Sorry, Donald, this is just wrong. It’s why I don’t like you

Loading

orange trump a

 

Donald Trump hurled some personal invective at Carly Fiorina yesterday:

The GOP front-runner added to his ever-expanding laundry list of questionable comments aimed at women with a knock at Carly Fiorina’s physical appearance made during a recent interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

“Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?” Trump reportedly bellowed while watching his Republican presidential rival on the news. “I mean, she’s a woman, and I’m not s’posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?”

In the face of criticism, Trump backtracked- sort of:

But asked Thursday on Fox News whether he was talking about Fiorina’s physical appearance, Trump insisted he wasn’t: “No,” he said, he was speaking about “the persona, the persona.”

“I say that about a lot of people,” he said. “I say look at that. Look at that — how does that — that’s not our president. That’s not going to be our president!”

“Probably I did say something like that about Carly,” Trump added, but “I’m talking about persona. I’m not talking about looks.”

Bullsh*t.

Trump has a history of real nastiness with women. He alluded to Megyn Kelly menstruating:

“She gets out and starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions,” Trump told Lemon. “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”

Trump also called Kelly a “bimbo” and called Rosie O’Donnell a “fat pig” and a “dog.”

While I am tempted to smirk at the O’Donnell insults, it’s still not fitting of a President. It reminds me of Obama calling Sarah Palin a pig. I’ll have more to say about that soon.

Trump doesn’t simply respond to his opposition in a political manner, he goes ad hominem in a big way.

I don’t like it. It’s not classy. It’s not dignified. It is Trump.

John Nolte says Trump fights like a leftist. He does. Specifically, he fights like Obama. Dirty. That could have been useful channeled properly, but not when he attacks a cancer survivor’s physical appearance- a fellow Republican yet.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
110 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Ditto: Several comments. I’m a conservative. Always been one. Supported Tea party. Supported Ronald Reagan. Hate Boehner and McConnell. Trump is the best answer to the Dimocrats to come along in a long long time. I don’t care if he says Fiorina is ugly, though I don’t think he said that. And he did not allude to Megan having her period. So unless someone unforeseen comes along, I’m gonna be voting for Trump.

@drjohn:

I’ve watched Trump for a long time. I don’t trust him.

Just which politicians do you trust? I suspect most of them say what they think their voters want to hear.

@George Wells: 41

Trump is thinning the field of better candidates,

Trying to figure out who these ‘better candidates’ are. Would you give us a hint?

but maybe James Carville…

No way.

I don’t think Trump is for the Muslims to take over the country as Obama is, and we’ve survived that so far. I do believe he will close the borders.

@Bill, #50:

So, you’re saying you’ll be voting for Trump since he is using the same formula as Obama has?

Oh? Do you think Obama is only telling people what they want to hear?

I suppose that must explain why he has so often taken positions and advanced policies that run contrary to public opinion.

@Redteam:
Carson, Walker, Cruz

#53:

“Trying to figure out who these ‘better candidates’ are. Would you give us a hint?”

Sure. ANY of them. As far as you should be concerned, Trump is a Democrat. He likes single-payer healthcare. Do you remember what that means? He likes the Clintons – do you? He supports gun control – when was the last time the GOP WASN’T in the NRA’s pocket?
You have no idea what Trump really stands for – all he’s doing is parroting whatever he thinks the GOP’s primary voters want to hear, and he’s doing it better that the rest of the GOP hopefuls. Does that make him a better candidate? NO. But at the rate he’s going, he COULD win, because Democrats think he’s a Democrat in disguise, and Republicans think he’s a real Republican. So far, what he has said indicates that what he really is and what he would really do as President is anybody’s guess. You and the rest of voters who are supporting “The Donald” are buying a pig-in-a-poke. I’m not sure that any of you would get your money’s worth.

@Greg:

I suppose that must explain why he has so often taken positions and advanced policies that run contrary to public opinion.

He isn’t running for office now and he is not concerned about votes in Congress… if he wants to do something, he just does it illegally, Constitution be damned.

