Donald Trump had a clear path to the nomination despite everything the Republican leadership said. All he had to do was close his big mouth.
Apparently that was too hard a mission for a man who got as far as he did by saying stupid things.
It’s the Middle Stupid!
Trump’s comments on abortion, now retracted, caused quite a stir.
I know of several people who would have voted for Trump but will not do so now. This is precisely the kind of attitude shift the anti-Trump brigade wanted.
Previous attacks from the left and right only served to make Trump stronger. It was only when Trump bit off more shoe than the the public could stand did things matter.
All Trump had to do was take a position on abortion to the Right of Hillary, and the Left of Cruz. It should not have taken a genius to figure that out.
Polls continually show the US public does not want abortion outlawed even if they do not want abortion on demand at any time.
The irony is this mess is Cruz is far more against abortion than Trump. The latter seemingly has had every position possible at various times.
Trump has a lot against him: Arrogance, his attitudes towards women, and his policies on free trade.
Free Trade
I am a huge free trade advocate, not a fake one like Hillary, Cruz, or Obama.
I don’t support the Trans-Pacific Partnership because it has everything to do with corporate cronyism and little to do with free trade. At least Trump would have gotten that correct, albeit for the wrong reasons.
Regardless, Trump did strike a chord with those who think China is to blame. In the process, Trump picked up angry white crossovers and non-evangelicals, something any Republican needs to do to win.
Warmonger Analysis
I genuinely fear the military policies of Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, and Clinton.
On that score, Trump did not have all the right answers but at least he had some of them.
The US needs to stop military meddling. A strong bit of isolationism is in order, but I don’t mean building walls. But as far as wasting money goes, I would rather build a wall than drop bombs on Iran.
Trump is also correct about Israel, Russia, and Syria (or at least more correct), than Hillary and the rest of the Republicans.
That’s what really upsets the Republican neocon insiders. They want a more wars and a president they can control. Hillary, Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz all fit the bill nicely, at least from a military standpoint.
One Step Over the Line?
Did Trump finally take one step over the line too far with his ridiculous comments this past week?
While pondering the question, you may wish a musical backdrop.
Damaged Good?
Trump is not a person that Wall Street or the Neocons can control. Despite the rest of his baggage, those are good two reasons to support Trump. Here’s a bonus reason: Trump wants to audit the Fed.
In contrast, Hillary represents war-mongering, Wall Street sleaze at its finest. Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich are also votes for war. If you want war, vote for one of them. Flip a coin, it probably doesn’t matter.
If you are so fed up with the lot of them, a position I easily understand, then consider Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.
Is Trump now too damaged to win? It’s close, but if he wins New York outright with 50% of the vote he will win all of those delegates and get back on track.
Meanwhile, what Trump needs most is some serious foot-in-mouth control. The things that got Trump to this point are not the things that will carry him over the finish line.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Trump’s shortcoming is that he does not prepare. If he would lose his ego long enough to learn about the issues from experts in the particular field, he’d then be prepared to answer.
An easy answer to the question by Mathews would have been, “You are the one who created this hypothetical anti-abortion law Chris, you tell me, does your law require that women be punished?”
John – agree. Trump has to get serious about REALLY learning the issues. He has a good intuitive sense of right and wrong, what’s working and what’s not, but he has to go deeper. He needs expert help in all fields, and he must be able to speak on issues easily, even hypothetical questions. In the end, if he gets expert help and he really thinks and hashes issues out in his mind, he will do just fine. His intuitive sense is right, but he needs to justify any particular stance he has with reasoned arguments, be able to say to the people that if we go this way, this will happen; if we go another way, we’ll get this.
If I were he or his handlers, I’d take a weekend off and go deep into all the main issues. You are right, he needs to lose his ego. If he doesn’t understand a question or doesn’t know enough, be honest and say so, tell the people that you need to get up to speed on a particular issue in order to give it justice, and that your answer will be forthcoming.
Trump needs help to fine-tune his good intuitive sense. I’m sure his handlers are working on this.
This is the first time in my life time that I have had the opportunity to vote for someone who has business experience and knowledge.Period… Clinton said -“it’s the economy stupid.”
Why can’t we get this.
All of these side ventures out of the media are just distracting. We are trying to change the way our government works. The time to do this is running out.
No one is against women or women’s rights. Courts have decided this. Its about government and business. Its about the elected representing the citizens.
Nuance is not what Trump’s supporters are looking for.
.
bocnick37 said:
” … “it’s the economy stupid.” Why can’t we get this. ”
___________
Not everyone thinks the most important issue is mammon.
.
