the Trump Phenomenon

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

The last I heard we were electing a federal president.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

?????????????????

[Nebe]

Pell grants are federally funded no?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

So I'm watching the republican front-runners on the stump this week. Primary campaign issues appear to be bottled water, spray tans, pathological dishonesty and hand size.

WTF is wrong with the GOP?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

So I'm watching the republican front-runners on the stump this week. Primary campaign issues appear to be bottled water, spray tans, pathological dishonesty and hand size.

WTF is wrong with the GOP?

I suppose it doesn't compare to non stop pandering for the black vote .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

I suppose it doesn't compare to non stop pandering for the black vote .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence accidentally stumbled into one truth, that teh debates aren't about ideas, or why one person has a better vision than the other. Until Super Tuesday, it's desperation tactics to take Trump down.

We're probably on the verge of nominating a punch line instead of a real candidate.

Spence woul dhave us believe that the Democrats are on the verge of nominating someone as competent as Eisenhower. Not exactly true. By his own admission, she has trouble remembering whether she was shot at, or whether she casually worked a rope line, shaking hands and posing for the camera.

Our choices...(1) An amoral, serial liar, who was a disaster as Secstate (inherited a stable Iraq, left office with Iraq ablaze), with zero integrity..or (2) a narcisstic, flip-flopping, horse's ass of a reality show host with zero integrity. What a choice. At a time when we are on the edge of an abyss.

What the hell is wrong with all of us? How can we not demand more?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by buckman

I suppose it doesn't compare to non stop pandering for the black vote .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Repub. appeal so little to blacks anything that is said about them is considering "pandering"

[buckman]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The Repub. appeal so little to blacks anything that is said about them is considering "pandering"

Tell me what the Democrats do for Black people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

Tell me what the Democrats do for Black people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They cripple them for life, a form of cultural genocide, by destroying their desire to succeed, and getting them addicted to welfare. I htink it was Lyndon Johnson who said "if we give these 'people' (he used the n-word) some free stuff, they'll vote for us for a hundred years. "

I cannot help but wonder if Democrats do this deliberately. The evidence of cultural destruction is so overwhelming, I don't see how any well-meaning person could fail to acknowledge it, unless the cultural destruction is actually the goal.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by buckman

Tell me what the Democrats do for Black people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They show some compassion for those that need a helping hand.

How is that?

What do Repub. do for Black people?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

So I'm watching the republican front-runners on the stump this week. Primary campaign issues appear to be bottled water, spray tans, pathological dishonesty and hand size.

WTF is wrong with the GOP?

Maybe you should start by figuring out what is wrong with your "perspective."

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Maybe you should start by figuring out what is wrong with your "perspective."

Why do you assume my perspective is wrong?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Why do you assume my perspective is wrong?

Perhaps because you can't do something as morally obvious, as admitting that Hilary lies.

Spence, she flip-flopped many times on the cause of the Benghazi attack. You chalk it all up to fog of war, and conflicting reports. That may be. But boy, isn't it interesting that in every private conversation, she seemed to admit it was terrorism, and in every public statement, she relied on the video protest theory (and therefore, the attack was spontaneous and not in any way her fault).

Now, it's possible, that every time she was about to have a private conversation, she got a report saying that it was terrorism. And then just before each scheduled public statement, those same intelligence folks said to her "look, we know we just told you it was terrorism, but forget that, now we believe it was a video protest, so we want you to go with that".

That's certainly possible. But I asked you several times for some kind of timeline (who briefed her, and when) to support that notion. And you provided zip. So it appears you are accepting her explanation without any skepticism.

How fortunate for her, that every time the intelligence community told her what the cause was, it worked out in such a way that every time she made a public statement, she was reporting that she was not to blame.

We should all be so lucky.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, she flip-flopped many times on the cause of the Benghazi attack. You chalk it all up to fog of war, and conflicting reports. That may be. But boy, isn't it interesting that in every private conversation, she seemed to admit it was terrorism, and in every public statement, she relied on the video protest theory (and therefore, the attack was spontaneous and not in any way her fault).

You sure throw out a lot of "every" for someone who can't even piece together a basic timeline on their own.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Why do you assume my perspective is wrong?

