Elections GOP 2016 Primary Thread V4: Can Trump be Trumped Edition

[Lead]

Running
Jeb Bush (Former FL Gov.)
Marco Rubio (Current FL Sen.)
Scott Walker (Current WI Gov.)
Donald Trump (Businessman, Media Troll Whore)
Rand Paul (Current KY Sen.)
Ted Cruz (Current TX Sen.)
Mike Huckabee (Former AK Gov.)
Ben Carson (Neurosurgeon...)
Chris Christie (Current NJ Gov.)
John Kasich (Current OH Gov.)
Rick Santorum (Former PA Sen.)
Carly Fiorina (Former HP CEO)
Lindsay Graham (Current SC Sen.)
Bobby Jindal (Current LA Gov.)
George Pataki (Former NY Gov.)
Jim Gilmore (Former VA Gov.)

Ceased Campaign
Rick Perry (Current TX Gov.)


2016 RCP Poll Data
2016 Huffing Post Poll Data

Previous Threads
GOP 2016 Primary Thread V3: More God and Guns Edition
GOP 2016 Primary Thread V2: Detour to the Right Edition
GOP Road to 2016 Primary Thread

Popular Threads on Candidates

 

[Lead]

Editorial

Mike Huckabee Needs a History Lesson

On MSNBC last week, Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee proclaimed the right for Kim Davis, the recently imprisoned Rowan County, Kentucky clerk, to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples despite the Supreme Court’s recent 5-4 decision finding that requires her to issue them. According to Huckabee, Davis was only acting in the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, who, he asserted, refused to recognize Dred Scott, the truly abhorrent 1857 decision denying African-Americans, both slave and free, any rights under the Constitution of the United States. And how, claimed Huckabee, did Lincoln ignore Dred? He issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

Huckabee needs to do a little reading. While it is true that Lincoln found the Court’s decision in Dred Scott an abomination, the 16th president recognized that it was the law of the land and that he was obliged to follow it. Furthermore, the proclamation was not, as Huckabee would have you believe, in contradiction to the Court’s ruling. In fact, in what must have struck Lincoln as a delicious irony, he indirectly relied upon Dred as a justification for his power to issue it.

 

[Lead]

Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio brawl on immigration

The immigration squabble among the Republican presidential contenders has turned into an all-out brawl between Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, with the two senators challenging each other's conservative credentials on the hot-button issue.
While they were by no means the only GOP candidates throwing around immigration accusations on Thursday, the intensity was the highest between Cruz and Rubio, seen as two of the strongest ascending members of the Republican field, especially after Tuesday's fourth debate.
Story Continued Below
"They fought tooth and nail to try and jam this amnesty down the American people's throats," Cruz said in an interview with conservative radio host Laura Ingraham on Thursday, speaking about the "Gang of Eight" senators. Rubio's membership in the group, which unsuccessfully shepherded a comprehensive immigration reform effort in 2013, has haunted him since.

Did Ted Cruz Actually Support Legal Status for Undocumented Immigrants?

Under fire from Senator Ted Cruz for fighting "tooth and nail to try to jam [immigration] amnesty down the American people's throat" in 2013, Senator Marco Rubio retorted Thursday by arguing that the Texas senator has also backed legal status for undocumented immigrants.
"Ted is a supporter of legalizing people that are in this country illegally," he told reporters in South Carolina. "In fact, when the Senate bill was proposed, he proposed legalizing people that were here illegally. He proposed giving them work permits. He’s also supported a massive expansion of the green cards. He's supported a massive expansion of the H-1B program, a 500 percent increase. So, if you look at it I don't think our positions are dramatically different."

Echoing Trump, Cruz Releases Sweeping Plan to Crack Down on Immigration

In a sweeping new policy blueprint unveiled Friday, Senator Ted Cruz attacked legal and illegal immigration from all angles, proposing to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, increase deportations of undocumented people, and slow the flow of visas for foreign workers.
The blueprint mirrored key ideas in rival Donald Trump's immigration plan, such as a border wall, reducing legal immigration, and ending birthright citizenship. It comes as the Republican presidential candidate from Texas is locked in a war of words with Senator Marco Rubio, whose support for immigration reform in 2013 included a pathway to citizenship for undocumented people.

Cruz goes to Rubio home turf to prove immigration cred

Ted Cruz on Friday afternoon went to rival Marco Rubio's home turf, seeking to firmly establish himself as the true conservative on immigration and taking barely veiled swipes at the Florida senator, after Rubio tried to minimize his own vulnerability on the hot-button issue by jabbing Cruz.
In an address at an Orlando church and in a proposal released online, Cruz detailed his plan to combat illegal immigration, embracing a deeply conservative vision that would include a ban on birthright citizenship and forbid any increases in legal immigration while unemployment "remains unacceptably high."

Very interesting Cruz is squaring off with Rubio instead of his own lane with Trump and Carson. I think that really proves he believes they will fall apart on their own. Before this, he was courting Rand's libertarian base away from him. Now he's going against what he sees as the biggest establishment thread between Kasich, Bush and Rubio. Thing that's most interesting is during the last debate, Rubio kept the most quiet of the three about the whole thing yet Cruz is specifically at him. They are the #3 and #4 candidates in the race but they seem to really believe their the legitimate #1 and #2 come time in Iowa and NH.

