New step in Trump's feud with Fox News; Clinton weighs in

[ABCer]

Wow Hilary is a expert on taking care of women need. That is why Bill had to find a few women on the side. If you can not take care of your husband you are a sure loser!

Well, that is a new low in sexism.

I do not like her. But your thinking is clearly below the waist.

How do you know what did she have to do? Maybe she was too smart to get caught with pants down?

Since when high libido was a prerequisite for a Presidents job? Be it man or woman...

I wonder if among about 300 M Americans these two are the best candidates? Really depressing...

[elgordo38]

A circus indeed...

The more I listen to this Trump and the more I watch him - the more I feel he is a nut cake.

On the other hand, whenever American Politicians eventually elect a POTUS on behalf of American People and in the name of American Democracy -

the choice is always the worst! A Tradition with very few exceptions...

P.S. This does not make Clinton a more desirable candidate.

"Unless someone points out the emperor has no clothes, he'll continue to strut about and what we'll end up with is a reality TV star as the nominee if we're not careful," Paul said unquote. After decades of unreal pompous political horse manure would a reality TV star be such a bad choice.? These so called Republican hopefuls of which there is a record number are all spouting the same time worn old crap. After what they said about a woman's right over her own body and wanting to rid the country of Planned Parenthood why would any woman vote for any of them? Page and chapter what in the bible?

[wabothai]

It is a shame that the "man" is ranking highest in the poll. When president, he will pop us as a dictator. Something the US is trying to warn Thailand about. Oh yeah, it is good to speak your mind. That does not make you qualify for president.

And as for madame Clinton, when she is so occupied with women's rights. etc. she does not qualify either for president.

But then in America, clowns do qualify.

[Usernames]

While I agree with most of being said here, I must admit: Trump is the first "political" person where I believe what he says. He speaks his mind. IF I were to vote for him, I wouldn't be getting any surprises after election. He doesn't hide anything...he doesn't care if you don't like what he says...if you don't agree with him, so be it. He doesn't seem to change his way in order to get votes. That is what I like about him...and pretty much the only thing I like about him. I wish all politicians would speak their mind instead of saying what people want to hear.

IF I were to vote for him, I wouldn't be getting any surprises

Most people would be more than surprised to have World War III come down on them.

Trump's grand corporate strategy is to create chaos then to swoop in amidst the confusion to grab the prize he wants, and it's snared him billions.

In global and international affairs Trump would be Putin and Kim Jong Fat combined on steroids. Trump's loudly public feuds with NBC, Univision, Fox et al and the political world does not involve nuclear weapons.

Can you picture Trump at the UN singling out heads of government around the world for their due bashings. Publicising Putin's personal cellphone number as if it were some kind of frat prank.

Liking Trump because he speaks his mind is one thing. Approving of Trump because he speaks his mind and because one believes what he says gives the country two crackpots.

Trump says he is very rich. Don't know his books, but I can believe this.

Trump says he wants to be a President. I can believe this too. Can't blame the old man for wanting.

Trump speaks his mind. A bad trait for a President or any Diplomat. Many people justly perceive him as a Boer.

Unfortunately my mind is nothing like his mind. This leaves me worried. He may pass in US for a President, but by my standards he hardly passes for a retard.

This makes me double worried. Because Americans usually elect the worst possible candidate. It's a kind of a National Tradition there.

I don't think too many "perceive him as a Boer." And you call Trump a retard?

[SheungWan]

While I agree with most of being said here, I must admit: Trump is the first "political" person where I believe what he says. He speaks his mind. IF I were to vote for him, I wouldn't be getting any surprises after election. He doesn't hide anything...he doesn't care if you don't like what he says...if you don't agree with him, so be it. He doesn't seem to change his way in order to get votes. That is what I like about him...and pretty much the only thing I like about him. I wish all politicians would speak their mind instead of saying what people want to hear.

IF I were to vote for him, I wouldn't be getting any surprises

Most people would be more than surprised to have World War III come down on them.

Trump's grand corporate strategy is to create chaos then to swoop in amidst the confusion to grab the prize he wants, and it's snared him billions.

In global and international affairs Trump would be Putin and Kim Jong Fat combined on steroids. Trump's loudly public feuds with NBC, Univision, Fox et al and the political world does not involve nuclear weapons.

Can you picture Trump at the UN singling out heads of government around the world for their due bashings. Publicising Putin's personal cellphone number as if it were some kind of frat prank.

Liking Trump because he speaks his mind is one thing. Approving of Trump because he speaks his mind and because one believes what he says gives the country two crackpots.

Trump says he is very rich. Don't know his books, but I can believe this.

