Lie detection equates to who barks or yells the loudest

Canada Free Press ^ | 02/17/16 | A. Dru Kristenev

[Sean_Anthony]

A heavy price will be paid in allowing emotion to guide our choices in a presidential campaign that far overshadows initial anger and frustration at overreaching government

Projection is what psychologists attach to individuals who 'project' their own behavior onto others, and, in this presidential race, the practice has run rampant. There are two candidates in particular who so believe that they deserve the presidency that they will stoop to new depths to attain their objective.

It is fascinating to see poll leaders in both parties act so similarly on stage when either referring to opponents not present or blaring directly at a fellow candidate occupying the same dais. As much as people like to root for their "champion," in polite society (which is less and less evident during speeches) opponents recognize others' right to opine and explain their position.

[oh8eleven]

who barks ... the loudest

[dynoman]

The irony here is Cruz didn't need to lie. If he had remained honest, he would still be competitive. Liars lie, they can't help it.— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) February 17, 2016

I just find it odd that while the typical Cruz supporter is hyper-religious, they are utterly blind to his constant LYING. It's just weird.— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) February 17, 2016

[mmichaels1970]

that far overshadows initial anger and frustration at overreaching government

Wish it was as simple as "overreaching government". Those words were deliberately chosen to make this look like it's a simple and traditional conservative versus liberal thing. It's absolute corruption. It's politicians controlled by lobbyists who are fine with whatever they say to get elected, so long as in the end they "play ball". It's a party that cowers at the feet of an overly influential media. It about a party that jammed THEIR nominees down our throats and told us to shut up and vote. A party that told us if we didn't like things, not to leave but to change it from within. Those changes are in progress. If the party doesn't like it, they should work to change it from within.

[blackdog]

OK, so Sam Kinneson is out for obvious reasons, so that leaves us with Bobcat Golthwait as president?

[bolobaby]

Yep - keep celebrating the planned destruction of a conservative hero by Team Trump.

Great job!

(BTW, you reap what you sow. Can’t wait to later hear your lamentations about how Trump betrayed you! Guaranteed to happen.)

[bigbob]

Barking and barking mad!

[Yulee]

We are seeing another version of “Hope and Change”, but I fear that this time Republicans are projecting themselves and their beliefs on a candidate, who may or may not be true to his word, once elected.

I dislike all the name calling and blustering that is contained in many of the comments on this forum.

It's strange how the tone changes during the election cycle. Previously, posts were supportive of the conservative standard bearers during the shared struggle against the oppressive, authoritarian Obama regime. Posters here cheered the stands taken by Carson and Cruz.

Yes, moderate Republicans failed to stand with conservatives in their effort to stop the drive to destroy our Republic. Yes, we are all sorely disappointed, but is this a reason to eat our own. Is this a reason to start calling our allies names and deriding them for not being pure enough conservatives.

I fear the angry tone will cause us to fragment when we finally have a nominee. I also believe there are those on this forum (new and old) who have that purpose as their goal. I also believe this same thing took place during the last two presidential election cycles.

Many stayed home because the candidate they had selected during the the primary withdrew or lost. They considered the nominee too moderate or liberal. We seem to stand strong during the interim congressional elections and elect Tea Party conservatives. But then, when nonconservative Republicans disappoint us, we demagogue not only those who disappointed us, but also our standard bearers.

I have a presidential preference and will vote for that choice in the primary, if he is still a candidate when I get to vote. I also know that whoever is the Republican nominee will receive my vote in the general election.

The alternative is a socialist dictatorship, with a leftist judiciary majority supporting the further destruction of our Republic.

My one hope is that if Trump is the eventual nominee, and elected, he will truly take conservative stands to restore our American Republic.

The alternative is that our party will have swallowed the promise of “Hope and Change”, in a different guise, and we will once again be betrayed and disappointed.

Remember the South Carolina Primary is an open primary, and Democrats are helping us determine our nominee. Who do you think they will vote for in the primary.

Pray for our Republic. Call for a Convention of States, and Restore Our American Republic.

[dynoman]

Ted’s destroying himself with dirty status quo politics, lies, and misrepresentations.

Someone once told me, “If someone hands you their head on a platter, why not take it?”

That is what Cruz has done. Very stupid to hand someone like Trump your head on a platter. He’s going to use it. Watch him dominate the new cycle this week with all the ammunition Ted gave him. For being so brilliant Ted sure pulls some bonehead moves.

I never dreamed Ted would have burned “principled” to ashes on the altar of winning like he has. Amazing Ted’s book title is “A Time for Truth”. I bought it.

I couldn’t believe Ted forgot Trump was the only one to mention the names of two conservative judges he’d consider appointing at the beginning of the debate. Instead the “brilliant debater” with “a photographic recall of the spoken word” LIED and said “Trump will appoint liberal judges.”

Wow. What a stupid tactical mistake. It shows canned soundbites overruled smart tactical maneuvering - Ted didn’t recognize the battle field changed with Trump’s mentioning the two conservative judges he’d appoint. He ran with the canned soundbite anyway. Very bad mistake, very bad tactical judgment. That was stunning. Ted’s just another status quo puppet politician. I’ll too vote for him as the nominee but it will be a default “cream of the crap vote for me”.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Reminds me of the pastor who wrote out his sermon. In one paragraph he found he could not back up what he was to say so he put a note to himself there. “Weak point, POUND PULPIT!”

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

dynoman:" What a stupid tactical mistake.
It shows canned soundbites overruled smart tactical maneuvering"

Canned soundbites are more easily recalled and repeated , regardless of truthfulness .
The beauty of tactics is that in its subtlety, it is not noticed while being effective.
A balance between the two principals is most effective in accomplishing the desired result.

[dynoman]

“A balance between the two principals is most effective in accomplishing the desired result.”

Only in politics is a balance between truthfulness and lies actually considered to be a virtue. The trouble with this cycle is that Trump isn’t standing for the status quo lies and misrepresentations. And the polls are showing we-the-people aren’t either. We are effin sick of it!

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

dynoman " ... Trump isn’t standing for the status quo lies and misrepresentations.
And the polls are showing we-the-people aren’t either. We are effin sick of it!"

There is a peaceful revolution in camps of both the Dems and the GOP - saying we are not going along with the "elites ".
We are seeing that revolution now in the rejection of the party elite candidates.

[GizzyGirl]

Barking and barking mad!

Can you imagine if she took this imaginary dog home to be with her? It would bark NON-STOP!!! I’ll be thinking of this every time she opens her mouth!