Mich, you’re usually right, but even you can be wrong. The polls I’ve heard WANT abortion overturned. As for war, the only one C,H,and K want is against ISIS. Are you for letting them run rampant in the Middle East, expanding brutality in a civilized world? Say you aren’t, please. Also, a large segment of women WANT their men like Trump; independent, say what they think, know the diff between men and women, know that most woman cherish childbirth and think abortion is a horror. That’s the middle class, and how many of them are out there?
Trump needs to stop the overly extemporaneous blabbering. It’s kind of fun for a month or 2, but if you want the guy to be President he needs to memorize and research his positions and stick to the plan. His foreign policy is very reasonable: Trash NATO, leave Ukraine to Russia, stop aiding ingrates like Saudis and Japan, get some reasonable trade policies. His Domestic Policies are not unreasonable too. It’s this litmus-test-crap from GOP. Abortion, guns and Jesus…who the hell cares.
He should have refused to answer the hypothetical regarding abortion being illegal. But his response to that hypothetical was consistent with how crimes are enforced, except for bankers and other above the law people. He gave a correct, but not politically correct, response.
Mish this non issue. No one cares about the Chris Mathews interview. It’s inside the the Washington Belt way echo chamber. It’s not even worth commenting on.
Obviously, Trump is not a seasoned politician – which will help him after this blows off.
.
Why is Trump being so blatantly inconsistent over an important
social/political issue… it really makes me think something else is
happening here. Politicians lie about issues… but usually their lies
are consistent before an election. Trump’s bizarre weirdness not only
brings him into question… but also the entire democratic process.
I think this was done on purpose. We are being covertly told that
not only is the current dog and pony show a sham… but the entire
demented deceptive democratic circus stinks.
.
Why is Trump being so blatantly inconsistent over an important
social/political issue… it really makes me think something else is
happening here. Politicians lie about issues… but usually their lies
are consistent before an election. Trump’s bizarre weirdness not only
brings him into question… but also the entire democratic process.
I think this was done on purpose. We are being covertly told that
not only is the current dog and pony show a sham… but the entire
demented deceptive democratic circus stinks.
.
It’s a non issue. Mish, who cares about a hypothetical question Chris Mathews posed. No one except the Washington echo chamber is even aware of if. I’m really surprised you even wrote about. Most people I know I have completely had it with the Press. They know the press is openly create news not reporting on it.
As for the people you claim wont’ vote for Trump now over this silly interview, I dare say we are doom then.
Again, it’s really sad when you people like yourself get caught up in the Chris Mathew’s baloney.
That’s some excellent political analysis Mish. The only reason I gave Trump any consideration was because I thought, being an anti-establishment outsider, he might be open to monetary reform. I see less and less evidence that this is true.
Now if libertarians and Austrians want to get on the bandwagon with my price deflationary retail discount innovation of Social Credit policies that integrates Austrian economic intentions, and form a natural alliance with small to medium businesses and consumers both of which have an interest in there being more money in the hands of the consumer….why it’d be a movement.
We don’t have to oppose ISIS or the TAliban with military force until they get nuclear weapons. We can isolate ourselves until then.
Oh, wait. Maybe that’s too late.
His daughter Ivanka I believe is the only one with the power and influence to keep Trump in line. She just had a baby and can’t keep an eye on dad right now. You notice it’s just in the last week he really went off the rails. The sooner she gets back involved again the better.
Mike, obviously you know he never wanted the job- just the publicity. Since the gop and dems were too incompetent to take him down he’s doing it himself. Period end of story.
Sent from my iPhone
>
Anybody but Trump because he doesn’t just wish to change policy but to dictate it. As much as Obama wishes to evade limits on his power, Obama ultimately has just stretched the prevailing margins incrementally. And if his executive orders such as deferred immigration enforcement are invalidated by a court, Obama will comply.
Trump cannot be trusted to, however. His way is to tantrum if denied, and to defy by any means available. Might makes right.
Riots if you (the Court) rule against me. And what army do you have, Mr. Chief Justice, by the way?
So, Trump threatens to expand executive power radically, not incrementally., and in contravention of the rule of law which has kept us relatively free. Trump is a danger to freedom.
Never Trump.
Bobby Hill – Obama has been an abomination, but he hasn’t really been in control, has he? We have an oligarchy (the “garchs”) and they’re firmly in control. No banker jailed, secret trade deals, no audit of the Fed, open borders, wars coming out of every pore.