Trump says he wants to be a President. I can believe this too. Can't blame the old man for wanting.

Trump speaks his mind. A bad trait for a President or any Diplomat. Many people justly perceive him as a Boer.

Unfortunately my mind is nothing like his mind. This leaves me worried. He may pass in US for a President, but by my standards he hardly passes for a retard.

This makes me double worried. Because Americans usually elect the worst possible candidate. It's a kind of a National Tradition there.

If Trump is a Boer then I guess you might be a Zulu.

[chuckd]

While I don't like Clinton (either one) and hope that I never have to vote for her as the (again) barely lesser of two evils, what Hillary said is right on. The troglodyte, lying, plutocratic, corporatist, anti-worker, union busting, racist, misogynist, homophobic, theocratic dominionist, war mongering neocon GOP has done everything in it's power to cut resources for women and all workers. As they did with their attempt to overthrow the US gov't after the election of FDR they are trying again, this time with money (see Koch (John Birch Society bros.)-ALEC, teabaggers) and a packed right wing extremist, federalist "gang of 5". I do believe when American became a democratic republic it's government was mandated with something life, pursuit of happiness, oh yea, something about separation of church and state, you know perhaps you read something like that at one time. Then again, probably not. Perhaps some of you should try reading these: http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.archives.gov%2Fexhibits%2Fcharters%2Fdeclaration_transcript.html http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ushistory.org%2Fdocuments%2Famendments.htm

"oh yea, something about separation of church and state"

How about pointing out where this is mandated.

[sgtsabai]

How about reading the links I posted. And congratulations, again when the right wing cannot win an argument, because they are wrong as usual, they attack the person instead of the argument and change the subject. A little reading would help several of our "readers". You know that "stuff" right wingers never paid attention to in school, like the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights. With the Donald in charge, the right wing extremist GOP will run off the cliff and hopefully into history (comic) books. The Donald and the rest of the clown bus would be entertaining if they weren't so dangerous. Hillary was right on in what she said. The Donald and the rest of the clown car are full of it. BTW I believe the sexism and homophobia of the right wing has showed its ugly face on this thread.

[Berkshire]

Why can't he just lie, insincerely use political correctness and hide how he really feels like "normal" politicians?

I like him.

I don't understand your question. Trump does lie. He lies his ass off. Nonstop.

[chuckd]

How about reading the links I posted. And congratulations, again when the right wing cannot win an argument, because they are wrong as usual, they attack the person instead of the argument and change the subject. A little reading would help several of our "readers". You know that "stuff" right wingers never paid attention to in school, like the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights. With the Donald in charge, the right wing extremist GOP will run off the cliff and hopefully into history (comic) books. The Donald and the rest of the clown bus would be entertaining if they weren't so dangerous. Hillary was right on in what she said. The Donald and the rest of the clown car are full of it. BTW I believe the sexism and homophobia of the right wing has showed its ugly face on this thread.

Just for the record, the separation of church and state is to be found nowhere in any of the following documents.

The Declaration of Independence

The Preamble to the US Constitution

The US Constitution

The Amendments to the US Constitution

From my government class, the Bill of Rights are the first ten Amendments to the Constitution.

To save you further embarrassment, the separation of church and state was first found in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Church in 1802.

Jefferson wrote in his letter...

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

The Supreme Court declared in a decision in 1879 that a separation of church and state was the intent of the founding fathers, and so it became.

You are forever wrong if you think the separation of church and state is to be found in any of the founding documents. It isn't there.

PS: Your links are a mess.

Edited August 11, 2015 by chuckd

[Chicog]

It is a shame that the "man" is ranking highest in the poll. When president, he will pop us as a dictator. Something the US is trying to warn Thailand about. Oh yeah, it is good to speak your mind. That does not make you qualify for president.

And as for madame Clinton, when she is so occupied with women's rights. etc. she does not qualify either for president.

But then in America, clowns do qualify.

There are 400+ days to the election. I really don't think responding to a bit of Trump and Bush misogyny qualifies as "so occupied".

[LPCustom69]

WWIII has already started. Most just aren't observant enough to notice.

[HooHaa]

whats the big deal? other democracies have elected megalomaniac billionaires to public office without ill effect.

After all, he is successful in business, he has to be good for the country.

[Usernames]

A vote for Trump is a latter day vote for Teddy Roosevelt, another brash defender of American interests and the American nation. They said all the same things about TR, too, and even worse.

[Chicog]

whats the big deal? other democracies have elected megalomaniac billionaires to public office without ill effect.

After all, he is successful in business, he has to be good for the country.

That's a very good point. He could be America's Berlusconi....

