politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Trump out at #RSG15; Update: Fiorina to Trump: “There. Is. No. Excuse.”
Source:
HotAir
URL Source: http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/07/breaking-trump-out-at-rsg15/
Published: Aug 7, 2015
Author: Ed Morrissey
Post Date: 2015-08-08 10:22:08 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 103993
Comments: 479
Earlier this evening, CNN’s Don Lemon interviewed Donald Trump about the debate on Fox News Channel last night, and set off another Trump-related tempest. After noting that Kelly pushed Trump during the debate, and that she “pushed a lot of people” besides Trump, Lemon asked, “What is it with you and Megyn Kelly?” Trump’s reply was, er … colorful, to say the least [emphasis mine]: TRUMP: Well, I just don’t respect her as a journalist, I have no respect for her. I don’t think she’s very good, I think she’s highly overrated. But when I came out there, you know — what am I doing? I’m not getting paid for this. I go out there, and they start saying this stuff [garbled]. But you know, I didn’t know there’d be 24 million people. I knew it was going to be a big crowd because I get crowds, I get ratings. They call me the ratings machine. So I have, you know, she gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions, and you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her … wherever. But in my opinion, she was off base. Kelly did ask Trump tough questions in last night’s debate, but she asked tough questions of Marco Rubio on abortion too, and of other candidates on stage as well. As the front-runner, Trump should have expected tough questions, especially given his track record of supporting nearly every progressive idea at one time or another, including Hillary Clinton being President. Kelly also asked Trump about his remarks about women, which appears to have particularly rankled him — and pushed him into validating Kelly’s premise in asking those questions in the first place. After all, it’s not often when a major party candidate takes a shot at a woman by reminding everyone of her menstrual cycle. I’m certain that will really impress women about their place in the Republican Party. Trump was scheduled to speak at the Red State Gathering tomorrow, in the final slot at the event. Not long after these remarks, event organizer Erick Erickson announced that he had withdrawn the invitation: I have rescinded my invitation to Mr.Trump. While I have tried to give him great latitude, his remark about Megyn Kelly was a bridge too far — Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) August 8, 2015 That will undoubtedly anger some Trump supporters, but after last night’s debate performance and his thin-skinned whining afterward, I wonder if that group wasn’t already in decline. This might fire up the die-hard Trump troops, but suggesting that a journalist went after his target-rich record only because she was menstruating should be a disqualifier for most voters. It’s vastly worse than anything Todd Akin said, and will almost certainly have media outlets demanding responses from the other Republican candidates. It’s practically tailor-made for Democrats to hoist up the Republican War On Women banner, especially Hillary Clinton. Get ready for plenty of Team Trump dog-in-the-manger, sour-grapes quotes in the morning, if not overnight. There may be some legitimate anger among a small group of RSG15 attendees tomorrow who wanted to see Trump at this event, but Erick has a solid case for not wanting to have this overshadow the event tomorrow, with more presidential candidates on hand to make their pitches. Erick will almost certainly address this in the morning, and we’ll see what the fallout is over the rest of the day. Update: Carly Fiorina appears to be the first Republican candidate to respond to Trump’s remarks, perhaps fittingly so (via Twitchy): Mr. Trump: There. Is. No. Excuse. — Carly Fiorina (@CarlyFiorina) August 8, 2015 I stand with @megynkelly. — Carly Fiorina (@CarlyFiorina) August 8, 2015 That’s interesting, because Fiorina actually deflected a Trump question at her presser today at RSG15 by asking why the media wasn’t calling out Obama for his offensive comments about opponents of the Iran deal. Not this time, apparently. Update: Erick has an explanation up at RedState: But I also think that while Mr. Trump resonates with a lot of people with his bluntness, including me to a degree, there are just real lines of decency a person running for President should not trust. His comment was inappropriate. It is unfortunate to have to disinvite him. But I just don’t want someone on stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal. It just was wrong. I have invited Megyn Kelly to attend in Donald Trump’s place tomorrow night. Well, that would be interesting. We’ll see if she can swing that.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-126) not displayed.
.
.
.