But you’re saying we shouldn’t trust Trump???? Yeah, riiiiiight. Trump intuitively knows what’s wrong, but he’s not polished, is he? Would you rather have a bunch of smooth-talking, lying psychopaths running the asylum? Here’s a good article on what Trump stands for: “Which Presidential Candidate Am I?”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/25/81057/
You tell me whether those are good or bad things. Then compare that article to this one: “The Clintons and Wall Street: 24 years of Enriching Each Other”.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/26/the-clintons-and-wall-street-24-years-of-enriching-each-other/
At least Trump wants to talk and negotiate with Putin, want to stop the endless wars. He wants to break up the medical monopolies; you know, the ones that end up costing you your arm and leg each year. Here’s a few other good articles:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/11/american-exceptionalism-and-the-election-made-in-hell-or-why-id-vote-for-trump-over-hillary/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/21/why-i-wont-be-voting-for-hillary-in-november/
You want war? Then vote for Hillary. Bernie Sanders is a great guy, but he’s voted for every single war the U.S. has gotten into. Here’s Chris Hedges (a progressive guy) speaking about Bernie Sanders:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/15/chris-hedges-on-bernie-sanders-and-the-corporate-democrats/
And here’s another good article on Bernie:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/
Cruz is a slime who is about to be DC Madam’d! No one would care if he saw a prostitute or two or twenty, but when he holds up the Bible and thumps his morality, then people care, because that turns him from a sleaze into a hypocrite.
Kasich is part of the establishment. If you want more of the same, vote for him. Same with Cruz, Clinton and Bernie.
Read all of those articles (half an hour) and then tell me what you think.
This is exactly why i fear Trump. He has never given any indication that he grasps the notion of separation of power. He clearly wants all the power. A Trump nomination will be the best thing for the Libertarian party in years. In 1980, Clark was poised to make it a real 3rd party option, but John Anderson went independent, so the 3-person debates once again excluded the Libertarians, and the party has never been as strong as 1980 since then. Now is the time for it to rise.
The abortion (non-) issue is nothing more than a distraction.
A woman’s right to have an abortion became LAW in this country 43 years ago.
It is not up to the President or Congress to decide otherwise at this point.
The only way that LAW can be changed would be for the Supreme Court to over-rule itself, which has very, very rarely happened in the history of this country.
This is a non-issue and a complete waste of time and energy to discuss.
What happened here, I imagine, is that Trump isn’t really pro-life at all and is just pretending to be in order to pander to the evangelicals. This rare departure from his general policy of genuinely speaking his mind came back to bite him this time. Because he doesn’t believe for a minute that abortion will ever be banned, he has never given a single thought to the form that a ban would take. What he didn’t realize is that the abortion issue is like a chess opening where the first 15 moves have all been worked out through years of analysis, trial and error. Even the greatest player in the world, if he hasn’t memorized those 15 moves, will probably lose if he tries to work them out over the board in real-time play. Trump tried to wing it and messed up badly.
Trump was working from the false assumption that the anti-abortion movement really plans to take serious measures to abolish abortion. Even supposedly rabid right-wing anti-abortionists like Ted Cruz don’t really plan to do that. They don’t propose to punish women for having abortions, and they propose only mild sanctions for doctors who perform them. What they really propose is to regulate abortion clinics to make abortions somewhat more expensive and inconvenient. The vast majority of women, even self-proclaimed pro-life women, demand the right to have an abortion whenever they want one, and anything that threatens them with punishment for doing what they want will lose their vote. That’s why I think Trump’s gaffe has likely doomed his chances for the nomination.
That’s not the only way. Republicans in Congress could pass a constitutional amendment banning abortions. I’m sure they’ve done this hundreds of times, but Obama has been vetoing it for decades.
Presidents can not veto constitutional amendments. It has to be approved by three-fourths of the states after passing both houses of Congress. Abortion is pretty much a non-issue. Republicans have denounced Roe vs Wade for half a century yet have done changed it.
David,
I was being facetious. Of course Republicans have done nothing. If they did, why would anybody vote for them?
It doesn’t matter. Trump wasn’t going to get the required number of delegates to prevent a contested convention and the GOP will make up and change whatever rules they have to to screw him over. He’s running 3rd party and Clinton will waltz to the presidency.
The primary potential value of this election is the possibility that the major party machines which spew an endless series of yes men and women for the oligarchy’s preferred status quo distribution of citizen tax funds and new debt accrued on their tab will lose their control of which candidates we are ALLOWED to vote for in the general election.
That candidate vetting control is the primary reason for the results of the following study and, since the corrupt system will NEVER vote to end that which makes it so corrupt, campaign financing, the ONLY effective way to attack the problem is to REJECT the products of that system.
Trump and Sanders are both the results of such rejection and that is why they must be chosen by voters if we are to have any hope of ending the otherwise endless chain of RINOs and DINOs.:
From the 2014 Princeton University study:
Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
Excerpts:
A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. We report on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.
In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
…the preferences of economic elites (as measured by our proxy, the preferences of “affluent” citizens) have far more independent impact upon policy change than the preferences of average citizens do. To be sure, this does not mean that ordinary citizens always lose out; they fairly often get the policies they favor, but only because those policies happen also to be preferred by the economically-elite citizens who wield the actual influence.