 

[Lead]

Carson campaign cancels slew of post-Christmas Iowa ads

Ben Carson’s campaign has canceled nearly $700,000 worth of ads in Iowa, according to sources tracking the campaign ad war.
The ad time, slated for five media markets beginning Dec. 28 and ending Feb. 1, was canceled Tuesday without explanation. The cancellation of $675,000 in reserved ad time included $165,000 in the Des Moines-Ames market, $138,000 in the market that includes Cedar Rapids, Waterloo and Dubuque, $122,000 in the region that includes Davenport and $82,000 in the Sioux City market. Another $168,000 was canceled in the Omaha, Neb. Market, which covers portions of western Iowa.

 

[Lead]

Reversed 1

 

[Lead]

Rubio Campaign Snags Former Romney Policy Director

Rubio Campaign Snags Former Romney Policy Director Lanhee Chen, the Hoover Institution fellow who served as policy director for Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, is signing on as a policy adviser to Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign. Chen’s decision, which was confirmed by the Rubio campaign, underscores Rubio’s commitment to being one of the 2016 candidates most conversant and fluent on policy issues. Chen will advise Rubio on both domestic and foreign policy and also lend a hand on debate prep, as he did for Romney in 2012.

 

[Lead]

Meanwhile, the #1 and #2 guys are squaring off. Seems like a four man race every since the 3rd debate if Bush can't get back on his feet.

Trump compares 'pathological' Carson to child molesters

Donald Trump lashed out at Ben Carson on Thursday, likening his "pathological" temperament to that of a child molester’s.
In an appearance on CNN’s "Erin Burnett OutFront," the billionaire businessman said that there is no cure for his 2016 presidential opponent’s condition, citing Carson's own memoir as his source.
Story Continued Below
“It's in the book that he's got a pathological temper," he said. "That's a big problem because you don't cure that ... as an example: child molesting. You don't cure these people. You don't cure a child molester. There's no cure for it. Pathological, there's no cure for that."

Trump attacks Carson in Friday the 13th-themed video

Donald Trump is going all in with the Friday the 13th motif in attacking Ben Carson.
In a video posted to Instagram, spooky, suspenseful music plays as footage of Carson speaks about past claim of physical violence, one that he attributed to his "pathological temperament" in his book "Gifted Hands."
Story Continued Below
"I had a large camping knife, and I tried to stab him in the abdomen," a younger Carson says in the video, before a clip of CNN's report last week shows a man who appeared to question Carson's autobiographical account.

Trump lays into Carson in 9-minute rant: 'How stupid are the people of Iowa?'

For nearly nine minutes of his 95-minute speech to a Fort Dodge, Iowa, audience on Thursday evening, Donald Trump laid into Ben Carson, his closest GOP rival, questioning key components of his biography of personal redemption and reenacting his stories in an unorthodox attempt to question them.
"I don't understand it. I really don't understand it," Trump began, discussing Carson's rise in the polls, remarking that the retired neurosurgeon had said "terrible things about himself" in his book, referring to his 1990 best-selling biography "Gifted Hands."

Christie on Trump's attacks on Carson: Not fitting of a presidential candidate

Chris Christie has weighed in on the increasingly bizarre comments Donald Trump has been making about Ben Carson's past.
In an interview with conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham on Friday morning, the New Jersey governor said that certain comments should not be made by presidential candidates.
“It's in the book that he's got a pathological temper," Trump said on CNN Thursday night about Carson. "That's a big problem because you don't cure that ... as an example: child molesting. You don't cure these people. You don't cure a child molester. There's no cure for it. Pathological, there's no cure for that."

With Carson on the defense, Trump pounces

Donald Trump tried to escalate a fight he picked with Ben Carson by comparing his past “pathological temper” to that of a child molester, releasing another taunting video Friday morning that portrayed him either as a liar or violent criminal.
Carson’s response: Let’s move on.
Story Continued Below
"Now that he’s completed his gratuitous attack, why don’t we press on and deal with the real issues?” Carson asked as he kicked off a news conference late Friday morning.

 

[Lead]

Trump says his backers would support an independent bid

As the political world condemned the GOP poll leader for his call to ban Muslim immigration, Donald Trump openly flirted with an independent presidential bid, noting on Facebook that a USA Today poll suggests two-thirds of his backers would stick with him if he did.
“A new poll indicates that 68% of my supporters would vote for me if I departed the GOP & ran as an independent,” he wrote, linking to the USA Today story on the poll.
Trump has suggested he prefers to run as a Republican but would bolt the party if he detected unfair treatment.

 

[Lead]

Reversed 2

 

[speakhandsforme]

CNN just had a Evangelical panel on Trump and it was fucking depressing beyond possibility.

As a Christian, I wish that Christian America wasn't a political demographic worthy of deriding. The American political information system and the democratic system itself makes the Christian faith a fucking joke in this country.

 

[Lead]

Poll: Republicans more optimistic about their party's ideas

Republicans are far more optimistic about their party's ideas than Democrats or independents, a new Gallup survey published Friday finds.
About 60 percent of those identifying with the GOP said that the presidential candidates have come up with good ideas, while 32 percent said they have not, and 8 percent had no opinion. Among Democrats, 42 percent said they thought candidates had come up with good ideas for solving their most important problem, with 53 percent saying they do not and 5 percent having no opinion either way. The same share of independents (42 percent) said that candidates have the right ideas for fixing their key issues, while 49 percent disagreed.

