Yesterday the Times covered the deepening debacle in Libya. Today, the bad news is from Syria; this is their front page headline:
Major Advance by Syrian Army Routs Rebels and Kills Talks
Syrian Forces Press Aleppo, Sending Thousands Fleeing
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Syrian government and allied forces pressed their most dramatic advance in months on Friday, sending insurgents scrambling and tens of thousands of civilians fleeing toward the border with Turkey.
The advance has accelerated in recent days, with new momentum from heavy Russian bombardments in the northern province of Aleppo. The government’s gains have given a morale boost to loyalists and prompted opponents of President Bashar al-Assad, including Turkey and Saudi Arabia, to calculate their next moves.
The government’s gains in Aleppo Province, building on earlier ones in Dara’a in the south and Latakia in the north, also scuttled United Nations-mediated peace talks this week in Geneva. Neither side saw much to discuss there: The government believed it was achieving its goals on the battlefield, while the opposition accused the Assad administration and Russia of using negotiations as cover for indiscriminate attacks.
Russia’s four months of escalating military intervention have strengthened the government, allowing Mr. Assad’s forces to go on the offensive in several provinces at once for the first time in years. It remains to be seen if the government’s advances will hold, but it has already dealt major blows to the armed opposition and made crucial military gains around the divided city of Aleppo, the provincial capital that was once Syria’s largest city and industrial hub.
Yeah, Putin is achieving his goals and Obama is not but don't call it leadership. And don't look in the rear-view mirror and suggest that a no-fly zone, as called for by Hillary and some top Republicans, might have curtailed Russian air power - that was half-baked mumbo jumbo.
And as tens of thousands of refugees commence the trek to Europe, well, its not our fight, Obama will say.
Switch to decaf, Mr. Maguire!!
Posted by: Beasts of England | February 05, 2016 at 04:38 PM
Barry will no doubt proclaim this as a great victory brought about by his sage leadership.
Forward!
Posted by: common man | February 05, 2016 at 04:47 PM
Lets tick off the accomplishments, shall we?
1) The signups for Zerocare are abysmal and the death spiral is now strong enough that major healthcare companies are starting to squeak about how much money they are losing.
2) The economy registered .7% growth record in the most recent measurement released. Not 3% or even 1% but .7%. We are this close to two negative growth quarters and a recession.
3) The unemployment rate while nominally down, forgets to include all of the discouraged from even looking not to mention the underemployed ( I will take anything right now but this is not what I want to spend my life doing ) and there are suspicions that the seasonal adjustments may well be reversed in coming quarters to show a higher unemployment rate.
4) There is not a single foreign policy success that can be proudly pointed too. Its all fubar.
So who is better off than eight years ago, Madam Hillary? Besides government employments and Washington DC lobbyists, I mean. Why in the world would we sign up for more of this mess?
Posted by: common man | February 05, 2016 at 04:57 PM
Maybe another leaflet drop will help things.
Posted by: henry | February 05, 2016 at 05:08 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/5/obama-depicted-as-murderous-devil-downtown-moscow/
Actually, I don't think this is far from wrong.
How'd that reset button work?
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 05:11 PM
It's going to take a Herculean effort to make a silk purse out of the jug ear this fool is leaving us and it's going to take decades to make it.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 05:14 PM
For a moment, I thought ANNE BARNARD was Ann Barnhardt.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | February 05, 2016 at 05:18 PM
What is the daily post record to date?
Not comments--TM posts.
I had to skip two completely.
Posted by: anonamom | February 05, 2016 at 05:18 PM
Didn't see anyone post that they wanted this thread stripper free so here you go.
http://mobileimages.lowes.com/product/converted/093945/093945007654lg.jpg
Posted by: Gentlejim | February 05, 2016 at 05:51 PM
I agree that calling 404 a murderous devil is appropriate. His inept foreign policy has set the Middle East, Northern Africa and Europe on fire. He just needs to go die in one now.
Posted by: Gentlejim | February 05, 2016 at 05:55 PM
The older Beastette just got word from the dealer that the main chip for her electrical system was shot - about $1,000 to get it fixed. She was freaking out and we went back and forth about how and who to fix it, rental car, et cetera. Got her off the ledge with OL, and all will be fine. 12 minute call.
