Just Don't Say "Boots On The Ground"

The US and allies will complete the burial of Hillary's plan for a bootless intervention in Libya sometime soon:

U.S. and Allies Weigh Military Action Against ISIS in Libya

By ERIC SCHMITT and HELENE COOPER  JAN. 22, 2016

WASHINGTON — Worried about a growing threat from the Islamic State in Libya, the United States and its allies are increasing reconnaissance flights and intelligence collecting there and preparing for possible airstrikes and commando raids, senior American policy makers, commanders and intelligence officials said this week.

While no decision has been finalized about when the United States and its allies will formally expand action in Libya against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, administration officials indicated that it might be very soon. A decision will probably come in “weeks” but “not hours,” Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Friday.

“It’s fair to say that we’re looking to take decisive military action against ISIL in conjunction with the political process” in Libya, General Dunford said. “The president has made clear that we have the authority to use military force.”

Presumably Obama will want to coordinate this escalation with the Iowa / New Hampshire political calendar.

The article includes a reminder of the scope of the Mid East debacle:

“There is a concern about Libya,” Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the head of the military’s Special Operations Command, said at a conference in Washington this week. “It can’t all be about Iraq and Syria.”

And Iran. And Yemen. And whatever.

Libya could present the West with challenges equal to those an American-led coalition faces in fighting the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. In those two countries, the Islamic State is hemmed in by a host of armed groups with international backing and is being pummeled by American, British and other allied airstrikes.

Right. Bombing a conventional government into submission rarely works. So what are the prospects for bombing a terrorist group holding the civilian population hostage?

Comments

[That's how I stand with the President.]

Nice, Porch; we need him, he fights.

[Miss Marple]

Heh. This got under Charles Cooke's skin this morning:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/23/conservative-intellectual-blasts-national-reviews-trump-attack-it-no-longer-represents-real-conservatism/

[Undress the Trappist.]

I desperately wish Cruz and Trump not to be alienated irreversibly; we need them, they fight.

[Momto2]

mThank you Clarice - you weave ideas together in such an artful manner! The "pieces" fit together and form a much stronger whole cloth - truly masterful writing.

Glad you are ok daddy - you may find a long lost book to read in the process of re-shelving. That is often the case with me if things get rearranged by nature (or children).

We are all a bit concerned about your knee Jack! Prayers for that new antibiotic to do its job.

No snow remaining here in my part of Ga. but the chill has many birds at my feeders.

[Cecil Turner]

Nice, Porch; we need him, he fights.

AFAICT, he talks.

What exactly IS our foreign policy? Does anyone know?

Do we even have one?

[Huntress with trapper keeper.]

Sarah mediator,
Not a common 'tater.

[We could argue about the phone. Or over it. Naw, the remote.]

The tongue is mightier than the pen.

[Next issue, or one of the ones after.]

Yes, CT, we have a foreign policy, it is to demean the cop on the beat, which for the last century and more, a coalition of functioning democracies. Has it been foolishly, or ignorantly destructive? Or has it been been malignantly, deliberately destructive?

I dunno. To be determined.

[Hybris to debris.]

Dang, should've worked in an 'arrogantly destructive' in there.

[Cecil Turner]

Dang, should've worked in an 'arrogantly destructive' in there.

I don't know, I thought it worked pretty well. I would also note you're judging from results and ignoring rhetoric . . . which is the only rational metric.

[Miss Marple]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430206/donald-trump-muqtada-al-sadr?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=56a4e09d04d3016bfe460c65&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

Yes, that's right! The National Review is comparing Donald Trump to Muqtada al-Sadr!

They truly have lost it.

[Cecil Turner]

Funny Rubio ad from Moe Lane (H/T: Insty) . . . and can somebody please explain the wizard/evil giraffe thing? I get the quote is a Pulp Fiction takeoff, but a search for the underlying legend got me nothing but merchandise:

[henry]

If there were no possibility of the GOPe flipping to Hilligula / Bernie to save us from "non conservative" Trump or "meanie" Cruz, the NRO tantrum would be histerical and I would enjoy the spectacle. Even more so as the Weekly Standard sunk under the weight of its own smugness. Unfortunately as Janet reminds us, they did exactly that in VA. Where is SMOD?

[Miss Marple]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-grains-farms-idUSKCN0V102L

I thought ethanol was causing prices to skyrocket. What's the explanation for this?