From “Post-Soviet Lessons for a Post-America Century” by Dmitry Orlov, someone who experienced the collapse of the Soviet Union and the various effects of that collapse on life there:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1M56LtVzVcYJSMGKm5CV2RcePETqK1BwvF-Pb5AkdTXM/preview
People in the United States have a broadly similar attitude toward politics with people of the Soviet Union. In the U.S., this is often referred to as “voter apathy”, but it might be more accurately described as non-voter indifference. The Soviet Union had a single, entrenched, systemically corrupt political party, which held a monopoly on power. The U.S. has two entrenched, systemically corrupt political parties, whose positions are often indistinguishable, and which together hold a monopoly on power. In either case, there is, or was, a single governing elite, but in the United States it organized itself into opposing teams to make its stranglehold on power seem more sportsmanlike. (no, it’s to maintain the ILLUSION of voter control – W)
Although people often bemoan political apathy as if it were a grave social ill, it seems to me that this is just as it should be. Why should essentially powerless people want to engage in a humiliating farce designed to demonstrate the legitimacy of those who wield the power? In Soviet-era Russia, intelligent people did their best to ignore the Communists: paying attention to them, whether through criticism or praise, would only serve to give them comfort and encouragement, making them feel as if they mattered. Why should Americans want to act any differently with regard to the Republicans and the Democrats? For love of donkeys and elephants?
Gary Johnson is not the Libertarian party candidate for president. He is certainly one of the favorites but a candidate hasn’t been chosen yet.
This is exactly the problem.
You know Trump will destroy the establishment and their cronyism and the cause of the decay.
But because of a single issue which probably doesn’t affect the majority of those who are clutching their pearls and swooning on their fainting couch “How could Trump say such things”, they will instead let the status quo persist.
Should I demand perfection from your predictions, should demand posts here agree on everything?
There is a larger meta-issue. Women aren’t being held responsible for their actions. They are like infants or the insane without moral agency yet without conservators to “keep them safe” from the mean, cruel world. Then they go out and say they are equal. Do they know where babies come from or not? If they do, can they act on that knowledge (e.g. not getting into a drunken stupor at a frat party), or not?
There’s the regret fake rape of Jackie of the Rolling Stone article, remember Duke University, and “Mattress Girl”?
Women need to decide – If they want to be the protected princess on the pedestal, well I’ll see if I can 3d-print a chastity belt. If they want equality, it means taking the same responsibility for actions that men do.
If the result of a bad decision is a baby, she should be held responsible, and if she kills it, be it before or after birth, it is murder. The baby isn’t a mouse and has not committed any crime.
The idea of freedom is irrelevant and futile if you can say it doesn’t apply to any class of humans. Because who decides on that class?
And your point of democratization, you are saying BECAUSE a majority don’t favor restrictions on Abortion, we should follow the mob’s rule. But most want to steal more of your money for Obamacare, why not that? And most want to keep the big fat bankrupting retirement plans in Illinois and elsewhere. Hey, right and wrong, truth and falsehood, even mathematics don’t matter, just the opinion of the majority.
Perhaps you can be no more persuaded that Abortion is Murder than a Chicago schoolteacher or policeman can be persuaded they didn’t “earn” their ridiculously generous pension. But facts are stubborn things.
Another fact is if we don’t destroy the system, the last gentle chance was Ron Paul in 2012, and only Trump can do so this election, the system will destroy us and all we hold dear.
There are many things I detest about Trump. I cannot say I don’t care, only that I can’t say any other alternative is better.
Your friends want the country overrun with illegal immigrants who will get amnesty and welfare.
Your friends want managed un-free crony trade deals.
Your friends want more quagmires across the world taking our blood and treasure.
Your friends want the waste, fraud, and abuse, and the omnibus lack of budgets to continue unopposed.
Your friends want the erosion of liberties to continue.
Your friends want more bailouts and DC to continue being subject to the Financial interests.
Your friends want the deficits to continue to explode until we crash and everyone will lose 50% to a bail in and more in the following hyperinflation (with gold in all forms confiscated)..
Your friends will accept all that because Trump suggested he might do something on Abortion.
Your friends are either evil, stupid or insane.
“If the result of a bad decision is a baby, she should be held responsible, and if she kills it, be it before or after birth, it is murder.”
“Murder” is the illegal killing of another human being. Abortion is not illegal. It is perfectly legal to kill other human beings in the United States under certain circumstances. Self-defense is one. Capital punishment is another. We killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq. If you add in pure negligence and lack of compassion, thousands are killed every day.
So no, abortion is not murder. It is killing. And, as with the items above, is a personal moral issue. The question is do we have the right to impose our personal moral feelings on the rest of our fellow Americans?
Killing begets killing.
Is the unborn child a fellow American?
Does a mother have the right to impose her own morals on that child to the point of killing it?