#127. To: Vicomte13, TooConservative (#122)
(Edited)
Yes. Women are equal nowadays. I am probably rationalizing Trump's boorish behavior (and I am a supporter) but if women want to be treated as equals and not like children (their pre suffrage legal status) then they can be metaphorically punched bloody. Politics is a blood sport it is said, is it not? The thing with Trump is that he is saying, I may talk like this but I am a highly competent business man/man of action. I will fix problems - I am a problem solver. Steve Jobs is praised as some sort of genius - and he was in a way. But he was also a complete asshole and boor as well. But if he ran for president his talents are so great that it outweighs having poor manners. Same kind of thinking people have with Trump. He has poor table manners but he will fix stuff. Also, here is the unsaid truth that the GOP is freaking over - ideologues don't solve shit. If ideology says 2+2 must equal 5 then an ideologue will never really fix a problem where the answer is 4. So deep down many Republicans must be thinking this. Trump will fix this and because he is not a true conservative all that bullshit we know is conservative ideological bullshit ideology (like capitalism's love of free trade is good for American jobs) won't get in his way.
All the bad things the GOP party said would happen under Clinton in terms of the economy did not happen - the economy was booming. An economy, freedom and business atmosphere STILL basking in the policies of Reagan and Poppy Bush. Reagan's policies made the US a powerhouse during the 80s midway thru the 90s. Yes, REAGAN. Klintoon's 8 years of over-officiousness, over-regulations, and anti-business policies soon helped jettison American factories and business to China. HELLO. 0buma passes a tax increase and now we are passing the economic level Romney said his tax cuts would take us to. And where is that? To hell in a hand-basket?? Two socialists whose nonsensical policies are devastating the US economy is NOT a surprise.
A debtor nation is not an economic power house indicator. That is like saying you are rich because you live off my credit cards. Clinton raised taxes and the economy boomed. He used the raised taxes from a booming economy to balance the budget. Bush, jr cut taxes and gave all the American people a refund because individual Americans know what is best with how to use their money and their credit card bills rose and the economy sank anyways. Reagan actually cut taxes and had to raise them again. No windfall in revenue came from cutting taxes - it did not somehow grow revenue from investments or some such.
I think he meant eyes; that is old term for being out to get someone. Megyn is a Fox News star; and they've got an agenda of supporting the RNC establishment picks. Most of the drones on that stage are fine to Rupert, but an independent guy like Trump is not. Rupert's RINO's are pushing an agenda, and threats to the agenda need to be ambushed. The globalist RINO is not too popular with the folks they're peddling it to; so lots of subterfuge. The RNC vineyards have not produced a good vintage in decades; so tey've resorted to passing off anti-freeze as wine. But they do not dare label it truthfully.
I agree. We need to do more to get Christians in the ME out of that Muslim hell hole.
"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
It's not sustainable as we do it. It is sustainable the way that France, Sweden and Denmark does it. Oh, and those three countries are the only places in the entire world where the WHITE birth rate is stable at replacement rate. EVERYWHERE ELSE has a less generous safety net, and therefore everywhere else has a white middle class that is dwindling in numbers because the fertility rate is below replacement (in America, it is WELL below replacement), and that is because the middle class simply do not feel secure enough to have children, or to have ENOUGH children to maintain their population. So the whites are dying out, everywhere EXCEPT France, Sweden and Denmark. That's it. That's all. And what do France, Sweden and Denmark have in common? Highly progressive and redistributive taxation, which prevents excessive wealth accumulation at the top through taxes, and spends those resources on the sort of comprehensive social safety net that makes the middle class feel secure enough to have babies. So they do. I myself, personally, am simply tired of arguing with Americans about it. Love your money and your system that much? Fine. Fucking die out and be replaced by Mexicans. Because that is what will happen. In 25 years the French will outnumber the Germans, and France will once again be the most populous and economically powerful country in Europe again. That is because of an intentional, comprehensive, targeted program of shoring up families and redistributing the national wealth to them so that they have children, so that the children are well-nourished, well-educated, and everybody is well-cared for, and the elderly are provided for. That's expensive, but it works. People are secure, and so they invest in the real future by having children, more and more. Sweden and Denmark do the same thing. Works there too. Works everywhere. It's WHY people are having babies. Know why France conquered Germany in 1806-1807 and again in 1808? Because the French had 35 million and the Germans had about 10 million. The French overwhelmed them with numbers. Know why France almost failed in World War I? Because by then, Germany had bloomed to 70 million, but France had 35 million. In World War II France was conquered by a country that outnumbered her 2:1. That's what happens when you focus on everything in the world but what matters to breeding families, and you heap burdens on them and refuse to relieve those burdens, refuse to redistribute wealth from the rich: your people don't breed, and you shrink in numbers, and then the