lowest winning margin since Abraham Lincoln in 1860 – a man who didn’t even appear on the ballot in most Southern states).

    Even Teddy Roosevelt – an immensely popular former President who split the Republicans in 1912 and was even able to win more votes than them – didn’t get that far. All he did was put Woodrow Wilson in the White House. What a success that turned out to be.

    So no, any talk of Bloomberg entering the race and getting the result decided in Congress is absolute nonsense. It would take a candidate of immense popularity to do what even Teddy couldn’t do – and Bloomberg isn’t it.

  73. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Can you please explain to us what predictive gift you have that gives you more insight than the betting markets and polls a Republican will win.

    The betting markets had Campbell Newman winning an overwhelming victory, right up until the day he lost the election.

    The betting markets had David Cameron either continuing to govern in coalition, or losing to a new coalition of Labor and the SNP.

    This far out I wouldn’t trust the betting markets. I’d look at the facts – the Democrats as a party are deeply unpopular, and their brand is in the toilet; the Republicans won an overwhelming victory across the nation in the mid-terms two years ago and have a new Speaker that is determined to accomplish things in Congress; one of the Democratic candidates is deeply mistrusted by the electorate, and the other is a wacky Communist; polls show most Americans believe the country is heading in the wrong direction, always bad news for the party of an incumbent President; and (most important) the economy is sputtering along, and may get worse – which always rebounds on the President and his party, regardless of who it is.

    All the indications are that the cycle is well and truly back in the Republicans favour.

  74. Ant says:

    The only thing that will return the US to greatness is returning it to its core Founding Principle:

    LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Running through the china shop with a spraying fire hose to douse the flames left burning by Obama – ala Trump (‘bull in the china shop’ would make a perfect anti-Trump ad) – and kicking ass is not a solution.

    Too many make the mistake of thinking a one hit wonder is going fix the US’s problems.

    The damage didn’t occur overnight and the seeds of decay were sown decades ago.

    Does Trump have the patience, strength and diligence to do this hard work, or will he capitulate the moment the more unsavoury but necessary actions required (such as entitlement reform) start to generate negative headlines?

    I think we all know the answer.

  75. Angus Black says:

    Good post, this. I can see why you think Trump is the the best choice (and, indeed, why the choice will not widen) and, crossing my fingers, I have got to agree. I don’t believe he is a new Churchill, but the truth is that in 1940, Churchill didn’t look much like the new Churchill either! The rest, well, the outcomes are obvious and, in that respect, I’m in total agreement with you.

    I just have this nagging worry that Trump could turn out like Palmer did here.

    Couldn’t happen twice … could it?

  76. JC says:

    So Alex, you have to win the a majority of the vote, not the most in a presidential race? Is that right?

    The writer did say it’s very low probability although not inconceivable in this race.

  77. incoherent rambler says:

    An election year is a good year to strike at the USA. Especially when you have an idiot as the Commander in Chief.
    My tip, external forces will have a significant impact on the voting pattern for the next president.

    Who will USA voters chose when they are seriously threatened?

  78. JC says:

    Ant

    One thing you could say about Trump is that the one single thing you require in the building business – particularly NY is lots and lots of patience.

    There are countless criticisms you can level against the fathead but lack of patience and staying power isn’t one.

  79. Ant says:

    You have to win the majority of the electoral college, not the popular vote.

  80. JC says:

    Otherwise it goes to the house? Wow, never knew that. I’m sure it’s happened but it would be pretty rare.

  81. Crossie says:

    The only good thing about a Trump presidency is that there would be nothing done. The US constitution is expressly designed to restrain lunatics from doing too much damage.

    As someone already pointed out upthread, Obama managed just fine sidestepping the Congress and the constitution. Republicans couldn’t be bothered with even a token resistance.

    Of course, two things could happen, Republicans in Congress will suddenly realise why they are there and block Trump or the Democrats win both houses of Congress.

  82. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. says:

    I’ve with Johanna, Heroditus, Winston and others who think Trump might actually achieve a win, whereas Cruz would not. Winners are grinners.

    Ask Gaius Octavius about that, Sinc. He insisted on outwardly preserving The Republic in order to found his Augustan Dynasty. Trump does know that there is a rot within. That’s a start.

    My hope is that Cruz would do all the brain work. The Donald, we know, can delegate.

  83. alexnoaholdmate says:

    So Alex, you have to win the a majority of the vote, not the most in a presidential race? Is that right?

    The writer did say it’s very low probability although not inconceivable in this race.

    No, you have to win a majority of the electoral college votes (I assume you are referring to the popular vote overall).

    This may happen without the candidate winning the majority of the popular vote nationwide. Bush won the 2000 election without winning the popular vote (and won it fair and square, whatever Michael Moore might say).

    If a candidate wins 50.1% of the votes in California, they get ALL of California’s 54 electoral college votes, which is a great headstart to the 270 you need in total (and California ALWAYS goes Democrat, as does New York’s 29). A few states like that and you can walk it in, even if the majority of voters across the nation turn you down.

    Look at Clinton’s election in 1992:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1992

    Despite winning only 43% of the vote, and being absolutely rejected by the American people – he won the election because Perot split the Republican vote in key states, leaving Clinton to take them as the candidate with the most votes, not the majority.

    Third party candidates can really muck up an election – and Trump has this in his back pocket to destroy the Republicans if they reject him. But the odds of it going to Congress these days are practically nil. Hasn’t happened since 1824, and that was a travesty.

  84. JC says:

    No, you have to win a majority of the electoral college votes (I assume you are referring to the popular vote overall).

    Yes, that what I meant. The electoral college.

  85. Rob MW says:

    You have to win the majority of the electoral college, not the popular vote.

    Errrr……..you have to win the nomination first……..ah…….fuckit 🙂

  86. Token says:

    Has the Cruz video been posted yet?

    “Senator Cruz, this might be my favorite political ad of all time,” Jim Geraghty writes, though he asks if the ad works “if you haven’t seen the Office Space scene? Is it funny enough to watch Hillary and her aides destroying her server?” I think the message comes through loud and clear even if you’ve never seen Office Space — though the copier destroying scene is probably the film’s most viral* clip

    Steve, Instapundit has the Cruz commerical, I’m sure you can add it to the post, just saying…

  87. Token says:

    Ok, the race is finalling going to get shaken up – Jim Gilmore has suspended his campaign

  88. JC says:

    Technically you don’t have to win the nomination. I don’t know the paperwork involved but you can run as an independent and get your name on the ballot.

  89. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Yes, that what I meant. The electoral college.

    In 1992 57% of the American electorate voted for either the conservative Republican candidate (Bush) or the VERY conservative third party candidate (Perot). Conservatism was the name of the game.

    Because the vote was split between them, America got Clinton. With 43% of the vote. They absolutely rejected him, yet they ended up with him.

    That’s the danger to Republicans this year – that Trump doesn’t win the nomination and runs as a third party, splitting the vote (I could also see Sanders doing the same). If he does, the Democrats will romp it in for a third term, despite all the indicators suggesting this is a Republican year.

  90. johanna says:

    Too many make the mistake of thinking a one hit wonder is going fix the US’s problems.

    Too many think that letting the Democrats appoint the next few Supreme Court judges is less important than feeling good about themselves.

  91. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. says:

    I just have this nagging worry that Trump could turn out like Palmer did here.

    Along with most of us, I guess.

    But real power is a mantle of awe; some rise well to the challenge of it. Trump could be one of those.
    He does have some idea of running a business. Palmer never did. Witness his resort.

  92. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Too many think that letting the Democrats appoint the next few Supreme Court judges is less important than feeling good about themselves.

    If Donald Trump was the candidate, I would vote for him. For reason like this. Better Trump with all his faults than another Democrat term.

    I just pray to God it isn’t him.

  93. Token says:

    That’s the danger to Republicans this year – that Trump doesn’t win the nomination and runs as a third party, splitting the vote …

    You have to respect Trump’s negotiating skills. He has been very shrewd in the

    He knows all that. He has used this as leverage throughout the process.

  94. Yohan says:

    Trump support among Latino republicans

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/12/no-joke-trump-can-win-plenty-of-latinos.html

    Trump 38%
    Cruz 15%
    Bush 14%
    Rubio 8%

    And remember Romney only win 6% of Blacks in the 2012 General election, some polls I saw had Trump getting 20+ % of the Black vote.

  95. JC says:

    There just aren’t enough voters for the GOP, Alex.

    New York and California along with possibly Florida has seen to that. The GOP just doesn’t have the demographics.

    Look, if the same demo applied now to what Reagan had Hillary would not be a candidate, yet she leads the polls and the betting markets.

    It’s a traversty but that’s what it is.

    I don’t buy the bullshit about who are the most incentivised voters either.

  96. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Cruz 15%
    Bush 14%
    Rubio 8%

    What these polls all forget is that as the race firms and others drop out, their support will likely go to the remaining candidates.

    Do you think Rubio’s supporters will turn to Trump? No, they’ll go to Bush. And Bush’s supporters won’t ever go to Trump either – they’ll go to Cruz, if Bush ever dropped out (though for personal reasons Cruz’s supporters may not turn to Bush).

    Remember – if Trump has 38% support among Latino Republicans, that means 62% of Latino Republicans don’t want him. They want someone else. And as the nominees are whittled down, they’ll go to whoever the anti-Trump ends up being.