[Chicog]

He phoned into Fox today and essentially issued a veiled threat that if they don't treat him "fairly" he'll run as an independent.

[Publicus]

 

A vote for Trump is a latter day vote for Teddy Roosevelt, another brash defender of American interests and the American nation. They said all the same things about TR, too, and even worse.

 

Colonel Teddy Roosevelt was commander of the "Rough Riders" cavalry and led the charge up San Juan Hill to drive the Spanish out of Cuba. Trump hasn't any such record in any respect, to include a zero record of military service.

Comparing Trump to a war hero such as T.R. who had been elected governor of New York state then also got himself elected President in his own right is presumptuous and a long reach.

If anything, put Trump back in the there and then and advance Teddy Roosevelt to the here and now.

[Publicus]

 

^Kelly is obviously the opposite of the extreme position you are asserting. She's highly educated, sharp as a tack, beautiful, and moderately right-wing, but not extreme right as most Fox women (pretend to be). It was surprising that Ailes allowed her to become such a star with her obvious somewhat liberal underpinnings. She did it in spite of him, and now he is pleased to go along because it makes Fox appear more reasonable with regard to women, and she is a rain maker for ratings stealing the show from old guys like Bill O'Reilly.

The Polls show that Trump is gaining, rather than losing popularity after his hormonal dig reference to Kelly. If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated. We'll see how this plays out longer term but it's great fun to watch.

"If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated."

As opposed to the rocket scientist demographics supporting Hillary? Carping women in HR. Hispanics who can't graduate high school. Unemployed and unemployable blacks. Millennial would-be revolutionaries who live at home with mom and dad.

 

Suburban Republican women throughout the country will vote for, as you call her, Hillary, as the polling over the past two years shows. The Republicans can't lose those votes and win but the votes of suburban Republican women is already gone from the Republican party. Committed, confirmed, gone.

[keemapoot]

He phoned into Fox today and essentially issued a veiled threat that if they don't treat him "fairly" he'll run as an independent.

Yup, Ailes, scared as hell, said he'll "be fair" to Trump. I don't think Trump believes it for a minute, nor do I, I think Trump will be the ultimate bad boy spoiler for this election.

[ggt]

Running for political office is a nasty business...slinging mud and feces is to be expected and must be prepared for...that being said...Trump had been given ample airtime by FOX news prior to the debate...was treated fairly and allowed to voice his opinions on how to correct the problems in the US...

Trump was totally blindsided by the "tabloid" type question posed by Megan Kelly as the first question directed towards Mr. Trump...IMHO it was the wrong place to be exploitive and nasty...this was supposed to be about moving the country forward...not dragging the candidates through a mud-hole...

I will likely never again watch a Megan Kelly show on FOX (Kelly presented herself as a hero on her show last night)...much like I quit watching Katie Couric when she blindsided Sarah Palin on national TV and was ecstatic about it...

I am sure I am not the only one who thought this was targeting to demote a Presidential candidate...as the internet was lit-up with folks voicing their outrage...none of which were die-hard Dems...I might add.

[Chicog]

I quit watching Katie Couric when she blindsided Sarah Palin on national TV and was ecstatic about it...

Was that when she asked her what magazines she reads?

[sdanielmcev]

 

^Kelly is obviously the opposite of the extreme position you are asserting. She's highly educated, sharp as a tack, beautiful, and moderately right-wing, but not extreme right as most Fox women (pretend to be). It was surprising that Ailes allowed her to become such a star with her obvious somewhat liberal underpinnings. She did it in spite of him, and now he is pleased to go along because it makes Fox appear more reasonable with regard to women, and she is a rain maker for ratings stealing the show from old guys like Bill O'Reilly.

The Polls show that Trump is gaining, rather than losing popularity after his hormonal dig reference to Kelly. If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated. We'll see how this plays out longer term but it's great fun to watch.

"If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated."

As opposed to the rocket scientist demographics supporting Hillary? Carping women in HR. Hispanics who can't graduate high school. Unemployed and unemployable blacks. Millennial would-be revolutionaries who live at home with mom and dad.

 

Suburban Republican women throughout the country will vote for, as you call her, Hillary, as the polling over the past two years shows. The Republicans can't lose those votes and win but the votes of suburban Republican women is already gone from the Republican party. Committed, confirmed, gone.

No, they voted Republican. As the majorities in Congress show. Try not to lie to support your position.

[Loptr]

Can someone please enlighten me as to why I would give a damn about what Hillary Clinton thinks about Donald Trump?