more numerous people across the border come and take your land from you. That's what happened to France, which is why they have a long-range, determined program to increase their population, and why the subsidize the necessities of life: because that's the ONLY WAY TO GET BABIES. People who are economically overstressed and who do not have security, do not have babies. Americans don't. The English don't. The Germans don't. The Greeks don't. But the French do. And the Swedes do. And the Danes do. Not coincidentally, they also have the most comprehensive social safety nets, and the most redistributive tax systems: children cost money, and raising them up to be well- educated adults who can contribute to the national advancement costs a lot of money. The French, Swedes and Danes spend the money, so they have the babies. And that means that France will be the alpha card in Europe. European French people will be the most numerous, and they'll be staring across borders and waters at an England full of old white people and young Pakistanis, and a Germany full of young Turks, Polish immigrants, but a dying out German population that is being replaced in the land. In 100 years, America will speak Spanish, for the same reason. Demographics is destiny, and it is power. It is culture and language. It is everything. The only way to have robust demographics is to incentivize it. The only way to do that - the only way that actually WORKS in the real world of real numbers - is progressive taxation, massive wealth redistribution, and a heavy and comprehensive social safety net. I'm on the side of life and victory. I know why France was overrun by Germany in the World Wars, and why America and the USSR won: numbers. America is being overrun now, because of the numbers game. We've aborted and contracepted a huge hole in our economy and our future. The birth rate has collapsed. So we have two choices, the RIGHT one, which would be to pay workers much higher wages, for their scarce labor, or the one we've done, which is import. We have imported our future. I'm Latin and Catholic - having America turn into Mexico doesn't bother me. It's inevitable. demographics is destiny. It doesn't have to be, but Americans refuse to be realistic about what it takes to get white middle class people to have children again. Stuck on stupid and unwilling to change, white America will simply die out and be replaced. "The actress hasn't learned the lines you'd like to hear. She won't join your clubs. She won't dance in your halls. She won't help the hungry once a month at your tombolas. She'll simply take control as your disappear." - Evita.
After Republicans overthrow of a regime that protected Muslims the best one can offer is an evacuation of Christians from where Christianity began. Bush's presidency was a disaster.
Consuming your way to wealth is the hallmark of RINOnomics. The ethos of Aesop's grasshopper is that of the modern GOP. Those who save the surplus of what the earn are only to be regarded as targets to be swindled by guys like Jon Corzine.
So, yes, Kelly may have an agenda. A yuge paycheck and the power of being a network anchor, independent of Fox News. Interesting. She can go to a TV network and finally be herself. NBC misses their old Ava Braun (Katie Couric). They can get a new one. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Media to any GOP nominee: "Why did you not confront Donald Trump's hate speech toward Mexicans or even Megan Kelly? Aren't you part of the GOP's War On Womyn?" Etc. Yes that fraud Wassamen Schultz made that clear to Kelly after the debate. Frankly it's an effective tool for them to do so given the tools we have voting these days. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Yeah all happened after the Contract with America in 1995. The same Congress that shutdown government to curb Bubbas spending sprees. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Don't be so sure. Before, I've said that I would never vote Republican again. Now I will if Trump is the nominee. Trump has earned my support, by drawing forth the poison and making it expose itself for all to see. I see it, and I see how it strikes at him, and when it strikes at him using these cunning little ploys, it strikes at me. I'll vote for Trump as a Republican. I'll vote for him as an Independent. Hell, I'll vote for him as a Democrat. It's not about parties. The parties are totally corrupt. It's about a method of manipulation that seeks to nullify what a person is by creating shifting walls of what is "acceptable discourse". Acceptable to WHOM? The more Trump fights, the more I will back him now. He has already won my vote. Now, I want to see him tear them to pieces, have better ideas (example: his common market in health insurance: he's right about that). If they want to make it personal, then make it PERSONAL. Toe to toe, face to face. See, Donald Trump s a good guy. He's an honest guy. I can see it. THEREFORE, when he is attacked like this, whoever is doing the attacking is a scumbag, a shill, a cheat, a cunt - by definition. By definition, if you oppose Donald Trump now in the media or the Establishment, it's obvious that you're evil and part of the problem. So the more that they attack, the more righteous he is, and the more evil they obviously are. That's the only way to fight this. Unleash a whirlwind of fiery hate. They use controlled hate to try to manipulate, it's cold hate. The response should be a volcanic blast of focused hate that literally destroys everything in its path. And if Donald wins, after having had to divide the party. He should not walk through and make nice. He should walk through and execute the wounded on the field. Use the IRS files, just like they all do, to TAKE OUT the rich who came after him. He knows their tricks. Destroy them. It's revolution, and it comes from a mouthy aristocrat. Trump should be the modern Lafayette.