Pollsters: The media are ruining our industry

Pollsters have a message for the media: Please stop bad reporting on polls, and please stop reporting on bad polls.
At a POLITICO event Thursday morning on the future of polling and the New American Electorate, pollsters made it clear polling was getting tougher. But the media's intense desire for more polls and data was leading to more surveys (and more surveys of questionable quality) than ever.
Story Continued Below
“I think the media is addicted to polls," said Neil Newhouse, the lead pollster for Republican Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign. "And they’re addicted to horserace. And we live in a sports-centered culture where people always want to know the score of the game. And that's driving the sense that we want to know what these numbers are every day. The horserace, from my point of view as a pollster, isn't really that important this far out. What I'm trying to figure out is how do you win the game?”

 

[Lead]

Thad Cochran throws his support behind Jeb Bush

Thad Cochran is supporting Jeb Bush, making him the fourth senator and 30th member of Congress to support the former Florida governor who is trying to break out of his low-single-digit polling slump.

Bush expands his lead in the endorsement primary

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

 

[Jack V Savage]

Haha. I'll vote in this one. From my perspective as a liberal, Trump is the obvious choice, both because in a lot of ways he's the most moderate candidate and because he has no chance of winning.

 

[Makani]

"Darwin Deason"

trololol.

Also, poll from CBS and the NYT today has Trump at 27 and Carson at 23. What a country.

 

[speakhandsforme]

Wow, Trump's attack video on Carson is unbelievable. It's like something you'd see in a parody of politics like in The Campaign.

Let these morons eat each other. They're just clearing the way for Rubio.

 

[Culombo]

trump is up 13 pts in iowa in another new cnn poll .. trump isn't going anywhere .. yet anyways

 

[ultraninjastar]

Deez Nuts.

 

[Adamant]

Will be interesting to see how the national polls look in a week.

 

[JosephDredd]

So it's kind of gone under the radar, but Trump (link) just announced that Carson is a pathological liar and those kinds of pathologies are incurable because it's exactly like child molestation.

"It's in the book that he's got a pathological temper," Trump told "Erin Burnett OutFront," speaking about Carson's autobiography. "That's a big problem because you don't cure that ... as an example: child molesting. You don't cure these people. You don't cure a child molester. There's no cure for it. Pathological, there's no cure for that."

I'm going to vote for Trump twice!

 

[Lead]

trump is up 13 pts in iowa in another new cnn poll .. trump isn't going anywhere .. yet anyways

I've noticed the last CNN national poll seemed like an outlier and found that the pool of voters they use varies a lot from other pollsters at this point. I'm not sure the same is true with Iowa but out of the last three polls, we have Cruz-Trump -2 points apart, +5, and 13+. Decent variance there. The monmouth poll actually ends the same as the poll you reference but begins later at 12/3 instead of 11/28.

Also, none of these polls are covering a range after Trump's recent remarks so if you are implying that this poll shows his statements didn't affect him, that is untrue. I wouldn't be surprised however if polls that do come out in the future show him still high as I don't think his voters seem to care. Cruz certainly is surging in Iowa however and the article I posted above may suggest Carson my drop from the race early.

 

[Lead]

Deez Nuts.

Forgot that grass roots politician.

 

[JosephDredd]

Gigantic Trump Crowd:

https://instagram.com/p/7okAHYGhSr/

Was this the incident where he claimed there were 20 000 people and there were only 5 000? Or one of the incidents where he claimed Bernie Sanders-like attendence (40 000) and there were only 20 000?

 

[Lead]

Cruz vs. Rubio Is A Long Way Off

The Ted Cruz vs. Marco Rubio clash is coming! After Tuesday night’s debate, Jamie Weinstein at The Daily Caller wrote an article titled “Cruz And Rubio Win Debate And Foreshadow A Coming Clash.” Sahil Kapur of Bloomberg went with “Debate Offers Hints of a Coming Cruz-Rubio Showdown.” Indeed, the collective “wisdom” here at FiveThirtyEight agrees: Rubio and Cruz are the first and second most likely candidates to win the nomination. We’re bullish on Rubio. We’re bullish on Cruz.

But just because an outcome is the most likely doesn’t mean that it’s likely. The favorite heading into the NCAA men’s college basketball tournament each year typically has about a 25 percent chance of winning it all. Kentucky, which went undefeated in the regular season last year, entered the tournament with a 41 percent chance. Usually, the odds are that the favorite won’t win. (And Kentucky didn’t.)

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

Why the fuck would anyone support Bush? Do they not realize the people don't support him? Of course they do, they just want him in there because he's one of them.

Crooked bastards.

 

[Cold Front]

From the previous thread:

Supreme Court has ruled on it so there isn't a meaningful debate left. The executive branches job isn't about interpreting law or even creating new law. It would take congress, the president and large majority of governors to overturn that ruling. The public would need to be far more in agreement on the topic and even then, it would be unlikely for an amendment to be passed.

Well, no, they haven't ruled on it. Besides, even if you don't believe that's the case, it's not as if the Supreme Court hasn't been known to alter its opinions from time to time. The fact that half-a-dozen GOP candidates have voiced their opinion on this matter in the negative, with some saying that there ought to be a change to the Constitution and some not, ought to give you pause.

