him #DuckingDonald

He picked a good time to pull the plug.

Kasich clearly agrees.

Cruz? Well, he was a debate team guy. He's great at debating, so of course he's going to want to do more of them.

Trump is smart.

[Article] "Ted Cruz has expressed a willingness to debate Trump or Kasich - or both. But obviously, there needs to be more than one participant," Fox News Channel’s executive vice president of news, Michael Clemente, said in a statement. "So the Salt Lake City debate is canceled."

The title should accurately reflect that the debate was canceled after Kasich declined to debate Cruz heads up, thereby leaving only Cruz willing to go on.

Kasich turned down a couple of hours of free airtime rather than debate Cruz heads up.

Kasich turned down a couple of hours of free airtime

Why bother when the RINOs are going to try and install him at the convention?

It's completely understandable why (D-)rumpf doesn't want to face Cruz.

What's he going to do when Putin calls him out?

Trump, who has clashed with Fox News throughout his campaign, told the network in an interview on Wednesday he would not appear at the event, scheduled for Monday, because he thought the Republicans had "had enough debates."

I wonder if this is how he would deal with Putin or anyone else over the negotiating table. Yeah, that's it, we'll just leave now because we had enough discussion.

"Kasich clearly agrees."

Kasich is angling for VP in a Trump administration. Otherwise why would he turn down 2 hours of free air time? Does he think Fox will go after him, take shots at him?

This smells.

1) Fox added this debate only last month. 2) Trump had already promised to speak at the AIPAC conference.

Are you saying that Trump never committed to this debate?

"Are you saying that Trump never committed to this debate?"

Yes. Are you saying he did?

"Are you saying that Trump never committed to this debate?"

Yes. Are you saying he did?

It appears that he did. Why do you say that he didn't?

"It appears that he did."

What makes you say that?

Trump thought the CNN debate was the last one. Actually it was, until Fox decided last month to add another one. Trump had already scheduled the AIPAC speech.

Nowhere did I read that Trump agreed to the date and agreed to debate.

Just the opposite. Trump thought the debates accomplished nothing -- other than a ratings boost for the networks and endless commentary on who "won" with the best put-down of the other candidates.

Tell me one thing you learned about any of the candidates in the last "debate" that you didn't know already.

Why bother when the RINOs are going to try and install him at the convention?

I know but we'll never let you rinos do that with the GOPe buttboy cruz.

GO TRUMP

NB - The Not Witch just cast a spell on Trump wishing that he will go away.

You really do miss Not Witch. I can tell.     : )

What's he going to do when Putin calls him out?

International leaders don't debate each other in front of voters. They negotiate in secret.

Trump's move here is wise: he is reducing the risk to himself of a bad debate performance, and denying Cruz the opportunity to express himself to the public for a good portion of two hours.

Cruz excels at debates. Trump, therefore, has opted to deprive Cruz of the free press and the opportunity to excel.

And Trump has won the point, because Kasich played along. Which means that there are TWO politicians who pulled out, so it's not just Trump.

This is strategic behavior, and it's smart. It reduces Trump's risk and reduces Cruz's ability to get his message out.

That's how Trump is going to deal with Putin: intelligently and strategically.

I wonder if this is how he would deal with Putin or anyone else over the negotiating table. Yeah, that's it, we'll just leave now because we had enough discussion.

WHen you are the stronger party, leaving the table and ending the discussion means that the weaker party ends up with bupkis.

Cruz needs these debates. They give him airtime. They give him the opportunity to shine in a format that his debate team background favors. And a forum run by Fox will always be hostile to Trump. It's free publicity for Cruz.

Trump just wrecked all of that, at some risk, but Kasich's second reduced any damage to Trump. Cruz advocates are mad. Nobody else cares.

A battle was offered. The commanding general of the stronger side declined battle: why risk a defeat when you're winning.

Trump's move deprives Cruz of air. Now Cruz has to spend money to be heard, and he doesn't get the chance to poke at Donald on the same stage.

So yes, Trump would deal with Putin the same way he is dealing with Cruz: strategically, in the way that is most advantageous to Trump.

Trump is not looking to be fair. He is looking to beat Cruz. And not debating Cruz on Fox makes it easier for Trump to beat Cruz.

Strategic behavior based on strengths, weaknesses and risk assessments: it's what you want to see in Commanders.

A battle was offered. The commanding general of the stronger side declined battle: why risk a defeat when you're winning.

Trump's move deprives Cruz of air. Now Cruz has to spend money to be heard, and he doesn't get the chance to poke at Donald on the same stage.

Cruz should read "The Art of War" because Trump sure has.

Kasich turned down a couple of hours of free airtime rather than debate Cruz heads up.

I doubt any of these guys could debate Cruz heads up in an honest debate with legitimate questions.

However, if Fox had not canceled the debate, i fully believe Cruz would have had no problem in getting in a heated debate with his podium.

The people are tired of the debates anyway. It's just entertainment, but with lots of airtime for Cruz, it would have gotten more serious, and Cruz would have been able to score some points.