Quote Spence: "So I'm watching the republican front-runners on the stump this week. Primary campaign issues appear to be bottled water, spray tans, pathological dishonesty and hand size.

WTF is wrong with the GOP?" End quote.

There are more important "issues" being addressed in the Repub. primary than you portray. But reducing the campaign to your parody dismisses them to your version of nonsense.

Jim says you're better than that. What's wrong with you?

[PaulS]

Trump did disavow Duke's support after Rubio laid into him.

I'm suprised he knew nothing about "David Duke or white supremacy or white supremacists"

LEESBURG, Va. — Republican front-runner Donald Trump drew sharp criticism from his rivals in both parties Sunday for refusing to denounce an implicit endorsement from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, raising the specter of racism as the presidential campaign hits the South.

Trump was asked on CNN's "State of the Union" whether he rejected support from the former KKK Grand Dragon and other white supremacists after Duke told his radio followers this week that a vote against Trump was equivalent to "treason to your heritage."

"Well, just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke. OK?" Trump said. "I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists."

Trump's comments came the same day he retweeted a quote from Benito Mussolini, the 20th century fascist dictator of Italy. And in a boost for his campaign in the South, he scored the endorsement of Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, one of the most strident opponents of immigration reform on Capitol Hill.

But it was Trump's statements about Duke that sparked a wave of censures with just two days to go before 11 states hold GOP primaries involving about a quarter of the party's total nominating delegate count. Several states in the South, a region with a fraught racial history, are among those voting in the Super Tuesday contests.

Marco Rubio quickly pounced on Trump's comments, saying the GOP "cannot be a party who refuses to condemn white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan."

"Not only is that wrong, it makes him unelectable," Rubio told thousands of supporters gathered in Leesburg, Virginia. "How are we going to grow the party if we nominate someone who doesn't repudiate the Ku Klux Klan?"

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz called Trump's comments "Really sad."

"You're better than this," Cruz wrote on Twitter. "We should all agree, racism is wrong, KKK is abhorrent."

Trump has won three of four early voting states, roiling a party divided over the prospect of the brash billionaire becoming its nominee. Late Sunday, Nebraska's Ben Sasse became the first sitting Republican senator to say explicitly that he would not back Trump if he does win the nomination.

"If Trump becomes the Republican nominee my expectation is that I'll look for some 3rd candidate — a conservative option, a constitutionalist," Sasse wrote on Twitter.

With a strong showing on Super Tuesday, Trump could begin to pull away from his rivals in the all-important delegate count.

In the Southern states that vote Tuesday, Republican candidates will face an electorate that is overwhelmingly white. In South Carolina, the only Southern state to have voted so far, 96 percent of the GOP primary electorate was white, while 6 in 10 voters in the Democratic race were black.

While the South was once a Democratic stronghold, many white conservatives who backed the party started moving toward the GOP during the civil rights movement. Trump has borrowed from the rhetoric former President Richard Nixon used during that time to appeal to working-class white voters, describing his campaign has a movement of the "silent majority."

Trump holds commanding leads across the South, with the exception of Cruz's home state of Texas, a dynamic that puts tremendous pressure on Rubio and Cruz as they try to outlast each other and derail the real estate mogul.

Trump was asked Friday by journalists how he felt about Duke's support. He said he didn't know anything about it and curtly said: "All right, I disavow, ok?"

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Trump did disavow Duke's support after Rubio laid into him.

I'm suprised he knew nothing about "David Duke or white supremacy or white supremacists"

Should "white supremacists" or black racists not be allowed to vote? Why should a candidate have to disavow a vote? It's going to count in the tally whether its disavowed or not. And candidates who win election don't have to, nor could they, make into law every desire of all who voted for them.

The guilt by association thing didn't sway Democrats from voting for Obama even though he was closely associated with radical anti-American, Marxist/communist people. He was actually more directly associated with those people than Trump is with so-called white supremacists.


In the Southern states that vote Tuesday, Republican candidates will face an electorate that is overwhelmingly white. In South Carolina, the only Southern state to have voted so far, 96 percent of the GOP primary electorate was white, while 6 in 10 voters in the Democratic race were black.