You will note with the last question there is a complete contradiction in terms in that the moral the mother is exercising would be automatically and forever denied to the child in the case that she killed it.
The only moral that stands out as a certainty hence is that as an unborn child you are completely subject to the reasoning of the mother.
As her reasoning will be partly a product of the society around her, you would hence be majorly subject to that society also.
Hence it could be stated that you are ( unwittingly maybe) a fellow of that society.
Are your fellows then not allowed to defend your ability to learn and hold morals?
To survive?
Or are they to pre-emptively sanction the choice of the mother and turn their backs.
So you could say, in principal, there is no moral defense available to a purposeful act of that nature.
The fact that under any circumstance used to justify the act there will later be no way to corroberate any other outcome as plausible or acceptable, is completely self fulfilling in its effect and therefore should be understood as speculative until proven otherwise.
Crysangle,
The same reasoning applies to any application of killing, be it self-defense, abortion, capital punishment and war.
Everybody makes a choice where to define killing as moral. In the end, in America, it comes down to democratic processes. Either that, or the imposition of the morality of a single dictator. Which usually ends poorly.
As a nation, we have decided it is ok to kill people who have been legally convicted of murder, it is ok to kill essentially anyone in war (or police actions), it is ok to kill we feel we are being threatened, and of course abortion.
Conservative evangelicals typically find killing to be moral except for abortion. Catholics reduce it to self-defense and war. Some Liberal Quakers deny it is ever acceptable.
I am always concerned when people start making distinctions. That is easily manipulated.
We are our own worst enemies , as the saying goes .
Let’s review Donald J. Trump’s Presidential qualifications…
Obama is against Trump…
The Media is against Trump…
The establishment Democrats are against Trump…
The establishment Republicans are against Trump…
The Pope is against Trump…
The UN is against Trump…
The EU is against Trump…
China is against Trump…
Mexico is against Trump…
George Soros is against Trump…
BlackLivesMatter is against Trump…
MoveOn.Org is against Trump…
Koch Bros are against Trump…
Hateful, racist, violent Liberals are against Trump…
Glen Beck threatened to kill Trump
Other death threats arriving regularly
Bonus points – Best qualifications ever:
Cher says she will leave the country…
Miley Cyrus says she will leave the country…
Whoopi says she will leave the country…
Rosie says she will leave the country…
Sharpton says he will leave the country…
Did I miss anything? Yes, The Donald has plenty of negative attributes also, especially, as Mish pointed out, his problem with foot-in-mouth disease.
Yes, can you tell me if Justin Timberlake will leave and stay out of the country? If Trump goes ahead and builds a wall across the Canadian border, will that help?
I agree. Trump 2016 … !!!!
Reminds me of the story of the frog and the scorpion http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop1.cgi?4&TheScorpionandtheFrog
Mish, this abortion blowup is not even real. It has been cherry picked and edited and misrepresented by frenzied hacks from both right and left. It was a non-committal shoulder shrugging hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question. It was a typically stupid question from the usually whacko Chris Matthews.
Trump’s attraction to this point has been his willingness to answer every question off the cuff without a phony focus grouped milquetoast answer for real issues. Let’s not cause him to withdraw into the handler’s shell along with the rest of them for all the reasons you stated. Let’s be frank that it was a realistic answer to a hypothetical. If this country were to outlaw abortion or anything else, there would be legal penalties for violating such a law. One must assume such laws would have wide support to be passed and violators would be sanctioned. That was essentially his conclusion. He in no way suggested he supported such laws or such criminal punishment. He stated the obvious. Nothing more.
Let us not go to a dark place where a guy being logical and open is a bad thing or a reason not to support someone.
It doesn’t matter who the Republican candidate is, I am voting for them as will many who are fed up with the current corrosive administration…… No more Dem’s!
I marvel at the lunacy of those who make abortion their “one issue” test for President. It shows an utter lack of understanding of what our Constitutional Republic really is. This said, the media and the communist/fascist in DC seeking status quo, know they can use that one issue to “turn off” a great deal of idiot voters.
You make a reasoned comparison of the candidates on important issues, but allow yourself to fall prey to the baiting on the abortion non-issue.
All of these candidates are pathetic, as they have been for at least the last 7-8 elections. The ONLY hope for a restoration is from the People, through their states, stopping the unConstitutional usurpation of powers by the federal government.
Then the people can have or ban all the abortions they want.
The 14th amendment ended state privilege, forever. The constitution was fundamentally reconstructed thereafter.
Well said. The abortion issue has been driven to the extremes. One camp wants abortion up to the third trimester and the other camp wants to define a fertilized egg as fully human. Both positions lead to ridiculous conclusions.
Trump an outsider? Get real.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-01/just-warning-ron-paul
Trump is a very simple decision to me. He wants to torture prisoners and kill children whose parents might be terrorists. Nothing else he might do outweighs that kind of evil.
