Posted on 03/11/2016 2:55:39 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Here’s my comment. He’s the son-in-law of Bill Kristol - writes a little blog and is in the family business of Punditry for Profit.
:-)
He would make a better Class President of a Texas high school. Because he is never going to be elected to a national office. He is Pugsley Addams.
This is like having a blind man tell you that Rosanne Barr is prettier than Marilyn Monroe.
Do you guys have a whole art department there in Mumbai producing that material for you?
Every ONE of these kinds of questions or statements have an adjective or verb that can be understood in more that one way
Trump could never stand for two days in front of the Senate and talk, nor can he sound like William F Buckley Jr, but that does not take away his ability as a man to be President of The United States
Too many people think Trump cannot win against Hillary because she has a lifetime of verbal gymnastics to draw on in a confrontation
Hillary will not stand up against the one syllable facts Trump will throw at her when they meet
When totaled up, you get a huge pant load of bullsh*t from the so called 'conservative' press.
Yep. And we made India pay for it. /s
I’ve been to those parties when I was stationed there. Decent food but mostly dull people.
Cruz cannot win if he loses Florida and Ohio on Tuesday night. It is a mathematical thing. That day he is also already losing Illinois, north Carolina, Missouri. At that point he will need 900 of the remaining 1100 delegates. That won’t happen. In fact trump would be leading in a large majority of the remaining states. Cruz will not win the delegates necessary to win.
I see Pugsley Addams. He’s grown increasingly repulsive over the last month or two.
Do you think any Trump supporter is going to admit that “if they don’t behave we’ll just build the factories over here.” is quite possibly the dumbest statement made last night?
Of course not. Drudge poll says he won the debate, so he won. It ends there.
The Free Beacon has been well-regarded here for years but let them write one article daring to say that Lord Trump has no clothes and they’re tossed into the dustbin with the National Review, Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and 100 others and we must also attack their looks. On behalf of the man with what is possibly the worst hairpiece in the world. What’s really funny is that half of you will probably be calling for Trump’s impeachment a year or two from now and swearing up and down that you never supported him.
Now, as to the substance of what this apparently reviled source said: The article makes a point I somehow hadn't thought of, in this shouting match of a primary season. Being President is more than posturing and image. Like anything else, it's mostly a day-to-day job.
How would Candidate X behave in office? "Knowing what you're talking about" suddenly looms large, gigantic, actually, when you think about the cumulative effect of someone working at a crucial job 365 days a year for a limited amount of time.
>>The Oval Office seems very far away right now. It’s unlikely either Trump or Cruz will be elected president. But nominating Trump would change the Republican Party in a way nominating Cruz would not. Trump overthrows the apple cart. He’s already breaking one weak institution—the GOP—and there’s no telling what other weak institutions he could break if elected to high office.
So, in the opinion of this professional pundit, neither will win so we must preserve the institution of the UniParty scam. In other words, “dammit people, we need to turn the heat down and go back to slow boiling you frogs! Too many of you are starting to jump out of the pot.”
You nailed it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.