  97. cohenite says:

    m0nty

    #1944092, posted on February 13, 2016 at 7:36 am

    Bernie is old enough to have probably shone some shoes to make a quid back in the old days.

    Sanders has never worked a day in his life.

  98. JC says:

    Keep up the wishful thinking, yohan. However try not to be disappointed in November.

    It’s a free stuff majority electorate now.

  99. m0nty says:

    . I’d look at the facts – the Democrats as a party are deeply unpopular, and their brand is in the toilet; the Republicans won an overwhelming victory across the nation in the mid-terms two years ago and have a new Speaker that is determined to accomplish things in Congress; one of the Democratic candidates is deeply mistrusted by the electorate, and the other is a wacky Communist; polls show most Americans believe the country is heading in the wrong direction, always bad news for the party of an incumbent President; and (most important) the economy is sputtering along, and may get worse – which always rebounds on the President and his party, regardless of who it is.

    The GOP is far less popular than the Democrats. 2014 was a midterm which historically favours Republicans, the turnout for presidential cycles is far more favourable for the left. Clinton’s ratings are far better than those of Trump among the general population. The economy is going about as well as can be expected after the Great Recession caused by the incompetence of the last GOP president.

    The signs, such as they are, point more towards a Clinton victory over Trump. A Trump thump, if you will. The early polls certainly bear that out.

  100. alexnoaholdmate says:

    New York and California along with possibly Florida has seen to that. The GOP just doesn’t have the demographics.

    I understand your fears, but I think they’re overblown. At least in this election. Maybe not in the long term.

    The Republicans have both houses of Congress, 35 of the 50 state governorships, and 68 of the 98 state legislatures. They have never been as dominant as they are now. Not bad for a party that can’t win votes. The Democrats are reeling, and their state networks are in disarray. Funding is down across the party, even if its up for individuals (i.e Hillary).

    Now, that will probably diminish a bit this year as things revert to the mean – but they will still sweep all before them. The Democrats’ brand is so trashed that even a lot of swing states have moved firmly to the Republican camp. Florida is one of them, especially if Rubio or Bush is the nominee (or Vice-Presidential nominee).

    This is the Republican year, even if the party has a major structural issue among minorities in the future. And it helps that the two major Democratic candidates are just so damn poor this time around.

  101. alexnoaholdmate says:

    And it helps that the two major Democratic candidates are just so damn poor this time around…

    By which I mean they have strong name recognition, but little trust among the electorate.

  102. alexnoaholdmate says:

    The GOP is far less popular than the Democrats. 2014 was a midterm which historically favours Republicans…

    Not only did they win an overwhelming mid-term victory in Congress, but they now hold 35 of 50 states governorships and most of the state legislatures.

    It wasn’t a win, Monty. It was a total rout, unlike anything seen since the days of FDR.

    Your trolling is getting worse. There should always be an element of believability in what you say, or it just gets scrolled past.

    As it shall from now on.

  103. m0nty says:

    You keep on restricting yourself to reading opinions you agree with, Alex. That always works.

  104. johanna says:

    My hope is that Cruz would do all the brain work. The Donald, we know, can delegate.

    Precisely, Lizzie.

    Look, The Donald is not my dream candidate. But, that’s not the point. Unlike some wankers narcissistic commentors here, I do not regard whether or not a candidate agrees with me about every single thing, down to their favourite colour, as the be-all and end-all.

    This is not fantasy football. It is about weighing up the realistic alternatives. Maybe Trump can’t beat Hillary or Bernie – but one thing is for sure, nobody else can.

    As a keen bridge player, let me impart one of the maxims of this superb game. If there is only one lie of the cards that allows you to win, that’s what you bet on.

  105. alexnoaholdmate says:

    If you take a quick glance through the page, Monty, you’ll see that I’m enjoying engaging with opinions that don’t match my own.

    It’s the opinions of a moron that I scroll through.

    It’s the same reason I wouldn’t ask a hippy homeopath for her opinion on diabetes – I’d go to a doctor instead.

  106. JC says:

    You keep on restricting yourself to reading opinions you agree with, Alex. That always works.

    Monst, other than cheap trolling of Katterlaxy where do you go to read contrary opinions?

  107. Ant says:

    alexnoaholdmate

    If it came down to a Republican a Democrat and Trump, who would you vote for?

    I’d go with the Republican, in vain hope that my compatriots aren’t stupid. But I know I’ll be disappointed.

    BTW, Trump, I think, is completely unpredictable on going 3rd party.

    On the one hand, he’s a slave to his ego and doesn’t like to lose. On the other, he will be aware that losing the presidency to Hillary or Bernie will see his name live in infamy for an eternity.

    Right now, my money would be on him not doing it. He has some history of walking away from failure and shrugging it off as the price of doing business.

  108. Tel says:

    The Democrats are reeling, and their state networks are in disarray. Funding is down across the party, even if its up for individuals (i.e Hillary).

    Sanders supporters really don’t like Hillary, and Hillary supporters really don’t like Sanders.

    The Democrat vote is pretty much guaranteed split at this stage. Gonna be very difficult for someone like Sanders to do that “step to the middle” that Obama was easily able to do.

  109. JC says:

    But, that’s not the point. Unlike some wankers narcissistic commentors here, I do not regard whether or not a candidate agrees with me about every single thing, down to their favourite colour, as the be-all and end-all.

    That’s my cue I guess.

    Starting a trade war, creating a supply shock in the labor market in an economy which is technically at full employment thereby triggering a nasty reaction from the Federal reserve. Wanting to appoint a Fed Chairman who will tighten monetary policy, while also suggesting he will weaken the dollar is not a favorite color issue, you moron.

    It’s serious shit that is a virtual reenactment of the last two year of he Hoover administration and Smoot Hawley.

    As a former public servant you shouldn’t be talking about this stuff. Remain silent and perhaps learn something, you vicious drunk.

  110. alexnoaholdmate says:

    If it came down to a Republican a Democrat and Trump, who would you vote for?

    The Republican. Trump outside the party would be even more of a loose cannon.

    And we’d better pray that never happens – if Trump runs as a third party, then the Dems have the election. And another four years, maybe eight, with a Democratic President in charge would completely change the character of the Supreme Court for decades.

    Right now, my money would be on him not doing it. He has some history of walking away from failure and shrugging it off as the price of doing business.

    I’m not saying he would do it – just that he’s clearly thought about it. Hence why the head of the Republican Party had a special sit down with him and promised to treat him as a genuine candidate if he promised NOT to run as a third-party candidate if he didn’t get the nomination. Trump agreed – but we’ve seen that his word means little.

    The fact the conversation had to take place suggests the Republicans are very, very, alert to the possibility.

  111. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Sanders supporters really don’t like Hillary, and Hillary supporters really don’t like Sanders.

    The Democrat vote is pretty much guaranteed split at this stage. Gonna be very difficult for someone like Sanders to do that “step to the middle” that Obama was easily able to do.

    This is the main reason why I believe the Republican nominee – whoever he is – will win the election. Win the nomination, win the White House.

    Unless Trump runs as a third party and splits the vote. Then the unloseable election is lost, and the Democrats will be able to appoint two, maybe three, judges to the Supreme Court. Then conservatives have lost the war for decades.

  112. JC says:

    Sorry Alex. The free stuff crowd will simply drag themselves to local precincts and vote several times. There’s no real split in the D’rat vote when it comes to free stuff and the ability to grab the prize, which is the SCOTUS.

    The GOP doesn’t have the votes.

  113. Ant says:

    And it helps that the two major Democratic candidates are just so damn poor this time around.

    It’s a great shame that Trump has generated all the fluff and bubble that distracts from the cartoonish, freak show of a campaign being run by the Democrats.

    You can go through the internet and find countless videos of the GOP candidates being interviewed in all forums imaginable. They’re desperate for airtime and want people to hear what they have to say. The GOP debates are held primetime, on key MSM TV outlets plus Fox and CNN.

    In what way can this be said about Hillary and Bernie?

    They’re effectively conducting their campaigns in absentia. Where’s the Fox run Dem debate? Where are the one on one interviews? Where are the confrontations with journos asking half decent questions?

    They have so much to hide. And it’s incredible that they’re considered viable candidates for the presidency in any shape or form.

    BTW, Lt Gen Michael Flynn, former Obama intel chief says Hillary should step aside while being investigated by the FBI.

    During the PBS debate yesterday, she was not asked one question about this.

    Imagine Ted Cruz in her shoes and what they media would do to him with the stench of a scandal of this magnitude anywhere near him.

  114. Tel says:

    It’s serious shit that is a virtual reenactment of the last two year of he Hoover administration and Smoot Hawley.

    There is a somewhat Hooveresque aspect to Trump… self made man, good at business, wants to put his hands into stuff, speaks directly and confidently without the usual political trickery.

    However, I doubt that Trump would increase the top income tax rates up to 63% like Hoover did, especially with the current Republican Congress (weak, but not that weak).

  115. johanna says:

    On the one hand, he’s a slave to his ego and doesn’t like to lose. On the other, he will be aware that losing the presidency to Hillary or Bernie will see his name live in infamy for an eternity.

    Ant, how about listing the losing candidates for Presidential elections for the last 100 years and demonstrating how their names have lived in infamy for an eternity?