So Trump chose to do something else that will get him full free press coverage, and that will leave Cruz in the dark.

I was listening to Mark Levin tonight. Sounds like he wants his followers to go kamikaze: if they can't have Cruz, then nobody. Fold arms, stay home. Hillary wins.

Tell me one thing you learned about any of the candidates in the last "debate" that you didn't know already.

That in a narrowed field Trump can't answer with specifics of his policy and action plans. All he does is repeat himself over and over again with meaningless lines such as "it's gonna be great", "believe me", "we will win again", "I'm very rich", etc. He has never articulated how he was going to do this and will get buried in the next REP debate with Cruz and Kasich where there is more time for him to kill. And he will get killed in a one-on-one debate with even Hillary if he can't do better on this score up to now.

WHen you are the stronger party, leaving the table and ending the discussion means that the weaker party ends up with bupkis.

Both parties gets bupkis. No-one wins. At best it's a tie.

And he will get killed in a one-on-one debate with even Hillary if he can't do better on this score up to now.

We've been hearing this silliness for a long time against trump. It just doesn't matter how bad the criticism, he just keeps getting more and more votes each day.

"It appears that he did."

What makes you say that?

Perhaps he didn't. I can't find anything on the web that says one way or another. But I find it strange that Fox would announce the debate without having an indication that the parties will attend.

And he will get killed in a one-on-one debate with even Hillary if he can't do better on this score up to now.

We've been hearing this silliness for a long time against trump. It just doesn't matter how bad the criticism, he just keeps getting more and more votes each day.

At some point he will have to meat on the bones, especially if he wishes to keep those REPS that did not vote for him. OTOH We The People bought empty BS before, the last time being "hope and change".

Trump's move deprives Cruz of air.

Kasich deprived Cruz the air time. IMO Kasich is in the tank for Trump.

What makes you say that?

Perhaps he didn't. I can't find anything on the web that says one way or another.

OTOH hand I just found this.

"The debate would clash with a “very important speech” he is due to give, Trump told ‘Fox and Friends’. The Republican front-runner is set to speak to the annual conference of the pro-Israel lobby group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an event he said “was scheduled a week ago.”

This is dated March 16. One week ago is March 9. The debate was scheduled in Feb. He claims that on March 9 he did not know of the debate in Utah that was scheduled in March and scheduled another event. In other words Fox scheduled a debate in Utah for March 20 and hadn't told Trump about it by Match 9. That is too incredulous to believe. Trump again by his own words seems to be caught in a lie here.

Why bother when the RINOs are going to try and install him at the convention?

The Kasich campaign will die from lack of oxygen if he fears debating Cruz or saying anything but memorized crap about mailman that is not news. He will get no coverage.

IMO Kasich is in the tank for Trump.

Kasich would rather not be seen, than be seen for a couple of hours debating Ted Cruz one on one. His Marcoesque minispeeches won't cut it.

You don't honestly think we give a rat's butt do you?

LMAO. Of course you do otherwise you wouldn't be trying to rationalize Trump's lying. This is living in your mind rent free.

You don't honestly think we give a rat's butt do you?

Wow, everyone is afraid of Cruz? Well then:

I need to take another look at Cruz.

Keep letting the media do your thinking for you.

Says the P.T. Barnum dupe.

I doubt any of these guys could debate Cruz heads up in an honest debate with legitimate questions.

Trump can and has. They are not judged on collegiate debating points. Trump talks to the people as if they were downing beers at a bar or just sitting around. He connects with people. Cruz is a more refined debater, but is delivery does not connect in the manner that Trump does with the audience. Cruz would win if only they were being judged by a gaggle of debate judges.

Trump v. Hillary would be interesting where Hillary shouts and screeches, and maybe barks, and Trump is conversational.

Wow, everyone is afraid of Cruz?

Just Kasich, understandably. One-on-one, center stage, he cannot stand to the side like a wallflower and chime in from time to time about mailmen.

Trump talks to the people as if they were downing beers at a bar or just sitting around. He connects with people.

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." - H L. Mencken

"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L. Mencken

That in a narrowed field Trump can't answer with specifics of his policy and action plans.

He wasn't able to offer any specific solutions during when the field was big,either.

He has no actual answers because he has no plans.

You don't honestly think we give a rat's butt do you?

You don't think it is more important that Trump talk with people who love and want to protect Israel,than it is he talk with people who love America?

Trump talks to the people as if they were downing beers at a bar or just sitting around. He connects with people. Cruz is a more refined debater, but is delivery does not connect in the manner that Trump does with the audience. Cruz would win if only they were being judged by a gaggle of debate judges.

WOW! You really are drinking the Trump bathwater,aren't you?

Trump is the Joy Behar of debaters.

That in a narrowed field Trump can't answer with specifics of his policy and action plans.

He wasn't able to offer any specific solutions during when the field was big,either.