The same Congress that shutdown government to curb Bubbas spending sprees. So, the Republicans controlled Congress, and therefore the Republicans are responsible for the Clinton prosperity? OK. So, the Republicans have controlled Congress now during Obama's term, so are they to be blamed for Obama's failures? Or is it just a one way door? Democrats controlled the House during Reagan's entire tour in office, and the Senate during part of it, so Democrats are to be credited with much of the Reagan success, yes? Or is this just a one way door? If it's a one way door, I'm not buying it, because one way doors in politics are lies designed to bolster one party over the other. And I have a very low tolerance for lies.
Which tells us something, about you and about Trump. But since it's Saturday night, maybe it's time for a music video.
Yah, yah. It's been done already. A link from AoS:
Your talking points deep political commentary is paper thin. I will again mention Bubba was restrained by a GOP dominated House and Senate. Which means he taxed high in the first two years, lost the Dem House majority and was not able to raise taxes the final 6 years. Add to that a GOP balanced budget. If not for the Gingrich Congress, Bubba would have spent us into the same oblivion that Bush 2 and Obola did. The success of Bubba was not raising taxes, which later he said he did too much, but realizing the new GOP congress was not going away and looking for things he could do to increase his legacy. For example the reform of welfare he signed into law. Of course Obola blotted out that accomplishment of Bubba-Gingrich. Stop reading those DC area textbooks. National economics are a lot more complex than we all think. And takes years to figure out all the dynamics. A good explanation here: As for Gingrich, he was quite accurate when he said the economy did better in the '90s after the Republicans took control of Congress, in particular after the '97 tax cuts. In fact, the Gross Domestic Product shrank in the first year after the Clinton tax hikes to an annual rate of 2.9 percent down from 1992's 3.4 percent. That's right: the economy as measured by GDP was better the year before Clinton took office and raised taxes than it was the year after. By far the best years under Clinton came after the Republican tax cuts when the GDP grew annually by 4.5 percent, 4.4 percent, 4.8 percent, and 4.1 percent from 1997 to 2000. The best job creation also occurred after the Republicans took over Congress with less than seven million new jobs created in 1993 and 1994 compared to over sixteen million in the next six years. As for the fiscal impact of the Clinton tax hikes, the left always ignores that we ran budget deficits in his first term. It was only after the Republican tax cuts that surpluses occurred. As for the stock market, Gingrich was of course correct that it did far better after the Republicans took over Congress than the two years when the Democrats controlled everything: I explained this all on Willie's horrible thread where you made the same claims. You did not respond to the data. Here's the entire piece: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/12/09/newt- gingrich-schools-lawrence-odonnell-clinton-tax-hikes "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
The same Congress that shutdown government to curb Bubbas spending sprees. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/09/lawrence-odonnell-newt-gingrich- apology-meet-the-press_n_2267553.html O'Donnell and Gingrich were both panelists on the program's roundtable. During a discussion on the fiscal cliff, O'Donnell reminded Gingrich that he falsely predicted in 1993 that the economy would suffer if then-President Bill Clinton raised tax rates. "Who said this?" O'Donnell said as he started to read off a piece of paper. "'The tax increase will kill jobs and lead to a recession, and the recession will force people out of work and onto unemployment, and actually increase the deficit.' That’s Newt Gingrich in 1993 on the Clinton tax increase." O'Donnell turned to Gingrich and said that "those working on the other side of that tax increase," which included O'Donnell, "have been waiting for [his] apology for 20 years for being completely wrong about that." From 1993 through 1995, O'Donnell served as staff director of the U.S. Senate Committee of Finance.
Yes it does, about me. I don't know what the support of some nobody tells anybody about Donald Trump. He's his own man.
This prediction did not happen. Clearly the economic theory failed to meet the prediction. This contradiction between the official ideology and the facts is what I propose has destroyed confidence in GOP's current ideology on a subliminal level. This I think is the real reason Clinton was deeply hated by the GOP. Clinton was a conservative Democrat more than any in recent history yet he was hated. Why? He exposed the other side's operating thesis as a lie.