    What a load of cobblers. It is equivalent to the Left’s frequent cries that something or other will permanently shame us in the “international community.”

    he’s a slave to his ego and doesn’t like to lose

    You want a President who doesn’t mind losing? I think they’ve got one of those already.

    Headline: US invaded.

    Prez: Oh, well. Shit happens.

  116. m0nty says:

    The Democrat vote is pretty much guaranteed split at this stage. Gonna be very difficult for someone like Sanders to do that “step to the middle” that Obama was easily able to do.

    You would have said the exact same thing eight years ago. You don’t know what you are talking about.

  117. JC says:

    You can go through the internet and find countless videos of the GOP candidates being interviewed in all forums imaginable. They’re desperate for airtime and want people to hear what they have to say. The GOP debates are held primetime, on key MSM TV outlets plus Fox and CNN.

    In what way can this be said about Hillary and Bernie?

    It’s the equivalent of a luxurious existence. Think about it, they run their debates at 3 in the morning and indictee is still ahead in the polls and betting markets. The GOP would kill for that sort of blind support.

    Some of you guys really don’t get it and I don’t mean it in a bad way. Hillary should be at 1% support after the shit she’s pulled. She’s ahead. I know it’s hard to accept, but that’s just how it is.

  118. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Ant, how about listing the losing candidates for Presidential elections for the last 100 years and demonstrating how their names have lived in infamy for an eternity?

    Just off the top of my head, some names that will live in infamy:

    Al Gore.
    John McCain.
    Mike Dukakis.
    Walter Mondale.
    Jimmy Carter.
    Thomas Dewey (‘Dewey Defeats Truman’).
    William Howard Taft.
    John Quincy Adams (lost to Jackson in a rematch of the 1824 ‘Corrupt Bargain’ election).

    Losing elections can hurt you in the history books.

  119. Ant says:

    Then conservatives have lost the war for decades.

    Deeply depressing as that would be, I look for the silver lining. Article V, Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution.

    There’s a bit of groundswell behind the scenes at state level and prominent Republicans, such as Texas governor Greg Abbott, have called for it.

    If a Republican takes the presidency, the urgency may be severely curtailed, although both Rubio and Cruz have said that they support it. A RINO such as Jeb! would turn his nose up at the idea. My guess is that a Rubio would reject it in office, beholden as he would be to the DC establishment, but Cruz would be energised by the visceral hatred from that crowd to maybe take the plunge (not that a POTUS has any say in it whatsoever, but lending his support to it would be an extremely powerful endorsement).

    If Bernie or Hillary take the presidency the urgency may get red hot.

    One of the proposals is term limits on Congress members and SC judges. Another is dismantling SC rulings with super majority state legislatures.

    All essential.

  120. Bruce says:

    Once Trump has secured the nomination he will go from strength to strength. His opponent won’t get near him. And a personal gripe, why do posters cheapen their opinions with the f word. Trash talking. Unnecessary.

  121. johanna says:

    JC
    #1944331, posted on February 13, 2016 at 1:15 pm

    Sorry Alex. The free stuff crowd will simply drag themselves to local precincts and vote several times. There’s no real split in the D’rat vote when it comes to free stuff and the ability to grab the prize, which is the SCOTUS.

    The GOP doesn’t have the votes.

    Razor sharp political analyst JC, who doesn’t even know the difference between the Prime Minister’s Office and the Prime Minister’s Department, jumps in the deep end again.

    He has been claiming that Trump is a joke and a lightweight for months, from the depths of his acute understanding of politics.

    Mugged by reality, he is now shifting his ground (as he does) by putting on his most serious pair of ironed jeans, and pompous pair of loafers, to enlighten the local yokels.

    About time to have a go at Lizzie, surely? After all, she agreed with me about something.

  122. JC says:

    You would have said the exact same thing eight years ago. You don’t know what you are talking about.

    Monst, congratulations. This is the first time since you started trolling the site you’re right.

    Sinc should still ban you until after both elections though.

  123. Tel says:

    There’s no real split in the D’rat vote when it comes to free stuff …

    Sanders is offering to write off the entire student loan debt causing nearly $2 trillion in bank assets to vanish in a puff of executive privilege.

    Now you know I’m no friend of the big bankers and big corporates, but those guys have one heck of a good reason to back Hillary over Sanders. I’m aware we have had Cantillon effects and bubble finance and those are causing tuition fees to rise in a very non-market manner. But just slashing that bubble with a pen and bringing it all down hard?!? Ouch, that’s gonna hurt. Bumpity bump, down it comes.

  124. Ant says:

    “But reading history books is hard.”

    Just ask Donald and his Trumpots.

  125. Ant says:

    I’d add Mitt Romney’s name living in infamy, after the full consequences of the Obama train wreck flourishes in all it’s inevitable horror.

  126. johanna says:

    Just off the top of my head, some names that will live in infamy:

    Al Gore.
    John McCain.
    Mike Dukakis.
    Walter Mondale.
    Jimmy Carter.
    Thomas Dewey (‘Dewey Defeats Truman’).
    William Howard Taft.
    John Quincy Adams (lost to Jackson in a rematch of the 1824 ‘Corrupt Bargain’ election).

    Yep, people around the water cooler are constantly talking about the “infamy” of these people.

    Especially that scallywag, William Howard Taft. 🙂

  127. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Yep, people around the water cooler are constantly talking about the “infamy” of these people.

    I’d say Hitler’s name will live in infamy.

    Are people around the water cooler talking about him too? Or rather, ‘I’m a celebrity, where the fuck is my dignity?’

    What a stupid response.

  128. Tel says:

    You would have said the exact same thing eight years ago.

    You are saying an event “would have” happened in the past? Would have, except for what?

    I must admit I’m not all that interested in exploring alternative histories with you… it either actually happened or it didn’t happen. So yes or no.

  129. johanna says:

    Tel
    #1944347, posted on February 13, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    There’s no real split in the D’rat vote when it comes to free stuff …

    Sanders is offering to write off the entire student loan debt causing nearly $2 trillion in bank assets to vanish in a puff of executive privilege.

    Now you know I’m no friend of the big bankers and big corporates, but those guys have one heck of a good reason to back Hillary over Sanders. I’m aware we have had Cantillon effects and bubble finance and those are causing tuition fees to rise in a very non-market manner. But just slashing that bubble with a pen and bringing it all down hard?!? Ouch, that’s gonna hurt. Bumpity bump, down it comes.

    The President doesn’t have the power to do that. Like almost all of Bernie’s promises, it is unachievable. No way that it would get through Congress and the Senate.

    I doubt that his low information supporters know that, though.

  130. JC says:

    Razor sharp political analyst JC, who doesn’t even know the difference between the Prime Minister’s Office and the Prime Minister’s Department, jumps in the deep end again.

    Yea, for a non-APS schelp that’s still a mortal sin. Lol. That’s so pathetic it’s funny.

    He has been claiming that Trump is a joke and a lightweight for months, from the depths of his acute understanding of politics.

    I’ve never claimed Trump is a lightweight. His macro economic policies aren’t funny either. They’re too dangerous to be a joke.

    Mugged by reality, he is now shifting his ground (as he does) by putting on his most serious pair of ironed jeans, and pompous pair of loafers, to enlighten the local yokels.

    What ground am I shifting as I’ve pretty much said the same things for a while now.
    Go find a horse you can fall in love with, Johanna.

    About time to have a go at Lizzie, surely? After all, she agreed with me about something.

    I don’t give a shit who agrees with either of us, but I guess it’s important to you though.

    You really are a nasty piece of work.

  131. Ant says:

    When looking for historical names that live in infamy, the pages of New Idea should not be your first port of call.

  132. JC says:

    Sanders is offering to write off the entire student loan debt causing nearly $2 trillion in bank assets to vanish in a puff of executive privilege.

    Bank assets wouldn’t vanish, Tel. The vast majority of student loans carry a federal guarantee.

  133. johanna says:

    You really are a nasty piece of work.

    It’s called projection.

    BTW, still waiting for your attack on Lizzie? Otherwise, people might think that attacking individuals, rather than ideas, is your M.O.

    Perish the thought, tassel-boy.

  134. Tel says:

    The vast majority of student loans carry a federal guarantee.

    Similar kind of federal guarantee protecting all the people who paid into Social Security?

    You know why the US federal government does not put down all those future liabilities on their books for accounting purposes? I’m not kidding around here, I’ll give you the lowdown. It’s called “sovereignty” and what it means is, all US federal promises are aspirational. Fulfilment is voluntary. Just let that soak in for a moment.

    Now… what is the Socialist position on honouring contracts again?

  135. Oh come on says:

    Sanders and Hillary both smashing Trump in all general match ups. Absolutely caning him.

    Several months ago Hillary was smashing Sanders everywhere in the polls. Then events happened. The current national polling matchups are a waste of time and reveal nothing as to who will eventually win the general election.

    Remember when Sanders let Hills off the hook over her e-mails in the first debate? Everyone said he was finished – he’d sheathed his most potent weapon against her. But the fact is that most Americans really don’t like Hillary, and nor do they trust her as far as they can throw her. Hillary is at present desperately trying to win back the bespoke demographic that has supercharged Sanders’s campaign, and she’s only going to get more extreme in her efforts to woo them away from Bernie (a fool’s errand, because they’re welded to him) . These people are not nearly numerous enough to win anyone an election. The campaigns of the GOP frontrunners will be taking careful notes so as to use her extreme primary positions against her in the runup to November. These won’t wash with Middle America. And Sanders…well, there’s more than enough ammo from his past to torpedo his Presidential bid should he win the nomination.