So make the statutory change and throw it into the courts. At least then we'll know.

 

[Adamant]

Was this the incident where he claimed there were 20 000 people and there were only 5 000? Or one of the incidents where he claimed Bernie Sanders-like attendence (40 000) and there were only 20 000?

This one was confirmed at 20,000. I didn't hear Trump, or anyone else, claim otherwise.

 

[Gervinho]

Wow, Trump's attack video on Carson is unbelievable. It's like something you'd see in a parody of politics like in The Campaign.

Let these morons eat each other. They're just clearing the way for Rubio.

Trump really fucked up, but the events in Paris will take the shine out of his pathetic attack on carson. Trump will struggle big time the moment they reduce the numbers in the debate. As long as you have about 10 people, he can get away with not saying much. even though paul embarrassed him on the the China thing

 

[Lead]

Why the fuck would anyone support Bush? Do they not realize the people don't support him? Of course they do, they just want him in there because he's one of them.

Crooked bastards.

He had a long delay since this endorsement so it is kinda odd he threw it behind Jeb, especially when he is no longer the favorite or even having a decent chance of winning. I think people are talking about a Christie comeback even more than Jeb having a chance.

 

[Lead]

From the previous thread:



Well, no, they haven't ruled on it. Besides, even if you don't believe that's the case, it's not as if the Supreme Court hasn't been known to alter its opinions from time to time. The fact that half-a-dozen GOP candidates have voiced their opinion on this matter in the negative, with some saying that there ought to be a change to the Constitution and some not, ought to give you pause.

So make the statutory change and throw it into the courts. At least then we'll know.

Yes, they have. How can you blatantly just say something like that when it's not true?

Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor
"Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.."

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Supreme Court ruled that a person who
-Is born in the United States of parents
-who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
-whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
-whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States

Besides, even if you don't believe that's the case, it's not as if the Supreme Court hasn't been known to alter its opinions from time to time. The fact that half-a-dozen GOP candidates have voiced their opinion on this matter in the negative, with some saying that there ought to be a change to the Constitution and some not, ought to give you pause.

So make the statutory change and throw it into the courts. At least then we'll know.

If your point is they should just throw it out there even though it won't work, then sure. I rather not have an entire media cycle revolve around it however. Hasn't helped anything for the GOP.

 

[JosephDredd]

This one was confirmed at 20,000. I didn't hear Trump, or anyone else, claim otherwise.

A quick search reveals it was only 15 000. Not bad. He only exaggerated by 33.3%.

 

[JosephDredd]

Article and video (link) on Trump's 11/12/15 speech which was essentially a 90 minute nervous breakdown which included challenging Ben Carson to stab him in the gut.

Gone was the candidate's recent bout of composure and control on the campaign trail....An hour and 20 minutes into the speech, people who were standing on risers on the stage behind Trump sat down. The applause came less often and less loud. As Trump skewered Carson in deeply personal language, a sense of discomfort settled on the crowd of roughly 1,500. Several people shook their heads or whispered to their neighbors.

Trump has frequently expressed disbelief at how stupid Iowans are for favouring Carson, a man who recently announced that the way to deal with illegal immigration is have American multinationals teach them how to farm in their own countries.

 

[Gervinho]

With Trump and what he has achieved last few months. Does this settle once for all that the R party is full of racists and bigots? I know right wingers love to say blacks are brainwashed and dems has convinced them they are racists. But I think its clear why so many minorities are against this party. huge part of its base are racists

 

[Cold Front]

Yes, they have. How can you blatantly just say something like that when it's not true?

Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor
"Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.."

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Supreme Court ruled that a person who
-Is born in the United States of parents
-who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
-whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
-whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States

I'm aware of all this stuff and it doesn't matter. No one questioned the right of Wong Kim Ark's parents to be in the United States when their son was born. So the case does not cleanly address the modern context of children born to illegal aliens.

If Judge Posner doesn't think it requires a Constitutional amendment and the Heritage Foundation Constitutional scholar doesn't think it requires a Constitutional amendment, then perhaps you shouldn't feel so confident that it requires one.

Here's Judge Posner:

Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is America

 

[JosephDredd]

But I'll stop being a dick and pushing buttons because I'm bored. In looking for that number I found this pro-Trump list:

Biggest Lies about Trump in the Media. (link)

 

[Adamant]

Cruz vs. Rubio Is A Long Way Off

A heavy duty one-on-one during the next debate would be extremely interesting.

 

[Lead]

With Trump and what he has achieved last few months. Does this settle once for all that the R party is full of racists and bigots? I know right wingers love to say blacks are brainwashed and dems has convinced them they are racists. But I think its clear why so many minorities are against this party. huge part of its base are racists

He hasn't won a primary. It settles that a lot of America is frustrated and venting the anger in a really really dumb way.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Trump has my my vote.

In this poll.

 

[bad seed]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/2016-presidential-tweet-bernie-sanders-most-retweeted-121157
from the previous debate, which he will surpass.

He also gained 50k twitter followers during this debate, compare with the actual candidates debating on stage:

lol this is gonna be easy. Not one person the GOP is fielding can stand up to scrutiny. The more people learn, the more are converted. Join the team, he loves you.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Cruz vs. Rubio Is A Long Way Off

The thing about this, is they're leaving out Trump and Carson.