[Vicomte13] to TRY to shut him down. What matters at this point is how he plays with the GOP primary voters, not the GOP moderate leadership. While the flash polls are not scientific, I think they may better reflect the GOP primary voter than Frank Luntz. How many times has the Trump campaign been declared dead now? Trump utterly dominated the flash polls. He has not only commanded all the attention in the GOP campaign, but has relegated Hillary's campaign, if there is one, into obscurity. What little press she gets is for her email and hanging with the Kardashians. Remove Trump and the GOP field is as charasmatic as Pajama Boy. A GOP problem is that when Trump is on the stage, the others appear to be lightweights in comparison. Would one prefer Trump to negotiate America's deals, or one of the others? Next debate maybe they can ask for a show of hands, who believes they are better qualified to negotiate America's deals than The Donald. The conservatives are fed up with GOPe candidates, GOPe non-leaders in congress, and GOPe in general. WSJ gives informative graphs on the debate. Who spoke to whom, how many words each spoke, how many times each received applause, laughter, or cheers. And a cartoon (this did not take long):
Megyn is not as pretty or hot as she thinks she is. I recall when she first got the new show and came on to tell everyone not to hate her for being pretty because she wasn't as pretty as the FNC makeup artists made her look. It was far from the first sour note of narcissism from her. OTOH, she is nowhere near Trump's league, a world-class narcissist.
Me too. But she was ushered out of CNN because she asked lib politicians tough questions. FNC has been a channel for old men. Horny old men from rural areas who like to watch women read the news in low-cut dresses with a high hemline. : ) Self indictment TC?:) "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Ever looked at all the FNC panty vids on YouBoob? They even post vids of FNC news-sluts crossing their legs, going berserk if they think they can see panties. Only old guys can get that excited over such minor stuff. The younger men are too jaded.
I rather liked the Russian new channel with the info babe who literally stripped during the show and sat there bare chested reading the news at the end. See, the Russians have some things right.
Hey Vic, Sharknado marathon on SciFi channel. Don't miss it:)
"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
OK. So, the Republicans have controlled Congress now during Obama's term, so are they to be blamed for Obama's failures? Or is it just a one way door? Democrats controlled the House during Reagan's entire tour in office, and the Senate during part of it, so Democrats are to be credited with much of the Reagan success, yes? Or is this just a one way door? If it's a one way door, I'm not buying it, because one way doors in politics are lies designed to bolster one party over the other. And I have a very low tolerance for lies. Yes, no and maybe so. Reagan held a gun to Tip O'Neal's head by going to the people telling them the Dems were blocking a recovery. Tip saw that and came to the table to negotiate with Reagan and he did. Similar to what happened with Bubba and Gingrich but Gingrich held the loaded gun. I responded to a simplistic claim that Bubba raising taxes is what caused a good economy in the 90s. Not true as evidenced. The make up of macro economics is more complex and I pointed that out. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Now I know you don't read my posts. I quoted from the transcript of the same Meet the Depressed airing. Didn't you go to the link I provided? "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
You have comprehension issues or just don't read my posts? You have twice responded to me with clips of refuted positions. Also check the time line. Was Newt House speaker in 93? What happened in 94 after the tax increases? How many balanced budgets happened after 95? Look at those balanced budgets and the tax reductions in them that Clinton signed into law. Basically just read everything I posted and you will see O'Donnel never got an apology and was taken to school by Gingrich. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
It is you who does not comprehend. I am talking about the GOP ideology which all you retards spout like it came from the bible. 2 years before the contract with America a tax increase was passed - under Republican ideological thinking - this was declared to be a disaster for the economy a full 2 years plus before any contract was passed this did not happen. Either a theory works all the time or it does not. If it does not it is an invalid theory. The Republican theory failed.
Inflation and unemployment went down despite a tax increase. Sounds like the GOP doom and gloom over a tax increase is a false theory. Unemployment keeps falling. in 1998 it was below 5% all with high taxes especially on the rich. How is this possible per GOP ideology? 1999 Unemployment is at 4.5% - that is like saying pretty much everyone is working. Bush, jr gets elected and cuts taxes and instead of growth or steadiness the economy collapses. Again proving the GOP thesis on taxes and job growth is bullshit. http://www.1990sflashback.com/1993/economy.asp Inflation: 2.9% Consumer Price Index: 144.5 Unemployment: 7.5% http://www.1990sflashback.com/1994/economy.asp Inflation: 2.7% Consumer Price Index: 148.2 Unemployment: 6.9%