But he was allowed to hide in plain sight then. He is clearly chicken sh*t to face Cruz in a debate. What does he think he would do against Hillary? Like her or not, believe her or not, she at least has mouthed specifics of how she will achieve her objectives. Perhaps Trump will decline to debate her too?

What does he think he would do against Hillary?

They are close friends,so he knows and so does she.

"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L. Mencken

Been there. Done that.

His name was George W. Bush.

He was an utter failure as President. He plunged us into foreign wars, lost, and blew up the US economy.

He was sort of the reverse of FDR. FDR took over a country that was sunk in an economic depression and disarmed in the face of rising threats. He armed the country, thereby bringing the country out of the Depression, fought a world war, and won it.

Bush took over a country at peace, militarily predominant, with a budget surplus and a booming economy. He took us to war in several places, lost, left us massively in debt and in an economic Depression.

Bush was a greater failure as President than Jimmy Carter. We got our moron.

He wasn't able to offer any specific solutions during when the field was big,either.

He has no actual answers because he has no plans.

He does have a plan. His plan is to become president. That's about it.

He's pretty much a content-free pol and likes to take as many positions on issues as possible, then back away from a few of the more offensive ones when he gets called on it. His other main strategy is the Trump-outrage-of-the-week. Before the wave of criticism from his last mini-scandal fades away, he emits some new bombast to keep the pundits talking and keep the free media interviews and coverage coming his way. This is a way of controlling the media that was largely perfected by the Xlinton machine in the Nineties. "We have a scandal problem? Well, we need a new scandal. And then another." Trump feeds on this scandal mill he has himself created. And it generates his ongoing free media, recently valued at $2 billion in free media coverage.

Cruz makes a cogent, sensible argument on an issue in a very articulate manner.

Trump responds by calling Cruz a fucking liar, liar pants on fire.

Advantage: Trump

I guess if you score a debate on those terms, Trump will always win.

He wasn't able to offer any specific solutions during when the field was big,either.

But he was allowed to hide in plain sight then. He is clearly chicken sh*t to face Cruz in a debate.

Absolutely.

What does he think he would do against Hillary?

She is no brighter than he is. The difference is she has been campaigning since the 70's,and all Trump has done was talk trash in front of employees and other captive audiences where he could get away with babbling nonsense because no follow-up questions were ever allowed.

If there is anything amazing about Bubbette! is that she for a career politician she still sucks at such epic levels. She only made it this far because she was lucky enough to marry the right hillbilly,and ride his coat tails to the top.

"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L. Mencken

Been there. Done that.

His name was George W. Bush.

Forgetting Jim-mah Cawtur?

He was sort of the reverse of FDR. FDR took over a country that was sunk in an economic depression and disarmed in the face of rising threats. He armed the country, thereby bringing the country out of the Depression, fought a world war, and won it.

Complete and utter bullshit. Roosevelt's policies EXTENDED the economic depression. The ONLY thing that pulled the US out of the Depression were the wars in Asia and Europe. Americans were put back to work manufacturing war related items to sell to countries who couldn't produce enough to supply their needs. Roosevelt desperately wanted to get us involved in WW-2 because he was terrified his good friend Joe Stalin and Communism would lose without US involvement. Putting Americans back to work came in a very distant second for him,his commie wife/cousin,and his cabinet.

In Carter's era, the Soviet's invaded Afghanistan, and thereby began their trajectory into the dustbin of history.

But on W's watch WE invaded Afghanistan. 14 years on, we're still there, still bleeding, and the Taliban are still in control of the countryside.

So, Carter saw the USSR step over a line and start to die. W started to kill US. Much worse result under Bush.

Carter got the Egyptians and Israelis to sign a formal peace agreement. No other President has achieved that.

On Carter's watch we had some bad inflation. On W's watch we entered into the worse Depression since 1929, and we're still not out of.

W's performance and legacy were much worse than Carter's.

"That in a narrowed field Trump can't answer with specifics of his policy and action plans."

He was the only one to offer up candidates for Scalia's replacement. It took Obama a month, and we have yet to hear from any of the other candidates.

He has presented a concrete tax plan. He has a specific immigration plan. A detailed plan for the VA. A detailed plan for healthcare reform. US-China trade reform.

You don't know what you're talking about.

"The problem with these "battle royale" debates is the winner is the one who gets the best "zingers." When it gets down to a couple of people, the logic of the argument becomes much more apparent."

Yeah, right.

Remember when Lloyd Bentsen said to Dan Quayle: "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy"? That was a one-on-one debate.

"But I find it strange that Fox would announce the debate without having an indication that the parties will attend."

No downside.

The upside is that if Trump attends they make millions off the advertising, Megyn Kelly gets to attack Trump again, and the other candidates get to comment on the size of Trump's hands. Or shoes. Or whatever.

The other upside is if Trump doesn't attend, they get to call him a coward. Win- win.

Remember when Lloyd Bentsen said to Dan Quayle: "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy"? That was a one-on-one debate.

That's one counter example. However, in that election, who got the last laugh?

"That's one counter example."