But when he was running…. hoooooboy! He’s going to secure the border, he’s going to grant amnesty, he’s going to raise taxes, he’s not going to raise taxes, he’s for traditional marriage, he’s for gay “marriage”, he can grant illegal immigrants amnesty, he CAN grant illegal immigrants amnesty.

It all depended upon which group he was talking to…. he promised them all they wanted. So, now you think that is what Trump is doing? I would think that would make you nostalgic.

@George Wells:

You have no idea what Trump really stands for – all he’s doing is parroting whatever he thinks the GOP’s primary voters want to hear,

Is that worse than saying what you know the voters don’t want to hear. If Trump got up there and said: “I’m gonna take down that little bit of border fence we have so the border will be wide open” Would that make you feel worse than it does when Bush and Rubio say the same thing. I mean they say it every time the border fence comes up.

Would you rather hear Trump say: “I’m going to make sure that if a foreign country gets a benefit from foreign trade that the US will share in that benefit” vs what some are the others say ” there ain’t nothing we can do about it but like it”?

Do we have an idea what any candidate means? or stands for? What we have learned is that EVERY politician says what he thinks he needs to say to get elected. None of them have any intention of being constrained by what they say or believe.
So if they won’t even say what you want to hear while they are running for office, do you think they are going to do something different after they get elected? Why?

and Republicans think he’s a real Republican.

I don’t think so. I’m certainly a Republican and I’m not of the opinion that any of the candidates are what a Republican used to be. Now they are all ‘politicians’.

Claribel the Clown is the current front runner for the the GOP’s next presidential candidate, and the only thought some people have on that is Yes, but Obama…

Well, I suppose the election is over a year away. People will surely come to their senses before then.

@Greg #59:

“Well, I suppose the election is over a year away. People will surely come to their senses before then.”

Since you are usually miles ahead of me and dead on-target, I’ll take a tiny little leap and conclude that this last line is undiluted sarcasm. I see no sign of an imminent public awakening.

#58:

You are making the argument that all politicians are worthless, lying scoundrels. So what’s the difference WHO we elect?

“Do we have an idea what any candidate means? or stands for?”

I suspect that when Bernie Sanders says he’s a Socialist, he’s probably telling the truth.

And when Huckabee talks about getting God all tangled in American politics, He probably really does think that that’d be a good thing.

@Greg:

Claribel the Clown

I find it interesting that the Dims have so much to say if Trump refers to someone ‘personally’ but see nothing wrong in doing it themselves. If you’re going to use the term, you might want to look at using it for Obozo.

People will surely come to their senses before then.

Really, and how will we know if/when that happens?

@George Wells:

I suspect that when Bernie Sanders says he’s a Socialist, he’s probably telling the truth.

I would be surprised if he knew what a ‘socialist’ were. I saw a ‘man on the street’ where the question was: “Do you know what a Socialist Democrat is?” and NO ONE knew the answer to the question.

You are making the argument that all politicians are worthless, lying scoundrels

Not true at all. Just the Dimocrats and about half of the Republicans.

“Do we have an idea what any candidate means? or stands for?”

Sure but it doesn’t make a difference. We surely knew what Obozo represented and he still got elected. That is indisputable proof that some people don’t have brains.

@George Wells:

Gee, Dit, isn’t that also exactly what’s happening over at the Republican leadership regarding Trump? Aren’t THEY all afraid that Trump will take them down with him if he wins the nomination?

Who gives a rat’s ass what the Republican leadership wants? Certainly not I. News flash for George: As I have already pointed out in #34 & 35, Trump has support all over the political map from people who are fed up with the Washington DC establishment progressives from both parties and their “business-as-usual” crony capitalism.

I’m not wondering ..

I’ve already said, I really don’t care about what far-left Democrat internet trolls have to say about the Republican primary candidates, as we aren’t out to please you. You worry about your own party..

@Skookum:

Are voters pissed enough to demand an indictment against Hillary if they get the goods on her? I don’t think so, you and I would be facing 20 years in Leavenworth, but Hillary is among the ruling elite and she would never face prison time.

