Amid Russian airstrikes, a Putin craze takes hold in Mideast

ap.org ^ | Oct 12, 2:55 PM EDT | ZEINA KARAMVIVIAN SALAMA

[Trumpinator]

Oct 12, 2:55 PM EDT

Amid Russian airstrikes, a Putin craze takes hold in Mideast

ZEINA KARAMVIVIAN SALAMA Associated pressAssociated press

BEIRUT (AP) -- Amid the ornate walls of Damascus' famed Omayyad Mosque, preacher Maamoun Rahmeh stood before worshippers last week, declaring Russian President Vladimir Putin a "giant and beloved leader" who has "destroyed the myth of the self-aggrandizing America."

Posters of Putin are popping up on cars and billboards elsewhere in parts of Syria and Iraq, praising the Russian military intervention in Syria as one that will redress the balance of power in the region.

The Russian leader is winning accolades from many in Iraq and Syria, who see Russian airstrikes in Syria as a turning point after more than a year of largely ineffectual efforts by the U.S.-led coalition to dislodge the Islamic State militants who have occupied significant parts of the two countries.

The reactions underscore that while the West may criticize Putin for supporting Syrian President Bashar Assad, there is some relief in the region at the emergence of a player with a coherent - if controversial - strategy.

"Putin does more than just speak," said Sohban Elewi of Damascus, summing up the views of Syrians on opposing camps who regard U.S. policy in Syria and Iraq as fumbled and confused.

[wardaddy]

LoL

[Hugin]

There has not been one of these outsider candidates that made it to the convention in quit some time. Perot never made it but he came close.

Perot ran as an third party, conventions were irrelevant, although he quit before they had them. The vast majority of delegates will be selected by voters in primaries. All I'm saying is the rules in some states (open and winner take all) that were supposed to help the establishment lock up things for the establishment choice will help Trump if he still has a plurality at that point. And the GOP doesn't have super-delegates like the Dems do.

[Cold Heat]

Yeah he did, but he got the most votes of any that has tried..

Perot would have liked to have run as a republican, but he did not think he could get the nomination as a outsider.

Trump, obviously considered the same issues..In fact many of us believed and some still do that Trump might switch to independent if the GOP runs any sort of major interferences.

There is a reason why complete outsiders cannot or don’t believe they can get the nomination in either party.

The primary issue is that they have no political track record. Their politics are whatever their hired writers say it is. Since there is no way to verify this through investigation of past votes, statements, and the like, their politics can be associated with science fiction.

That is until they are elected, and then you find out what is real and what was created.

Most thinking people have a issue with that or they should. Trust has to earned and with nothing to verify the veracity of a position in politics, you are forced to take ones word for it and that may be a bridge too far.

[Cold Heat]

All I'm saying is the rules in some states (open and winner take all) that were supposed to help the establishment lock up things for the establishment choice will help Trump if he still has a plurality at that point. And the GOP doesn't have super-delegates like the Dems do.

Yeah, I understood that when you said it earlier..But delagates chosen by primary voting in most states are not a solid lock. They are only pledged.. That is what I was trying to say. This is why we can end up with a floor fight. Pledges are worth the paper they are not written on. Then again if the GOP concedes the issue, then everything will go swimmingly, but based on recent events in congress and around the US, I don't see a easy nomination. But I could be wrong....deals may be made...and Trump is good at deals, we do know that much at least.

[kiryandil]

[Cold Heat]

Here, let me give you a example...(fictitious) of what may happen because it's a open election with no incumbent. We have some 14 or candidates, I forget the count now, but lets say by the time the primaries wrap up, there are 4 left. All four have won at least one primary or more and there is a leader, say candidate "A" who has won the primaries with the most delegates. Candidates "B" , "C' and "D". refuse to release their delegates because they want to use them as leverage at the convention. (this is normal politics)

let's say that the combined totals for the B-C-E bunch is sizable and enough for a challenge if one of them controlled all of them.

Taking into account that as the floor fights brew, delegates can defect. Or, the others can simply pledge their delegated to the winner, or the winners delegates, might get PO'd and balk..

Politics is the making of sausage and it's not very pleasant to watch much less experience. So I don't know what will happen because it depends on who's ox has been gored, and how solid the primary leader is, and if the others and there will be others are willing to pledge their delegates or retain them.

[Gideon300]

“I don’t see how you can say Trump has no chance but think Cruz does. The GOPe will try to torpedo either one, but Trump has the resources and leadership ability to overcome it. Cruz doesn’t. If somehow he did get the nomination he would be undermined by the RNC because they know their jobs are at stake. Then they could blame his “extreme” positions for the loss, while using a Democrat president to keep conservatives voting for Republicans.”

Well, perhaps you’re right, and I hope you are. I’m basing my feeling about Trump’s chances on what I read and see first hand to a degree, that he is looked on my many as they would look at a sideshow barker or medicine show huckster: a lot of patter but no proof of anything of substance beneath.

The American electorate is notoriously fickle, and after seeing Sick Willie and Buckwheat both get elected TWICE, I’m frankly at a loss as to what to believe.