Then my Mom calls. Same thing. What should she do? Yada, yada, yada. I told her it was under control - no problem. Not good enough. Ugh. 17 minute call.
Then my ex calls. Same thing. 8 minute call.
I'm not a talker in real life. For every fifty words I type here, I probably say five in person. I hate to chat. My dream girlfriend has the perfect Southern drawl with a marginal propensity to yak of 1.00 - that way all I have to do is smile and nod my head. Nirvana.
Posted by: Beasts of England | February 05, 2016 at 05:59 PM
So Russkie cannoneers put their boots on the ground, and rounds in the tube--and made a difference. Who woulda thunk that? And did you see how brilliant Obama was in arranging that? I'm certain that Mr. Assad will be very grateful to Bath House Barry for his cleverness.
Posted by: Comanche Voter | February 05, 2016 at 06:00 PM
Just as well there's a new thread. Saves lyle some eMBARRASSMENT. :)
Posted by: lyle | February 05, 2016 at 06:11 PM
Poor Beasts! If I didn't have the flu, I'd be springing up to bake another batch of cookies!
Hang in there!
Posted by: maryd | February 05, 2016 at 06:18 PM
Amazing story of hit men with more scruples than this woman's ex husband and how she crashed her own funeral.
[you think you've got problems Beasts?]
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 06:21 PM
Hilarious, MaryD!! Life is tough when you have to negotiate with three very hard-headed females in a one hour span. :)
Posted by: Beasts of England | February 05, 2016 at 06:23 PM
Anecdotal story about China, free trade etc.
About ten years ago I got a chainsaw stuck in huge pine log I was bucking into movable sized pieces.
Long story short, huge log vs saw = log wins.
I saved the intact crankcase and tossed just about everything else because everything else was broken. But it was never worth repairing because genuine Stihl parts from Germany cost more than a new saw would.
Recently noted the amazingly cheap Chinese after market parts at ebay. Ordered a couple hundred dollars worth to put the thing back together assuming they'd probably be ill fitting flimsy junk and it would be a failed experiment.
Have gotten nearly every part now and every one has fit perfectly and has been amazingly high quality and stout; perhaps not as good as OEM parts but at 1/4 to 1/10 the cost, plenty close enough.
Result is economic activity and one virtually new saw.
With massive tariffs, as Trump favors; result is no economic activity and lonely crankcase sitting unused in basement.
How does that make America great again? Great as in 1933?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 06:32 PM
Beasts - I feel your pain and was dealing with it yesterday and today, and likely to keep going until someone with a bigger business card than mine steps in to stop it.
It is emotionally-based and biased situation, and in no way does my "logical reasoning" and direct way of speaking help the matter. I have resigned myself to the fact that it is better to keep my head down until this "storm" blows over.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | February 05, 2016 at 06:38 PM
Come on Iggy. Trump doesn't want you to have a working chainsaw. He wants you to have an awesome door stop.
Posted by: Gentlejim | February 05, 2016 at 06:40 PM
JamesD is hanging tough at 37% but the little Rubio-like pustule at the bottom has edged up to 30%.
What's a little carpal tunnel, people?
Vote early and often.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 06:41 PM
Apologies if this was linked before but I just snagged it from the Ewok:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/an-awful-candidate/article/2000940
I like how it points out how through sheer necessity she was a much better candidate in 2008 than now. I've excoriated her pervert husband and imbecile daughter for not talking her down from the ledge she's teetering on but I'm not sure that even if those dimwits had the requisite amount of normal human compassion that they'd be able to talk any sense into the driven monomaniacal bat.
If she wasn't such an extremely horrible person it would be quite sad.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 05, 2016 at 06:42 PM
http://www.birtherreport.com/2016/02/must-see-canadian-born-cruz-dodges.html#du7wmWAoBXUbbjKW.99
This short video accomplishes several things. Not only does it showcase Cruz's creepiness, it allows everyone a visual of one of the keen lawyerly tricks often played right here on the pages of JOM.