[hrtshpdbox]

"...he turned on the Huntress"

Didn't she just blame her son's beating up women on Obama? Beck might be kind of bonkers in his own right, but Sarah has obviously gone around the bend as well (I mean, didn't she also just endorse a ludicrous narcissist for President?).

[Momto2]

MM - NR also continued the *oh so effective* tactic of insulting Trump's supporters.

"What he says might strike more-educated Americans as noxious"

[narciso]

I listed the examples Brian sacks entertained the adultery slander, Eddie scarry likewise a nazgul.

[narciso]

Thank you for missing the point.

[hrtshpdbox]

"Beck is saying if Cruz doesn't get the nom he's going to vote for the Bern."

I'd vote for Cruz, or any of the other GOP candidates except Trump. If Trump were the nominee, I'd have to sit out my first presidential voting opportunity since I voted for Ford in 1976. What's that...nine straight GOP votes. Yet if Trump is the nominee I won't have to feel as if I'm completely abdicating my responsibility, since there would be no Republican running. I didn't leave the party, the party left me, blah blah blah.

Nat Review is entirely consistent trying to tear Donald a new one - Bill Buckley would be appalled at how the GOP has been hijacked by a hate-mongering simpleton (whereas I suspect Andrew Breitbart might be aghast at some of the tripe now published at his brainchild).

[Cecil Turner]

If there were no possibility of the GOPe flipping to Hilligula / Bernie to save us from "non conservative" Trump or "meanie" Cruz, the NRO tantrum would be histerical and I would enjoy the spectacle.

Depending on the poll you look at, Trump's negatives run from just under 50% to ~75%. The problem isn't the GOPe, it's that a whole bunch of voting Americans are telling anybody who'll listen that they won't vote for this guy. So if the plan is to nominate him and hope they come back to the fold, well . . .

[hrtshpdbox]

"He trashed them because they trashed him first.."

When Walker dropped out he cited his rationale as being that the party needed to winnow down the number of candidates in order to avoid a Trump nomination, i.e. "I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to do the same so that voters can focus on the limited number of candidates who can offer a positive, conservative alternative to the current front-runner."

http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-walker-donald-trump-drop-out-speech-2015-9

[Truthbetold]

Wake up Trump supporters you're being played!

Trump’s bad bet: How too much debt drove his biggest casino aground

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trumps-bad-bet-how-too-much-debt-drove-his-biggest-casino-aground/2016/01/18/f67cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

[Rick Ballard]

Trump's own assessment of Trumpeteers' embrace of Trumpismo is certainly accurate. Cold blooded murder on 5th Ave probably wouldn't be enough at this point.

Perhaps he could begin and end each performance by dropping his pants and mooning the audience which he holds in such absolute contempt?

[henry]

Cecil, that may be the case. Electability is not the issue for me here. It is the inside the beltway smugness and elitism on display.

I am no fan of Trump. In fact, i am one of those who raise his negatives. That I and others dislike Trump does not excuse the despicable behavior of the NR.

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

If Trump OR Cruz end up as our nominee & if they even win....will the Republicans in Congress just bash them all the time?

History says yes. Dondi came off pretty well on Rove News Sunday.

[clarice]

How much of the anti-Trump venom is fueled by falsity. I keep reading, for example, that he's for universal health care, suggesting he's for a single payer system.In fact, here's his policy and I agree with it.http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/22/part-2-the-professional-political-machine-says-donald-trump-is-not-conservative/
♦ Healthcare Policy – While Donald Trump has not laid out a formal Healthcare policy we are able to assemble the outline with a review of his 2015 verbal comments and proposals (interviews) regarding ObamaCare and Health Care Reform.

Candidate Trump has committed to a full repeal of ObamaCare with a replacement policy proposal consisting of patient-centered, market-based reform. Trump has outlined a desire to remove the state regulatory barriers on healthcare insurance exchanges allowing insurance companies to present an insurance product across state lines, a market-based approach.

Businesses and individuals would be able to purchase health insurance from any company regardless of origination state. All insurance companies would be able to compete for, and offer insurance coverage toward, the consumer and/or business in any state.

However, Trump has also proposed federal guidelines, rules, to ensure the financial solvency of any health insurance company. Any healthcare insurance provider would have to pass regulatory and compliance financial “stress tests” and retain financial reserves as established by federal regulatory agencies. A similar approval and regulatory program is currently in place for financial/banking services to eliminate risk.