Off the top of my head. I'm sure I could dig and find a dozen more.

Of course then you'd say, "That's only a dozen". So why bother? I made my point.

W Bush was worse than Jimmy Carter.

Only if you are a communist.

In Carter's era, the Soviet's invaded Afghanistan, and thereby began their trajectory into the dustbin of history.

Carter's presidency also ushered in the trajectory of America into the dustbin of history.

Carter got the Egyptians and Israelis to sign a formal peace agreement. No other President has achieved that.

Big Whoop! I wouldn't care if they wiped each other out. I am an AMERICAN,not a globalist. My prime concern is for America. If Israel is that important to you,you need to move your ass to Israel.

Hmmmm,you are obviously a big fan of the Dummy from Plains,and are also a big fan of the Dummy from NYC. I sense a pattern here.

He was the only one to offer up candidates for Scalia's replacement. It took Obama a month, and we have yet to hear from any of the other candidates.

He has presented a concrete tax plan. He has a specific immigration plan. A detailed plan for the VA. A detailed plan for healthcare reform. US-China trade reform.

WHO are you talking about? It obviously isn't Trump unless you consider saying "I will hire good managers" is a plan.

But I won't exploit your youth and inexperience for political gains.

I sense a pattern here.

There is nothing to sense. I am a common sense Midwestern person with a clear view of things.

That's why I sound reasonable next to you and your ilk, who are batshit crazy.

unless you consider saying "I will hire good managers" is a plan.

It IS a plan.

"Carter got the Egyptians and Israelis to sign a formal peace agreement. No other President has achieved that."

We promised Egypt foreign aid equal to two-thirds of whatever we gave to Israel. I bet even I could successfully "negotiate" a treaty like that.

"I said the weight of the argument becomes more apparent in co comparison to the zingers."

And I again offer as counter-argument when Lloyd Bentsen said to Dan Quayle: "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy". What else do you remember from that debate? I rest my case.

Why should Trump, polling at numbers that double his opponents', participate in a debate where his opponents could have a Lloyd Bentsen moment?

We promised Egypt foreign aid equal to two-thirds of whatever we gave to Israel. I bet even I could successfully "negotiate" a treaty like that.

It established and kept the peace. Egypt was the only Muslim country that had the population and power to actually defeat Israel - they nearly did it in 1973 - AND they had been a Soviet client.

With the Camp David accords, Carter managed to remove the only true existential threat to Israel AND pluck the most important Soviet client card in the Middle East out of their hands. It was a pretty good move. Republicans are blinded with hatred towards Democrats, and blind to their own faults and errors.

the risk to himself of a bad debate performance,

AKA Getting his ass handed to him.

Evidently little things like Truth, Logic and Reason are beyond the comprehension/attention span of militant Generation XBox populists manufactured by Reality TeeVee.

What else do you remember from that debate? I rest my case.

Mostly, I remember Quayle began living in the Vice President's quarters a few weeks later.

And frankly, for all the press the remark got, it was cheap and pointless. They were talking about legislating, and when it came to being an actual legislator, Jack Kennedy was no Dan Quayle.

"But I find it strange that Fox would announce the debate without having an indication that the parties will attend."

No downside.

You truly are blind. You don't think that Fox is embarrassed over having to cancel the debate? Really? No I truly understand that there is no hope for Trump dopes.

So you're telling me that constitutes a commitment to participate in the debate?

I am telling you that Trump lied. But you have so hopelessly been conned by Trump that you have lost your ability to reason. There is no hop for Trump dupes.

FDR took over a country that was sunk in an economic depression and disarmed in the face of rising threats. He armed the country, thereby bringing the country out of the Depression, fought a world war, and won it.

FDR's economic policies were a disaster, the record is perfectly clear on that. The only thing that turned that around was the war. FYI FDR campaigned at least twice (his 3rd AND 4th terms) promising We The People that he would not get into "that war in Europe" while all the time doing the opposite of what he promised. He lied, over and over again. But it seems that you are one of those the ends justify the means type, aka a DRat.

"You don't think that Fox is embarrassed over having to cancel the debate?"

Not when they're able to convince people like you that Trump agreed to the deba debate then backed out.

Not when they're able to convince people like you that Trump agreed to the deba debate then backed out.

Belief should be based on evidence. I don't know for a fact that Trump reneged on his acceptance to participate. But I have a brain and use it to find and evaluate the evidence. And the evidence is perfectly clear that Trump lied about why he is not participating in the debate. You had to go deeper up you ass to claim that there was no downside risk for Fox in announcing the debate without having an indication that all three of the candidates will attend. This was an especially risky thing to do for Fox since Trump already reneged on his commitment to participate in an earlier Fox debate. The facts are all before you but you continue to sell out your intellect for your ideology. There is no hope for Trump dupes.

There is no hop for Trump dupes.

Oh please, your GOPe constant bashing trump hasn't done one thing but give him more votes.

Keep on posting nonsense, while we count our votes.