    Point is, current polls are utterly useless predictors of who will win in November.

  136. JC says:

    Go make love to pharlap, johanna.

    As I said I don’t care whom agrees with whom.

    You started the stupid shit and deserve to be punished.
    You could flood a large room with venom you old drunk.

  137. Oh come on says:

    The utility of polling in general is declining precipitously. Too many people refuse to respond, too many respondees say they’re undecided when they aren’t, too many people respond mischievously to discredit polling because they’re sick of the influence it has had on the process. And this is getting worse. Polls are getting it way wrong ever more often these days. At some point in the not too distant future, people will simply stop paying them any attention.

  138. johanna says:

    Go make love to pharlap, johanna.

    It would be preferable to going anywhere near you.

    Have you shaved your back today? Oh, and the ones growing out of your ears need a seeing-to as well.

  139. Goanna says:

    Who will USA voters chose when they are seriously threatened?

    Good question Incoherent Rambler.
    Voters of course would be reminded of Clinton and Benghazi while Sanders does not belong to club sensible at all. This rules out the Dems.
    My guess is that threatened voters would bypass the blowhard in favour of someone who talks softly, carries a big stick and an air of stability – Cruz.

  140. Oh come on says:

    So Clinton has conceded frontrunner status to Sanders –

    Clinton adjusts pitch: I can be a Sanders, just better

    So now Hills is openly admitting it’s Sanders calling the shots, and she’s reacting to them. What a loser.

    (via Drudge)

  141. srr says:

    War huh … remember The War?

    Don’t worry, Trump’s reminding everyone 😉

    Ali Vitali [email protected] 3 hours ago

    Trump says he’d like to run against Hillary
    but “I’d also love to run against the communist.”

  142. stackja says:

    Who knows what is happening? Trust MSM/polls?

  143. Vicki says:

    I feel a bit sorry for for people who have to live in Sydney, now that we don’t have to do business here any more. It isn’t a life, it’s an endurance.

    Good for you. Hold onto that thought. Reality is in the eye of the beholder.

  144. . says:

    A Lurker
    #1944071, posted on February 13, 2016 at 6:44 am
    When your house is infested with termites, you have to call in the exterminator.

    No! Burn the fucker down!

    If Clinton was so unpopular, then why did democrats control Congress until 1995?

  145. DrBeauGan says:

    You left out a few letters. It’s trIumpH the insult comic dog we should all be backing. And the bloke with his hand up Triumph’s arse for vp. It would be so appropriate.

  146. . says:

    Triumph the Insult Comic Dog/Dennis Miller 2016 for me.

  147. srr says:

    I love this, mostly for the honestly bad light it shines on the Anti-Trump propagandists –

    The Untruth About Donald Trump:
    Mainstream Media Lies and Attacks

    http://www.untruthaboutdonaldtrump.com/

  148. Yohan says:

    Cruz has an excellent economic plan. 10% flat personal tax rate, 16% corporate tax rate, payroll tax eliminated.

    Problem is not enough independents, moderates or democrats will come out to vote for him.

  149. Ant says:

    “Problem is…Cruz is unelectable.”

    We’ve heard such before.

  150. srr says:

    Bikers for Trump rev up in Florida

    A lot of Republicans are terrified that Donald Trump would be general election poison as the Republican presidential nominee. But ask yourself: Can you imagine hundreds of leather-clad bikers turning out to rally for Marco Rubio? Or Jeb Bush? or Hillary Clinton?

    Donald Trump? Perhaps. In a sign of Trump’s potential for expanding the GOP electorate, a grass roots group called Bikers for Trump …

    … surveying fellow bikers, and found overwhelmingly their top issues include fighting ISIS, combating illegal immigration, and standing behind America’s veterans. And overwhelmingly, he said, they see Trump as the best candidate on those issues.

    “Bikers are citizen-crusaders. They’re very active in their communities, but they haven’t been that active in (presidential elections). It’s taken Donald Trump to unite them,” Cox said in a phone interview.

    http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/bikers-for-trump-rev-up-in-florida/2262240

  151. Goanna says:

    A lot of Republicans are terrified that Donald Trump would be general election poison as the Republican presidential nominee. But ask yourself: Can you imagine hundreds of leather-clad bikers turning out to rally for Marco Rubio? Or Jeb Bush? or Hillary Clinton?

    The Rolling Stones once, and once only, befriended motorcycle riders.
    Trump sure can put on a circus and you couldn’t want for a better MC but, in all seriousness, as President?

  152. Yohan says:

    Doesn’t Putin have some biker group that supports him? Trump could get one too. Every modern dictator needs a biker group.

  153. Tel says:

    Doesn’t Putin have some biker group that supports him?

    The group is called the “Night Wolves” and not so much that they support Putin, more that he provides direct funding from the Kremlin. They have a tendency towards a lot more political activism than most motorcycle clubs and they are strongly Russian nationalist. Also, a rumour that ex-military quite often join this group.

    It might not be entirely equivalent to the meth-dealing bikers you find in the West.

  154. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. says:

    Don’t let JC phase you, Johanna. He lives in a man cave around here and mixes with the trading community, so he’s ethnographically interesting. You and I have both hedged our bets anyway. Obviously we prefer the clearer policies of Cruz, but both of us know that a showman works for votes. And I’ve also seen show ponies who when given the top ribbon suddenly start to be very serious people, who can get a lot done, without hubris, and who are open to good advice which they readily assess and may take, while saying, and meaning, that the buck stops with them. Best case scenario of course.

    I’ve no idea what will happen anyway and nor has anyone else, so it is all huff and wind so far.

    A good discussion canvassing possibilities and fun to dip in and out of on a Sat’dy arvo though. 🙂

  155. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. says:

    Waiting for my fingernail polish to dry too. Big night tonight.

  156. herodotus says:

    After Obama, who is going to convince us that the quality of the candidate is of prime importance?
    Quite clearly, the ability to fluff, stab & parly your way to a win is important.

  157. stackja says:

    Andrew Jackson was the seventh President of the United States from 1829 to 1837, seeking to act as the direct representative of the common man.
    Born in a backwoods settlement in the Carolinas in 1767, he received sporadic education. But in his late teens he read law for about two years, and he became an outstanding young lawyer in Tennessee. Fiercely jealous of his honor, he engaged in brawls, and in a duel killed a man who cast an unjustified slur on his wife Rachel.

    Benjamin Harrison was the 23rd President of the United States from 1889 to 1893, elected after conducting one of the first “front-porch” campaigns by delivering short speeches to delegations that visited him in Indianapolis.

  158. srr says:

    Stop being children and treating everyone like idiots.

    Oils ain’t Oils

    Bikers ain’t Bikers

    and

    Armies ain’t Armies, all of the same type, strength and side.

    btw, Cruz is a Politician, and so are Gillard, Hillary and Merkel …

    … oh and that other bitch, Rudd …

  159. Fisky says:

    Trump up to 48% in Florida. This is a blow-out. The other candidates should just give up before they embarrass themselves.

  160. herodotus says:

    fun to dip in and out of on a Sat’dy arvo though

    Lizzie, I was an early reader, and not always of books, quite often comics!
    I still recall being hauled over the coals by my year 2 teacher, a straight-laced, opaque stockinged and tweed-skirted lady. My sin was to use the vernacular in a composition. “This arvo” was too shocking. It was evidence that I was skating close to the abyss of ignorance, the slippery slope of slang.

  161. Yohan says:

    It might not be entirely equivalent to the meth-dealing bikers you find in the West.

    Ah, the Night Wolves. I see…. its a shame biker groups were not like that here. As you say, local bikie groups are just drug dealers.

  162. Yohan says:

    A large part of the anti-Trump sentiment on the right is from people saying a celebrity and reality TV star can’t be taken seriously in a general election.

    But remember this is a country that elected Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor of California. People take Trump more seriously on business matters than they do the Governator. Once the nomination starts to be sewn up you will see Trump move from firebrand mode into presidential mode, and the polls of electibility will move up.

    Already polls of Republicans, when asked can you see him as a serious contender, have gone from 30% to 70%. This is a raising of the vote ceiling.

  163. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. says:

    It was evidence that I was skating close to the abyss of ignorance, the slippery slope of slang.

    She was right of course. Luckily I am a champion skater. Well, not a champion, but I did make the advanced skating group once. Managed to do a few jumps. Gave it up because pregnant. Hairy kept going because he was not. It was something we decided to learn to do together, like our rock n’roll classes, but we were caught out on both because we’d already done something else together first. 🙂

    However, I can still skate around any slippery slanging slope.

    Hairy preferred the rock n’roll classes to skating. The first instruction was that in rock n’roll the man always leads and the girl always follows; no argument.

    Our one hour of perfect harmony, he always called it.

    And to get back on topic, Trump built a skating rink so his daughter could skate. Good on him.

  164. Alex:

    Your trolling is getting worse. There should always be an element of believability in what you say, or it just gets scrolled past.

    Monty:

    As it shall from now on.You keep on restricting yourself to reading opinions you agree with, Alex. That always works.

    Monty, I don’t buy a car from someone who has ripped me off once. What do you do?

  165. Yobbo says:

    Several months ago Hillary was smashing Sanders everywhere in the polls. Then events happened. The current national polling matchups are a waste of time and reveal nothing as to who will eventually win the general election.

