Taking down ‘The Donald’

The Marietta Daily Journal ^ | August 13, 2015 | Patrick Buchanan

[2ndDivisionVet]

If his Republican opponents will not take down Donald Trump, Fox News will not only show them how it is done. Fox News will do the job for them.

That is the message that came out loud and clear from last Thursday’s debate in Cleveland, which was viewed by the largest cable audience ever to watch a political event — 24 million Americans.

As political theater, it was exciting and entertaining.

But what was supposed to be a debate among the top-10 Republican candidates turned into a bear-baiting of Donald Trump.

Make no mistake. The issues Fox News raised were legitimate.

Trump’s threat to run third party, his remarks about women who have affronted him, the bankruptcies that four of his companies went through as he built his real estate empire — these are all fair game.

What was wrong here was that it was not his Republican rivals raising these issues or taking on Trump. It was the Fox News “moderators” of what was supposed to be a candidates’ debate. They came into the arena to do to Trump what his GOP rivals have been too timid or reluctant to do.

Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly came with their oppo research done and attack questions prepared — to sack Trump in the end zone and send him to the locker room on a stretcher.

When did that become the job of a “moderator” who is supposed to be more of a referee than a middle linebacker?

Who decided to turn the first Republican presidential debate into a two-hour version of “The Kelly File”?

With the exception of Rand Paul on the opening question about Trump bolting to run as a third-party candidate, no Republican chose to follow up the Fox News attacks on Trump that were disguised as questions. They let Fox do the wet work.

The anger of Trump and his followers that he was being singled out and sandbagged is understandable, even if his reaction revealed that Fox News had drawn blood. Indeed, this debate will be recalled in political lore as the night Fox News tried to take down the Donald.

Did they succeed?

According to an NBC poll, taken in the 48 hours after Cleveland, Trump held first place and rose a point to 23 percent. Sen. Ted Cruz had vaulted into second place with 13 percent. Dr. Ben Carson had risen to No. 3 with 11 percent. Carly Fiorina, who was not in the top 10 a week ago, is now fourth with 9 percent.

Together, these four outsiders can claim the support of well over half of all Republicans, while the beltway favorites — Marco Rubio at No. 5, Jeb Bush at No. 6 and Scott Walker at No. 7 — can together claim less Republican support than Donald Trump alone.

Who won the debate? According to the NBC poll, it was Carson, Trump and Cruz in that order.

With a real opportunity to capture the presidency in 2016, those leading in the race for the GOP nomination seem to be among the least likely to amass 270 electoral votes. But those most acceptable to the establishment seem, as each month passes, to generate less and less enthusiasm.

Yet, what is now clear is that the Republican establishment wants Trump out of this race, and, frustrated at his continuing strong support, is less and less willing to wait for him to implode.

Over the weekend, we heard talk of a Kasich-Rubio ticket, or vice versa. Yet, in that NBC poll, Kasich remains dead in the water after the debate, dropping from 3 to 2 percent, while Rubio is at 9 percent.

A real danger is emerging here of the split inside the GOP deepening and widening. For if it is seen that Trump has not been rejected by the voters, but driven out the race by the establishment and the elites, the value of the nomination will be vastly diminished.

Thus far in this presidential season, the rise of the Republican outsiders, insurgents, nonpoliticians and anti-politicians reveals how far the people of the United States are estranged and alienated from their political leadership.

In the Democratic Party, too, we have seen the rise of outsider-insurgent Socialist Bernie Sanders to within single digits of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and the fall of Clinton to where she is underwater in the polls on issues of trust and, “Does she care about people like me?”

If there is one lesson to be taken from this run-up year to the presidential campaign of 2016, it is that a huge and growing segment of the nation does not want what the establishment of either party has on offer.

And as insurgent parties spring up all over Europe, and the two-party system disintegrates there, the Europeanization of American politics may be at hand.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Comments?

[Finalapproach29er]

Maybe so. But if that happens DT will “take down” the GOP with a 3rd party run;he’ll have a gimmick VP pick to stir interest.

The GOP is screwed, and hopefully the democrat party too.