Some tweeting about Trump via Mediaite: Come Saturday morning, a few of Fiorina’s fellow GOP candidates offered their tweeted support for her statements and for Kelly. Perhaps the most surprising was the brief vote of confidence from Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker: I agree with @CarlyFiorina, there’s no excuse for Trump’s comments. Stand with @MegynKelly. -SW — Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) August 8, 2015 Former Texas Governor Rick Perry, a frequent verbal combatant of Trump’s, also chimed in with some harsh words for the businessman: .@realDonaldTrump's attack on @megynkelly proves once again that he does not have the temperament to be President. https://t.co/eEp4Zk7uds — Rick Perry (@GovernorPerry) August 8, 2015 A little less surprising was Senator Lindsey Graham, who not only voiced his support for Fiorina and Kelly, but also shared a few choice comments about Trump: .@RealDonaldTrump unrelenting & offensive comments about @MegynKelly puts the @GOP at a crossroads w/Mr. Trump — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) August 8, 2015 .@GOP – it is better to risk losing w/out @RealDonaldTrump than trying to win w/him — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) August 8, 2015 .@RealDonaldTrump comments are not worthy of the office he is seeking nor consistent w/the leadership we should expect from POTUS — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) August 8, 2015 Graham even went so far as to commend Erick Erickson‘s decision to rescind Trump’s invitation to the RedState gathering in Atlanta on Saturday: I applaud Erick Erickson & @RedState for doing the right thing when they disinvited @RealDonaldTrump — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) August 8, 2015 Even Senator Ted Cruz, one of candidates most friendly to Trump on the trail, spoke out on the matter: Cruz tells reporters “every Republican candidate should treat everyone with respect,” Kelly is “terrific journalist.” Then… (1/2) — daveweigel (@daveweigel) August 8, 2015 However, he quickly added a caveat: … Cruz chastises media for asking. "I'm not going to engage the back and forth on personalities. I get that's what the media loves.” (2/2) — daveweigel (@daveweigel) August 8, 2015 The real fun begins when one digs a little deeper into Twitter’s cesspool of asinine political commentary and trolling. Such is especially the case when surveying the responses of professed social media conservatives. Many support Fiorina’s stance, albeit with the occasional reservation: RT @carlyfiorina: I stand with @megynkelly. — Byron York (@ByronYork) August 8, 2015 I too, after much deliberation, stand with @megynkelly. — David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) August 8, 2015 I stand with @megynkelly and @EWErickson #DumpTrump #RSG15 — Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) August 8, 2015 The only #Republican candidate to stand up against .@realDonaldTrump. “@CarlyFiorina: I stand with @megynkelly.” #Trump — Victoria Brownworth (@VABVOX) August 8, 2015 And we stand with you. RT@CarlyFiorina: I stand with @megynkelly. — Carl Gustav (@CaptYonah) August 8, 2015 Others, however, throw their hats into the Trump-branded ring without fail: Yep. I stand with @realDonaldTrump. If Megyn Kelly wants to dish it out & bring personal agenda to a debate, she should be able to take it. — Lauren Michelle (@NYCVixen) August 8, 2015 I’m very sorry to hear this Katie. If you stand w/ @megynkelly I no longer can stand with you. Regretfully so https://t.co/J86Q3OAgp2 — Johanna (@C0nservativeGal) August 8, 2015 megyn kelly stands with Debbie Wasserman Schultz. i don’t stand with megyn. — Mark (@mark85nh) August 8, 2015 Via @CarlyFiorina: I stand with @megynkelly. @realDonaldTrump @DanScavino #Are U worried Mr. Trump will out debate you?? Don’t worry he will — Drew Hanson (@johnnyreb1864) August 8, 2015 @CarlyFiorina terrible decision to stand with a media personality. Terrible. They will flip on you.. Aim higher. — Jayne Patton (@JaynePatton) August 8, 2015 Of course it wouldn’t be the bat sh*t-crazy end of Twitter without at least one conspiracy theorist in the mix: @CarlyFiorina @megynkelly Trump is a plant by the Clinton’s to ensure Hillary wins. He’ll run 3rd party and hand her the White House. — Ryan Schumacher (@NoChillRyan) August 8, 2015
You did not look at anything I posted. GDP decreased in the succeeding quarters AFTER the tax hike. GDP gained later in the 90s AFTER the contract with America. Clinton can take credit for the increase in GDP given he signed the Republican plan into law. That is not in dispute. Only that tax hikes led to growth. The evidence shows different. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
So the tax cuts proposed and signed into law after the contract with America did not contribute to growth? The balanced budgets? There was no spike in growth one mere year into a tax hike. As I said and showed there is more to national economics. It is not monolithic. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Clinton can take credit for the increase in GDP given he signed the Republican plan into law. That is not in dispute. Only that tax hikes led to growth. The evidence shows different. No. http://useconomy.about.com/od/GDP-by-Year/a/US-GDP-History.htm 1993 2.7% growth rate $6,878.7 Nominal GDP (in billions) $37,171 GDP per Capita. 1994 4.0% $7,308.8 $38,008 GDP ALMOST DOUBLED after a tax increase. How is that possible per GOP tax theory? You fail once again. Contract with America not passed yet. Contract with America was passed in 1995 and GDP went down to 2.7% Why do you want to believe this lie so badly you lie about history?