Each insurance provider would also be required to pay a fee, into a federally controlled risk pool established in the event any single provider is unable to meet their policy obligations. The collection of these fees eliminates the risk of a taxpayer funded bailout if an insurance carrier becomes insolvent. This process also allows insurance regulators to keep the market flush with multiple competitive carriers eliminating a too big to fail monopoly by any individual carrier. (Think Hurricane Insurance Programs).

This market approach would open the health insurance markets to competitive pricing and allow consumers to tailor their coverage to their individual needs. The insurance product is offered by the insurance company, the individual has choices and options.

Low income healthcare coverage is continued through the use of the current Medicaid services program and is provided as a subsidy or voucher to the insured customer. In addition, Trump is open to “health savings accounts” so long as the account itself is controlled by the individual and catastrophic insurance coverage is included as part of the overall program.

Candidate Trump has also proposed retention of the mandated “pre-existing coverage” rule insuring that people cannot be denied entry into the market based on pre-existing conditions. However, unlike ObamaCare, Trump is also proposing “High Risk Pool” subsidy for those who have extensive and long-term medical issues.

The long-term medical coverage subsidy for high risk patients would be administered through the existing medicaid and medicare process; the difference becomes the amount of the subsidy which would be based on the individual or family income level, and extent of the coverage needed.

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

Michael Needham is slattering Trent Lott.

[Cecil Turner]

I am no fan of Trump. In fact, i am one of those who raise his negatives. That I and others dislike Trump does not excuse the despicable behavior of the NR.

I didn't read 'em (except for the occasional link) before this, I don't read 'em now. The articles I browsed (that folks here linked) seemed okay to me, and they certainly have the right to pile on as they deem fitting.

My takeaway was that it was likely to be counterproductive and smacked of desperation. And I find the howls of mistreatment by the Trump crowd just about as genuine.

[Miss Marple]

clarice,

Quite a bit is exaggeration or taking an old position on which he has since changed, like his stand on abortion.

The story in the Post about the Taj Mahal deal is a bit of a problem, but then I cannot judge if it is the truth or not, since there is so much lying going on, and because the Post has a vested interest in having a weak GOP candidate.

[Cecil Turner]

Enough of this politics nonsense, there's some super (almost) football on today! The lines I'm seeing are the Pats by 3 and Carolina by 3. And as much as I'd like to argue with these guys, that's about the way I see it (at least both being tough games: I doubt the spreads will be that close).

Will the Mile-high home field advantage and a stingy defense upset the Pats? Will the Cards finally get their high-octane offense properly fueled? Only a few more hours . . .

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

Adam Schiff spinning furiously to defend Rodham for her haphazard treatment of classified emails. James Lankford is having none of it.

[Miss Marple]

Cecil,

Well, when the first guy in the list of "Against Trump" people is Glenn Beck, and Beck (a known nut case) gets on stage with Cruz and says he would vote for Sanders over Trump, they have lost their right to claim any sort of intellectual high ground.

They have every right to publish. I have every right to point out they are smug Beltway elitists who don't like hearing from the peasants.

[Truthbetold]

Clarice

Who do you think you're fooling?

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

Has the Rove News Channel decided to jettison its namesake because of his recent ineptitude or do they plan on bringing him and his fellow dunce, Trippi, back when the voting mercifully starts?

[hrtshpdbox]

The Pats get beat by a triad - thin air, deflategate karma, and the inevitable dynamic of everyone loving the old man magically reaching into the well one last time thing.

[Miss Marple]

Oh,
it's THAT guy again!

Think I will get ready and head to mass. Seems like an opportune time.

Prayers for Jack will be offered!

[henry]

Axel rod writing paychecks a again?

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

Schiff is a complete piece of shit for trashing Petraeus to defend the lying drunk predator enabler.

[hrtshpdbox]

Rove won't feel like a total failure unless they start pairing him up with Bob Shrum for commentary.

[DebinNC]

Clarice's Piece had extended quotes from Thomas Lipscomb today, and he seems like my kind of conservative. Who is he and what group/site is he a part of?

[Cecil Turner]

Quite a bit is exaggeration or taking an old position on which he has since changed, like his stand on abortion.

Any possibility he's pandering on any particular issue for political gain?

The guy doesn't have a record. He can change his position with the political wind (and has). Only mindreading can reveal his actual principles, and any particular claims are necessarily projection.