I’d say Hillary going to prison is a mute point, as even if the public did eventually call out for her arrest, the Democrats are going to try to drag this out until after the primaries. The problem for Hillary is that this is simply not going to go away until after the primaries and I think the Hildabeast wants to be president so badly that she’s willing to drag the Democratic primary down with her.. The Democrat DOJ is not going to do a damn thing about her unless Obama orders them to throw her the wolves. (He might just pardon her at the end, just to thumb his nose at Republicans and to get some of the Clinton millions.)

IF we get a conservative Republican nominee AND Obama hasn’t pardoned Hillary, well it is very possible that she might be indicted. (Especially if we get Trey Gowdy as Attorney General.)

McConnell and Boehner need to go, either by primary or recall, they need to stop enabling Obama. They are enemies of the American people.

Absolutely. I think their days are numbered. There are growing numbers of citizens contacting their Rep reps and Senators and demanding those two progressive twits be removed from their leadership positions.

Bad news for Rich Wheeler’s meme on Women hating Trump: CNN Poll: Trump Soars with GOP Women

A new CNN/ORC poll shows that Trump has increased his lead among Republican women, boosting his share to 33% of women voters, up from 20% a month ago.

@Greg: @George Wells: Anyone that voted for Obama does not have the capacity for reasoning and making intelligent decisions to be able to pose an opinion on Republican candidates.

#Bill #67:

“@Greg: @George Wells: Anyone that voted for Obama does not have the capacity for reasoning and making intelligent decisions to be able to pose an opinion on Republican candidates.”

And anyone who wastes his time talking to people who he believes to be irrational and stupid is suffering from a bad case of brain farts precisely because he has his own head stuck up his A$$!

@George Wells: … and then someone comes along and proves my point.

@Bill, #67:

A person doesn’t have to be a genius to figure out that Donald Trump isn’t remotely qualified to be President of the United States. This isn’t even a partisan perspective. The man can’t see beyond the boundaries of his own ego. He’s probably the least qualified of the entire republican field. He’s so psychologically unsuited that he would be dangerous. Giving this guy presidential power would be like trying to put out a fire with gasoline. All he’s actually interested in is the spotlight. I honestly don’t understand how it is that so many people don’t see this.

@Greg:

A person doesn’t have to be a genius to figure out that Donald Trump isn’t remotely qualified to be President of the United States.

Don’t you think that, after Obama, making being qualified the standard by which we judge has sort of sailed? I mean, really?

So, you think having run a multi-national company, negotiated complex business deals, been responsible for finding and selecting talented advisers and aides, evaluating personnel, created hundreds if not thousands of jobs, watching over budgets, negotiating with foreign entities, navigating through myriads of state and federal regulations…. none of this makes Trump “remotely qualified”? And yet, you think someone who never held a job, never made a payroll, never had any business experience, whose primary governmental experience was running for office, never created a single job… you think THAT guy IS qualified?

REALLY?

See, that’s exactly what I was talking about. Please do not embarrass yourself any further.

@George Wells:

precisely because he has his own head stuck up his A$$!

you need to stay away from those homosexual activities.

@Greg:

A person doesn’t have to be a genius to figure out that Donald Trump isn’t remotely qualified to be President of the United States.

And no one has to be a genius to know that after seven years with the title, Obama still isn’t remotely qualified to be President of the US. ” I honestly don’t understand how it is that so many people don’t see this. “

@Bill: You said to Greg:

Please do not embarrass yourself any further.

He won’t, he’s not capable.

@Bill:

So, you think having run a multi-national company, negotiated complex business deals, been responsible for finding and selecting talented advisers and aides, evaluating personnel, created hundreds if not thousands of jobs, watching over budgets, negotiating with foreign entities, navigating through myriads of state and federal regulations…. none of this makes Trump “remotely qualified”?

Correct. All this demonstrates is that he’s qualified to be a businessman, possibly only within the areas of the specific sorts of businesses with which he has been personally involved. A nation is not a business. The concerns of a nation are much broader. Businesses of all descriptions exist within the greater context of a nation.

And yet, you think someone who never held a job, never made a payroll, never had any business experience, whose primary governmental experience was running for office, never created a single job… you think THAT guy IS qualified?

Obviously I believe he’s qualified. I voted for him twice and continue to support his presidency. Have you not noticed?