[Publicus]

 

^Kelly is obviously the opposite of the extreme position you are asserting. She's highly educated, sharp as a tack, beautiful, and moderately right-wing, but not extreme right as most Fox women (pretend to be). It was surprising that Ailes allowed her to become such a star with her obvious somewhat liberal underpinnings. She did it in spite of him, and now he is pleased to go along because it makes Fox appear more reasonable with regard to women, and she is a rain maker for ratings stealing the show from old guys like Bill O'Reilly.

The Polls show that Trump is gaining, rather than losing popularity after his hormonal dig reference to Kelly. If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated. We'll see how this plays out longer term but it's great fun to watch.

"If you look at the demographics of Trump supporters now that is not surprising: white male, uneducated."

As opposed to the rocket scientist demographics supporting Hillary? Carping women in HR. Hispanics who can't graduate high school. Unemployed and unemployable blacks. Millennial would-be revolutionaries who live at home with mom and dad.

 

Suburban Republican women throughout the country will vote for, as you call her, Hillary, as the polling over the past two years shows. The Republicans can't lose those votes and win but the votes of suburban Republican women is already gone from the Republican party. Committed, confirmed, gone.

No, they voted Republican. As the majorities in Congress show. Try not to lie to support your position.

The post is about the Trump election cycle we're presently in and going forward to include about a quarter of Republicans saying they will vote for Mrs Clinton in 2016, so do try to keep up with the posts plse thx while also trying to avoid incendiary words.

In the Pew-USA Today survey of a year ago 25% of Republicans said there is a good or some chance they will vote for former SecState Hillary Clinton. Most of the Republicans in this group are women. (8% of all Rs said a "good" chance; 17% of all Rs said "some" chance. Eight percent would be more than enough to decide the election against the Republican party candidate.)

Here's the link....read it and weep....

http://www.people-press.org/2014/03/04/hillary-clintons-strengths-record-at-state-toughness-honesty/

[sgtsabai]

While a bit 'aside' for the the subject, but still remaining within the parameters, the subject of separation of state and church is rather explicit in yes not only Thomas Jefferson's and others writings, who like many were not "god fearing christian" founders of the US but other writings among which are: http://www.theocracywatch.org/separation_church_state2.htm , also https://duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSeparation_of_church_and_state , and also http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=http%3A%2F%2Fatheism.about.com%2Fod%2Fchurchstatemyths%2Fa%2Fphrase.htm . Many right wing dominionists purposely interpret the lack of the exact phrase of "separation of church and state" not being anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights as being an excuse to force their religious sharia on those that interpret it correctly from the writers, very secular btw, meant. I, along with many others with more than one working brain cell interpret as also meaning freedom FROM religion. In other words, you worship what ever you want, I don't try to make you worship anything, you don't shove your crap down my throat. While I'm not sure what the Donald's stance is, I believe he is a person without morals, ethics, humanity or religion (except the worship of money and power), like all the rest of the GOP. BTW, in case anyone hasn't noticed, there are more than 10 amendments to the Constitution. Try reading them all. No, my links aren't a mess. I don't use search engines that record and track. Again, the right wing tries to change an arguement they cannot and will not ever win because they are oh so very wrong by steering the conversation off course. Hillary's call out of the lack of GOP morals, ethics, etc. had nothing to do with religion as religion has nothing to do with morals and ethics.

[sgtsabai]

My apologies, you will have to copy and paste the last 2 links, I missed something there. The majorities of Republicans in Congress show several things, the ignorance of the American voter, the power of money, and gerrymandering by the Republicans. In many cases thanks to the Koch (John Birch Society) bros., ALEC. Money talks, good people walk. Women, minorities, poor, young have nothing to do with it.

[chuckd]

While a bit 'aside' for the the subject, but still remaining within the parameters, the subject of separation of state and church is rather explicit in yes not only Thomas Jefferson's and others writings, who like many were not "god fearing christian" founders of the US but other writings among which are: http://www.theocracywatch.org/separation_church_state2.htm , also https://duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSeparation_of_church_and_state , and also http://r.duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=http%3A%2F%2Fatheism.about.com%2Fod%2Fchurchstatemyths%2Fa%2Fphrase.htm . Many right wing dominionists purposely interpret the lack of the exact phrase of "separation of church and state" not being anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights as being an excuse to force their religious sharia on those that interpret it correctly from the writers, very secular btw, meant. I, along with many others with more than one working brain cell interpret as also meaning freedom FROM religion. In other words, you worship what ever you want, I don't try to make you worship anything, you don't shove your crap down my throat. While I'm not sure what the Donald's stance is, I believe he is a person without morals, ethics, humanity or religion (except the worship of money and power), like all the rest of the GOP. BTW, in case anyone hasn't noticed, there are more than 10 amendments to the Constitution. Try reading them all. No, my links aren't a mess. I don't use search engines that record and track. Again, the right wing tries to change an arguement they cannot and will not ever win because they are oh so very wrong by steering the conversation off course. Hillary's call out of the lack of GOP morals, ethics, etc. had nothing to do with religion as religion has nothing to do with morals and ethics.

