Who Are These People and Why Are They "The Frontrunners?"
We don't have a country anymore.
We have an Oligarchic system run by a Government/Corporate Media Complex.
BIG DONORS TO GOP CANDIDATE BEFORE DEBATE: TAKE OUT TRUMP
-------
In the interest of full disclosure. I don't like Trump. I don't trust him. Sorry to sound paranoid, but the Oligarchs need this guy to suck votes away from a Conservative and give them to Hillary.
That's the plan.
Oligarchs are not totalitarian. There is no such thing as a large group of people with no disagreement between them. But a system ruled by Corporate Welfare (which is not Capitalism) does create a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" good old boy network in which the distinctions between interests are more minute.
The difference between Bush and Clinton is almost negligible. They would govern almost exactly the same way. But their corporate cronies are each a slightly different set. Trump is a wild card. His network is all over the place. They haven't pinned him down.
But the easiest way for him to add to his billions is to give the Oligarchs an opportunity to pin him down; to whore him out for awhile.
Running for President is good business. And the business of America is a businessman running for President, and businessmen running a businessman for President.
And what's good for the Corporate Media Complex's Election Cycle is good for America.
Meanwhile, there is the business of roping Trump in. And they will. They will use him (whether he wants to be used or not) to wreck the Conservatives in the GOP field, only to have Bush get the nomination, and Trump declare as a third party candidate. He'll get about 12-17 percent of the vote (about 80% of that will be Republican votes) and Hillary will ascend to the Presidential Throne.
Let's see if I'm right.
-------
By the way, Megyn Kelly should be ashamed of herself for her treatment of Trump last night. And, as I said, I don't like Trump.
-------
UPDATE ---
I hesitated to criticize Megyn Kelly, but I was truly offended by her behavior.
Looks like I am not the only one.
From Gateway Pundit:
Enough Is Enough: Petition Started to Ban FOX’s Megyn Kelly from Hosting Any Further GOP Debates
Conservative viewers last night were very offended at Megyn Kelly’s antics during the Republican FOX News debate.
Twitter exploded with attacks on Kelly and FOX News for the constant attacks on the Republican candidates.
23 comments:
Last night, Trump said (paraphrase), "Most of these people on the stage here have taken money from me."
Rubio chimed in, "I didn't."
Apparently, Trump donated to Rubio's opponent.
Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear anyone other than Rubio deny having taken money from Trump at some point.
I will not be voting in 2016 if Jeb Bush is the GOP candidate. Voting for him would be the same -- or nearly the same -- as voting for the Dem candidate.
fWIW: FULL: 2016 First Republican Presidential Debate- Top 10 Candidates
That was not a debate last night. Each of the ten candidates were not provided equal time to respond to each question posed to the others.
I do have a favorite based on bias from prior history... not from last night's events.
It would be interesting to challenge each of the candidates from both of yesterday's events to answer ALL the questions...but, not identify which candidate responded by name.
Perhaps a blind response sheet should be provided which can later be matched to each candidate.
I'd like to see if I would arrive at the same conclusion if I had to choose a candidate based solely on the responses given to the questions posed last night at both events.... sans any prior knowledge/bias of/towards each candidate.
Who's your favorite candidate?
Mine is Cruz, and then Walker and then Rubio.
I don't like Rubio's stance on immigration, but I think he is real.
I also like Jindal, but I think he is even more unelectable than Cruz.
To me, Rubio and Walker are the most electable of the field.
Bush is not electable. But he will be forced down our throats.
Cruz has consistently been my favorite conservative candidate thus far.
As for the others....
I was impressed with Dr. Carson last night, but his stance on the second amendment is troubling. Carson would fit nicely as Surgeon General in the next administration.
Jindal is also appealing but his numbers don't seem to reflect any growth in support.
Rubio - I just don't trust him because of his Gang of 8 history and his obstinate view of amnesty.
Walker is one to watch, but he wasn't given enough exposure last night. There were stories that Walker considered Rubio as his running mate - a negative feature in my book.
Trump serves a purpose by rattling the cage of the RINO establishment...but not trustworthy for POTUS, given his investments in the ME and admission that politicians can be bought (see comment @ Hillary coming to his wedding).
In no way would I ever pull the lever for Jeb Bush, but in all fairness he wasn't as bad as I expected last night...despite his 'deer in the headlights' appearance. No possible vote for him, from me.