@Bill #71:

“Don’t you think that, after Obama, making being qualified the standard by which we judge has sort of sailed?”

Do two “wrongs” suddenly make a “right”?

If qualifications mean nothing now, do you think employers are going to stop looking at resumes and base their hiring decisions on how outrageous a job applicant is? What sort of loose cannon of a mouth he has? Does he sport a clown-do?

If you are making the point that Obama’s lack of qualifications contributed significantly to what you view to be a disastrous presidency, then why on Earth would you be willing to accept yet another president who lacked qualification? On the other hand, if you DON’T think that Obama’s lack of qualifications had anything to do with his poor job performance, why keep bringing it up?

@Greg:

Correct. All that this demonstrates is that he’s qualified to be a businessman, possibly only within the confines the specific sorts of businesses that he has been personally involved with. A nation is not a business. The concerns of a nation are much broader. Businesses of all descriptions exist within the greater context of a nation.

And, just to clairy, this does not even “remotely” qualify one to be President yet someone with no experience in any field (other than a community rabble-rouser) you, without even a shadow of a doubt, feel is qualification. This is so absolutely fantastically absurd and ridiculous that I want to give you every opportunity to make some sense of it.

@George Wells:

If qualifications mean nothing now, do you think employers are going to stop looking at resumes and base their hiring decisions on how outrageous a job applicant is?

No, that was a rhetorical question aimed at people like you and Greg who vote for well-packaged inexperience and ineptitude while being severely critical and disdainful of accomplishment, experience, ability and resource. This is what I mean about your opinions and capacity to pass judgement being absolutely worthless. No doubt that mindset plays well over at MSNBC or Media Matters, but there are more discerning intellects residing here.

Trump may NOT be the best candidate for President… but not even “remotely qualified”? He is SUPREMELY qualified while Obama was not qualified and, even after almost 7 years of OJT, STILL totally unqualified, as his record shows.

Would Trump make a good President? Possibly, but difficult to tell. One thing can be absolutely assured… he would not be the WORST President. That title will never change hands again.

I’m not that negative about Obama’s time in office. I compare the situation the nation was in at the point he took office with the situation that exists now, and consider the overall situation to be much improved. The national and global economies were spiraling out of control. The nation’s financial system was was the brink of a cascading collapse. The unemployment rate was headed for the stratosphere. One of the nation’s big-three auto makers was circling the drain, along with all of its related jobs and support industries. State and community governments were so tapped out that they couldn’t afford to maintain essential services. We were involved in two overseas wars run on a credit card with no clear way to extricate ourselves and no clear, attainable objective. Where we’re at now is far from ideal, but it’s way the hell better than it was.

I don’t think Obama has actually done all that badly, all considered. I don’t regret the votes I cast for him. That doesn’t mean I idolize the guy. There have been errors. There always are errors. Things have to be kept in perspective. The nation has never had a president that there’s been no divided opinion about.

@Greg: Life is wonderful when you view it with your head in the sand!

@George Wells:

Does he sport a clown-do?

Just love these liberal Dimocrats, just foaming about Trump saying something about someone’s looks, then they turn right around and make a personal remark about someone’s hair. Does Donald’s hairdo have a great impact on how he will do his job?

@Greg: 78

I’m not that negative about Obama’s time in office. and consider the overall situation to be much improved.

I’m very interested Greg, tell us one real thing that is improved over when Obama took office. I’ve never heard anyone that could give a specific. Though I’ve seen the question asked on tv several time.

The national and global economies were spiraling out of control.

Right, and tell us all how that’s improved now.

The nation’s financial system was was the brink of a cascading collapse

You mean kinda like they’re describing everyday on the news cycles.

The unemployment rate was headed for the stratosphere.

Yea and has gotten there. Real unemployment now is about where it was during the depression.

We were involved in two overseas wars run on a credit card with no clear way to extricate ourselves

And now Obama has added more to that credit card than all 43 presidents ahead of him combined. Well, I guess setting records is worth something.

I don’t think Obama has actually done all that badly, all considered.

“All that badly”, but still way down on the ‘badly’ scale, right?

@Ditto:

the Hildabeast wants to be president so badly that she’s willing to drag the Democratic primary down with her.