"You had to go deeper up you ass to claim that there was no downside risk for Fox in announcing the debate without having an indication that all three of the candidates will attend."

The debate was set up with the GOP, not the candidates. Maybe the GOP agreed. Trump didn't.

In post #13, you claimed that Trump committed to this debate. You can either back that up or keep quiet.

Oh please, your GOPe constant bashing trump hasn't done one thing but give him more votes.

Keep on posting nonsense, while we count our votes.

And the will be less than the votes for Hillary. FYI I have decided that if Trump is the nominee I will vote for him over Hillary. Not because I believe that Trump is anything other than a con man but because the country deserves that.

There is no hope for Trump dupes.

But it seems that you are one of those the ends justify the means type, aka a DRat.

I am not a Democrat. Never have been. Am not likely to become one as long as the Democrats have their current policies on abortion.

FDR's economic policies were the right thing to do. He inherited a disaster inflicted by Republican Administrations - a familiar theme, and he stabilized the situation and gave the country hope.

FDR didn't drag us into the war. The Japanese bombed us, remember?

You hard-core partisan Republicans are just like hard-core partisan Democrats: immune to reality, immune to the truth, living in your fantasies, and more and more out of touch with the people. That's why your precious Establishment is falling to pieces in the face of Trump. All the Establishment has is guys like you.

Belief should be based on evidence.

Are you a Christian?

In post #13, you claimed that Trump committed to this debate.

Now you stoop to lying? Here is exactly what I said in post #13:

"It appears that he did. Why do you say that he didn't?"

Do you understand what the word appears means?

"You can either back that up or keep quiet."

I have clearly and convincingly backed up my claim that Trump lied about knowing about the debate. That is obvious to any intellectually honest person. But as I say, there is no hope for Trump dupes.

Belief should be based on evidence.

Are you a Christian?

I have faith in God, a gift He has given to me. A leap of faith is required for such belief. There is no leap of any kind required to understand, to know, that Trump lied about not knowing about the debate before he accepted another speaking engagement.

"Do you understand what the word appears means?"

Yep. It appears you were using a weasel word.

"I have clearly and convincingly backed up my claim that Trump lied about knowing about the debate.

You were claiming that Trump committed to the debate and backed out. When you couldn't back that up, you now claim he knew about the debate.

You can't back that up either.

You hard-core partisan Republicans are just like hard-core partisan Democrats: immune to reality, immune to the truth, living in your fantasies, and more and more out of touch with the people.

It is exactly my endeavors to discover the truth that led me to change my registered party affiliation. I haven't been a registered REP in years. I haven't support the national or my state REP party in years.

As for you, you have stated many times on this forum that you strongly prefer the DRats to the REPs. In fact I seem to recall that you stated that you hated the REP party. I recall that you even stated that you supported Obama even though he supports late term abortions. You have been a major hypocrite on your precious issue of abortion. You best do a reality check on yourself.

"Do you understand what the word appears means?"

Yep. It appears you were using a weasel word.

If admitting up front that I was not certain, that I didn't have the evidence, to know for sure that he commited to the debate is weasel in your world, then guilty as charged.

"you now claim he knew about the debate.

You can't back that up either."

I most certainly did back that up. Read the posts again.

"I most certainly did back that up."

All you showed is that he could have known. You morphed that into he did know.

I call bullshit.

All you showed is that he could have known. You morphed that into he did know.

I call bullshit.

Call it want you want claiming that he didn't as late as March 9 is what is pure BS. And you know that even though you are a Trump dupe.

As for you, you have stated many times on this forum that you strongly prefer the DRats to the REPs.

You have a reading comprehension problem.

I have stated that I strongly prefer the Democrats to Republicans on economic matters and poverty relief.

I hate the Republican Party because they are liars.

I hate the Democrats because they're babykillers.

If you recall me saying that I "supported Obama" you are now doing what you accuse Trump of doing: lying. I voted for McCain (really, I voted for Sarah), and I voted for Romney. I held my nose and voted for Romney, because he was obviously a fraud, but I still considered him better than an avowed babykiller. At least Romney felt the need to lie about his real position.

You're making things up now, purposely obtuse.

And your political platform is shot full of holes and sinking. You're not getting anything you want, you're not going to, you're unappeasable and obnoxious, and you can't keep your facts straight. You went from truths - like "Vicomte hates the Republicans" to wholesale lies, like "Vicomte supported Obama", and you believe them.

Bitter, mean, and defeated - you're the old guy shaking his fist as the kids passing by in the street.

Sucks to be you.

You're not going to enjoy President Trump. But I will.

unless you consider saying "I will hire good managers" is a plan.

It IS a plan.

So is wishing upon a star. That doesn't make either a GOOD plan.

We promised Egypt foreign aid equal to two-thirds of whatever we gave to Israel. I bet even I could successfully "negotiate" a treaty like that.

It established and kept the peace. Egypt was the only Muslim country that had the population and power to actually defeat Israel

Remind me again why that is any of our business or concern.

I am telling you that Trump lied. But you have so hopelessly been conned by Trump

Trump didn't con him,he conned himself.