[Lee Enfield]

I don’t care who you are for, this is the most entertaining election in decades. Seventeen people in the clown car of love, WOW!

[Morgana]

I don’t care for The Donald. I’d much rather have Cruz and/or Scott Walker.

[Pelham]

What was wrong here was that it was not his Republican rivals raising these issues or taking on Trump. It was the Fox News “moderators” of what was supposed to be a candidates’ debate. They came into the arena to do to Trump what his GOP rivals have been too timid or reluctant to do.

Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly came with their oppo research done and attack questions prepared — to sack Trump in the end zone and send him to the locker room on a stretcher.

When did that become the job of a “moderator” who is supposed to be more of a referee than a middle linebacker?

[PraiseTheLord]

Trump should start his own party.

We really should have TWO partys.

[DoughtyOne]

Make no mistake. The issues Fox News raised were legitimate.

This is such a lie, that it should be vibrating on our screens.

Anyone have any idea when the original Trump vs O'Donnell spat took place. I thought it was a couple of years ago, but I would have not been surprised if it as only 18 months or so.

Folks, Megan Kelly drug up this feud from December of 2006. LINK

That's how relevant it was. Going on nine years ago. Seriously? Legitimate? We have nothing better to ask our presidential contenders than about nine year old spats?

In the Democratic Party, too, we have seen the rise of outsider-insurgent Socialist Bernie Sanders...

Passing Bernie Sanders off as a Socials outsider in the Democrat Party is just plain lying. Bernie is main stream Democrat party, pure and simple.

Where has this writer been?

[OddLane]

The takeaway:

Thus far in this presidential season, the rise of the Republican outsiders, insurgents, nonpoliticians and anti-politicians reveals how far the people of the United States are estranged and alienated from their political leadership.

Not that the brain trust in charge of the GOP will learn anything from this.

[Bon mots]

[sickoflibs]

Despicable, the media has been playing this clip of Trump.

Trump:”I would look at the good aspects of Planned Parenthood, and I would also look because I’m sure they do some things properly and good for women. I would look at that, and I would look at other aspects also, but we have to take care of women,” he said. “The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should absolutely not be funded.”

What line of the budget dedicates funding specifically to abortion?

[Morgana]

I’m glad the media is playing it. Tell me Donald, just what good has abortion done for women? I can’t think of a single thing.

Abortion oppresses women Donald.

[CA Conservative]

If Donald wanted to run third party, he would have to decide before Iowa. Most states now have laws or filing deadlines set up specifically to prevent someone from running in the primary and then running in the general as an independent. By the time Iowa votes, enough of the filing deadlines have passed that a candidate that had already filed for the stated available at that point would be excluded from too many states in the general to get to 270 EC, even if they swept all of the states they COULD enter.

[Bobalu]

Here’s an idea.

Trump could just announce he’s going 3rd party.

Set up the workers needed in each state and start running attack ads on Hillary and the RINOs on the republican side.
Hit ‘em till it really hurts.

Then just when the pressure is really intense and he is ahead in the polls he could announce that he would entertain the idea of retiring from the race but only if a suitable conservative is the republican nominee... and name Cruz as that acceptable nominee.

This would present the GOPee with a huge dilemma. It would at that point be a certainty that either Hillary or Trump would prevail..and that Jeb? had no chance at all. So they would either chose to win with Cruz or admit that they think it would be better to let Hillary win than allow a true conservative republican to win. ... Quite a choice.

This is something Trump could do if he is really only interested in saving the country.

I happen to think that he could mount a 3rd party run that has a better than even chance of winning. People are royally pissed off at lying politicians and he could get a lot of votes from both parties.

Wouldn’t the debates be fun.. Hillary, Jeb? and Trump all on one big stage together...lol

[tumblindice]

“they let Fox do the wet work”
heh

[tcrlaf]

“DT will “take down” the GOP with a 3rd party run;he’ll have a gimmick VP pick to stir interest.”

All Trump has to do is name Kim Kardashian or LeBron James as VP, and the low-infos will crawl through minefields and broken glass to vote for them.