He will not answer a simple question, but instead goes for the outrage angle by acting if he is under assault from a different question.
This guy is a genius, right?
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 06:43 PM
A bigger business card - lol, PD!!
Posted by: Beasts of England | February 05, 2016 at 06:49 PM
No, TK. He's a lawyer and a politician.
Posted by: Another Bob | February 05, 2016 at 06:53 PM
You are correct, Another Bob.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 06:54 PM
JMH, if you are around... I see where (a few threads ago) I unintentionally introduced confusion into my discussion using both Go8 and G-8 in the same comment...
Some might claim auto correct is to blame, but I know, it's my own damn fault.
No wonder the confusion, entirely of my making. Sincerely apologize.
Still don't trust Mr Rubio... 😲
Posted by: Sandy ن Daze | February 05, 2016 at 06:56 PM
Almost all of you will find the Trump chart I just linked to of interest.
(BTW, I know chartists have many names for various patterns, If you happen to know what that one is called, I' appreciate you sharing it.)
Posted by: Jim Miller | February 05, 2016 at 06:59 PM
"Hail Caesar" is getting good reviews. Has anyone seen it?
Posted by: clarice | February 05, 2016 at 07:02 PM
Oh, and scroll down a little for a real movie bargain at Amazon.
Posted by: Jim Miller | February 05, 2016 at 07:02 PM
And no different than about a million other lawyers and politicians.
I'm with you as to the general question re. Constitutional eligibility. Why don't we require candidates to prove eligibility? What should recourse be when there are questions?
But the system isn't fixing that. So we gotta play the best hand we can.
Posted by: Another Bob | February 05, 2016 at 07:03 PM
Jim Miller, that pattern looks like the Dow in '29
Posted by: henry | February 05, 2016 at 07:03 PM
Or right after a publicly traded company announces they've hired a law firm specialized in reorganization work. I'm sure the charts on the junk bonds for the Taj Mahal looked a lot like that when the default was announced so Trump would be very familiar with the correct term.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 05, 2016 at 07:09 PM
Iggy,
I appreciate your desire to get your chainsaw working again.
However, how do you think the Chinese were able to make those replacement parts?
When my husband was at in Germany back when he was working for the coal companies, he toured a German manufacturer of longwall mining equipment. The President of the company told him he had a firm rule not to sell anything to the Chinese unless they ordered at least 10 of the millions of dollars pieces of equipment; the reason was that he wanted to get some profit out of them. He said if he sold them one, they would back-engineer it and be competing with him the next year.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 07:20 PM
Sandy Daze:
Not to worry. I did some face palming of my own when I realized you were talking about the Gang of 8, which made far more sense. :-)
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 07:23 PM
I, also, do not trust Rubio. My husband and I are at odds. He wants Rubio, and I want Cruz. I am afraid Crux is "done for" as the GOPe has spoken, and now Jindal is endorsing Rubio! He strikes me as an immature child who speaks "by rote."
Posted by: new lurker | February 05, 2016 at 07:27 PM
Jim Miller,
The Cohn piece linked at your site is amusing. Is the Cruz win confounding the pollsters really much different than the Bevin win in Kentucky? It's not as if the size of the core support groups isn't known and it's not as if the historical electoral strength of the core groups isn't known. The only real unknown was the electoral strength of the ABT group, the fact it exists isn't a secret.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 05, 2016 at 07:41 PM
Good read on the Chinese [and the world's] predicament.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 07:42 PM
-- He said if he sold them one, they would back-engineer it and be competing with him the next year.--
Yep. So?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 07:44 PM
new lurker:
If Cruz is "done for" it's not because the GOPe has spoken. They were speaking long before he even started running. Cruz whiffed a huge, possibly once in a campaign, opportunity to parlay his amazing Iowa win into something much bigger with a knock out victory speech. Aside from the fact that he just rambled on and on and on, he made what I consider a classic rookie error by talking to the room, with no apparent sense of the vastly larger audience listening in. It was a really disappointing performance at a potentially pivotal moment. Better over rehearsed, than unprepared.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 07:44 PM
new lurker,
They are trying to elevate Rubio and take out Cruz and Trump. Meanwhile, Jeb sits on his pot of money waiting until Cruz and Trump fall and then he will try to take out Rubio in South Carolina.