    The Dems are still smashing Republicans in every poll and will continue to do so for the rest of time. The Republican party is done. There simply aren’t enough conservatives left in America to elect them. Keep in mind that the US republican party is drastically more culturally conservative than any equivalent right of centre party in any other English-speaking country. They are an anachronism.

    Democrats are 3/5 on vs Republicans at 5/4. Difficult to get more uneven odds in a 2 horse race.

  166. JC says:

    A large part of the anti-Trump sentiment on the right is from people saying a celebrity and reality TV star can’t be taken seriously in a general election.

    Not true.

    But remember this is a country that elected Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor of California. People take Trump more seriously on business matters than they do the Governator. Once the nomination starts to be sewn up you will see Trump move from firebrand mode into presidential mode, and the polls of electibility will move up.

    We’ll see.

    Already polls of Republicans, when asked can you see him as a serious contender, have gone from 30% to 70%. This is a raising of the vote ceiling.

    Yea right.

    Indictee vs Trump

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

    The Communist vs Trump the spread is actually bigger

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html

    Some of you Trumpets are just making shit up as you go along. It’s like you’re all in a trance.

    Current polls show that Trump would lose big against both candidates – incredibly, bigger against the communist.

  167. JC says:

    Cruz does hugely better

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

    If some of you think Trump will do better if he gets the nomination, well that’s a bet you’re having against the polls that suggest otherwise. Good luck with that.

  168. C.L. says:

    There simply aren’t enough conservatives left in America to elect them.

    How did George W. Bush get elected twice, then?
    Did America fill up with communists in seven years?
    US governors right now: 39 Republicans, 18 Democrats, one independent.

  169. srr says:

    War.

    Who do want backing you?

    Maybe a guy who doesn’t want military bases to be gun free zones, where only your enemy is equipped to kill your soldiers, and no soldiers are equipped to defend themselves or their base.

    Maybe a guy who would have liked Parisians to be able to shoot back at the enemy slaughtering them.

    Maybe a guy who can look around his audience and take comfort in spotting the likely gun carrying men and women.

    Maybe a guy who wants his Nation’s soldiers to be equipped with what they want and need to do their job, instead of the crap equipment that Washington’s lobbyist force on them instead.

    Maybe a guy like that.
    Maybe a guy like this –

    Listen from 1:29 …

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/02/12/donald-trump-rally-tampa-florida-usf-sun-dome-700pm-est-live-stream/#more-112302

  170. Tel says:

    Ah, the Night Wolves. I see…. its a shame biker groups were not like that here. As you say, local bikie groups are just drug dealers.

    I think there’s a limit to how much the Kremlin can afford to pay, and selling drugs is one the whole a pretty good earner. Score one point to free enterprise and natural property rights I guess.

    Our local boys also burn down a tattoo shop now and then, if that counts for anything.

  171. incoherent rambler says:

    Yep, people around the water cooler are …

    I never touch the stuff. It ruins the whisky.

  172. Infidel Tiger says:

    All the match up polls show Trump would energise the Democrats Voting bloc.

    If you think he fires up Republicans just wait and see what he does to Democrats.

    Which is very strange because Trump is an old school Democrat.

  173. JC says:

    CL

    The Kenyan received 10 million less votes in 2012 than he did in 2008. He still beat Romney by around 2 million votes.

    How did George W. Bush get elected twice, then?

    It was 11 years ago. For instance Reagan won California and New York. It was the last time a Republican has won those two huge states. It’s not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

    Did America fill up with communists in seven years?

    It has since 2004. Big time.

    US governors right now: 39 Republicans, 18 Democrats, one independent.

    Means nothing without the big states. Gubernatorial elections are not the same as national elections.

  174. JC says:

    How did George W. Bush get elected twice, then?

    One election was basically a toss up. Luckily he got through the SCOTUS, He certainly won but it was by a couple of thousand votes.

  175. Token says:

    The Republican party is done. There simply aren’t enough conservatives left in America to elect them. Keep in mind that the US republican party is drastically more culturally conservative than any equivalent right of centre party in any other English-speaking country. They are an anachronism.

    Not sure about this narrative, but keep believing if that makes you happy.

    Even in the 2012 Obama wave the GOP kept the house. As we discussed at the time, the seats are gerrymandered, by D’rats to keep the black & hispanics in their own electorates and away from the whites.

  176. Token says:

    But remember this is a country that elected Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor of California. People take Trump more seriously on business matters than they do the Governator. Once the nomination starts to be sewn up you will see Trump move from firebrand mode into presidential mode, and the polls of electibility will move up.

    We’ll see.

    Schwarzenegger & Jesse “The Body” Ventura have left Republicans with a bad taste over the way such candidates go. They spend a year doing good things and then the rest of their term pandering to the hard left in desperate attempts to get love from the media.

  177. sdfc says:

    Trump’s a wacky protectionist who thinks the Mexicans and Chinese are ripping the seppos off by supplying them with cheap goods.

  178. srr says:

    War.

    Trump on deals with the enemy, where the enemy gets everything and you get less than nothing.

    Trump on the traitor Bergdahl.

    Trump on why he would not have done those deals, and how he would deal with traitors and the enemy.

    Yeah, no wonder so many anti-patriot, open border, free [to screw your nation for your personal wants] traders, are so anti-Trump –

    From 1:49 –

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/02/12/donald-trump-rally-tampa-florida-usf-sun-dome-700pm-est-live-stream/#more-112302

  179. Yohan says:

    JC, your not bothering to read what I wrote. I said polls of electability among Republicans, have moved from 30% to 70%. These are questions like “Can you see Donald Trump as being leader of the Republican party”

    His potential vote ceiling among Republican voters has moved up drastically in the last few months. That’s why those voter matchup polls means nothing until the nominations is done for bother parties.

    I remember the same thing when Schwarzenegger was running for Governor. People were laughing, saying he’s a joke, that no-one will vote for him or take him seriously. I can guarantee you his matchup polls would have been low in the early days.

  180. cohenite says:

    Islam, alarmism and the left shithole press and ancillary pernicious influences in the bureaucracies and academia; who is the best candidate to take them on?

  181. JC says:

    Yohan

    I did read it. Who cares how he travels among GOP’ers.

    That’s fine, keep praying.

  182. Token says:

    Another Cruz ad, this one on Trump and eniment domain

  183. srr says:

    cohenite
    #1944592, posted on February 13, 2016 at 7:22 pm

    Islam, alarmism and the left shithole press and ancillary pernicious influences in the bureaucracies and academia; who is the best candidate to take them on?

    Trump.

    I base that on how much he is like my best friend.

  184. Infidel Tiger says:

    Your best friend is like Trump?

    I am intrigued to say the least.

  185. JC says:

    What meds is he on, USSR?

  186. srr says:

    Don’t stress yourselves, there are more people in the world like that, than you could imagine 😉

  187. Infidel Tiger says:

    Is his hair distracting or do the nurses gel it down?

  188. alexnoaholdmate says:

    If some of you think Trump will do better if he gets the nomination, well that’s a bet you’re having against the polls that suggest otherwise. Good luck with that.

    As I’ve said, I really don’t think the polls say much this far out. Whoever the Republican nominee is, they will win – barring a Trump third party run that splits the vote. Win the nomination, win the White House.

    But it seems a lot of people on here are telling us Trump is the only one who can win, and use polling to try to back this statement up.

    Yet Cruz and Rubio both beat Clinton convincingly in the polls, whereas Trump does not. So where does this line keep coming from?

  189. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Who do want backing you?

    Maybe a guy who would have liked Parisians to be able to shoot back at the enemy slaughtering them, etc…

    False dilemma. Just because Trump believes in all these things (or claims to – his policies change every day, and he often denies he even said what he announced just the day before) doesn’t mean the other candidates don’t.

    Cruz and Rubio, for example, have been pretty damn tough when it comes to the second amendment and have talked a lot about the disaster that is America’s declining influence in the world today.

  190. srr says:

    … and there are way too bloody many like this –

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/cruz-body-of-christ-575×310.jpg

    Ted Cruz Says He’s Not Running For “Pastor in Chief”
    …But Will Still Deliver Sermon at South Carolina Church Sunday

    Ted Cruz is sounding more like a preacher than a politician these last few weeks.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/ted-cruz-says-hes-not-running-for-pastor-in-chief-but-will-deliver-sermon-at-south-carolina-church-sunday/

  191. C.L. says:

    Republicans have more than double the gubernatorial mansions the Democrats have.
    Over the past 50 years, Republican presidents have occupied the White House for 28 years.
    Don’t take any notice of Yobbo’s bullshit about disappearing conservatives.
    That’s just prolegomena to the boilerplate insistence that the GOP must abandon ‘social issues’ and Christianity and re-badge itself as the home of surpluses and gay weddings.
    Won’t happen, shouldn’t happen. First, the Democrats do that better. Second – and more importantly – the key to reducing government and bolstering liberties is to smash the left in social and cultural arenas. For it is in these arenas that extravagance and tyranny have arisen over the past few decades. The Republicans have to fight the good fight. A good start would be a president who cannot be dragged down by traditional media-boosted leftist gotchas. Nobody looks remotely likely to get to the Oval Office having done that. Trump is the closest thing we’ve seen to that possibility since Reagan.