Where have I ever tried to cram religion down anybody's throat?

Where have I ever claimed there were only ten amendments to the Constitution? My well worn desk copy of the Constitution shows Amendment XXVI (26 for Democrats) giving the right to vote to 18 year old citizens.

By the way, you also do not have freedom FROM religion. That is also not in the Constitution. I have freedom OF religion and that is guaranteed in the First Amendment.

I am glad to know you finally realized your links were a mess. Took you long enough.

I can't wade through any more of your nonsense so this is it for me.

[Baerboxer]

Yeah right. Women are so dumbed down that they always vote for a woman no matter what. They'll always lean in favor of a crooked or incompetent woman even if a competent man is running. No woman could ever dislike Megyn Kelly or like seeing her get a comeuppance. Nosiree, they are all feminists, hate all men and especially love that blonde, ditzy Kelly.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of women enjoyed watching Trump light into Kelly. There are women who don't like Fox News, let alone some blonde who seems to have everything except street smarts.

The polls would indicate that Trump came out ahead of Kelly, but what would we know?

Golda Meir? Indira Gandhi? Margaret Thatcher?

Not counting all those women who stood behind and manipulated and directed the miserable sods known in history as "Great Man".

I am not really a sexist. Least of all I am a Women's Liberationist.

But a person who can run a big family stands a better chance of running a country than a 'macho man' often thinking with his dick.

( do not take this as a vote for Hillary; besides - I am not American)

What a condescending comment about women!

Meir,Thatcher, Ghandi, Merkel were/are highly educated career politicians who worked very hard to get to the top.

Do you really think they all ran a big family as part of their education and training?

A considerable number of "mums" work and run a family, some don't work and can't run the family very well, and some concentrate on their careers or give it all up and concentrate on the family. And you think a mum successfully running a family for years could be plucked into the position of running a country, with no prior experience, skill, information or knowledge?

[Thai at Heart]

A circus indeed...

The more I listen to this Trump and the more I watch him - the more I feel he is a nut cake.

On the other hand, whenever American Politicians eventually elect a POTUS on behalf of American People and in the name of American Democracy -

the choice is always the worst! A Tradition with very few exceptions...

P.S. This does not make Clinton a more desirable candidate.

The most terrifying part is that he has got as far as he has.. It truly shows how the American mainstream media is open to manipulation when this guy can have such a free ride for so long. And then his main challenge came from a news channel that should be supporting him

[Usernames]

Trump is a juggernaut that cannot be stopped. The rest of the Republicans look like a field of munchkins. Hillary Clinton is becoming irrelevant. Bernie Sanders and his almost all White audiences and supporters are being attacked as racists by Black activists. Megan Kelly is roadkill, Anderson Cooper is yelling for mommy. Trump! It's going to happen.

[Usernames]

 

A vote for Trump is a latter day vote for Teddy Roosevelt, another brash defender of American interests and the American nation. They said all the same things about TR, too, and even worse.

 

Colonel Teddy Roosevelt was commander of the "Rough Riders" cavalry and led the charge up San Juan Hill to drive the Spanish out of Cuba. Trump hasn't any such record in any respect, to include a zero record of military service.

Comparing Trump to a war hero such as T.R. who had been elected governor of New York state then also got himself elected President in his own right is presumptuous and a long reach.

If anything, put Trump back in the there and then and advance Teddy Roosevelt to the here and now.

And the Clintons' (either of them) war record is what? Whose hill did Bernie Sanders lead a charge up? And what about Jeb and the rest of the munchkins? I know the soon to be eliminated, brainless Rick Perry was in the air force, where he apparently flew to Germany a lot. And there is Lindsay Graham, the air force lawyer. There is Jim Webb, who IS a viable alternative. Were Webb to be elected, however, he would be the first "war hero" elected since JFK (I don't count GHWB as a "war hero," per se). So, we're not likely to find anybody with a history of being a "fighter" in the White House anytime soon. That being the case, I'll take someone who echoes the pro-American, pro-worker attitude of TR. That person is Trump. None of the munchkins do. And neither does HRC or BS of the Young People's Socialist League. Although at least BS has something of record for defending American trade interests and workers' rights against illegal immigrants. Let's see if he remains committed to it.