The whole thing makes me mad, and it should anger everyone else, no matter who they support; because, mark my words, if you support Rubio, he will be taken out, too.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 07:45 PM
Here's some Straight Talk for NH dem primary voters: Sanders won Iowa!
Hill will be 0-2 next Wednesday, but just wait for the blacks in SC, they'll save her bacon!
Posted by: Skoot | February 05, 2016 at 07:45 PM
If it is true that Cruz didn't know until 2014 that he was a Canadian citizen, he should answer that question directly. He can follow up with the part about his eligibility, if need be. McCain did, and his eligibility was more straightforward (two citizen parents, U.S. sovereign territory). I have a feeling the MSM might not cut Cruz the same slack they cut McCain.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 07:48 PM
Porchlight:
Unfortunately, the bigger stumbling block may be the fact that Cruz' Senate colleagues won't cut him the same slack they cut McCain, when they unilaterally recognized his eligibility, thus laying the matter to permanent rest.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 07:53 PM
I have friends (libs) who are certain Bush will be the nominee. Since I'm an R voter and have barely even heard of anyone who supports him, I've wondered how they can be so sure. SC certainly has been good to the Bush family.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 07:53 PM
Exactly JMH. A *Dem* Senate did it for their buddy McCain. Not at all clear that McConnell would do it for Cruz.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 07:55 PM
Well, Porch, I was so embarrassed to see Barbara Bush on the television tonight speaking in support of Jeb Bush. Just how old is she, and JEB! should be ashamed to have made her go on television. Amazing.
Posted by: new lurker | February 05, 2016 at 07:57 PM
Oh for heavens sake. A sense of the Senate resolution on any subject is about as worthless as a resolution naming a post office. It would never lay anything to rest...
Posted by: common man | February 05, 2016 at 07:58 PM
I think she's 90, new lurker. It is embarrassing.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 07:58 PM
Rick Ballard -- I didn't follow the Kentucky race, so I'm not sure what happened there.
(I did follow the general election in Britain a little, another bust for the pollsters. "Herding"' seems to have been a big part of the problem, there. I recall thinking before the election that the poll results were too similar, but, alas, didn't bother to mention that in a post.)
Posted by: Jim Miller | February 05, 2016 at 08:00 PM
If it is true that Cruz didn't know until 2014 that he was a Canadian citizen, he should answer that question directly.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130819-cruz-vows-to-renounce-his-canadian-citizenship.ece
How would he not know?
Like Obama, he learns about things from the news.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 08:00 PM
common nan, I'm not talking legally, I'm talking politically, as in taking it off the table. It did just that for McCain. MSM dropped it for good.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:00 PM
thus laying the matter to permanent rest.
:-)
I love you, JMH.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 08:02 PM
Isn't this how Godzilla started off ?
Posted by: henry | February 05, 2016 at 08:03 PM
Porchlight,
Since I have become convinced that the entire thing is Kabuki theater, here is what I think is happeneing:
1. They are trying to drive the votes to Rubio in New Hampshire. Lots of endorsements of Rubio (Santorum and Jindal over the last couple of days, with probably more to come).
Polls showing Trump moving up. Mrs. Bush campaigning will bring Jeb's numbers up so maybe he comes in fourth in New Hampshire.
2. Meanwhile, in South carolina, W is the voiceover in an ad for Jeb. W is still popular with ex-military, and South Carolina has a lot. I figure Jeb maybe will come in 2nd in South Carolina. Then he will have Jebmentum! and Marco iwll be said to have been damaged.
3. Jeb is sitting on a pile of money. He can outlast a lot of the candidates. Adelson in Vegas has apparently come out for Rubio, so Marco will have some additional money, but will it be enough?
4. Jeb has been making really bad statements against Rubio. I imagine further attack ads are in the can.
The whole thing is beginning to disgust me. The press seems amazingly complicit in pushing Rubio, which makes me particularly nervous.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:06 PM
Porch:
I thought McC actually already did decline to do so (althoough perhaps not categorically?). I may be mistaken though.