Trump seems to be sticking in there, no matter how over-the-top he gets, and he's really been over it ever since going 2nd in Iowa. Two long rants in which he's cursed primary voters in Iowa, and his numbers there, and nationally, have remained pretty damn high.

Carson, no matter how much he seems to be falling asleep during the debates, is maintaining high numbers as well.

Cruz and Rubio has gained a few points each in the last two weeks, but not enough to predict they're going to be the last men standing for the nomination.

We currently have 12 candidates, and hopefully those that don't have a chance will be dropping out sometime this century. But they're still getting interviews on Fox News segments, and opportunities to self-promote to a national audience during the debates. (Ever wonder why the four guys that are between 1%-2.4% got an entire two hours to yack to millions of viewers during the Fox Business debate?) As they drop out, it'll be interesting to see how their numbers are spread across the relevant candidates.

It'd be very bizarre if we have four candidates, each with over 20% in the polls. Very bizarre.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

Finally a conservative with a comprehensive anti-terror plan.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Haha. I'll vote in this one. From my perspective as a liberal, Trump is the obvious choice, both because in a lot of ways he's the most moderate candidate and because he has no chance of winning.

As a Conservative, Trump is far more desirable than most of the candidates.

No chance of winning? Reality check. Look at the presidential elections since 1980 and possibly before. American voters, as a whole, go for the most charasmatic candidate, reguardless of issues and controversies.

Carter VS Reagan - Reagan was the most charasmatic, by a long shot.
Clinton VS Bush VS Perot - Clinton won the three-way dance because of charisma.
Clinton VS Dole - Oh please, wasn't even close.
Bush VS Gore - Gore could put an insomiac to sleep.
Bush VS Kerry - Ditto on Kerry.
Obama VS McCain - McCain had the life of a walker on The Walking Dead.
Obama VS Romney - Perhaps if Romney kept the momentum up after the 1st debate, he would have won. But he coasted and practically sucked the excitement out of his campaign.

So, it would be Trump VS..... Biden? Kerry?

I'd take that bet. Sure, you could say Trump has alot of Skeletons in the closet, and he probably does, but Obama danced around his exposed controvercies like he was Michael Jackson. Obama and Trump have dodged their controvercies with their likeability, whit, and charisma.

Unless someone can talk Warren to jumping into the race, I can see it be smooth sailing for whoever is the Republican nominee.

 

[Adamant]

A quick search reveals it was only 15 000. Not bad. He only exaggerated by 33.3%.

They said 20,000 tickets were distributed, but I guess not everybody showed up.

 

[Tigerknee]

Rubio has actually gone down in the polls a tad since the debate, this narrative of him being the nominee is just liberal media propaganda

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Thad Cochran throws his support behind Jeb Bush

Bush expands his lead in the endorsement primary

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/

When everyone takes a shit, they can give it to Thad Cochran.

But for now, no ones gives a shit.

 

[Cold Front]

As a Conservative, Trump is far more desirable than most of the candidates.

No, he's not. Trump's value is that he forces the other candidates out of their comfort zone and forces them to deal with issues they prefer to sideline.

But he's not conservative, and much of his support doesn't come from conservatives.

 

[Adamant]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/2016-presidential-tweet-bernie-sanders-most-retweeted-121157
from the previous debate, which he will surpass.

He also gained 50k twitter followers during this debate, compare with the actual candidates debating on stage:

lol this is gonna be easy. Not one person the GOP is fielding can stand up to scrutiny. The more people learn, the more are converted. Join the team, he loves you.

You really think he can take Hillary down? His 500-600k twitter followers vs her 4.25 million, doesn't seem likely.

 

[speakhandsforme]

Rubio has actually gone down in the polls a tad since the debate, this narrative of him being the nominee is just liberal media propaganda

I still think he's the clear favorite given the incompetence of Trump and Carson, and the former's proclivity for tearing into the latter.

Cruz is the other dark horse, but I'm holding on to hope that his ultra-douche face will be his undoing.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I haven't read all 81 pages, maybe this has been posted but I think it's genius:

 

[Makani]

Wanted to vote Trump for the obvious lulz, but Kasich overrode my troll vote.

 

[bad seed]

You really think he can take Hillary down? His 500-600k twitter followers vs her 4.25 million, doesn't seem likely.

Hillary's lead over Sanders in the polls is smaller than her lead over Obama was at this point in primary in '07. And she wasnt in a steep downward trend at the time.

 

[Lead]

The thing about this, is they're leaving out Trump and Carson.

Trump seems to be sticking in there, no matter how over-the-top he gets, and he's really been over it ever since going 2nd in Iowa. Two long rants in which he's cursed primary voters in Iowa, and his numbers there, and nationally, have remained pretty damn high.

Carson, no matter how much he seems to be falling asleep during the debates, is maintaining high numbers as well.

Cruz and Rubio has gained a few points each in the last two weeks, but not enough to predict they're going to be the last men standing for the nomination.

We currently have 12 candidates, and hopefully those that don't have a chance will be dropping out sometime this century. But they're still getting interviews on Fox News segments, and opportunities to self-promote to a national audience during the debates. (Ever wonder why the four guys that are between 1%-2.4% got an entire two hours to yack to millions of viewers during the Fox Business debate?) As they drop out, it'll be interesting to see how their numbers are spread across the relevant candidates.