  192. JC says:

    Republicans have more than double the gubernatorial mansions the Democrats have.

    Sure, but they never carry that to the national elections. The big states win the elections for the D’rats.

    Over the past 50 years, Republican presidents have occupied the White House for 28 years.

    Sure, but history is not important as to how they will go now. The numbers are stacked up against them.

    Don’t take any notice of Yobbo’s bullshit about disappearing conservatives.

    I don’t. Yobbo is a good guy, but he’s just being an idiot. Repubs aren’t disappearing. It’s just there are far more D’rat supporters.

    That’s just prolegomena to the boilerplate insistence that the GOP must abandon ‘social issues’ and Christianity and re-badge itself as the home of surpluses and gay weddings.

    Yobbo wishes that.

    Won’t happen, shouldn’t happen. First, the Democrats do that better. Second – and more importantly – the key to reducing government and bolstering liberties is to smash the left in social and cultural arenas. For it is in these arenas that extravagance and tyranny have arisen over the past few decades. The Republicans have to fight the good fight. A good start would be a president who cannot be dragged down by traditional media-boosted leftist gotchas. Nobody looks remotely likely to get to the Oval Office having done that. Trump is the closest thing we’ve seen to that possibility since Reagan.

    I think the demographics are on the D’rat side. They have a lock on all the big urban centres which is where all the votes are.

    The population was around 300 million when I left. It’s over 320 million now.

  193. alexnoaholdmate says:

    Trump is the closest thing we’ve seen to that possibility since Reagan.

    Perhaps. I’d prefer Cruz in that respect. He refuses to kowtow to the media, and has given them some really bloody noses. He refuses to bow to the Washington way of doing things – look at how he stood firm in Iowa against the ethanol pork barrelling, and even picked up votes because of it. If he believes an unpopular position is nevertheless the correct position, he’ll say so.

    He’s been unflinching in his condemnation of climate change fanatics, gun control zealots, the EPA, the gay marriage lobby (whatever you might think of gay marriage itself, the Supreme Court certainly made up out of thin air a Constitutional ‘right’ to it. And Cruz has said so).

    And unlike Trump, he seems to respect that document that is meant to form the basis of things over there. The Constitution.

    This is not an endorsement of Cruz – merely yet another example of how anything Trump can do, others can do better.

  194. JC says:

    CL

    The D’rats own, yes own, California, New York, Illinois, Virginia and Philly. Florida used to be strongly GOP and now it’s a swing state. Ohio seems to go D’rat now too.

    The GOP can win, but it’s path is very narrow.

  195. MD says:

    I spend a lot of time analysing the leftist mind in order to understand their sicknesses, which, I have to say, are all pretty straightforward. Whether it is:

    – their obsession with illegals, to the exclusion of all else – especially, you will note, all of the disadvantaged people in our own community;
    – their willingness to politically exploit minorities to the great detriment of those minorities – note, for example, the Left’s campaigns against resources developments;
    – their obsession with ‘renewables’;
    – their embracing of all of the groups in society whom they see as ‘victims of society’;
    – their hatred of the notion of ‘middle Australia’ living in a safe, prosperous, cohesive, happy society;
    – their desire to vandalise everything mainstream in society;
    – their propensity to see everything in the context of an ‘us against them’ conflict;
    – their desire to destroy wealth and to stop aspirational people from moving ahead in life;
    – their desire to use politics and government power to punish those they hate or disagree with;
    – the desire those who have decided they are an elite have to rub it in the faces of the less-well-off; or
    – their desire to destroy the heritage and culture of ‘mainstream Australia’ – the so-called ‘republic’ being a typical example,

    all of these actions and desires of the Left can be traced directly to narcissism or self-loathing (amusing, isn’t it, that amongst the Left we find people from the opposite ends of the self-esteem spectrum) or just to plain old lack of intelligence – for example, we know that many on the Left display a child-like naivety on the subjects of climate ‘change’ and ‘renewables’.

    But I am having difficulty with something, and readers of this blog might be able to assist. I’ve been trying to bed down exactly what is happening in the leftist mind vis-a-vis the Sanders/Clinton tussle for the Democratic endorsement. Sanders is apparently an old-school socialist, one who claims to believe that the state can and should help the poor and downtrodden (whereas the truth is that the state is the cause of poverty and the disenfranchising of the people). Is Bernie’s belief in old-school socialism well-intentioned though naive, or does he, like most politicians, simply see it as a means to exploit a particular constituency for his own ends? We can never really know the answer to that question.

    Clinton on the other hand is big and old money Establishment. She is backed by the big end of town, including big business, big public and private institutions and the big advocacy organisations that themselves have evolved into big businesses, far removed from grassroots advocacy on actual issues that matter to ordinary people. The Establishment, too, is a big business, but it is also a social network, a closed society whose members use power structures such as government to advance their own financial and social interests and those of their acquaintances – they use the positions they hold in trust to advance their own interests, they trade inside information, they promote their own, they protect their own, and they take a certain malicious pleasure from excluding others from their exalted ranks and also from rubbing the faces of the less fortunate in their power and wealth. In exchange for this abuse of public trust, they very occasionally will throw a few scraps to the people who are stupid enough to believe in them.

    That then begs the question: why are the Left in Australia, such as many at the ABC, doing their utmost to promote Clinton rather than Sanders? Wouldn’t you think that ABC-type leftists would be drawn romantically to the folksy, old-school socialism that Sanders appears to embody? Wouldn’t you think that he ticks all the right boxes for those who claim to be genuinely concerned about power imbalances in society? It appears not. When trying to answer this I first looked at the most obvious things. Perhaps it is a climate change ‘thing’. But, no, Bernie’s website contains all the usual leftist drivel about fossil fuels, renewables and taxes.

    In trying to understand why the Left would embrace the elite rather than the downtrodden, we have to be mindful that, as psychologists will tell you, nothing is random – there is a reason for everything that people do. Since leftists in Australia receive no direct benefit from the results of the presidential campaign, the rewards they take from it must be psychological, or, to be more accurate, they must provide some form of psychological relief from one or more of their many sicknesses. That is where we will find the answer. Here’s what I’ve come up with so far. Other contributions are welcome.

    – Women who believe that being a woman makes you a victim of society are naturally drawn to a female candidate, or, more correctly, to the non-male candidate;
    – Sanders is popular with white blue-collar workers (a constituency that the Democrats alienated decades ago), whereas Clinton is popular with the New Left (such as the green-left types in the media) – that is, those who have deluded themselves into believing they are part of an ‘elite’. The New Left have nothing but contempt for blue-collar workers, whom they regard as little more than ‘drunken white racists’. And, after all, how can you distinguish yourself as part of an ‘elite’ unless you cast others in a disparaging light. Naturally, the New Left don’t want to be associated in any way with the unwashed masses who comprise Bernie’s constituency;
    – Those more generally who believe they are ‘victims of society’ will naturally blame it on the dominant power in society, which they wrongly perceive as being white, conservative males. The aggrieved Left are inclined to believe the long-propagated MYTH that the Democrats are the antithesis of this, so they see a vote for the Democrats as a vote against the power holders in society who have made them into victims. This explains why they vote Democrat, but it does not explain why they support Clinton rather than Sanders. The reason is simple. Conservatives do not see Sanders as a threat. Instead, they see him as somewhat of a curiosity, but largely harmless. On the other hand, Clinton is openly loathed by many conservatives, not for her beliefs (whatever they are) but for what she has done and for what she represents. So, naturally, all of the aggrieved Left are drawn to Clinton, their enemy’s enemy, rather than to Sanders;
    – The New Left will always support the Establishment, meaning Clinton. They see it as edifying to associate themselves with big money and big power. Subconsciously, it makes them feel that they are a part of it all, which, of course, reinforces their puerile belief that they are somehow ‘special’;
    – Those we think of as the naive Left – the ones who respond to simple messages about climate change and such – are drawn to the Establishment for similar reasons. These are often well-intentioned people, but they are unable to reason through complex issues. They are drawn to the symbolism and slogans of the Establishment but they are unable to comprehend that while symbolism and slogans might make you feel good they will not solve problems. They will vote for ‘hopey changey’ not because of a stated agenda to reform something, but simply because it seems ‘good’. They see a need for change but they do not understand how to define it or bring it about. In their minds, ‘likes’ on Facebook and fashionable bumper stickers are the solution to all problems.

    Can you add more to the list?

  196. m0nty says:

    CL

    The D’rats own, yes own, California, New York, Illinois, Virginia and Philly. Florida used to be strongly GOP and now it’s a swing state. Ohio seems to go D’rat now too.

    The GOP can win, but it’s path is very narrow.

    When Texas turns blue, as looks inevitable given demographic shifts, the only thing the GOP will have left are gerrymanders.

  197. srr says:

    Politico:
    Trump Freezes Establishment Mega-Donors in Place


    Some of the biggest Republican donors, who collectively have contributed tens of millions of dollars to shape the presidential race, are tightening their purse strings out of frustration with their inability to boost their favored candidates, or to slow Donald Trump.

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/02/12/politico-trump-freezes-establishment-mega-donors-in-place/

  198. C.L. says:

    When Texas turns blue …

    What a perfect description of the process.
    But anyway … the same thing was said about the Irish. Everyone seen Gangs of New York?
    Who do the ‘Irish’ vote for now? Both parties.
    Try again.