Liberals seem to see Jeb as the electable Republican. I've had to disabuse some folks on that score myself. :-)
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:06 PM
That should read "Polls show RUBIO moving up.."
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:07 PM
LOL, TK!
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:09 PM
Step away from the tin foil, Miss Marple!
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:11 PM
Well, MM, I totally agree. The whole thing disgusts me!! The MSM pushes Rubio--what does that mean?--do they think he cannot defeat their precious Hillary or what? I had wanted to stop watching all this political stuff and hopefully will because am going out of town tomorrow, and visiting children who definitely will not want to watch political "stuff." I am amazed that entire cable networks move to Iowa and now on to NH!!! Has that ever been
done before?
Posted by: new lurker | February 05, 2016 at 08:14 PM
MM, I had never thought about that until you explained it. Yow. I do still think Rubio is the overall GOPe choice. It seems to me that by that point (Super Tuesday) the conservative/insurgent voters will have coalesced around a single candidate and Rubio and Bush would split everyone else.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:15 PM
JMHanes,
Yeah, well, we will see. I just think that this seems obvious if you realize that they want Jeb. Rubio is being used as a stalking horse.
This is what happened with Guiliani and Fred Thompson in 2008. Then they withdrew and we ended up with McCain.
Of course, my complete suspicion and paranoia could be governing my thinking. I don't think so, though.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:15 PM
JMH, not sure about McCain. Bush v. Clinton, what a nightmare. People would be pining for Trump. :)
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:19 PM
Joe Biden Becomes First VP With A Facebook Page, “I’m Ready To Go!”
I tell ya: It's going to be Biden v Rubio. Get ready.
Posted by: Jane | February 05, 2016 at 08:20 PM
Christie on O'Reilly says he will be bringing forward stuff that will move his numbers in the next four days.
Hmmm.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:21 PM
So is it being suggested Giuliani [my paternal grandmother was a Giuliani and I had to double check my spelling, pitiful] and Thompson were mere rabbits for the inevitable juggernaut McCain in 08?
If so may I recommend a long stay at a spa?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 08:25 PM
Which direction?
Posted by: henry | February 05, 2016 at 08:26 PM
Miss Marple:
Giuliani totally miscalculated with his putative 50 state strategy, and Fred Thompson dilly dallied around so long before finally declaring his candidacy, that he had next to no chance to catch up on the ground. The only "they" that deep sixed those campaigns were the candidates themselves.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:26 PM
--Isn't this how Godzilla started off ?--
Nah henry, the Big Guy was from them Yank nuclear tests.
A volcano by a nuke plant was probably Gamera or maybe Rodan.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 08:29 PM
If Thompson had won, and gotten a second term he would have died in office.
Posted by: Jane | February 05, 2016 at 08:30 PM
JMHanes,
I don't agree. I watched the whole thing.
WHY did Guiliani "miscalculate?" The conventional story is that he thought he could win Florida with all of the ex-New Yorkers there. I don't believe he is that stupid.
Fred Thompson got in but never acted that serious. It was like he was just taking up air for a while.
We will just disagree.
If I am wrong about how the current primary comes out, I will be happy to admit it.
If I am right, I will be on here saying "Ha-Ha-Nanny- Boo-Boo Neener-neener!"
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:31 PM
If I am right, I will be on here saying "Ha-Ha-Nanny- Boo-Boo Neener-neener!"
FWIW, I've been waiting to say that since 2009.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 08:34 PM
TK,
Hope springs eternal in the human breast.
Hang in there.
:-)
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:41 PM
http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/schlafly-unloads-on-rubio-he-betrayed-us-all/
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 08:42 PM
When my mind drifts to GOP primary conspiracy theories, I think "but this is the GOPe we're talking about - how could they be so competent as to pull it off?"