It'd be very bizarre if we have four candidates, each with over 20% in the polls. Very bizarre.

2 weeks ago, at that point in past primaries, the frontrunners were

08 Giuliani
04 Howard Dean
92 Jesse Jackson

It's still early and the "he's still in the lead" talk isn't a counter to the argument that it's early because it is.

 

[Lead]

I haven't read all 81 pages, maybe this has been posted but I think it's genius:

Just say this on facebook. Pretty inmpressive. The Jeb, Walker and Rubio one's are the most hilarious.

 

[Juventud]

Voted Trump because in theory the only person who can stop him is himself. It will probably happen but so far nothing has shown it will.

If Trump implodes it's still Bush. He's got the money to go to the end and throughout the primary he'll be dragged right just enough like he's been on anchor babies to be the party safe pick.
IMO Rubio isn't ready for the big time yet and Cruz might be too crazy.

 

[Adamant]

Hillary's lead over Sanders in the polls is smaller than her lead over Obama was at this point in primary in '07. And she wasnt in a steep downward trend at the time.

What if Biden or Warren jumps in? Can he take them down?

 

[Lead]

Rubio has actually gone down in the polls a tad since the debate, this narrative of him being the nominee is just liberal media propaganda

Can you tell me where he has gone down in the polls a tad since because there hasn't been a national poll out even since the last debate, let alone one which covers a time range post debate. Even if one were to be out at his point, you'd need about 3 to have an idea where they stand post debate. We need a tally of how many times we get comments on polls that have no basis at all. It's really weird it keeps happening.

Also, are you insinuating that the "liberal media" wants Rubio to win the nomination?

 

[tenniswhiz]

I pick Trump because I want him to entertain us for a while longer.
And then we'll have another Democrat in the White House.

 

[Lead]

I'm aware of all this stuff and it doesn't matter. No one questioned the right of Wong Kim Ark's parents to be in the United States when their son was born. So the case does not cleanly address the modern context of children born to illegal aliens.

If Judge Posner doesn't think it requires a Constitutional amendment and the Heritage Foundation Constitutional scholar doesn't think it requires a Constitutional amendment, then perhaps you shouldn't feel so confident that it requires one.

Here's Judge Posner:




And here is the Heritage Foundation legal scholar John Eastman in a piece written almost ten years ago.



These two people are not Ann Coulter and Mark Levin. They are both constitutional scholars and one is a judge.



Why not? Do you think the media have something better to do? What would you rather they spend their time talking about?

We have five months to go before a single vote is cast. There's plenty of time to hash out all of these issues.

I;ve heard the original intention of the amendment. The law has ruled on a broader interpretation since it was put in place and to challenge that interpretation is a long and hard process that just isn't reasonable compared to the other things you could address and focus on as POTUS

 

[JDragon]

Generally speaking...does anybody remember this guy called Howard Dean?

Nothing matters until the first primary is over.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Also, are you insinuating that the "liberal media" wants Rubio to win the nomination?

Yeah, that's crazy. Not only because the media aren't liberal, but because actual liberals are pretty scared of Rubio and not scared at all of *any* of the other candidates.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Finally a conservative with a comprehensive anti-terror plan.

 

[Lead]

Picked Kasich but Rubio is almost neck and neck for second. I doubt I'll like either candidates foreign policy however and Rubio seems far more hawkish at the moment than Kasich.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Generally speaking...does anybody remember this guy called Howard Dean?

Nothing matters until the first primary is over.

Heeeeeyaaaw!!!!

 

[Lead]

Yeah, that's crazy. Not only because the media aren't liberal, but because actual liberals are pretty scared of Rubio and not scared at all of *any* of the other candidates.

If I wanted to pick the candidate to face Clinton for her to win, it easily would be Trump or Bush hands down. Bush-Clinton would make it just about which name holds stronger over the years and if he is struggling this hard in his own party in the polls, the national election would be disastrous; possibly the first time Dems benefit from a low turnout.

If it was Trump, there would be loads of stuff to attack him with and once it's down to 1 on 1, it's not like the primaries we see now where people are worried about going at him and rather just wait for someone else to do it. You already have the nomination secured on your side AND you're a woman. They will be able to pull so much on Trump's view on women. Fiorina tried it somewhat but that is in a GOP primary. In a GE, it would work so much better.


Anyways, that whole comment above had little merit since the first comment about the poll was a broad claim that I think he just made up and then the second is the same thing. "Liberal media" is a scapegoat for making a point now. I don't like candidate X so I'll say the "liberal media" wants candidate X to win which means there is definitely something wrong with that candidate or they are somehow secretly liberal.

 

[Ayin]

Oh my gosh that caught me unprepared. That's hilarious Anung, the perfect response.

 

[Cold Front]

I've heard the original intention of the amendment. The law has ruled on a broader interpretation since it was put in place and to challenge that interpretation is a long and hard process that just isn't reasonable compared to the other things you could address and focus on as POTUS

Well, we have Judge Posner's claim that it would take nothing more than a statutory change by Congress, which is not a long and arduous process. It is something which is quite easily done with a GOP Congress and a GOP president, so long as that president is amenable to the change.

 

[speakhandsforme]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/2016-presidential-tweet-bernie-sanders-most-retweeted-121157
from the previous debate, which he will surpass.