You're not going to enjoy President Trump. But I will.

LMAO No you won't.

And there are posts on LF were you said you supported Obama positions over REP's. They are out there but I am not going to take the time to find them, it would just be a waste of time. I didn't say that you voted for him, voting is not the only means/way of support. So bone up on your reading comprehension. Perhaps you should spend more time understanding current languages rather than dead ones.

I am telling you that Trump lied. But you have so hopelessly been conned by Trump

Trump didn't con him,he conned himself.

There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

If it comes down to Hillary vs. Trump I will vote Trump. I have just had it with both parties and more so with the character of We The People. F*ck it all. Let's destroy this MF and remake it from the ground up. Let Trump destroy the REP party. Let Hillary and the DRats destroy what's left of the country.

If we can't save the system or We The People from themselves then I want Trump to f*ck everything up for everybody. My wife and I will survive and live out the rest of our days relatively untouched by the impending corruption. I think that our daughter will likely do so as well but I am not all certain about my grandkids as I think they will be screwed over - they are white you know.

F*ck it all. Let's destroy this MF and remake it from the ground up. Let Trump destroy the REP party. Let Hillary and the DRats destroy what's left of the country.

If we can't save the system or We The People from themselves then I want Trump to f*ck everything up for everybody.

This is precisely the sort of dynamic, positive thinking we so desperately need from today's conservatives! Thanks for giving us the pep talk!

If we can't save the system or We The People from themselves then I want Trump to f*ck everything up for everybody.

This is precisely the sort of dynamic, positive thinking we so desperately need from today's conservatives! Thanks for giving us the pep talk!

Yeah, Sparky, go ye forth and make America great again.

"I am telling you that Trump lied."

Without any proof, what you're telling me is that you think he lied. And you're not even sure what he lied about.

Amateur.

... but I am not all certain about my grandkids as I think they will be screwed over - they are white you know.

Sorry about your luck, honky.

Yeah, Sparky, go ye forth and make America great again.

Will do.

Without any proof, what you're telling me is that you think he lied. And you're not even sure what he lied about.

Amateur.

Amatuer. LMOA. If the evidence was presented in a court of law there is no reasonable doubt that Trump lied about not knowing of the Fox debate prior to March 9th. That's proof enough.

But if you want more evidence here is some:

"A source close to the matter explained that the network was slow to confirm the debate’s cancellation because Clemente was still trying to persuade Trump to participate. Trump himself admitted at the recent CNN debate that he was aware more debates were on the horizon. “I think they want to do two more debates, and I guess I’m pretty much okay with it,” he told CNN’s Chris Cuomo.

This is not the first debate Trump has elected to skip. He boycotted January’s Fox News debate, hosted by his media nemesis, Megyn Kelly. He continued to criticize her on Twitter on Tuesday."

Try and keep hope alive, Sparky. But there is no hope for a Trump dupe.

... but I am not all certain about my grandkids as I think they will be screwed over - they are white you know.

Sorry about your luck, honky.

That's OK, I still enjoy my privilege.

"The debate would clash with a “very important speech” he is due to give, Trump told ‘Fox and Friends’. The Republican front-runner is set to speak to the annual conference of the pro-Israel lobby group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an event he said “was scheduled a week ago.”

This is dated March 16. One week ago is March 9. The debate was scheduled in Feb. He claims that on March 9 he did not know of the debate in Utah that was scheduled in March and scheduled another event. In other words Fox scheduled a debate in Utah for March 20 and hadn't told Trump about it by Match 9. That is too incredulous to believe. Trump again by his own words seems to be caught in a lie here.

An additional debate was penciled into the debate schedule by the GOP in February, without a firm date, time, venue, or sponsor; or commitment by any participant.

It was announced on March 14.

http://deadline.com/2016/03/fox-news-channel-nabs-march-21-gop-debate-in-salt-lake-city-1201719939/

Fox News Channel Nabs March 21 GOP Debate In Salt Lake City

by Lisa de Moraes
March 14, 2016 10:18am

Fox News Channel will host its fourth Republican presidential primary debate March 21 from Salt Lake City. The two-hour debate will be presented live from the Salt Palace Convention Center at 9 PM ET.

[...]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/media/fox-news-gop-debate-donald-trump/index.html

Fox News announces March 21 GOP debate

by Dylan Byers
@CNNMoney
March 14, 2016: 1:12 PM ET

The Republicans will hold another debate, whether Donald Trump likes it or not.

Fox News announced Monday that it will host a March 21 debate in Salt Lake City, which was penciled into the calendar just last month. It will be the 13th debate of the Republican presidential primary contest.

[...]

On March 14, the date, time, venue and sponsor were announced. It was to be on Monday, March 21; not on Sunday, March 20.

Two days later, on March 16, came the announcement that the event had been canceled.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-to-skip-next-republican-debate/

By Reena Flores
CBS News
March 16, 2016, 9:15 AM

Fox News cancels next Republican debate after candidates bolt

[...]