Surprisingly, Rand Paul moved up a notch on my scale - having relented on his support for Israel...again, not POTUS eligible but would be suitable in the next administration as Secretary of Treasury.
Huckabee- another non-starter performed well last night, but that's the point. He's a seasoned performer with a negative political track record (clemency/4 police deaths)
Kasich...nice guy, not sure about him yet.
Christi impressed me with his early actions against the teachers union. Everything after that has been down hill. NJ remains a cesspool. My deceased FiL's town is infested with muhammedans. Christi embraces that culture - he can keep them.
Lindsey Graham - seems immature, defensive and weepy (Boehner-esque). Not presidential material at all. How he keeps getting elected in his state is beyond comprehension.
Walker's response to the abortion question hurt him, IMO. He came across on the side of save the life of the baby if the choice comes down to save the baby or save the mother.
The biggest surprise for me last night was Huckabee. He did himself some good, IMO.
Anonymous,
Carson would fit nicely as Surgeon General in the next administration.
I'd like to see him as the head of the HHS.
Pasto,
To me, Rubio and Walker are the most electable of the field.
I agree about Rubio, but not about Walker -- unless the latter does better in other debates.
Bush is not electable. But he will be forced down our throats.
I hope not, but I'm afraid that you are right. Karl Rove wants Bush at the top of the ticket.
If I could wave a magic wand, I'd put Ted Cruz in the Oval Office.
Me too, AOW.
The more Trump is successful in his underlying argument .. that the govt is a corrupted few and R's elected to leadership are LIARS, the more electable Cruz becomes, especially if Bernie continues his successes.
The conclusion today by GOP insiders that Trump was the big loser and is on the way out, says ALL. IF slamming McCain did n ot kill Trump, then the PEOPLE perceive his MESSAGE ismore important than him, HUGE warts and all.
The R's may really now be the Whigs and something else is about to be born
The more Trump is successful in his underlying argument .. that the govt is a corrupted few and R's elected to leadership are LIARS, the more electable Cruz becomes, especially if Bernie continues his successes.
The conclusion today by GOP insiders that Trump was the big loser and is on the way out, says ALL. IF slamming McCain did n ot kill Trump, then the PEOPLE perceive his MESSAGE ismore important than him, HUGE warts and all.
The R's may really now be the Whigs and something else is about to be born
I hope so, because I truly hate the Republicans.
This notion of a candidates "electability" really pisses me off.
Against a Hillary -- warts and boogers and all -- ALL the current crop of Rs electability is sallow.
We're supposed to be voting for someone who will do the best (in our eyes) for the country, not just because they have the best chance of beating the other guy (that's how we got McCain -- who I don't like -- and Mitt -- who I sorta do) and WE OUGHT TO BE PREACHING THE SAME THING.
So if it's Jeb or Lindsey or Awshucks Huck or most of the others I'll be pulling a third lever somewhere. My conscience will not let me do otherwise anymore.
I don't like Trump personally or as a candidate but I agree and enjoy that he is challenging the others to step out of their political comfort zone or be pilloried and criticized as out of touch and being D.C. elites.
Don't like Rubio anymore, either.
I like Jindal but most I like Cruz and Walker and Rand in no particular order.
And I agree with Pasto. The way the moderators conducted themselves last night -- including and especially Megyn Kelly (a former favorite of mine) -- was something akin to reprehensible.
The proof of that pudding is in the praise heaped on them for the debate by --
*GASP*
-- CNN!
(HEY!!! CRUZ AND CARLY!! A Hispanic and a woman!!! Take that Billary!!!)
Yes, and by the way, I like Carly too. But she was on the B-team last night.
I don't like that she said Islamic civilization was the greatest in the world. It was not. She misunderstands history to say that. Hopefully she will clarify that statement.
MR,
We're supposed to be voting for someone who will do the best (in our eyes) for the country, not just because they have the best chance of beating the other guy.
The Doctrine of Electability is Karl Rove, through and through.
Karl Rove needs to go! His time is over.
As for Marco Rubio, I'm not as anti-Rubio as you are. Why? Because he likely represents the future of conservatism. I had dinner with a couple of conservative Millennials last week and gained some insights from the generation about to take the baton. Interesting discussion, I tell you!
Both of these Millennials are recent graduates of Hillsdale College; one of them is Dinesh D'Souza's nephew, and the other, a Capitol Hill intern for a couple of years, wrote Ted Cruz's press releases last summer.
Both of these Millennials agreed with me that the GOP will lose if Jeb Bush is the 2016 candidate.