What’s the difference, Obama is willing to destroy the Democrat Party to push his personal agenda. He still believes he has the key to Utopia and figures he is so special that a man like Trump would never consider reversing everything he’s done. Surprise!

Obama’s grand scheme and the Democrat Party is about to be flushed into oblivion and judging by the billionaires who are ready to jump into politics, we made be rid of all the hog trough bottom feeders sooner than we expected. Yea, I am talking about both houses and all the seats controlled by the Chamber of Commerce and George Soros. These billionaires may have problems, but they don’t consider themselves among the ruling elites and you aren’t likely to buy them.

@Redteam, #81:

I’m very interested Greg, tell us one real thing that is improved over when Obama took office.

Did you somehow miss the financial crisis of 2007-2008? Contagion was rapidly setting in across world markets. The world narrowly escaped a Second Great Depression.

Republicans seem to be totally incapable of acknowledging that total disaster was averted, in spite of them rather than because of them. During a national crisis of confidence they did everything in their power to pitch a negative message and destroy confidence in a recovery. I haven’t forgotten their 24/7 assertions that doom was just around the corner, which followed closely on the heels of their public announcement that job #1 was to assure the failure of the Obama administration. That all happened at about the same point that they finally became worse than useless.

Maybe they’ll eventually get better, but I’m not holding my breath.

#81:

“I’m very interested Greg, tell us one real thing that is improved over when Obama took office. I’ve never heard anyone that could give a specific.”

The day Obama took office, the Dow stood at 7949. Since then it has more than doubled. Over the same period, the S&P rose about 150%. Evidently, the stock market has appreciated Obama’s presidency. That’s a “specific.”

And for the record, I’ve been pleased with Obama. Yes, to Greg’s point, he hasn’t been perfect, and he certainly hasn’t lived up to the head-in-the-clouds unrealistic expectation that he was going to work miracles and bring the whole World together in one massive Kumbaya orgy of peace. But he has delivered on many of the promises that he made before he got elected, and presidents don’t often do very well by that measure.

@Greg:

Did you somehow miss the financial crisis of 2007-2008? Contagion was rapidly setting in across world markets. The world narrowly escaped a Second Great Depression.

And of course, you haven’t noticed the state of the markets now, have you?

eventually get better, but I’m not holding my breath.

You’re talking Obama, right?

@George Wells:

The day Obama took office, the Dow stood at 7949.

You do recognize that as the panic that set in when it began to look like Obama was going to win. And after he did win. it went down a lot between Nov 1 and Jan 20. look at the panic in the market now. Look at the fact that Obama has added more to the debt than the 43 presidents all together before him.

EXCLUSIVE: Nevada Election Officials Investigating Hillary Campaign

Top election officials in the state of Nevada are investigating the Hillary Clinton campaign official who was snared in the latest James O’Keefe video, Breitbart News has exclusively learned.

Nevada attorney Christina Gupana, who is managing voter-registration efforts for the Clinton campaign in the key state of Nevada, was the unwitting star of O’Keefe’s undercover sting video this week. Gupana was caught on film apparently conspiring to violate election laws.

Now top state officials are investigating the matter.

“We do have an official complaint referencing the video,” Wayne Thorley, deputy secretary for elections in Nevada’s Secretary of State’s office, told Breitbart News. “The complaint was filed 2:30 local Nevada Time today. We will be investigating the complaint.”

“We can confirm that we are aware of the video and we will look into what’s on the video,” Thorley said.

The O’Keefe project marks one of the most clear-cut examples of potential election fraud yet committed by a 2016 presidential campaign. Gupana deleted the website for her law practice Friday.

“Do whatever you can. Whatever you can get away with, just do it, until you get kicked out, like totally,” Gupana told who she believed to be Clinton campaign staffers and volunteers in the video, which was released Thursday by O’Keefe’s organization Project Veritas.

But only licensed field registrars, certified by a county clerk, can register voters.

The Republican Revolt

Rank-and-file Republicans have signaled their disaffection from their party in spectacular fashion, from the Tea Party to the summer of Trump. The reason of the Republican revolt is not hard to explain: disappointment and frustration.