Well, when the first guy in the list of "Against Trump" people is Glenn Beck, and Beck (a known nut case) gets on stage with Cruz and says he would vote for Sanders over Trump, they have lost their right to claim any sort of intellectual high ground.

If someone were citing Glenn Beck as an authority (on anything), this might be a pertinent complaint. They aren't, and it isn't.

They have every right to publish. I have every right to point out they are smug Beltway elitists who don't like hearing from the peasants.

You can call them anything you like. It has almost exactly the same impact as Glenn Beck telling me who to vote for.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Trump gave "Axel rod"s boy Rahm Emanuel 50K

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

The Bezos Daily Worker should get its own house in order instead of meddling in national campaigns. I don't think macaca claims will work so well.

[clarice]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fox-poll-trump-retakes-lead-from-cruz-in-iowa/article/2581308

You might not like his tactics viz Cruz, but they seem to be paying off.

[jimmyk]

I will enthusiastically vote for Trump if he's the nominee vs. Hillary/Bernie/SloJoe. I find it bizarre and troubling that any conservative (or moderate) would do otherwise. (Granted I would be much more enthusiastic about Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina, maybe some others.) Inveigh against him all you want in the primaries, but sitting out the general and risk electing one of those Dems is just unthinkable to me.

[Cecil Turner]

The Pats get beat by a triad . . .

Forgot to factor in the karma thing. But I'm not sure how to handicap it.

Who is he and what group/site is he a part of?

Lipscomb runs American Thinker. I don't know of anywhere else, but . . . I've emailed him a few times, nice guy.

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

George Will: Rodham is a wine that doesn't travel well. Juan: Rodham didnt willfully share information like that terrible Petraeus.

[Truthbetold]

Clarice

As you know. Trump is getting help from the media. You also know that the Taj Mahal article is spot on.

[hrtshpdbox]

"I find it bizarre and troubling that any conservative (or moderate) would do otherwise. "

I can't pull a lever for a person who I suspect is genuinely a bad person. There is no redeeming, for me, the way he came out of the gate - in many ways I don't much like John McCain, but putting him down for becoming a POW is reprehensible. There is no excusing it. Similarly, I've differed at times with Charles Krauthammer, but his personal bio is one of tremendous triumph in the face of adversity - for Trump to call him a "loser" merely reveals what a loser slob Trump is himself. I have no reason, at all, to believe anything that Trump says, and plenty of reason to disbelieve him. I find it plenty troubling and bizarre that anyone that isn't a member of Trump's family would consider voting for him under any circumstances.

[henry]

How much of that $50k from Trump to Rahm did Axelrod forward to you?

[hrtshpdbox]

"Forgot to factor in the karma thing. But I'm not sure how to handicap it."

Scientific studies have the karma thing worth a full point on the road, half-a-point at home.*

* - jk. Looks to me like this will be the more fun game to watch, though.

[Rick Ballard]

From the WaPo Taj Mahal piece

“I didn’t want to have any personal liability, so I used junk bonds. I accept the blame for that, but I would do it again,” he said. But Trump vehemently denied that the deal represented a personal failing or affected his personal wealth.

“This was not personal. This was a corporate deal,” he said. “If you write this one, I’m suing you.”

I suppose he missed the Sullivan decision somewhere along the way. The WaPo highlights contrasting the bragadoccio v reality in his utterances are entertaining.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Back up your foolish assertion with an example.

[henry]

You never back up yours.

[Janet]

Trump’s bad bet: How too much debt drove his biggest casino aground

Does the WaPo care about debt now?

Was Trump's casino subsidized by taxpayer money like many "green" projects are?

Did the feds invest millions in building Trump's casino?

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Did you read the WoPo article? Did Trump give 50k to Rahm?

[Truthbetold]

Janet

Are you serious?

[Buckeye]

Somebody running as a Republican who gets help from the media?

Without paying for it?

How's that happen?

[henry]

Did Axelrod give part of his cut to you?

[Rocco]

The more I think about a Trump/Cruz ticket as Jeffrey Lord suggests in Clarice's article the more I like it. It appears he's the one so unless they kill each other, why not combine the top two? Trump Democrats might rival Reagan Democrats in numbers and we'd get the added benefit of watching GOPe heads explode.

[Truthbetold]

Buckeye

Thank You for injecting common sense into the conversation

[jimmyk]

I can't pull a lever for a person who I suspect is genuinely a bad person.