And yet: Romney. McCain, 43, Dole, 41, skip Reagan, Ford, Nixon, skip Goldwater (whose loss actually benefited the establishment for a few cycles because no one wanted a repeat of that), maybe Eisenhower, it's too depressing to continue.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:43 PM
Miss Marple:
Oddly enough, I watched the whole thing too. As a matter of fact, Giuliani was the guy I wanted to vote for. If he'd won the nomination, of course, everybody would have been calling him the RINO, and claiming that "they" torpedoed Fred to make way for Rudy.
"WHY did Guiliani "miscalculate?" The conventional story is that he thought he could win Florida with all of the ex-New Yorkers there. I don't believe he is that stupid."
Well that's where he concentrated his ground game, when everybody else was going retail in Iowa, NH etc. He decded to bet it all on the big states, not the early primaries, and he lost.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:45 PM
Maybe it's not the GOPe that's so competant. Maybe it's that the majority of voters are not as conservative as conservatives would like to believe.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:49 PM
Did it ever occur to anyone that these mopes keep winning because similar mopes vote for them and there are more mopes than people who have any sense?
Even a significant number of people with sense seem to think a sinister "they" is engineering these votes and not their idiot fellow citizens.
Believe it or not, Pogo knew whereof he spoke.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 08:49 PM
Or, what Hanes said.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 08:50 PM
Ditto Ignatz.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 08:51 PM
I thought of that, JMH. But of that list, with the exception of Goldwater in a year when the GOP had zero chance, the generally more conservative candidates won. And almost all of the winners were then re-elected.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:54 PM
LOL!
Yep, Ignatz, Pogo was probably right.
BUT, you couldn't get those votes unless you staged a Kabuki theater, which is now going on.
Rubio positions himself as the nice guy. Cruz and Trump are too mean. Movement!
He's moving up in New Hampshire! He's looking like a comeback kid!
Let's get a bunc of also-rans to endorse him! Gives the impression of clout and winning!
Voters: Oh,Rubio looks nice and has endorsements. I will go for him. He's young! And attractive! And not mean!
Step into my parlor, said the apider to the fly.
When Rubio gets to south carolina, Jeb wil take him out. Part of this is personal, as Jeb and his people feel like Rubio shouldn't have run.
Yes, the voters are stupid. BUT the GOPe knows this and structures their presentation accordingly.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 08:55 PM
"They" equals "mopes in early goofy primary states."
If they voted on the same day as the rest of us, mope theory would be diminished greatly.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 08:56 PM
It's when the GOPe get their way that we're most likely to lose.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:56 PM
Part of this is personal, as Jeb and his people feel like Rubio shouldn't have run.
I've wondered about this, too. It simply wasn't Marco's turn yet.
But I don't think Jeb has the juice. We shall see.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 05, 2016 at 08:59 PM
. Maybe it's that the majority of voters are not as conservative as conservatives would like to believe.
Exhibit#1: Trump supporters.
Posted by: Jane | February 05, 2016 at 09:00 PM
Listened to that Cruz video, re credibility.
DID NOT LIKE HIS ANSWER, AND THE STEP-ASIDE.
Would have been so easy, as Mrs Daze commented, to have suitable responses ready to go, and without prompting, she said, for example:
- "What, you think I was trying to hedge my bets?" (responded with a bit of humor and incredulosity...) or
- "Never thought much about it because I never planned on running for President of the United States. Then, after my Senate win, I was pulled aside buy some friends and it was strongly recommended that I look at the circumstances of my birth, and make sure I was administratively good to go in case a higher office might be in my future. So I did. Sure, it was late in the day, but I have never thought of myself as any thing but American through and through. "
Now, Mrs Daze had those answers within a seconds of hearing the video. Why didn't Mr Cruz have similar responses ready to go ?
Is is because Mr Cruz is rattled. His answer was VERY off - putting.
Well that, and his support for a VAT move him toward the bottom of my preferred candidates list.
Still and all, IVR, and will crawl over broken glass to vote for whomever is the Republican nominee, even if the nominee happens to be Messrs Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich ! 😱
Posted by: Sandy ن Daze | February 05, 2016 at 09:00 PM
Maybe it's not the GOPe that's so competant. Maybe it's that the majority of voters are not as conservative as conservatives would like to believe.