Donald Trump was propelled into first place among Republicans in July 2015 much more by anger against the party’s existing leadership than by any attraction he exerted on his own…

(Snip)

…And it didn’t start in 2015, either. The influential conservative-leaning election analyst Sean Trende observed after House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost a primary election in 2014 that:

[A]nalysts need to understand that the Republican base is furious with the Republican establishment, especially over the Bush years. From the point of view of conservatives I’ve spoken with, the early- to mid-2000s look like this: Voters gave Republicans control of Congress and the presidency for the longest stretch since the 1920s.

And what do Republicans have to show for it? Temporary tax cuts, No Child Left Behind, the Medicare prescription drug benefit, a new Cabinet department, increased federal spending, TARP, and repeated attempts at immigration reform. Basically, despite a historic opportunity to shrink government, almost everything that the GOP establishment achieved during that time moved the needle leftward on domestic policy.

Whatever happens to the Trump candidacy—almost certainly nothing good—the insurrectionary mood inside the Republican Party will not easily be quieted…

(Snip)

…After the Fox debate, I received an email from an old friend who advises one of the Republican Party’s very largest donors. I quote an extract with his permission:

This is the first time I’ve ever done anything but throw cold water on this idea, but I think the Republican Party is about to split.

The establishment’s utter failure to even consider what Trump’s rise means, much less how the Republican Party must accommodate Trump supporters rather than the other way around, means a split. And a good thing, too.

I have never voted anything other than straight-ticket Republican ticket in my life, nor ever considered doing so. But I think I’d be happy to cast one for Trump as a protest vote.

But, but, but … I wanted to say to my friend, you and your boss are the Republican establishment, or at least two of its very most important members! If we’ve reached the point where even the establishment hates the establishment, the mood is dangerous indeed.

IF the party splits, the establishment side of it will be of minority third party status, as they only make up a small fraction of the Republican base. establishment Republicans may have money, but they don’t have the votes. Their decision to continue to listen to Rove Wormtongue and his ilk and agressively attack the Tea Party and the GOP’s conservative base, was a poorly planned and stupid one that has lead to the anti-establishment backfire, and support for the “outsiders”. Their arrogant overconfidence has put them in this place, and the GOP congressional leadership is operating on much less stable ground than they perceive.

@Greg:

I’m not that negative about Obama’s time in office.

Shocking. Again… judgement.

The first thing Obama did with the economy? $800 billion in “stimulus”. This was to keep unemployment at 7.9% or below. It made it to 10.2%. Even today, we have the lowest labor participation rate in half a century.

As reported, Obama has made an absolute disaster of Iraq, Syria, Libya and, now, Iran. We showed such abject weakness in the face of Iran, in fact, that now North Korea wants some of that, making noises about ICBMs and nuclear weapons (see what we mean about projecting weakness?).

Racial tensions are at an all time high and, after Ferguson and thanks to Black Lives Matter, Obama, Holder and Sharpton, it is starting to sustain itself, with racially provoked blacks killing cops and then cops killing the black killers.

While wages remain stagnant, those evil 1% have made a killing in the 0% interest rates for money printed out of thin air markets.

All this and more is not to simply continue bashing Obama with his dismal record; it is to prove, despite your opaque-colored glasses view, it is to show you what not even “remotely qualified” looks like and what the results are because, even today, Obama is not qualified… he is and never has been anything like a leader.

Don’t help Republicans pick a candidate…. you are not even remotely qualified. You OR George.

@Bill:
He does an excellent job of summarizing the catastrophe of the last 7 years and how difficult it will be to repair it.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423992/obamism-correctable

As for Trump, he is most certainly more qualified for the job than a rabble rousing community organizer. Even McCain came out yesterday and said if he is the nominee he would back him. On the flipside, pollster John Zogby, who has been right on the money before but has also bombed before in his predictions, said Trump’s campaign is about to start fizzling. He has in fact come down in the National level polls the last couple of days. One has Carson pulling into a statistical tie with him. The good thing is that the Republican field is deep enough to have multiple viable alternatives should Trump fall. The Dems, not so. They put all of their eggs in one basket with Hillary. The left should worry about their own problem (a shallow field of candidates and being way out of touch with all but the left wing of the country) before worrying about the Trump and the rest of the Republican candidates.