He also gained 50k twitter followers during this debate, compare with the actual candidates debating on stage:

lol this is gonna be easy. Not one person the GOP is fielding can stand up to scrutiny. The more people learn, the more are converted. Join the team, he loves you.

How did Carson gain any followers? He was lethargic and incomprehensible.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

2 weeks ago, at that point in past primaries, the frontrunners were

08 Giuliani
04 Howard Dean
92 Jesse Jackson

It's still early and the "he's still in the lead" talk isn't a counter to the argument that it's early because it is.

This cycle is completely differ.....

Jessie Jackson? Really?

Anyway, usually there's already been significant changes in approval numbers since the debates start. But since August 9th, they've been mostly stagnant. Bush's numbers have dropped to almost nothing, only one candidate has dropped out, and the top two candidates are still the top two candidates.

You're mostly right with the excuse that 'Its early.' But when does it become 'not early?'

From day 180 to 90 before the first primary Trump is #1 in the polls, longer than any other non-establishment candidate since Reagan.

Other candidates being asked about Trump's success in the polls with a mere 'It's early' is excusable, because what are they gonna say? "Yeah, I'm really fucked."

But in honestly attempting to assess the race for the nomination, saying 'Its early' comes off a biased and dismissive of success, merely because your candidate isn't high in the polls.

'Hey Lead, your favorite guy looks like he's going to win the nomination! Isn't that great?'

'Its early.'

 

[Lead]

Viguerie endorses Cruz, asks other conservatives to follow suitl

Richard A. Viguerie is endorsing Ted Cruz for president and asks other conservatives why they haven’t yet.
“To conservatives who continue to window shop I say, 'What are you waiting for? In Ted Cruz conservatives have a candidate that’s everything we want,'” the Conservative Headquarters chairman said in a post on the site.
Viguerie, who is credited with pioneering direct marketing mail and is an author, said that the Texas senator is the “best presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan.”
POLITICO asked Viguerie why he supported Cruz and he responded: "It’s almost the reverse of why not support Cruz? I say that to all conservatives; this is the candidate we’ve been waiting for for 25 years.

Marco Rubio secures another top GOP donor

Ken Griffin, one of the top 10 biggest GOP donors in 2012, threw his support behind Marco Rubio on Wednesday.
The decision by another major establishment donor signals the GOP donor class is starting to coalesce behind the Florida senator as Donald Trump and an ascendant Ted Cruz have moved to the front of the GOP pack.
“I am very excited to support Senator Marco Rubio in his effort to become the 45th President of the United States," Griffin said. "I have known Senator Rubio for a number of years and he is an inspiring, courageous and bold leader who embodies the American dream of freedom and equal opportunity for all."

Rep. Bucshon endorses Rubio for president

Southwestern Indiana Congressman Larry Bucshon says he's endorsing Marco Rubio for president.

Bucshon, a Newburgh Republican who's seeking a fourth term in 2016, said the 44-year-old Senator from Florida is the only candidate who's made progress in undermining the Affordable Care Act.

 

[Cold Front]

Deleted. Will put comment in new thread.

 

[Flamma]

I liked Rand Paul until he said he wanted a 14.5% flat taxation rate. One of the US's biggest problems, and something they did not touch on, is the yawning gap between the regular worker and the executives in America - essentially executive corporate greed. A 14.5% flat rate just reinforces that and is surely reckless regards addressing the debt and deficit. You need to be taxing these elements progressively, not letting them pocket more and more while the countries finances go south. Anyway, did not warm to any of the candidates. As an outsider looking in I'm almost backing Trump. Pluses he's an independent thinker and a high achiever, a practical guy but also a straight shooter and won't be a Wall Street creature. Down side I think he'll have a big conflict of interest to address with his businesses and the mass illegals deportation plan... is that bluster or for real? He has to explain how that is going to be done. I can just see the UN and all the Amnesty International types going into meltdown over that. You see the media over these Muslims invading Europe, imagine the scenario with millions of waling Mex's being punted over Donald's new wall. It isn't happening is it. But it says how bad the rest were that I'm seeing Trump as the best candidate. Some of the others are terrible, Huckabee especially is a joke. Jeb has some good qualities but do you really want another Bush?

 

[Jack V Savage]

If I wanted to pick the candidate to face Clinton for her to win, it easily would be Trump or Bush hands down. Bush-Clinton would make it just about which name holds stronger over the years and if he is struggling this hard in his own party in the polls, the national election would be disastrous; possibly the first time Dems benefit from a low turnout.

Carson or Cruz would be easy wins, too, I think. That's among the serious candidates. Christie and Kasich would probably do OK in a general but they have no chance in the primary. Rubio can actually win over conservatives and do well in the general--though as he rises, he's going to have to confront the base's distrust of him on immigration.

Anyways, that whole comment above had little merit since the first comment about the poll was a broad claim that I think he just made up and then the second is the same thing. "Liberal media" is a scapegoat for making a point now. I don't like candidate X so I'll say the "liberal media" wants candidate X to win which means there is definitely something wrong with that candidate or they are somehow secretly liberal.

It's funny how that parallels the Democratic primary discussions. I think I have to do some retractions on my denials of equivalence.

But in honestly attempting to assess the race for the nomination, saying 'Its early' comes off a biased and dismissive of success, merely because your candidate isn't high in the polls.'