While the South was once a Democratic stronghold, many white conservatives who backed the party started moving toward the GOP during the civil rights movement. Trump has borrowed from the rhetoric former President Richard Nixon used during that time to appeal to working-class white voters, describing his campaign has a movement of the "silent majority."

The irony in the notion that the "Southern Strategy" was racist is that the South became less racist as the South became More Republican and less Democrat.

Trump was asked Friday by journalists how he felt about Duke's support. He said he didn't know anything about it and curtly said: "All right, I disavow, ok?"

There you have it. He disavowed Duke's support. But Duke's vote will count anyway. Happy now.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Small Government -v- Big Government is not all Federal either. More conservative people think the states should have bigger responsibility and the Federal gov less, Progressives think the Federal Government needs more control.

Control -v- Liberty, sliding scale

The moderate middle is lacking leadership.

The importance of the moderate middle in a sliding scale is its ability to keep the scale from sliding any further in any direction. To maintain the status quo. So it depends at what point the moderate middle asserts itself.

The scale has obviously slid in one direction, toward Federal power, for a long time. So if we assert moderation at this point, we maintain the massive power advantage the Federal Government has at this point. And granting that the mechanisms by which the central government have used and are using to gain more power are part of our status quo, moderation will keep in place those mechanisms. So we will continue sliding in that direction, perhaps at a moderate pace, although the mechanisms have allowed the pace to quicken.

Conservatives of a constitutional stripe believe the power scale should rest at that place where individuals have the most influence on where the widest scope of direct power over them is applied. They believe that place is local government. They believe moderation at that point will best maintain the "Control -v- Liberty, sliding scale" necessary for self-government.

[Jim in CT]

Paul S, yes, white supremcists will endorse Trump.

And Al Sharpton (who has been to the White House more times than the tour guides) will endorse Hilary. Al Sharpton has innocent blood on his hands, in at least one case his hateful, race-baiting incited a riot that led to a completely innocent Jew being stabbed to death. Google Crown Heights, Freddys Fashion Mart (where after Sharpton got the mob sufficiently crazed, someone set fire to a store rented by a Jew, I think 6 or 7 were killed).

If we are going to hold Trump responsible for everyone who endorses him, let's do the same for Obama and Hilary, correct?

Trump is an ass. But let's hold everyone to the same scrutiny. Fair enough?

[spence]

The GOP is imploding and Jim's throwing the "Freddy's Fashion Mart" card.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The GOP is imploding and Jim's throwing the "Freddy's Fashion Mart" card.

We're 'imploding"? We control both houses of Congress, and a large majority of governorships and state legislatures. If you call that "imploding", what do you call what's happening on your side?

Yes, Freddy's Fashion Mart. I tend to be an irrational stickler about trivial little things, such as 7 innocent people (it was 7) who were burned to death, after Sharpton worked the crowd into a racist mob. I know, i know, I shouldn't obsess over such insignificant, trivial things!

Every democratic presidential candidate of our generation is forced to kneel before Sharpton and kiss his ring. That's more than sufficient evidence to tell me that somethging is terribly, horribly amiss on your side.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

The GOP is imploding

I think the GOP was declared dead for a generation shortly after the election of Obama...... but then proceeded to dominate national and local elections

it's your whacked perspective

[spence]

What does Al Sharpton have to do with any of this?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

What does Al Sharpton have to do with any of this?

More than any of your comments.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

More than any of your comments.

You're on a roll today. Why so pithy?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You're on a roll today. Why so pithy?

Sometimes I use your style.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What does Al Sharpton have to do with any of this?

Let's see... The liberals here are bashing Trump for the fact that David Duke endorsed him. My point, and it's valid, is that if Trump is to be criticized for getting Duke's endorsement, then we should criticize Obama as well. Because not only did Sharpton endorse Obama, he has been to the White House 100 times.

If Trump were to get elected, I doubt he would rely on David Duke for counsel on race relations. But that's exactly what Obama has done with the pig Sharpton.