Yes, he said he will obey the law, but he also said he wants to change it. So this is someone with a badly broken or missing moral compass. We give him power at our peril.
Patrick – I agree that on abortion and torture Trump is way off the mark. I don’t think he’s thought any of these topics through, like, for instance, how people who are tortured will say absolutely anything just to get the torture to stop. You really don’t get to the truth in most cases. As I said above, he’s flying by the seat of his pants on some issues, hasn’t thought them through. Torture is wrong, no doubt about it.
But take a look at the rest of his positions (see below). He wants to stop wars, negotiate. Without constant made-up wars, how much would the U.S. be torturing anybody? They’d be minding their own business (which is not what the military-industrial money-grubbers want) and merely defending their own borders, not aggressively seeking war.
Trump needs to step back, read, think, get some expert help, and then speak. He hasn’t thought these issues through. You can tell by the way he speaks: he’s unsure, and it’s not coming from conviction. These are not issues he’s thought a lot about, obviously. He definitely needs to stop and seriously think about them.
As far as I can tell, Trump has zero interest in reading, thinking or getting any expert help. He has spent his entire career surrounding himself with yes-men and toadies who indulge his impulses and tell him what they think he wants to hear. His new so-called foreign policy team is composed of people who, if he listens to them, will tell him to be more aggressive overseas, not less so.
Furthermore, we need not be in constant made-up wars for torture to be an issue. The Bush administration began it while conducting a relatively small incursion into Afghanistan that almost everyone agreed was justified. Trump will have many temptations to order and/or permit torture and everything we see suggests he will do so. His lawyers will find some statutory fig leaf to let him believe it is legal, just as Bush’s did.
Torturing prisoners and murdering terrorists’ children (which you don’t mention) are not simply “way off the mark.” They are monstrously evil and in opposition to everything our country stands for. In my book, anyone who even for a moment thinks they can be justified is permanently disqualified from holding any public office.
Other than Bernie Sanders, you have disqualified the entire lot of them, throwing drone policy int the mix.
Yes. Cruz, Kasich and Hillary Clinton are no better. I have other issues with Sanders, so will probably write in Ron Paul in November. I will not be party to whatever these people unleash on us.
Here’s a good article on Trump: “Which Presidential Candidate Am I?”
“Of the four Republican presidential semi-finalists who have spoken and debated during the first three months of 2016, who am I?
I am the only candidate who has taken a mostly nationalist or non-interventionist approach—as opposed to internationalist or imperialistic—to foreign affairs, saying that trillions of dollars wasted on wars like Iraq should have been spent on American infrastructure at home (e.g., schools and bridges).
I am the only candidate who has pointed out that George W. Bush was president on September 11, 2001, and who has criticized him for not keeping our country safe.
I am the only candidate who opposed the Iraq War in 2004 and has strongly denounced it in 2016.
I am the only candidate who has rejected the policy of meddling in Syria and trying to overthrow the Assad regime.
I am the only candidate who has said that the U.S. president should be a neutral broker in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
I am the only candidate who has not rattled the sword at Russia but instead has warned about the possibility of World War III if we pursue a belligerent course.
I am the only candidate who has questioned our government’s close relations with Saudi Arabia.
I am the only candidate who has questioned the need for continued membership in NATO, relic of the Cold War and instrument of US/Euro wars of aggression.
I am the only candidate who has said he wants good relations with all countries and would have a strong military that wouldn’t be necessary to use.
I am the only candidate who has expressed a willingness to normalize relations with Cuba (during the Florida debate, which elicited boos from the audience).
I am the only candidate who has rejected the bipartisan program of economic globalization, including NAFTA and TPP (unfair trade agreements driven by transnational corporations).
I am the only candidate who has promised to return factory jobs to the United States by warning corporate executives that their outsourced products would receive a substantial tariff upon being imported.
I am one of two candidates who has linked illegal immigration to lower wages and higher unemployment for unskilled and blue-collar American workers, which is another reason I have earned hostility from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/25/81057/
If you want more wars and pandering to Wall Street, Hillary is your man! “The Clintons and Wall Street: 24 Years of Enriching Each Other”:
“For twenty four years the Clintons have orchestrated a conjugal relationship with Wall Street, to the immense financial benefit of both parties. They have accepted from the New York banks $68.72 million in campaign contributions for their six political races, and $8.85 million more in speaking fees. The banks have earned hundreds of billions of dollars in practices that were once prohibited—until the Clinton Administration legalized them.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/26/the-clintons-and-wall-street-24-years-of-enriching-each-other/
Read it and weep.
