[mrsmith]

No candidate has to have “policy specifics” at this point LOL!
You could ‘catch’ any of them with that.

[kiryandil]

No candidate has to have “policy specifics” at this point LOL! You could ‘catch’ any of them with that.

Exactly!

As a matter of fact, I don't think ANYONE has ever axed President Jarrett about her "policy specifics"...

[henkster]

Republicans with “policy specifics” are “wonky” and unelectable. Trump has no policy specifics and is called out for delivering a “Trumpian soliloquy.”

0bama and Hillary are called “forward thinking” and “nuanced” in the same circumstances.

I see where this is going.

[iontheball]

No candidate has to have “policy specifics” at this point LOL!
___________________________________________

What is important is learning the predisposition of the candidate on an issue. Secondly, there is the need to ascertain whether the candidate is expressing the predisposition just to film-flam the voter.

[kabar]

the answer is simple: Attrition thru enforcement. The amnesty advocates like to offer the false choice between mass deportation or a blanket amnesty. Why the urgency to legalize them?

[Windflier]

No candidate has to have “policy specifics” at this point LOL!

Exactly!

I might add, why isn't the press demanding policy specifics from the rest of the candidates? Just Trump, huh?

Phhhht. These chumps are so transparent, you could use 'em for window glass.