Do you ever, and I mean ever, concede that conservatives have a valid point?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Let's see... The liberals here are bashing Trump for the fact that David Duke endorsed him. My point, and it's valid, is that if Trump is to be criticized for getting Duke's endorsement, then we should criticize Obama as well. Because not only did Sharpton endorse Obama, he has been to the White House 100 times.

If Trump were to get elected, I doubt he would rely on David Duke for counsel on race relations. But that's exactly what Obama has done with the pig Sharpton.

Do you ever, and I mean ever, concede that conservatives have a valid point?

i don't have a problem so much with the endorsement (anyone can endorse someone) as much as Trump's not disavowing it until people got on him. And then his asinine comments that he didn't know who Duke was or what white supremacy is. That either shows he is a liar or really stupid (I suspect the former).

To your point about Sharpton. He speaks out when he sees (or thinks he sees discrimination). And when he speaks, he says stupid stuff. That stupid stuff overwhelms any valid points he may have so that his message is lost. I don’t really recall he had a part of the crown heights incident but know a lot about the Tawana Brawley mess. The KKK killed 0,000s of blacks. So while not the best analogy, I can see how people can make it. I think Obama has Sharpton to the WH to pay lip service (can't wait to see comments on that one) to him and thus the Black community.

Edit - just saw on CNN a Medal of Honor ceremony honoring a Seal Team 6 member for rescuing a hostage. I'm sure you would have enjoyed watching that.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

i don't have a problem so much with the endorsement (anyone can endorse someone) as much as Trump's not disavowing it until people got on him. And then his asinine comments that he didn't know who Duke was or what white supremacy is. That either shows he is a liar or really stupid (I suspect the former).

To your point about Sharpton. He speaks out when he sees (or thinks he sees discrimination). And when he speaks, he says stupid stuff. That stupid stuff overwhelms any valid points he may have so that his message is lost. I don’t really recall he had a part of the crown heights incident but know a lot about the Tawana Brawley mess. The KKK killed 0,000s of blacks. So while not the best analogy, I can see how people can make it. I think Obama has Sharpton to the WH to pay lip service (can't wait to see comments on that one) to him and thus the Black community.

Edit - just saw on CNN a Medal of Honor ceremony honoring a Seal Team 6 member for rescuing a hostage. I'm sure you would have enjoyed watching that.

"i don't have a problem so much with the endorsement (anyone can endorse someone) as much as Trump's not disavowing it until people got on him. "

That's 100% fair.

"{I don’t really recall he had a part of the crown heights incident "

A car driven by white Jews in NYC was sideswiped, pushed onto the sidewalk, where it killed a young black boy. A mob appeared to be threatening the driver of the car (who cares that he got smashed into, and that's why he ended up on the sidewalk), so he was escorted out of there. Sharpton got everyone worked up about how the Jews are out to kill the blacks, and after they were foamong at the mouth, one of them walked up to the nearest white person and stabbed them to death.

Look up the incident at Freddys.. 7 innnocent pepole burned alive.

Look, I'm not saying Sharpton is the moral equivalent of the Klan. But he's got innocent blood on his hands, stemming from racial hatred. And every single Democratic candidate feels the need to suck up to him, and Obama calls him into the White House all the time. That should be disturbing to anyone.

"I think Obama has Sharpton to the WH to pay lip service (can't wait to see comments on that one) to him and thus the Black community"

It's cowardly. You can respect blacks by inviting someone else to teh White House, anyone else. By inviting him constantky, Obama is legitimizing Sharpton. He doesn't deserve legitimacy, he deserves to ba called out for what he is. That's what leadership is.

"just saw on CNN a Medal of Honor ceremony honoring a Seal Team 6 member for rescuing a hostage. I'm sure you would have enjoyed watching that"

Thanks! I read about it this AM, I didn't know it was SEAL team 6, I knew it was a Seal. I hope th edoctor they saved goes on to live a rich, fulfilling life. One SEAL was killed in that raid. You don't hear about hand-to-hand combat every day in modern warfare...Awful stuff.

[spence]

This is really good.

https://www.facebook.com/LastWeekTon...93596/?fref=nf

[PaulS]

We've discussed this many times. Take out giving to churches and the #s are very close. My largest charity is to my church.