As the article above points out, the mess the next POTUS is going have to deal with is going to be a major undertaking. I would figure at least 12 years. While restoring our status as a world leader, reassuming the initiative in the fight against terrorism and reversing the enormous gains made by ISIS and AQ on Obama’s watch, and getting the deficits under control and on a path to a balanced budget shouldn’t take that long, it will take that long to change the make up the Supreme Court to where there are enough Constitutionalists on the bench to declare crap like Obamacare unconstitutional.

@another vet:

And the public now understands that a progressive-establishment RINO isn’t going to cut it. More of the same business as usual is a failing strategy..

@another vet, #89:

As the article above points out, the mess the next POTUS is going have to deal with is going to be a major undertaking.

Dealing with the disaster that Obama was left with was a major undertaking. He has managed quite well. Meanwhile, the GOP has accomplished nothing constructive for years. They’ve continued to accomplish nothing in spite of controlling both chambers of Congress. Imagine how much more nothing they could accomplish if they also occupied the White House!

The GOP is only able to maintain an illusion of internal consistency because they’re not actually attempting to engage in governance. They engage in political posturing. They don’t craft substantive bills addressing serious issues in a serious way, because doing so would immediately put their internal factions at war with one another, or put the entire party at odds with the opinions of a majority of voters. All they care about is the next election.

There’s no integrity there. I believe nothing that they say.

@Ditto: What’s telling is when you look at how the candidates in both parties are polling because it is a reflection on the parties themselves. Around half of Republicans are favoring non-politicians. Trump, Carson, and Fiorina combine for around 50%. With the Dems, two-thirds prefer either a bonafide socialist (Sanders) or one that uses the party name Democrat to try and disguise the truth (Hillary). The only non-lefty (Webb) is polling at around a whopping 1%.

Any Republican is better than the anti-American disaster in there now. My first choice has dropped out. I liked the way Perry wanted to empower the states and decentralize control. If it wasn’t for the Republican governors and state legislators out there, just think of how much worse off this country would be. Imagine a bunch more California’s and Illinois’s out there with all of their big government financial instability. The Federal government needs to take care of what it is supposed to according to the Constitution and let the states handle the rest.

@Greg: To a large degree, I would agree with you. The Republican majority has proven largely lame, due primarily to a corrupt President that will not even consider bipartisanship and a corrupt media that spins everything that happens as anti-Republican, putting them all in perpetual electoral jeopardy.

But, why should this bother you? Obama had the Presidency AND both Houses of Congress for two years and did nothing; “stimulus” failed, the economy self-healed, slowly and painfully, despite liberal damage and Obamacare, the worst law in the history of the United States was passed to kill jobs, kick people off their insurance and drive up health care costs. After the Democrats lost the House, Reid blocked every attempt to pass economic recovery bills… even the “pass this now” bill Obama pushed. So, why does non-accomplishment bother you? You CELEBRATED it for 6 years!

@Greg:

Dealing with the disaster that Obama was left with was a major undertaking. He has managed quite well.

Wake up, that dream is over. Back to the real world. Unemployment as high as it’s been since the depression in the 30’s. Weakest military force we have had since before WWI. Muslims taking over all the muslim countries and driving the Christians out. Muslims now moving into Europe to take them over. Obama is sending them welcome mats. Healthcare so expensive no one can afford it. His family has spent over 44 million on their vacations since coming into office at the taxpayers expense. National debt at 20 Trillion, increased more under Obama than the 43 presidents before him all combined.
Strange when you use a term like ‘managed quite well’, you can’t mention at least one thing that he has actually managed ‘quite well’. None sure come to mind.
I don’t know where you got the idea that congress can pass laws without a president to sign them. Only with a 67% margin and they sure don’t have that.

I believe nothing that they say.

With Obama as your idol, you have no frame of reference.

@Another Vet #92:

“My first choice has dropped out”

Perry dropped out because he “wanted to empower the states and decentralize control,” something that evidently neither Republicans OR Democrats really want. Sorry for your loss, but the rest of the country isn’t.