Trump is as bad or worse than Hillary? Or perhaps Bernie is more to your liking? Because like it or not, you don't get to chose the nominees. Those may be the choices.

I don't see much evidence that Trump is a "bad person." He speaks off the cuff and and says some stupid things, but has he caused people to die, intentionally ruined lives, put the country's security at risk, the way Hillary has?

[Threadkiller]

If Trump were the nominee, I'd have to sit out my first presidential voting opportunity since I voted for Ford in 1976

Vote for the Libertarian.

[Threadkiller]

Who is your choice, TBT?

[Truthbetold]

Henry

You sound like a democrat

[hrtshpdbox]

"Was Trump's casino subsidized by taxpayer money like many "green" projects are?"

It was subsidized by bonds that taxpayers bought, some of them certainly thinking, "Well, Trump is a great businessman, so these bonds will be secure even though Moody's and S&P are rating them single B". Those investors weren't quite informed enough to realize that Trump would, without a care in the world, walk away from those obligations when it suited him financially.

[Truthbetold]

You can bet the farm it's not Trump

[henry]

Axelrod sends no checks to me Ernie.

[jimmyk]

It was subsidized by bonds that taxpayers bought

Not sure that word (subsidized) means what you think it means.

[Threadkiller]

Awesome, TBT!

Anabell's farm?

How about in order of preference?

Who tops your list? Trump being last...

[Rick Ballard]

Rocco,

That works if people actually buy Ginzu knives on the basis of the reality info-mercial. We'll know a little about actual conversion numbers after Iowa and we won't actually know about Iowa until a week or so after the caucus. Romney was declared the winner in '12 but Santorum actually 'won'. My bet is we're watching a Deaniac/Ronulan show and the Trumpeteers don't actually have the structural framework to get Trump to Dean or Paul results.

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Stop embarrassing yourself

[Buckeye]

hrtshpbox

Could be worse. They could have bought General Motors bonds.

[cheerleader]

Janet, no the Republicans in Congress won't bash him all the time because he's going to win them over too. He'll be the anti-Obama and work deals that will be for the good of America. I wish I knew how to post pictures because there's a picture of him stitching up the American flag that sums up what he's about.

"...... the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another."
George Washington Farewell Address

[Truthbetold]

Threadkiller

Are you backing Trump?

[Threadkiller]

Taxpayers should be mad at Trump because of bonds they voted for, or were voted for by their representatives?

Is the bond issue in the WaPo article?

Maybe I'd better read it.

[henry]

I'd have to start first. :)

[hrtshpdbox]

"Trump is as bad or worse than Hillary? Or perhaps Bernie is more to your liking?"

I really wish I could say that I think that Hillary or Bernie would be worse presidents than Donald Trump. That Hillary or Bernie would pick worse Supreme Court justices than Trump, that Hillary or Bernie would behave worse than Trump in the event of international crisis, that Hillary or Bernie would grow government more than Trump. I'm always up for voting for someone I'm not truly enthused about (I did it in 2008 and 2012), but with Trump, Hillary or Bernie I have no clue who would do the most damage to the country.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Conservatives generally accept the world the way it is and make their peace with it by making the best of what the world offers.
Lefties live in a world of their own imagination creating havoc by refusing to accept the limitations of life.

With Trump many conservatives are threatening to or actually are acting like leftists. Trump is real and apparently not going away. There's a good chance he will be the nominee.
If he is, are conservatives going to go the full lefty monty and make things vastly worse by refusing to accept Trump, thereby delivering us into the hands of either a closeted Marxist or an open one?

We're told he's a big mouth egomaniac.
First, most politicians are some version of that.
Second, so what?

We're told he's not conservative enough.
First, after GHWB, Dole, W, McCain and Romney the point is almost laughable.
Second, who cares? The alternative would be a Bolshevik.

We're told what conservatism he does have is false and untrustworthy.
First, after GHWB, Dole, W, McCain and Romney the point is almost laughable.
Second, who cares? Now, after the list above we're supposed to worry a politician might not keep his word?

Perhaps Trump will reverse course on everything he says he'll do, but we don't know that and it is quite unlikely he would do so. What would he gain from doing that? He's always been more conservative than Schwarzenegger and the nation as a whole is very different from the pressures of California and the crowd of leftist nuts Ahnuld runs with. So I consider the Arnie model unlikely.
More probably he will try to do some of what he says but not all, which is kind of like every other president ever elected.