"The network was slow to confirm the debate’s cancellation because Clemente was still trying to persuade Trump to participate."

If Trump had previously agreed to participate in the debate -- as you say he did -- that's an odd way to phrase it.

If you're correct, shouldn't that read, "... the network was slow to confirm the debate’s cancellation because Clemente was still trying to persuade Trump to participate not to cancel"?

On March 14, the date, time, venue and sponsor were announced. It was to be on Monday, March 21; not on Sunday, March 20.

That doesn't mean that Trump and the other candidates weren't notified well before that date by either Fox of the RNC. Does it really make sense to you that in February the RNC agrees to a debate to be hosted by Fox in Salt Lake City on March 20 or 21 and neither the RNC nor Fox contact any of the candidates for participation until March 14? This in the middle of a heated campaign season and knowing of the AIPAC convention being held at the same time? Really?

If either Cruz or Kasich say that they also were not notified prior to March 9 or if the RNC or Fox say the didn't notify Trump prior to March 9 I will apologize for calling Trump a liar AND I will vote for him if he gets the nomination.

On March 14, the date, time, venue and sponsor were announced. It was to be on Monday, March 21; not on Sunday, March 20.

LMAO. Do you live in a cave? Trump reneged on his commitment to Fox earlier and boycotted that debate. That's no lie. And Fox continued to try and persuade Trump to "participate" in that debate.

Nice try. But there is no hope for a Trump dupe.

That means Trump didn't lie!

Wrong.

Wait just a minute! That means Trump didn't lie!

SJWs always double down. Therefore, SOSO will double down.

"Trump reneged on his commitment to Fox earlier and boycotted that debate."

And he kept his commitment to Fox to debate in Detroit on March 3rd. So?

Therefore, SOSO will double down.

Have no fear, I will always double down on truth.

The is no hope for a Trump dupe.

I will always double down on truth.

With an emotional lie.

I will always double down on truth.

With an emotional lie.

What is my lie?

"With an emotional lie."

Hey, hey. It's not a lie if he believes it.

If the evidence was presented in a court of law there is no reasonable doubt that Trump lied about not knowing of the Fox debate prior to March 9th.

Double down.

BTW:

It's not a lie if he believes it.

True that.

If you're correct, shouldn't that read,

Here is the headline of this thread "After Trump pulls out, Fox News cancels Republican debate."

If he never accepted the invitation shouldn't that read Trump declines invitation rather than pulls out? Pulling out literally mean that he was once in, doesn't now?

LMAO.

shouldn't that read Trump declines invitation rather than pulls out?

Yes. Nice foot shot.

If the evidence was presented in a court of law there is no reasonable doubt that Trump lied about not knowing of the Fox debate prior to March 9th.

Double down.

Where is the lie? Where is the untruth? C'mon now, you are a smart guy and should be able to expose little old me.

I remind you that like posters, symbols are for the symbol minded.

Where is the lie?

Some of your MoveOn buddies?

"If the evidence was presented in a court of law there is no reasonable doubt that Trump lied about not knowing of the Fox debate prior to March 9th."

Triple down.

Nice foot shot.

Shouldn't you have addressed that to misterwhite?

#99. To: SOSO (#96)

"The network was slow to confirm the debate’s cancellation because Clemente was still trying to persuade Trump to participate."

If Trump had previously agreed to participate in the debate -- as you say he did -- that's an odd way to phrase it.

If you're correct, shouldn't that read, "... the network was slow to confirm the debate’s cancellation because Clemente was still trying to persuade Trump to participate not to cancel"?

misterwhite posted on 2016-03-18 17:37:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

LMAO. There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

Shouldn't you have addressed that to misterwhite?

No.

Shouldn't you have addressed that to misterwhite?

No.

Oh, I see. Trump dupes stick together.

Shouldn't you have addressed that to misterwhite?

No.

I see sarcasm doesn't escape your keen intellect. Nor is intellectual honesty your strong point.

Did you forget to take your Midol® today?

Of course. I should have known. You just lost. Bye, Mary.

There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

Since you know they are unpersuadeable by any factual presentation, maybe you just enjoy all that typing.     : )

Since you know they are unpersuadeable by any factual presentation, maybe you just enjoy all that typing. : )

For the most part depantsing intellectual bankrupts is akin to pulling the wings of flies but sometimes it is fun. If you note I only chime in on them when there is an event, as was today with Romney, that highlights either Trump the con man or Trump the destroyer of the REP Party (as with Trump's response to Romney) or when they post something really stupid even for a Trumpkin.

But it really isn't the Trumpkin dupes that is at the heart of my feelings, it's the state of our society. It's the division that seems to grow wider each day without a glimmer of hope that this election will do anything but exploit and widen the rift. It is what I see as the inevitable future of the country. It's the sin and self-destructiveness of believing in false Gods.