Such is the state of the American Idiocracy now.

[nathanbedford]

Intellectual honesty compels us to concede that the same people who are complaining about Fox' alleged adversarial interrogation at the Republican debate would be complaining just as loudly if Fox had failed to be equally adversarial in a Democrat debate.

The unwarranted assumption is that Fox should be a special pleader for the Republican Party, or even one candidate in that party, or even a candidate who might or might not be in that party. Fox has its own agenda-surprise!

Intellectual honesty compels us to concede that the questions asked of Donald Trump and the other Republicans were perfectly in order given the context of the times. Should Donald Trump and the others not have been asked in a Republican debate whether or not they will go rogue? Should Donald Trump in an age in which Democrats are alleging a war on women, not have been confronted with his misogynistic comments? Should Marco Rubio who had been accused of being too young and too inexperienced to be president, not be asked about his qualifications for the office? And so on.

Do we really think the Democrat opposition researchers are not already well acquainted with every aspect of the biography of every one of these candidates? Should we really think that the Democrats are not prepared to exploit fully these statements of Donald Trump in which he called a female a "pig?" Do we really think that if Fox doesn't mention it it will never be mentioned?

Intellectual honesty compels us to say that politics is not beanbag and debate is not an occasion to grasp hands and sing kumbaya. A news organization's job is to make news and to expose the candidates to the people. I have said several times on these threads, Trump supporters turned on their televisions to watch a beanbag contest and Megan Kelly came to a political debate.

This is by necessity an adversarial process because a field of seventeen people has to be winnowed down to only one person and the American system is the survival of the fittest in which we say one who would be president must be able to fight in the contest and win. The American people have a right to consider whether they want a man of Trump's intemperance and bellicosity to be president of the United States. They cannot make that judgment unless they are informed by the questioner about his biography. If a candidate is good enough to be president, a candidate should be good enough confront his own biography. The people are entitled the judge the candidate by considering his character. That character is best revealed in adversity.

Fox has performed a great service to Donald Trump and to the other candidates. It is better for these matters to be aired now well in advance of the election in an atmosphere in which the candidate can make his explanation than in a Democrat media dominated debates or, even worse, in an air war in which Hillary's hundreds of millions of dollars worth of campaign ads simply carpet bomb the Republican. Megan Kelly did her job as did the other Fox moderators. Intellectual honesty compels us to admit that if George Stephanopoulos was wrong for planting an IED in a presidential debate, Fox would be equally guilty for not exploring obvious, relevant political questions.

The complaints about Fox moderators come from a misconception and a disagreement about the nature of their proper role. Moderators are interrogators not enablers.

[BerryDingle]

Last Thursday? Mods should put this in ancient history.

[Bratch]

For entertainment purposes only.

---

Attacking Vanilla

AUGUST 12, 2015

LEAVE A COMMENT

[Blind Gossip] Usually it’s the opposing political party that takes the biggest negative shots at a Presidential Candidate. However, in this case, the shot against one Candidate are being orchestrated by another Candidate in his own party!

What are they going to do? They are going to try to paint the First Candidate as a racist!

Right now, the Second Candidate’s people are interviewing and “encouraging/incentivizing” those who have worked with/dealt with the First Candidate over the years to give specific examples of anything – anything! – that he has said or done that could be interpreted as racist.

Some of the stories are really dumb, and it would be embarrassing to put them out. “He only eats vanilla ice cream? Never chocolate? That’s racist!” I don’t know which of these [accusations] they are going to use, but they’re feeling kind of desperate about taking him out of the race A.S.A.P. Just don’t expect [Second Candidate] to admit that this is coming from his camp. He doesn’t want the blowback.

Similar: Huge Presidential Secrets

First Candidate:

Second Candidate:

[2ndDivisionVet]

August 13th is today.

[kvanbrunt2]

Folks, Megan Kelly drug up this feud from December of 2006. LINK
correct and i think most of us knew it was old crap and then generalized by MK into “all women you disagree with?” but this stuff would have come out at some point. better to have it all come out now and see if he can handle it. He obviously did.