“The Federal government needs to take care of what it is supposed to according to the Constitution and let the states handle the rest.”

Another “pie-in-the-sky” fantasy dream that has no chance of ever coming true. Why? Because the very politicians who would have to act to make that happen won’t, because doing it would lessen their own significance to the point of irrelevance. The Federal Government is responsible for defense, but politicians aren’t really needed for that – all they do is make misguided decisions on funding defense projects that are based more on which state benefits from a given project or which contractor has better lined the pol’s pocket. Congress spends wastes as much time as it does on issues like Terry Shiavo’s life support because it WANTS to make itself bigger and more important, not because it wants to turn over any power at all to the states, regardless of what the Constitution says. It’s what the politicians that infest our congress do, and we are blessed with 535 of them, thanks to our constitution.

@Redteam, #94:

Why do you believe anything the GOP says? When was the last time they followed through on any of their campaign promises? Majorities in both Houses of Congress, but still nothing. Not even a serious effort. They do this election after election. People never seem to catch on to the fact that they need the hot button issues. They need the problems, not the solutions to them.

Trump’s entire strategy has consisted of punching the buttons. He isn’t even expected to explain how he would get from a preposterous assertion that he’ll fix something to accomplishing it in reality. Apparently it’s thought he can do it because he’s a Magic Billionaire with Special Powers. He tells people he can fix things, and they just believe him.

@Greg:

He tells people he can fix things, and they just believe him.

What does that have to do with anything. Obama can’t fix anything and doesn’t claim to know anything and nobody believes anything about him but that he is a muslim and they still voted for him, so what is the standard? Why should Republicans use common sense when there is no precedent of electing presidents by using common sense?

#97:

“Why should Republicans use common sense when there is no precedent of electing presidents by using common sense?”

You are offering an excuse for being stupid?
Is that the Republican game plan?
Is your best candidate selection option a dart-board?

How on Earth do you think up such stupid comments?
And why on Earth do you post them?

Why don’t you ask your “friend” Retire05 what she thinks about your “common sense” question? I’m guessing that she gives Republicans a bit more credit than you do.

@George Wells: No, it is a question, like mine, as to why do you liberals only expect everyone else to judge with strict standards when you yourselves are willing to accept so much less from a liberal.

For instance, a Republican must be highly qualified to be considered for office while a Democrat should simply be liberal… and the more liberal, the better. A Republican must be squeaky-clean honest for consideration, but any dishonesty detected in a Democrat is either inconsequential or “a witch hunt”. If a Republican does not fulfill a campaign promise, he is a damned liar, yet if a Democrat outright lies about a promise, well, that’s just what politicians do.

In other words, if you do not demand the highest standards of your own candidates, why would you dare to suggest what the standards of someone else’s candidate should be or think anyone cares what your opinion is? The election of Obama has caused, in many cases, irreparable damage; absolutely EVERY Republican candidate offered today is a vast improvement over Obama and certainly more capable to effect positive change than any of the Democrats, but possibly for Webb, who is not even a Democrat consideration.

@Bill #99:

“if you do not demand the highest standards of your own candidates, why would you dare to suggest what the standards of someone else’s candidate should be or think anyone cares what your opinion is?”

First of all, I doubt that “caring” has anything to do with this question. You’ve made it clear that you don’t care what I believe, and I’ve made the same point repeatedly, so as that point is moot, why throw it on the fire? Your “caring” or not about my opinion is irrelevant.

Secondly, I didn’t suggest what anyone’s standards of qualification should be, Redteam did. I only questioned his dubious criteria that seemed to offer the suggestion that two wrongs make a right. They don’t.

I don’t NEED to demand the highest standards of qualification from my candidates any more than YOU need to demand the same thing from yours, or hasn’t that painfully obvious fact smacked you in the face yet?

If liberals are making stupid candidate choices, are you SUGGESTING that Republicans ought to make the SAME mistakes? What warped logic tells you that?

You’ve pissed and moaned about double standards enough to make your point ten times over. I stipulate that the playing field isn’t level, and that it favors the liberal side. What do you expect me to do about it?
You seem to think that you’re the one with all of the good ideas, YOU come up with the solution.