But there isn't a strong correlation between leading at this point an eventual success. There's a stronger correlation between success and the endorsement race, which Rubio is starting to do well in.

 

[Lead]

Reports: Trump to meet with Netanyahu during Dec. 28 Israel visit

Donald Trump will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Dec. 28 during his trip to the country, according to reports.
The Times of Israel, The Jerusalem Post and wire services reported Wednesday that Trump would meet with Netanyahu on that date.
Story Continued Below
"Prior to the end of the year, I will be traveling to Israel. I am very much looking forward to it," the Republican poll leader tweeted Tuesday evening, following an Associated Press report that he would also be meeting with Jordanian King Abdullah on the same trip.

Trump proclaims he will 'never' leave the race

Come Hell or high water, Donald Trump will not be leaving the race, the billionaire businessman and dominant poll leader is proclaiming.
In an interview with The Washington Post from Dec. 3 that was published Wednesday, the Republican presidential candidate made his point emphatically, saying he's not going anywhere, even if he loses an early state primary or two.
"I will never leave the race," Trump said. Pressed again, the report states, Trump "wave[d] one arm over his head, as if to clear away everything and remove all doubt."
"I. Will. Never. Leave. This. Race," the Manhattan mogul declared.

Cruz keeps distancing himself from Trump's 'Muslim' proposal

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz says he does not agree with Donald Trump's call for a temporary, but "complete shutdown" of Muslims entering the U.S., remarking in an interview with NPR aired Wednesday that the U.S. should "focus very directly on the threat, which is radical Islamic terrorism."
"Well, I disagree with Donald on that. He — he is welcome to discuss his policy ideas. That — that is not my view of how we should approach it," the Republican presidential candidate told NPR's Steve Inskeep in an interview conducted Tuesday aired Wednesday on "Morning Edition."

 

[carlos cadona]

I want Trump to get the nomination for 2 reason, 1 he's more moderate in comparison to the rest of the field on most issues(other than immigration) and 2 his trolling is destroying legitimate political discussion within his party.

 

[JosephDredd]

I was disappointed to learn, last night, that Trump was an anti-vaxxer. Up until now all the crazy shit he said still had undeniable comedic elements and the more extreme stuff (like when his supporters committed a hate crime assault against a Mexican and he refused to condemn them, saying his supporters were "passionate") had an element of shocking surrealism to it that made it easy to dispel with an eye-roll and a bemused shake of the head.

Now he's simply saying shit that has been far too stupid and repeated for far too long for it to still be dismissed as his peculiar charm. It's strange to be let down by a candidate you only supported jokingly.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

But there isn't a strong correlation between leading at this point an eventual success. There's a stronger correlation between success and the endorsement race, which Rubio is starting to do well in.

Jeb obviously has the endorcement of his father and brother, how's that working out for him?

History of the primaries are relevant, but also irrelevant because Trump announced and blew our minds with what he said in the weeks afterward, and that rocketed him to the top of the polls. That's evidence that we have primary voters that aren't like they were in prior cycles.

There's been billionaires that said they're self-funding their campaigns, and they did about as well as Rand Paul is right now.

 

[Lead]

Bloomberg Politics Poll: Nearly Two-Thirds of Likely GOP Primary Voters Back Trump's Muslim Ban

Almost two-thirds of likely 2016 Republican primary voters favor Donald Trump's call to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the U.S., while more than a third say it makes them more likely to vote for him.
Those are some of the findings from a Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies PulsePoll, an online survey conducted Tuesday, that shows support at 37 percent among all likely general-election voters for the controversial proposal put forward by the Republican front-runner.

 

[Cold Front]

I want Trump to get the nomination for 2 reason, 1 he's more moderate in comparison to the rest of the field on most issues(other than immigration) and 2 his trolling is destroying legitimate political discussion within his party.

Legitimate political discussion?

 

[Denter]

Yes, they have. How can you blatantly just say something like that when it's not true?

Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor
"Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.."

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Supreme Court ruled that a person who
-Is born in the United States of parents
-who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
-whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
-whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject
becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States



If your point is they should just throw it out there even though it won't work, then sure. I rather not have an entire media cycle revolve around it however. Hasn't helped anything for the GOP.

You could always appoint 10 new Supreme Court justices, and have them revisit the case.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jeb obviously has the endorcement of his father and brother, how's that working out for him?

History of the primaries are relevant, but also irrelevant because Trump announced and blew our minds with what he said in the weeks afterward, and that rocketed him to the top of the polls. That's evidence that we have primary voters that aren't like they were in prior cycles.

There's been billionaires that said they're self-funding their campaigns, and they did about as well as Rand Paul is right now.

It's possible that there's been some kind of fundamental shift and history is no longer any kind of guide (I don't see any good reason to believe it, but maybe), but at least understand that when people dismiss early polling, it's because they disagree with you on that claim. It's not always a matter of bias.

 

[Lead]

Jeb Bush’s super PAC burning through money with little to show for it

The super PAC supporting Jeb Bush is racing through its massive war chest much faster than money is coming in, spending close to $50 *million in a record blitz that has so far failed to lift the former Florida governor’s sputtering presidential candidacy.

The group, Right to Rise, has already gone through nearly half of the $103 million it brought in during the first half of the year, records show. It raised only about $13 million in the five months that followed, according to a person familiar with the figure.