  199. JC says:

    But anyway … the same thing was said about the Irish. Everyone seen Gangs of New York?
    Who do the ‘Irish’ vote for now? Both parties.
    Try again.

    I recall reading that it took 80 years for Italian Americans to start voting majority GOP. Eighty years!

    I would guess that it was about the same for the Irish too.

  200. Fisky says:

    There needs to be an immigration pause, just like after 1925. Have a 40 year breather to give the existing migrant population a chance to rise up through the classes.

  201. Ant says:

    Monty-type thinking:

    GOP gerrymandering: Bad!

    Dems changing the demographics of a state through illegal immigration: Good!

  202. m0nty says:

    But anyway … the same thing was said about the Irish. Everyone seen Gangs of New York?
    Who do the ‘Irish’ vote for now? Both parties.

    IIRC, the Irish had some legitimate beefs with the way the Protestants treated them. Kind of like the beefs that Latinos currently have with the way Republicans want to treat them.

  203. m0nty says:

    Ant, the demographics are already changed, the illegals already live there and pay taxes.

  204. Fisky says:

    Illegals pay virtually nothing in taxes. Zilch.

  205. srr says:

    Chilling claims ISIS have ‘gained NEW WEAPONS’
    as they ‘shoot down Libyan jet’

    A FIGHTER jet has been shot down over the Libyan city of Benghazi in the latest chilling attack that has been claimed by Islamic State militants.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643739/Chilling-claims-ISIS-have-gained-NEW-WEAPONS-as-they-shoot-down-Libyan-jet

    EUROPE TERROR WARNING:
    Another ISIS attack WILL happen, warns French PM

    ISLAMIC State (ISIS) will carry out another “major” terror attack in Europe, the French prime minister has warned.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643750/ISIS-terror-warning-Europe-attack-French-PM-Manuel-Vall

    yeah but there’s no war to worry about, so just trust traders who tell you Cruz will pray the avowed enemies of Christians into behaving themselves, letting you get rich and keep everything that’s yours … like your wives, sons, daughters …

  206. alexnoaholdmate says:

    yeah but there’s no war to worry about, so just trust traders who tell you Cruz will pray the avowed enemies of Christians into behaving themselves, letting you get rich and keep everything that’s yours … like your wives, sons, daughters …

    This is really off the plantation stuff.

    I’m sorry, but if you’re convinced from a few speeches – almost none of which mention foreign affairs at all – that Donald Trump is the scourge of ISIS, and that they’re all quaking in their boots over there at the thought of a Trump victory, then there’s not much point in arguing anymore.

  207. Infidel Tiger says:

    Right of centre politicians are absolutely scheizenhaus at selling right of centre policies. They are incapable of explaining the positives of their agenda.

    Unless you can explain why the free market, smaller government, less regulation and lower taxes benefit everyone, then just shut up. Right wingers are great at pointing out problems and who is causing them but hopeless at explaining why the pain of fixing that problem will be so much better for people.

    That’s why Trump will be the greatest missed opportunity of the next 20 years at least. If he was running on policies that promised to make America great again by returning to the limited government model clearly outlined in the instruction manual for the United Stated, otherwise known as the the constitution, it would be an incredible and powerful movement that could cement in him in history with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Reagan. Then all the Presidents that followed him could be as awesome as Coolidge.

    He’s identified all the problems but is very wrong with most of his solutions. Fixing an out of control behemoth like the US Government does not involve getting better people in to run it. If trump was selling Cruz’s policies this would be the start of a new golden age. Promising to better manage all the current failed policies is just feeding the beast.

  208. Infidel Tiger says:

    Ant, the demographics are already changed, the illegals already live there and pay taxes.

    The only taxes they pay are sales taxes.

    The lucky nuggets live in the shadows, collecting all the benefits of big government, but without ever having to deal with the associated tyranny of the bureacracy and parasitical tax theft that goes with it.

  209. JC says:

    The lucky nuggets live in the shadows, collecting all the benefits of big government, but without ever having to deal with the associated tyranny of the bureacracy and parasitical tax theft that goes with it.

    Their incomes would most likely be too low to attract tax anyway .

  210. sdfc says:

    A plan to spend bucket load of money reducing the size of your labour force. Doesn’t sound all that small government.

    The immigrants pay around $12 billion in tax some of it income and property taxes. They would likely pay more tax if their labour was legalised. Best to round them up though apparently.

  211. m0nty says:

    Lucky nuggets, eh IT?

    Living on the poverty line with no legal status, no vote, no health care, no government services and no security. Sounds lucky.

  212. Cheryl says:

    They may as well have stayed home then Monty.

  213. Stimpson J. Cat says:

    Living on the poverty line with no legal status, no vote, no health care, no government services and no security. Sounds lucky.

    Yes Monty you’re right.
    It’s our job to save them from having to take responsibility for their own actions and choices.

  214. Stimpson J. Cat says:

    When was the last time you ever heard a real alien from another planet complain about healthcare, or votes, or services?
    Never.
    Because they are just happy to be here.

  215. Token says:

    Living on the poverty line with no legal status, no vote, no health care, no government services and no security. Sounds lucky.

    They can get on a cheap plane flight and return home if it was truly as dire as your fantasy writing suggests.

    They do not. This tells us you are full of bs M0nty.

  216. Infidel Tiger says:

    There are ways to work around it. You have to remove all incentives for those currently there and wanting to get there illegally.

    Deport every single illegal who has committed a fine.

    No path to citizenship for anyone not arriving by legal means including their offspring.

    Institute a hefty levy that allows those currently working to remain in the US. Make it sizeable. If they or their employer can’t or won’t pay it, deport them immediately. Make it payable every year or two.

    Ban all money transfers to Mexico from the United States by non-citizens or better still make them pay a 50% tax.

    Then you move on to massive financial and criminal penalties for those harbouring, employing or helping illegals gain false ID papers etc.

    And for all the industries who will suffer from the removal of illegal labor and depress the economy create a strict guest worker visa that is only available to those not residing in the US.

    Take away all incentives for illegal entry and promote the chances of those the enter legally.

  217. Token says:

    A plan to spend bucket load of money reducing the size of your labour force. Doesn’t sound all that small government.

    It is not small government to have taxpayers subsidise non citizens. This leads to ever bloating government.

  218. Infidel Tiger says:

    Living on the poverty line with no legal status, no vote, no health care, no government services and no security. Sounds lucky.

    They still manage to access government services. It’s crazy.

  219. srr says:

    alexnoaholdmate
    #1944745, posted on February 13, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    yeah but there’s no war to worry about, so just trust traders who tell you Cruz will pray the avowed enemies of Christians into behaving themselves, letting you get rich and keep everything that’s yours … like your wives, sons, daughters …

    This is really off the plantation stuff.

    Yes.

    It’s off the plantation, out of the jungle, on he trains, planes and trucks, in the streets, in the shops and theaters, in peoples homes throughout once civilised, major western cities … and all your bullshit about trusting some unholy roller to fix what none of you can even admit is The Problem, is just playing traitorous politics for (very temporary), personal gain.

  220. Fisky says:

    The immigrants pay around $12 billion in tax some of it income and property taxes. They would likely pay more tax if their labour was legalised. Best to round them up though apparently.

    Illegal immigrants receive far more in benefits than they pay in taxes.

  221. alexnoaholdmate says:

    It’s off the plantation, out of the jungle, on he trains, planes and trucks, in the streets, in the shops and theaters, in peoples homes throughout once civilised, major western cities … and all your bullshit about trusting some unholy roller to fix what none of you can even admit is The Problem, is just playing traitorous politics for (very temporary), personal gain.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I give you – the Trumpbot.

    It’s not all that different to the Obamabot, frankly. It just pretends to be from the other side.

  222. StraightShooter says:

    At this late hour I doubt anyone will read this, but here goes:
    Steve, you couldn’t be more right, and Sinc, you couldn’t be more wrong.

    I’ve been watching trump for months and he is the real deal. He loves America and he wants to do the best he can for it.

    No other candidate can say the same. Jeb! is a goober, Cruz and Rubio are both one world globalists, Kasich, Sanders and Clinton are even worse.

    Trump has always done,and will always do everything he needs to to achieve his goal.

    Pay the Dems, sure why not, if it made him money in the past.

    But NOW, NOW he isn’t fighting for Trump, he’s fighting for America; and heaven help anyone who gets in his way.

    Trump is not a Democrat, Trump is not a Republican, and Trump is not a Libertarian; Trump is an American Citizen.

    In politics, that is a difficult thing to come to terms with; one who, when he decides to do something, sticks to his guns – a rare man indeed.

    Sure, he has dealt with the devil, but that was within his objective (to enrich himself) but now he has decided to enrich America again,and the devil better watch out.

    Trump is a unique man, better, I think, than even Steve gives him credit for; Trump is something the world hasn’t seen in politics since the founding fathers, a true patriot.

  223. BorisG says:

    Shorter Kates:

    1) The world is free falling into the Abyss.
    2) The only chance to stop this fall is to elect Trump.

    I do not know whether to cry or laugh. Trump is definitely a good entertainer (for those who like these vulgar jokes). Press loves him (even when they pretend to hate him) because Trump sells papers. He might even be the best man for the job (from a pretty unpleasant set of choices).

  224. BorisG says:

    (continuing) BUT TRUMP IS NO MESSIAH.

    The world is in crisis but not falling into the abyss. And Trump might become a good president but is not a messiah. Those thinking he is the saviour are delusional. They need to check their medicine.