The Clinton’s fundamentally turned the Democratic Party into the GOP Lite. Bill Clinton’s was an historic presidency in which he recognized that the democratic base, blue collar industrial tradesmen, had to be sold out for cash from the finance industry. He kept the democratic party alive in the face of the wholesale outsourcing of American industry. Obama follows closely in those footsteps.
He made himself fabulously wealthy for that treason.
Cruz is cruising for a bruising. He’s about to be DC Madam’d. No one would really care (except the evangelicals) whether Cruz used one, two or twenty prostitutes, but what they care about is that on the one hand he thumps his Bible and speaks about morality, while on the other hand he’s sleazing all over the place and then lying about it (or at least not answering with a “yes” or “no” answer). That makes him a hypocrite. Plus he’s a member of the establishment, and with him you’d get more of the same: wars, more debt, no banker jailed, corruption, sweet and secretive trade deals for the multinationals.
Bernie is a nice person, but he’s voted for every war the U.S. has been involved in during his time. Chris Hedges (a progressive, even) speaks poorly about Bernie.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/15/chris-hedges-on-bernie-sanders-and-the-corporate-democrats/
And then “The Myth of Bernie Sanders”:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/
Cruz is cruising for a bruising. It looks like he’s about to be DC Madam’d. Ouch! Most people wouldn’t care (except the evangelicals) if he had hired some prostitutes. But when Cruz then turns around and thumps the Bible and speaks about morality, tries to portray himself as holier than thou, and won’t answer “yes” or “no” as to whether he’s had affairs, then he comes off as a hypocrite. He’s careful not to say “no” because that would make him a liar as well.
Plus, he’s a part of the DC establishment. With him you’d get more of the same: wars, more debt, corruption, sweet and secretive trade deals for the multinationals, monopolies, etc. Sleaze.
Bernie is a nice man, but even the progressive Chris Hedges is not impressed.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/15/chris-hedges-on-bernie-sanders-and-the-corporate-democrats/
And another good article:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/
I want nothing more then Hillary to lose the next election, That said, Trump is clueless on foreign policy and he will get his butt handed to him by Hillary in any debates. He will make Perot’s running mate Adm Stockdale look like a great debater although his insults will be entertaining. The media is trying to destroy Cruz (Mish is the media too) and the unsophisticated voter will again be distracted by shiny objects and emotion and let this opportunity to elect a great candidate(Sen Cruz) pass them by. .
superdooper – “The media is trying to destroy Cruz”? What? I thought Trump held that distinction. Cruz is a sleazy man: Bible-thumper by day, prostitute-thumper by night. Unsophisticated voter? That’s just it, voters are no longer being fooled by shiny objects. Trump is not shiny; he’s rough, everybody knows that. Shiny objects are what Obama represented: smooth-talking, slow saunter, eloquent speech, wore a good suit, read a good teleprompter. Now that was one shiny object that sucked everybody in. Clinton too. “Unsophisticated voter”? How about unprincipled candidate.
Cruz is a part of shiny Washington, D.C. He’s a member of the establishment, and he’ll make sure the status quo continues. Lots of war, lots of corruption, lots of looting. The people are tired of this crap, but apparently you’re not.
And “Trump is clueless on foreign policy”? Yeah, because it’s been going so well, hasn’t it? Not. The United States has been in almost every single country, bombing the shite out of them. Can you just smell the success in the air?
April Fool’s Day was yesterday.
Trump was apparently baited to mouth “lawbreakers must be punished” regarding abortion. Yet he monopolized the news for a week and turned it around saying “Abortion law must not be changed.”
—
Trump is a strategic genius. It is within the realm of possibility that he staged that section of the interview in advance. For sure he does not begin an interview without personally laying down the guidelines in no uncertain terms to the interviewer. And woe betide who does not obey Trump. Megyn Kelly got the shortest haircut of her life and a short leash on her contract. Fox viewership is down ten percent.
Jack – “Fox viewership is down ten per cent.” Good, I hope it goes down a lot more, like down 90%. I won’t even turn on CNN now. Absolutely every second is spent on Trump, pulling him apart. Nothing on Clinton and her emails and the investigation hovering over her head, nothing. Nothing on Cruz and his girls. You barely hear about Bernie, only to say that Clinton will probably beat him, but that it’s nice that he continues to struggle on. All of their time is spent pulling down Trump.
Charles Hugh Smith had a good article re the money that goes into media advertising from both parties. Millions and millions are supplied from Super-PAC’s, and of course they all want Trump destroyed. So the major media outlets are being paid a lot of money, and you can imagine if they ran anything favorable about Trump or Sanders that heads would roll. The money train would stop.
“When a Super-PAC raises $100 million for Hillary, Jeb, et al., where does 90% of that money go? To the Corporate Media. […] Real campaign finance reform would gut Corporate Media’s profits. […] Nobody has to openly state that big advertisers are not going to get negative coverage; editorial staff know better than to even propose such a self-destructive notion. Stories are either buried (“this one needs more research”) or they are never proposed due to self-censorship by editorial staff worried that their head will roll in the next downsizing.”