I'm bothered by his character, but so long as he is directing its flaws toward my and America's enemies it doesn't bother me much at all. And frankly his character flaws seem mainly to consist of fighting dirty with his enemies. Not good when they're other Reps. Kinda laudable when they're the white washed sepulchers and brood of vipers knows as the Dem party.

As a constitutionalist I'm bothered by his bombast and arrogance, but the fact of the matter is if he were to follow, even slightly, the political philosophy he now advances and were to overreach and go too far in its pursuit and have to be restrained from doing too much, it would be the first time in my life any Republican ever had to reined in rather than kicked in the ass to get moving and take the fight to the other side. That possibility alone would be worth voting for in the general.

The program the guy has put forth is pretty decent and superior to that advanced by most, if not all, of the nominees since Reagan. Now, apparently because he has held different positions in the past and because of his bombastic and often crude nature and his apparent ignorance on a lot of issues we're told we're idiots if we believe he might attempt implement his program. Genteel, well mannered and long serving GHWB lied through his teeth to us about no new taxes and repudiated Reaganism.
War hero Bob Dole would have rolled over for the Dems in the WH like Hello Kitty just as he did in Congress.

He's not my first or even second choice but if Trump is the nominee I'll be happy to take a chance on a big mouthed, vulgar, braggart who might actually do something.

[hrtshpdbox]

"Not sure that word (subsidized) means what you think it means."

Haha, OK.

[Threadkiller]

TBT, you first.

You descended in here on winged chariot to tell us how not to vote and you can't tell us how you will vote?

Makes your case weak.

[cheerleader]

"That Hillary or Bernie would pick worse Supreme Court justices than Trump,"

He recently did quite a long riff on the selection of judges, and the model he cited was Clarence Thomas.

[Truthbetold]

Threadkiller

I have not told you how to vote. I have presented facts about Trump. What you do with those facts are up to you.

[jimmyk]

I am 100% confident there is no one Trump would pick for SCOTUS who would be worse than anyone Hillary or Bernie would pick.

[henry]

TK, he does Axelrod's bidding. Never denied it.

[Threadkiller]

This is not voting advice:
Wake up Trump supporters you're being played!

Got it.

Let's try this question:

Based on the facts, which candidate, in your expert opinion, will "play" their supporters the least?

[Truthbetold]

Henry

Put down the Saul Alinsky manual and stop embarrassing yourself.

[cheerleader]

insults aren't arguments

[Truthbetold]

TK

Do you support Trump

[Threadkiller]

If you have a copy of the manual, TBT, will you explain which rule you are following when you used a diversion instead of a response to my first question to you?

[henry]

Stil not denying.

[Threadkiller]

Maybe your computer lacks a scroll back feature. Here is the question you choked on:

Who is your choice, TBT?

Posted by: Threadkiller | January 24, 2016 at 11:11 AM

Tough one, I guess.

After you answer, I will rip your choice apart with facts and then tell you my choice.

Deal?

[Cecil Turner]

I really wish I could say that I think that Hillary or Bernie would be worse presidents than Donald Trump.

What she said. But it really doesn't matter. That party unity thing only works on the subset of the GOP (~40% of the electorate) who weren't already voting for him. Which leaves his enormous negatives to work on the 60+% everyone else. I'm not confident he can beat Hillary even if she gets indicted (as if).

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

The local fishwrap is provincially concentrating on how the mailman's son is targeting black donks in South Carolina, which his Medicaid expansion should make a natural plus his willingness to portray himself as holier than everyone else. His campaign operatives are repeating the lies about McRINO being victimized by "dirty tricks" by GWB's staff in SC for which there is not one iota of convincing evidence. As much as I want Rove dead in a fire, South Carolinians were surely influenced by what a horrible human being McCain was and always will be.

[Momto2]

with Trump, Hillary or Bernie I have no clue who would do the most damage to the country. I don't know you but this is a pretty amazing statement if you really mean it!

[Truthbetold]

TK

Why don't you guess?

[Threadkiller]

Obama?

[Truthbetold]

No

[Threadkiller]

Rosie O'Donnell?

[henry]

Cecil, there is logic in what you say... but the last pair of "electable" tomato cans led to Pres Obama. I find it hard to believe the analytics anymore. That said, Trump is adjacent to JEB! on my preference list.