@CarlyFiorina @megynkelly Trump is a plant by the Clinton’s to ensure Hillary wins. He’ll run 3rd party and hand her the White House. — Ryan Schumacher (@NoChillRyan) August 8, 2015 After how most of the GOPe came after Trump, I would not be surprised if he flips them off now and start his 3rd party run. He knows how long that will take to do. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
The balanced budgets? There was no spike in growth one mere year into a tax hike. As I said and showed there is more to national economics. It is not monolithic. One again, why did the tax cuts of Bush fail to keep the economy booming and why did Clinton's tax increase not destroy prosperity? Answer? There is no correlation between the two. It is just a campaign talking point - a gimmick where a majorly complex thing like macroeconomics can be distilled into a one sentence line to throw out to the ignorant. I mean it sounds scientific and I mean lower taxes and the economy booms right? I mean if taxes are up people can't spend on stuff to buy and the economy slows, right? Sounds like it's based on economic science. But then how can an increase in taxes bring about a hot booming economy? The GOP can't explain how their theory failed to produce the predicted result.
— Ryan Schumacher (@NoChillRyan) August 8, 2015 After how most of the GOPe came after Trump, I would not be surprised if he flips them off now and start his 3rd party run. He knows how long that will take to do. If the Clintons are that smart and Machiavellian than they deserve the White House. I say this as a Clinton hater. Why are not the Republicans this clever?
Start at about 4 minutes asshat.
Because Bush did not decrease spending. He expanded social programs along with a huge bill for two wars. Big difference. When you expand the size of the economy with tax cuts, but expand spending how much government spends, you get disaster. Same principle when you raise taxes and yet spend what you collect and beyond you get disaster. When you have Bush 2 economics followed by Obolo economics you have what we see today disaster. Clinton raised taxes in 93. The GOP Congress curbed spending by balancing the budget 4 times. Clinton was a tax and spend Democrat. He taxed but could not spend. He needs to thank Newt for this legacy. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
So Ericson invites the homo activist Megan Kelly to speak. What an asshole.
Why are not the Republicans this clever? Lol. Good point. Where are the GOP ruthless operatives? The answer is quite easy IMO. They don't have the MSM in their corner. The one Obolo pretty much owns. So the Clintons better beware too. "When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan
Comments (168 - 479) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestSo you think it's fine for a man to talk about giving a woman a bloody nose? Seriously? Stop trying to excuse the inexcusable. You know exactly what he meant.
#128. To: Pericles (#125)
OK, one more time because you don't get the point. Republican conservatives deep down inside have a crisis of faith regarding the economic ideology of the Republican party.
#129. To: Liberator (#128)
(Edited)
An economy, freedom and business atmosphere STILL basking in the policies of Reagan and Poppy Bush. Reagan's policies made the US a powerhouse during the 80s midway thru the 90s. Yes, REAGAN.
#130. To: Vicomte13 (#115)
He meant NOSE. He bloodied her NOSE.
#131. To: Vicomte13 (#72)
#132. To: Liberator (#124)
(Edited)
ome of those items are earned, some designed as a safety net...but NEVER as an ENTITLEMENT. They provide Exibit A is to why the USA is $19 TRILLION in debt; It's just not sustainable. Someone is profiteering, and it ain't the above people. It's lobbyists, those businesses and politicians who've been overcharging on the increased numbers of lazy, parasitic, generation welfare slobs...And those whose pensions for the leftist/socialist cademe and goob drones rake in upwards of $50k+ with Platinum health insurance. bennies. Some retirement bennies start at age 45 or so. Gimme a break.
#133. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#131)
I agree. We need to do more to get Christians in the ME out of that Muslim hell hole.
#134. To: Pericles (#129)
A debtor nation is not an economic power house indicator. That is like saying you are rich because you live off my credit cards.
#135. To: TooConservative, liberator (#81)
And NBC lost Brian Williams and Stephanopoulos at ABC is tainted by his Xlinton connections. So there are obvious openings and Kelly's agent would be well aware of them.
#136. To: TooConservative (#92)
You know they're trying to script up ways to tar the entire GOP with Trump.
#137. To: Pericles (#100)
Why? 8 years of Clinton prosperity
#138. To: redleghunter (#136)
Frankly it's an effective tool for them to do
#139. To: redleghunter (#137)
Yeah all happened after the Contract with America in 1995.
#140. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter, Liberator, Excalibur, sneakypete (#138)
Before, I've said that I would never vote Republican again. Now I will if Trump is the nominee.