Trump wants to make America great again - can any two people agree on what that means? Hillary wants to make America whole again - can any two people agree on what that means? We are all dupes of a sort. It makes me sad. I have no expectation that anything said to the Trumpkins gadflies or Hillary's useful idots or Bernie's Stalinistas or Cruz's Purists will change anyone's thinking .

Shame on me but I am beginning to think that the wisest man on the planet was H.L. Menckin - and he was such a cynical godless bastard. Then I think it might be Lily Tomlin who said "No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up." How did the country become so f*cked up?

How do you think she'll reward you for trying to rescue her?

Panties still in a bunch, Mary?

Does it really make sense to you that in February the RNC agrees to a debate to be hosted by Fox in Salt Lake City on March 20 or 21 and neither the RNC nor Fox contact any of the candidates for participation until March 14?

No. That is so terminally stupid that I am surprised you would suggest that it happened.

Until March 14, no firm decision was made on the venue, specific date, specific time, or who would be sponsoring the event. When all was confirmed, only then could the event be officially anounced.

The February action of penciling in a debate in February was no more than the RNC determining to have another debate with a venue, time, place, and sponsor to be determined.

in February the RNC agrees to a debate to be hosted by Fox in Salt Lake City on March 20 or 21

The problem with this declarative crap is that the underlined portion is creative bullshit. That decision was made in mid-March for March 21.

Does it really make sense to you that in February the RNC agrees to a debate to be hosted by Fox in Salt Lake City on March 20 or 21 and neither the RNC nor Fox contact any of the candidates for participation until March 14?

No. That is so terminally stupid that I am surprised you would suggest that it happened.

I didn't, this what Trump claimed. He stated that he had no knowledge of the Salt Lake City debate on March 9 when he accepted the engagement at AIPAC. That is so terminally stupid a statement by him that you know that it is a lie. He knew about the SLC debate well before March 9 and likely said he would participate in it sometime in Feb. He just chickened out when it became clear that it would just be three of them and peed his pants when he found out that one of them would be Cruz.

FTR misterwhite and Roscoe believe Trump's story. Now that is terminally stupid.

There is no hope for Trump dupes.

I didn't, this what Trump claimed. He stated that he had no knowledge of the Salt Lake City debate on March 9 when he accepted the engagement at AIPAC.

It was not announced until March 14th. Trump and Kasich declined to accept the invitation which did not exist until March 14th.

Keep trying.

Headlines are written by editors, not writers.

According to the article, "... front-runner Donald Trump told the network he would not participate." Nowhere does the article say he pulled out.

Stop. You'll make her cry.

Trump kicked paul's little boy's ass and you clowns can't get over it.

go TRUMP

soso's a typical paultard, whine, whine whine and the constant "the two party system doesn't work" while they try their best to keep it in place.

go TRUMP

LMAO. There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

go TRUMP

I wish he would GO ... away. He is a loud mouth only obsessed with himself.

He is a loud mouth only obsessed with himself.

I know bucky but I still like you anyway.

Did you post to us by mistake, paultard?

You intelligence matches you gullibility.

But you are the same guys that got Obama elected. How has that worked out for you?

There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

There is no hope for a Trump dupe.

Well ... they could be looking for a free baseball cap:

Well ... they could be looking for a free baseball cap:

LOL. Dollar Donald never does anything for free.

Dollar Donald never does anything for free.

That is exactly Fred's opinion.

Dollar Donald never does anything for free.

That is exactly Fred's opinion.

For once Fred is right:)

Hey, thanks. I better mark this down on my important moments calendar.

Naw, you'll only lose it.

Well ... they could be looking for a free baseball cap:

LOL. Dollar Donald never does anything for free.

wake up silly geese, that why we want him making the "DEALS" for us.

your GOP/DNCe crap just doesn't mean diddly squat to we trump supports.

n diddly squat to we trump supports

You Trumptards will be the first to go to the FEMA camps. The Donald ain't gonna leave y'all running around loose.

It's the first step in making America great again. Lose the morons.

Lose the morons.

we did, ron paul out of it, baby rand totally embarrassed and forced to leave by trump

LOL. Dollar Donald never does anything for free.

wake up silly geese, that why we want him making the "DEALS" for us.

Oh, you want to be like the dupes that he left holding the bag of his bankrupt companies. Well OK then, knock yourself out.

But you are the same guys that got Obama elected. How has that worked out for you?

If you say so. You must be the guy who keeps figuring out a way to back a loser. How's that working out for you?

But you are the same guys that got Obama elected. How has that worked out for you?

If you say so. You must be the guy who keeps figuring out a way to back a loser. How's that working out for you?

I didn't stay home last election like you and your "principled" losers. We made sure that we all lost and f*cked us all.

We made sure that we all lost and f*cked us all.

thanks for admitting to f*cking things up.

We made sure that we all lost and f*cked us all.

thanks for admitting to f*cking things up.

Got brains?

I didn't stay home last election like you and your "principled" losers.

When offered the choice of two turds, I chose neither. Different people have different standards. I will not vote for another GOP establishment turdburger.

When offered the choice of two turds, I chose neither.

You chose Obama.