Hillary and Sanders have another CNN debate this coming Thursday. It is very telling that Trump is afraid to debate Cruz any more. Now, when the states have to decide between Cruz and Trump is when we need more debating and clarifying their policy positions. For example, I would like to hear more about Trump charging other countries for the use of our military for protection.
The Republicans have had more debates than the Democrats by a very large margin.
It is very telling that Trump is afraid to debate Cruz any more.
It is perfectly obvious even to Cruz supporters that Cruz just wants an opportunity to unleash 15 lies in 2 minutes. You can't seriously believe that would be a debate.
Trump should tell O'Reilly that he will agree to give Cruz one more chance, and even agree to give Rafael the home town advantage, if Bill can arrange it.
Hold the debate in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Then by all means, ask Trump’s campaign committee...Look on his websites...Do your own searches...
Trump isn’t “afraid” of any of them...That’s ALREADY obvious...15 so-called debates is about 10 too many anyway...They were all boringly redundant...
If you want to know something about a candidate, ask their local campaign site in your area...
Excuse me doosh bag. The democrats are on debate number 9. We’ve had 13. Get back to me when your party catches up the the republicans.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gates-criticizes-nato-how-much-does-us-pay/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-nato-members-increase-defence-spending
Europe’s declining interest in defense:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/03/opinion/scrimping-on-nato.html?_r=0
payblocked:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/natos-spending-slumber-1434993123
even Obama got into it, a shaming of England brought their 2% to the table (a few dozen paragraphs in)
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/04/the-obama-doctrine/471525/
Brietbart points out the trade imbalance with our NATO partners:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/23/terror-trump-trade-and-nato/
now, to be perfectly fair, WaPo gives Trump a three pinochios, basing that on future promises of Europe to pony up, and caging the “billions and billions” (total to date Trump is talking about) with the old “ annual direct contribution is under $500 million a year” line (which some may agree adds up to billions and billions over just a few years’ time). However, the WP doesn’t address the trade imbalance.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/30/trumps-claim-that-the-u-s-pays-the-lions-share-for-nato/
There’s really not much to debate about it other than, how soon NATO members are going to get with the program and pony up or how slow we’re going to walk to their defense if they don’t. And, why is there such a trade imbalance with “partners” who depend on the USA for their peaceful existence.