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmar16/corp-media3-16.html
It’s not over for Trump by a long shot – as long as he doesn’t intentionally sabotage himself like Perot did in 1992. When he walked right into Chris Matthew’s (of all people) trap the first thing that came to my mind was Ross Perot who led both Clinton and Bush 1 by double-digit percentages until he took a dive and was carried out fo the ring feet first.
Trump is not a stupid man. He knew that Matthews would try to take him down. Yet he appeared on his show and then took the bait. Sorry, I can’t believe it wasn’t intentional.
I find it interesting that when Hillary had a big lead Sanders makes a comeback. And when Trump had a big lead that Cruz makes a comeback. Me wonders whether the media and the candidates are in cahoots to appear to make a horse race out of these political races to squeeze as much advertising revenue out of the public as possible.
I’ve felt these elections have been rigged for the longest time. What I’ve seen happen in this latest one only substantiates my suspicions.
LFOldTimer – “…whether the media and the candidates are in cahoots to appear to make a horse race out of these political races to squeeze as much advertising revenue out of the public as possible.”
I sure wouldn’t put it past them. Get people interested, get people donating, and 90% of the money (see my post above) ends up in the hands of corporate media. Anderson Cooper gets a raise, the political pundits are paid well, and everybody’s pockets are bulging. The American people get duped again.
Very plausible. Campaign finance reform is sorely needed, and it would put a stop to all of this. I don’t understand why every candidate isn’t given a list of identical questions to answer, and then these get posted on-line. Then every candidate lists their positions (foreign policy, education, health care, abortion, etc.), explaining their reasons for said positions, why they wouldn’t vote any other way, and have their positions posted on-line. Sure would save a lot of time and money. Cut corporate media right out of the loop.
The donations are just pouring into Bernie Sanders campaign now even though he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hades of being nominated by the democrat party unless Hillary gets indicted. And the odds of that happening are 100 to 1. The money makes it all worthwhile for some stumblebum politician to run against the headliner even though he has no chance for a victory (and never had a chance). The media manipulates the story to give the false impression that Sanders has a chance of overtaking Hillary and winning the nomination. Of course, nothing is further from the truth. This drives higher viewship (ratings) at the next debate and generates more advertsing dollars. It’s a win-win-win for the crooked political system, the media and the Wall Street advertisers. All the while the stupid peasants are played like a fiddle believing that it’s still a horse race when the winner was chosen long before the Iowa primary.
Substitute Cruz’ name for Sanders.
Sorry for being so cynical. But I’ve been alive for about 20 of these POTUS election cycles and carefully monitored at least 15. Each one just provides more evidence that the electoral system is rigged. I’m not running for office so I can be honest about it. And I refuse defy my own God-given common sense.
I think Trump sees the writing on the wall now and no matter what he does he will not get the nomination. Thus his change of mind in supporting the RNC delegate. The problem in todays world is we expect politically correct people that do not make mistakes when doing speeches and media interviews. You do not hear the media discussing the FBI investigation of Hillary. Although you can watch many criticisms of Bernie. Bottom line the career politically correct politicians are scared to death of these two, more so of Trump as they cannot control him.
He is making a mockery of our electoral system for all to see and they still do not get it. I think he is a master at playing the media though getting all of this coverage for FREE! I do not care about his statements about women, quite honestly women should be held accountable for their actions. Instead we hand them money!
The only way Trump does not get the nomination is if he takes a dive and sabotages his own campaign or if the RNC steals it from him by nominating Paul Ryan after Trump did all the heavy lifiting while Ryan sat on the sidelines waiting for all the vultures (media, establishment pubs and dems, Wall Street, foreigners, George Soros, etc…) to pick the meat off Trump’s bones. (Or a combination of the 2). If the RNC nominates Ryan they are going to destroy the Republican Party. Cruz will NOT be the nominee. If Trump does not continue on to the general election it will be a coveted insider.
The quicker the American people figure out that these elections are rigged the better off our country will be.
@Old Guy,
“FREE!” Yes! Isn’t that terrible! 😉
Glad to see Gary Johnson mentioned. I voted for him in 2012 and will be voting for him again this year. I enjoyed reading into what he did as Governor in NM, actually coming out with a budget surplus!
Gary Johnson? Again? That old GOP retread? He’s the one who said no crimes were committed on Wall Street in 2008-09 at the last Libertarian Presidential debate in 2012. It’s a shame the Libertarians can’t find a decent candidate to represent their Party. They keep using Gary Johnson over and over again and he repeatedly delivers 1% of the vote. You’d think after a while they’d learn.