  225. Makka says:

    “A plan to spend bucket load of money reducing the size of your labour force.’

    Cheap labour trumps sovereignty? Nah.

    11 million of which how many actually work- a few million- departing gradually over 4 years? In a massive economy where 120 million work. To what extent would that even impact labour costs other than a transitory one off kind of effect. Pretty minimal I’d say.

    Deportation sends the right message: borders matter.

  226. BorisG says:

    MD:

    That then begs the question: why are the Left in Australia, such as many at the ABC, doing their utmost to promote Clinton rather than Sanders?

    Simple: Because old school socialism is out of fashion.

  227. BorisG says:

    and also because Sanders is too old.

  228. BorisG says:

    Yep, Trump for Prez (to set the agenda) and Cruz for VP (to do the work) would be the optimum solution.

    Name one VP ever who ran the government, or was close to ANY decision making.

  229. srr says:

    Trump predicts REVOLUTIONS across Europe as a result of immigration

    US PRESIDENTIAL hopeful Donald Trump has sent an ominous message to Europeans, predicting “revolutions” across the continent as a response to mass immigration.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643281/Trump-predicts-REVOLUTIONS-Europe-immigration-refugees-Merkel
    _____________

    The small port about to become the new Calais as migrants dodge security to reach Britain

    MIGRANTS are ditching Calais to make their bids for Britain from the Belgian port of Zeebrugge, sparking fears a new Jungle shanty camp is about to sprout up.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/643611/Zeebrugge-Calais-Jungle-Belgium-France-migrants-crisis-refugees-Europe

  230. Zatara says:

    Schwarzenegger & Jesse “The Body” Ventura have left Republicans with a bad taste over the way such candidates go.

    Don’t know why they would care about Ventura as he wasn’t a Republican.

  231. C.L. says:

    At least Schwarzenegger was elected and re-elected.
    The GOP establishment gave the Republican base John McCain and Mitt Romney.
    Losers.

  232. Fisky says:

    Brilliant Florida rally speech by Trump. The hostility to Jeb! is incredible. They really fucking hate him.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ3bm5zoMQw

  233. Zatara says:

    Infidel Tiger
    #1944775, posted on February 13, 2016 at 11:31 pm
    There are ways to work around it. You have to remove all incentives for those currently there and wanting to get there illegally.

    Deport every single illegal who has committed a fine.

    If fine = crime, yes.

    And for all the industries who will suffer from the removal of illegal labor and depress the economy create a strict guest worker visa that is only available to those not residing in the US.

    Add in the end of 8 years of “unemployment compensation” and EBT, also known as the lazy man’s gravytrain (which plenty of illegal aliens are on as well), and watch those jobs that “Americans won’t take” start filling in with people who want to eat.

    Otherwise, spot on IT.

  234. srr says:

    Now John Kerry intervenes over Brexit:
    US Secretary of State tells Brits to STAY in EU

    THE United States’s top diplomat has urged the UK to abandon dreams of a Brexit and stay in the EU.

    Now, Consider – the EU is at war against Judeo/Christian Western Europe, as demonstrated by attacking them with the floods of foreign armies of Muslims.

    Brits want to get out and wash their hands of the EU.

    The ‘wests‘/UN & EU nations interference in the MENA only results in building and arming more Muslim Armies, and creating floods of “refugees“/Muslim infiltrators into Western Judeo/Christian countries.

    EU/UN monster keeps scratching it’s two heads over why it ‘can’t defeatISIS/Islam, and wringing it’s tentacles over the many millions of MUSLIM “refugees“/”migrants” it needs to take in and settle in Western Judeo/Christian countries.

    The Communist ‘pope’ and Evil Obama keep telling the world to suck up to Islam.

    Communist Defeating, Christian Russia, comes in and kicks ISIS/Murderous Muslim Hordes filthy arses.

    The EU/UN and Washington scream, “Russia is trying to start WW3!

    Trump says America should be working with Russia to defeat the Murderous Muslim Hordes.

    Of course the Militant Atheist, UN & EU captured US and UK, are desperate to stop Trump.

    Trump and Putin have the working relationship and Will, to Do The Deal to Defeat the Global Militant Atheist’s, Muslim Trojan Hordes.

  235. srr says:

    Donald J. Trump [email protected] 8 hours ago

    “@jd4160: Nice column by Bill Donahue, head of Catholic League.
    He’s a blue collar New Yorker and gets it

    http://www.newsmax.com/BillDonohue/trump-election-vote/2016/02/10/id/713649/ …”


    How is it possible for a billionaire to connect to blue-collar workers but polished politicians cannot? Because Trump speaks their language: He is bold and decisive, and he is not owned by the political class.

    Regarding the latter, he is not surrounded by big donors, consultants, handlers, pollsters, and lobbyists who seek to manipulate the public. This is music to the ears of blue-collar men and women.

    The political class is so well orchestrated, so fine-tuned, that it lacks the kind of authenticity that appeals to the working class. The jeans, boots, and lunch-bucket guys and gals like their politics straight up — they can spot a phony a mile away. Moreover, they like those who (unlike Mitt Romney) are not apologetic about their wealth. After all, they want to be rich, too, and if they can’t be, they want their kids and grandkids to be.

    Who speaks for cops, firefighters, construction workers, barbers, bus drivers, bartenders, small businessmen, truckers, military personnel, and the like? Who of the candidates, save for Trump, can relate to their alienation? Many of these workers are veterans, and they have no patience for those who commit troops abroad but won’t let them finish the job.

    … When conservative pundits tout the virtues of immigration, saying nothing about the free ride that illegal aliens are getting, they are treating workers with contempt.

    Similarly, when blue-collar jobs are being lost to nations who don’t believe in reciprocity, conservatives who tout the virtues of free trade sound like professors who never left the comfort zone of their library carrel.

  236. srr says:

    Donald J. Trump [email protected] 6 hours ago
    “@wino911: #Trump2016 We know better than to trust the RNC “
    So cute!

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    2,609 retweets 6,338 likes

  237. Muddy says:

    MD.
    I like your thinking. This is something ‘we’ haven’t been much good at previously: figuring out why a percentage of the general population are drawn to the policies of our ideological enemies, and asking “How can we provide the same emotional/psychological rewards by substituting our narrative/values?”
    How is it that the population does not see through the insincerity and manipulation of our self-appointed New Elite, our Moral Superiors and Future Benign Overlords, who use such concepts as ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’ as a means to their own narcitopic ends? The narrative, while containing a kernel of truth, is tailored to provide a psychological reward to those of its audience who embrace it. Beautiful propaganda.

    I won’t offer my thoughts on Trump et al, as I’m still quite uncertain and a little confused, but if a true conservative here in Australia is not paying close attention to the strategies and tactics, particularly in relation to the media, then an opportunity to learn is going begging.

  238. srr says:


    Bush brought up Trump’s name unprompted in order to question the real-estate developer’s plans to combat the Islamic State in the Middle East. Bush said it was “ludicrous” to support Russia helping the US out in Syria, as Trump has done.

    “Let me just tell you this: Jeb is so wrong. Jeb is absolutely so — ah,” Trump began.

    A chorus of booed in the audience interrupted Trump, who then suggested that the crowd was stacked with pro-Bush elites in the GOP establishment.

    “Just so you understand: You know who that is? That’s Jeb’s special interests and lobbyists talking,” Trump continued.

    Trump took another shot at the audience shortly after. The crowd loudly booed Trump when he mocked Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), for having “0%” in the polls before dropping out of the presidential race and endorsing Bush.

    “I only tell the truth, lobbyists,” Trump told the people booing him. “We’ve spent $5 trillion all over the Middle East. We have to rebuild our country.”

    http://www.businessinsider.com.au/donald-trump-jeb-bush-gop-debate-boo-2016-2?r=US&IR=T

  239. srr says:

    FireAm 85?????? ??????????? says:
    February 13, 2016 at 10:02 pm

    This “show” is nothing but a farce to attack Trump.
    Jeb is a complete moron, he is mentally off, truly. Rubio has his talking poinst down, (questions in advance)? and Raphael Jr. is a loathsome, Canadian/Cuban infiltrator. Kasich is mimicking DT positons and Carson as usual doesn’t stand up for himself and has the fastest time ticker.
    The RNC should be embarrassed, but I know they are not.
    ___________

    emma says:
    February 13, 2016 at 9:55 pm

    Here is the difference; Jeb’s anger is badly concealed and motivated by insecurity. Trump’s anger is explosive and RIGHTEOUS.

    And the viewers can see this, no matter what CBS or the GOPe do.
    _______________

    parteagirl says:
    February 13, 2016 at 9:58 pm

    Great point. Trump’s anger is directed at the situation America is in.
    Jeb’s anger is directed at the situation HE is in.

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/02/13/cbs-news-republican-debate-900pm-est-open-discussion-thread/comment-page-8/#comments

  240. Makka says:

    “How is it that the population does not see through the insincerity and manipulation of our self-appointed New Elite, our Moral Superiors and Future Benign Overlords, who use such concepts as ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’ as a means to their own narcitopic ends?”

    Free stuff. As long as the free stuff keeps rolling out , the punters will swallow the bullsh*t every time. There are now too many households dependant on Govt transfers for it to be any other way. This is why the 2 main parties are now left of centre.

Comments are closed.