Karl Rove has less than zero traction with Conservative Millennials.
I think that whomever Karl Rove endorses for 2016 will have one helluva time winning in 2016.
IMO, Carly Fiorina needs to be on the 2016 GOP ticket.
I'd love to see her at the top of the ticket. Why? Because, as a woman, Fiorina could really go after Hillary.
BUT...
Is Hillary going to be the Dem candidate?
Epa,
The more Trump is successful in his underlying argument .. that the govt is a corrupted few and R's elected to leadership are LIARS, the more electable Cruz becomes, especially if Bernie continues his successes.
I agree with that!
I believe you are wrong about Kelly and the other anchors. Are we so blinded by PC that even we are shocked when real questioning of actions or words are brought up?
The questions were probing and what was required. The questions asked at the afternoon debate were equally or even more probing. That's what is needed. They want to be elected president, they should be ready to face the music. The question to Dr. Carson on electability was demolishing, but he took it with grace, because it was fair. Why not ask Trump about calling women fat pigs? That did require an explanation, and his response was deplorable because he did not have a rational answer. There was none.
Yes, Rove HAS to go. We owe him much of the Islamization of the GOP. As he has said, he is an operator. He does not care about policy or substance. HE HAS TO GO. It aggravates me beyond imagination every time FOX sticks a mike under his nose to ask for his opinion.
Yes, Fiorina was magnificent. Don't know much about her performance as CEO, where I believe she was less than brilliant, but IT corporate mergers not always make people shine. Will do some serious research on her. Would love to see a debate between her and Clinton (don't like to use Hillary. It humanizes her, when she is far from human.) Hate the bitch.
It's easy to envision Bush swallowed by the Washington cartel. GOP present leadership has to go. We owe them Palin and Ryan as potential VPs which hurt both elections. Palin may be good as Alaska's governor or representative, but that's it. As for Ryan he managed to make Biden look presidential in the debate. He looked like a good kid at Catholic Sunday school reciting the Ten Commandments. Definitely not what the country needed. As a consequence we ended up with Obama, both terms. Thanks GOP.
Anonymous,
You have some great points there. You are a great commentator.
I especially liked your comment on Ryan. It was very accurate and it put into words something I had observed but did not know how to express.
Your point about Megyn Kelly's questions:
It's not a matter of PC. I think her question is fair, in one sense, THE ELECTABILITY SENSE.
On the other hand, I'm with Trump on this: Who gives a rat's ass? We do have bigger problems here in the US and PC is used OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER as a way to avoid actually addressing the issues.
Trump (who I feel I must repeat - I do not like) is tapping into the Zeitgeist against PC.
Fuck women's feeelings about being called a fat bitch.
Think of all the terrible things white men get called all the time.
If a woman is a fat bitch, it's ok to call her a fat bitch.
In fact, if she's not a fat bitch, it's still ok to call her a fat bitch, but you'll lose points for being innacurate.
What does using the words "fat bitch" have to do with the cost of tea in China?
Or more importantly, what does it have to do with the fact that our President is trying to strangle our economy with EPA regulations, importing another population to replace Americans who are educated about our history and our Constitution, faggotize our military, and surround our ally Israel with rabid enemies?
It has nothing to do with any of the actual problems in the world.
Calling someone a fat bitch is not a real problem, in my estimation.
And, stupidly, I actually forgot to address the real reason I am offended by Megyn Kelly's antics in moderating that debate. It's that she played on a team who served a divide and conquer strategy, did not give equal time, only gave 30 seconds per answer, attempted to denude a popular politician when she is a journalist and that is not her job, and generally served the interests of those who are pouring so much money into Jeb Bush - who no one wants as a candidate.
Why didn't she ask Bush about his Royal lineage? Why didn't she go attack dog on him, and ask him who is donors are, and why they are giving him so much money, when we can't even figure out what he stands for?
Pasto,
Why didn't she ask Bush about his Royal lineage? Why didn't she go attack dog on him, and ask him who is donors are, and why they are giving him so much money, when we can't even figure out what he stands for?
Because FNC didn't want her to do so.
Anonymous,
It aggravates me beyond imagination every time FOX sticks a mike under [Karl Rove's] nose to ask for his opinion.
Same here!
Rove hasn't been right in some 10 years now. His days as a political strategist and meaningful commentator are OVER!
As he is now is a mouthpiece for the GOP establishment, and it is what group which WE THE PEOPLE are pissed off at.
Post a Comment