#141. To: Liberator, Pericles (#126)
NEWSFLASH: Women start fights, are murderers and assault people too. Sometimes there are consequences. Just sayin'.
DaTech Guy: Megyn Kelly Can Either Assert Women Should Be Protected from the Put-Downs of Boorish Men, Or Equality With Men, But She Can't Assert Both
This has been bothering me... DaTech Guy is on to something here, I think. We keep seeing this same dynamic play out, again and again... and it has to be remembered that Rosie O'Donnell started all that crap with Trump... as for the stuff Trump is alleged to have said of other women -- Kelly provided no context, and so I don't know how to judge those comments
#142. To: Pericles, Excalibur, liberator, GarySpFc, CZ82, tomder55, TooConservative (#107)
In any case, Clinton era economy showed that raising taxes has zero effect on an economy. Gingrich and most Republicans screamed that the raising of taxes would tank the economy and that did not happen. Bush came in and cut taxes and the economy sank regardless.
#143. To: redleghunter (#137)
(Edited)
Why? 8 years of Clinton prosperity Yeah all happened after the Contract with America in 1995.
#144. To: TooConservative (#140)
Which tells us something, about you and about Trump.
#145. To: redleghunter, Excalibur, liberator, GarySpFc, CZ82, tomder55, TooConservative, Vicomte13 (#142)
"'The tax increase will kill jobs and lead to a recession, and the recession will force people out of work and onto unemployment, and actually increase the deficit.' That’s Newt Gingrich in 1993 on the Clinton tax increase."
#146. To: Vicomte13, Liberator (#115)
[Liberator] trouncing the GOP field in the polls before the GOPe colluded with FOX News to shut him down.
#147. To: nolu chan (#146)
#148. To: TooConservative, liberator (#113)
Personally, I would have picked Greta instead.
#149. To: redleghunter (#148)
Self indictment TC?:)
#150. To: redleghunter, Too Conservative (#148)
FNC has been a channel for old men. Horny old men from rural areas who like to watch women read the news in low-cut dresses with a high hemline. : )
#151. To: Vicomte13 (#117)
#152. To: Vicomte13 (#139)
So, the Republicans controlled Congress, and therefore the Republicans are responsible for the Clinton prosperity?
#153. To: Pericles (#143)
#154. To: Pericles (#145)
This prediction did not happen. Clearly the economic theory failed to meet the prediction.
#155. To: redleghunter (#154)
(Edited)
#156. To: redleghunter (#154)
(Edited)
Also check the time line. Was Newt House speaker in 93? What happened in 94 after the tax increases?
#157. To: Pericles, Vicomte13, redleghunter (#156)
Conservative Twitter Split Over Carly Fiorina’s Support for Megyn Kelly
Carly Fiorina took to Twitter to express her displeasure with Donald Trump‘s post-debate comments about Megyn Kelly‘s incessant “bleeding” on Friday night. Specifically, she said Trump had no excuse, and that she would “stand with Megyn Kelly.” Many across the political spectrum have voiced their support for both Fiorina and Kelly. However, the annals of conservative social media are visibly split on the matter.
#158. To: Pericles (#155)
Either a theory works all the time or it does not. If it does not it is an invalid theory. The Republican theory failed.
#159. To: Pericles (#156)
#160. To: redleghunter (#158)
You did not look at anything I posted. GDP decreased in the succeeding quarters AFTER the tax hike. GDP gained later in the 90s AFTER the contract with America.
#161. To: TooConservative, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator, CZ82, tomder55 (#157)
Of course it wouldn’t be the bat sh*t-crazy end of Twitter without at least one conspiracy theorist in the mix:
#162. To: redleghunter (#159)
So the tax cuts proposed and signed into law after the contract with America did not contribute to growth?
#163. To: redleghunter, TooConservative, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator, CZ82, tomder55 (#161)
Of course it wouldn’t be the bat sh*t-crazy end of Twitter without at least one conspiracy theorist in the mix: @CarlyFiorina @megynkelly Trump is a plant by the Clinton’s to ensure Hillary wins. He’ll run 3rd party and hand her the White House.
#164. To: TooConservative (#157)
(Edited)
#165. To: Pericles (#162)
One again, why did the tax cuts of Bush fail to keep the economy booming and why did Clinton's tax increase not destroy prosperity?
#166. To: TooConservative (#0)
#167. To: Pericles, TooConservative, liberator (#163)
If the Clintons are that smart and Machiavellian than they deserve the White House. I say this as a Clinton hater.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]