But voter attitudes can change, and they can be changed. We went from Don't Ask, Don't Tell to the government putting people out of business because they don't want to participate in a same sex wedding, in 20 years or so. And you can see similar movement on many other issues. The issues where our side fights hardest and gives the least ground (2nd amendment, for one) are the ones where our position has the most public support.
When one side goes all-in on an issue, and the other side doesn't choose to fight, public opinion tends to follow the side that's all-in. Maybe that's why voters are less conservative.
Posted by: James D. | February 05, 2016 at 09:04 PM
Exhibit#1: Trump supporters.
In the previous Primaries, who did this group select?
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 05, 2016 at 09:05 PM
I'm trying to figure the argument out;
Cruz actually did know all along he was a Canadian citizen. As we have also been apprised he very early on had political ambitions. He is also supposed to be ambitious, devious and clever.
Given all that if he actually did know and had presidential ambitions all along why would he not have renounced his Canuck citizenship decades ago rather than waiting until right before he was going to run?
He certainly made no secret of where he was born nor could he possibly hope to hide the fact he was a Canuck citizen if he actually knew he was.
Either he didn't know because he took his mom's word for it and never thought much about it or the Brits hope to finally avenge 1776 and 1812 by sneaking the menace from the Great White North via Texas into the White House to burn it down for the second and final time.
What is the birther explanation for him knowing he was a Canuckistan citizen and waiting until 2014 or whenever to renounce it?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 09:15 PM
So Robert Kaplan came up with a slim volume, Mediterranean winter, that stitches together many of the travels he did in the 70s and 80, with many historical detours.
I out forward my theory about guiliani, a slimy nazgul named Wayne Barrett was responsible.
Posted by: narciso | February 05, 2016 at 09:17 PM
http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexkantrowitz/twitter-to-introduce-algorithmic-timeline-as-soon-as-next-we#.rcZrG6DkB
This will kill Twitter. It's of no use to me if the timeline isn't chronological.
Posted by: Miss Marple | February 05, 2016 at 09:17 PM
JamesD was down to a mere 5% lead. I upped it to 6% but somebody is falling down on the job.
Come on we've only got...OMG...24 MORE DAYS!?!
This could be tough James. Suggest you hire a couple of young cybergeeks.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 09:20 PM
No Anne barnard is a well meaning but confused Carlos slims correspondent.
Posted by: narciso | February 05, 2016 at 09:20 PM
Looks like people have been making a push against JamesD. Damn thing quit adding votes after 5 this time.
I just can't understand why the republican candidates are saying one word about each other. Their libtard opponents are such easy targets. Talk about those idiots and what you will do. Seems simple.
Posted by: Gentlejim | February 05, 2016 at 09:23 PM
James D.
Yes, attitudes can certainly change. I'm certainly more conservative in some respects, and more liberal in others, than I was 20 years ago. What I'm suggesting is that folks may be ignoring Occam's razor in favor of casting themselves as victims of conspircies which offend the otherwise natural order of things.
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 09:25 PM
Kaplan regerrences flaubert's salaambo, and livy's war with hannibal, as examples how conflicts soon out of control.
Posted by: narciso | February 05, 2016 at 09:26 PM
Apparently there will be a new link and a restarted poll on Sunday or Monday. They'll drop the lowest candidates, just like the R primaries, and recite until there's only one book left standing.
Posted by: James D. | February 05, 2016 at 09:26 PM
When even Citibank says the world economy may be in a "death spiral" ya got problems.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | February 05, 2016 at 09:28 PM
Barrett was a gruntled scribe at the village voice in the 90s, who took Giuliani's reign as his personal ragnarok.
Posted by: narciso | February 05, 2016 at 09:31 PM
Miss Marple,
Let me see if I've got this straight. In your view, Rubio is not the establishment fav, he's just the GOPe stalking horse for Jeb -- the assumption being that since the two are virtually interchangeable, Marco is just collecting votes for JEB till his charisma is sacrificed on the altar of GOPe Bush love? Or are you saying Bush is, himself, the GOPe incarnate, cleverly disguised as a losing candidate?
Posted by: JMHanes | February 05, 2016 at 09:33 PM