Trump, Cruz go at each other in Republican debate

[webfact]

Trump, Cruz go at each other in Republican debate
JULIE PACE, Associated Press
BILL BARROW, Associated Press

NORTH CHARLESTON, South Carolina (AP) — Bombastic billionaire Donald Trump doubled down Thursday on his questions about Texas Sen. Ted Cruz's eligibility to serve as president, telling his rival that his birth in Canada leaves "a big question mark on your head."

Thursday's Republican Party debate — the first of the year — came less than three weeks before the Iowa caucuses kick off this year's voting. Trump has led the Republican field for months, confounding Republican leaders and many of his rivals.

"You can't do that to the party," said Trump.

Cruz forcefully defended his ability to serve as president, accusing Trump of raising the issue only because polls show Cruz is challenging the billionaire businessman's lead, particularly in Iowa.

"The Constitution hasn't changed — but the poll numbers have," Cruz said. The senator was born in Canada, but his mother is American, which legal scholars agree fits with the Constitution's provision that only a "natural born citizen" may be president.

The heated exchanges signaled an end to months of relative civility between Trump and Cruz, both of whom are appealing to Republican voters deeply frustrated with Democrats in Washington and sometimes with their own party leaders.

Cruz renewed his criticism of "New York values," a coded questioning of Trump's conservatism that elicited an unexpectedly emotional response from the real estate mogul about his hometown's response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

"No place on earth could have handled that more beautifully, more humanely than New York," Trump said. "That was a very insulting statement that Ted made."

Cruz also defended his failure to disclose loans of some $1 million from Wall Street banks on federal election forms during his 2012 Senate campaign, saying it was little more than a "paperwork error."

Underscoring the split in the party that has defined the turbulent Republican primary, the more mainstream candidates on stage fought to edge their way into the debate.

On the economy and national security, the candidates offered a sharp contrast to the optimistic portrait of the nation President Barack Obama outlined in his State of the Union address earlier this week, warning that sticking with Democrats in the November election could have dire consequences.

"On Tuesday night, I watched story time with Barack Obama, and it sounds like everything in the world was going amazing," New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said.

On national security, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush suggested the country was less safe under Obama and declared Hillary Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, would be a "national security disaster."

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio went even further, saying Clinton was "disqualified for being commander in chief," accusing her of mishandling classified information and lying to the families of Americans killed in the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

Trump stuck with his controversial call for temporarily banning Muslims from the United States because of fear of terrorism emanating from abroad. He said he had no regrets about the proposal and noted that his poll numbers rose after he announced the plan.

Thursday night's debate came at the end of a week that has highlighted anew the deep rifts in the Republican Party. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, a rising Republican star, was widely praised by many party leaders for including a veiled criticism of Trump's angry rhetoric during her response to Obama's State of the Union address — only to be chastised by conservative commentators and others for the exact same comment.

Trump said he wasn't offended by Haley's speech and argued his anger is justified.

Tighter rules for Thursday's debate, hosted by Fox Business Network, resulted in a smaller cast of candidates in the main event. Businesswoman Carly Fiorina was bumped to the undercard event, as was Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, though he chose to not participate in the early evening contest.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-01-15

[Cynical Sailor]

As a keen observer of world politics I find the US system quite amusing. Before a candidate is chosen to 'fight' the opposition, they literally tear their own party to pieces in an attempt to gain the nomination. They do this very publicly and will go to great lengths to achieve their goal.

As an Australian I find our system to be somewhat more discreet.

I'm certainly not saying that one system is better than the other, but the contrast is stark.

[Usernames]

From the OP,

Cruz also defended his failure to disclose loans of some $1 million from Wall Street banks on federal election forms during his 2012 Senate campaign, saying it was little more than a "paperwork error."

Cruz is in real trouble with the business of the loan. Unreported low interest loans from Citibank and Goldman Sachs, where Cruz' wife works. Then, lying about liquidating their assets. This guy is a weasel. TVF doesn't have a topic on it, so go here: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/national-politics/20160113-cruz-s-2012-senate-bid-bolstered-by-undisclosed-loan-from-goldman-sachs.ece

[Publicus]

Trump kicked Cruz's arse and Rubio buried Cruz with his machine gun bulleting of Cruz's reverses of positions and Senate votes focusing on immigrants. Rubio is himself vulnerable among Republicans on immigration.

Trump presented a broader appeal than others because he (in a set-two against Bush) hammered China (and thus corporate America) on the Boeing deals, ie.,trade, trade deficits, globalisation.

American corporate elites of both parties love China deals but most Republicans and many Americans are hostile toward shipping jobs and industries out to the Middle Kingdom of cheap and exploited labor. Workers of the world unite kind of thing from Trump.

[webfact]

Trump-Cruz vendetta at center stage in aggressive Republican debate
By Dr. Stefan Grobe



WASHINGTON: -- With just 18 days to go until the Iowa caucuses, the leading US Republican candidates for president candidates faced off in their sixth debate of the campaign.

After weeks of increasingly hostile jabs that have been levied on the campaign trail and in TV ads, the candidates had a chance to deliver their hits in person – and they did, big time!

The first debate of the year revealed a growing combativeness among the candidates, coupled with a much more aggressive rhetoric.

Front runner Donald Trump clashed repeatedly with conservative Texas Senator Ted Cruz over Cruz’ birthplace in Canada and Trump’s “ultraliberal” (Cruz) home town of New York City.

Trump also had several run-ins with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Trump’s favorite target (“low energy”).

Cruz and Florida Senator Marco Rubio sparred over their respective tax plans and immigration positions, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie exchanged vicious attacks with Rubio over practically everything.

But Trump and Cruz were at center stage after days of increased sparring on the campaign trail. They are as close as they’ve been in competing for the lead in Iowa, according to polls, and Cruz is in second place in several other states.

It took only a few minutes into the debate until Trump and Cruz locked horns. Cruz, responding to Trump’s recent suggestions that Cruz’s Canadian birth could disqualify him, said the developer seemed to be “dismayed” at recent shifts in polling.

During the exchange about Cruz’s citizenship, Trump told Cruz that “there’s a big question mark on your head, and you can’t do that to the party.”

“Who the hell knows if you can run for office?” Trump added.

The exchange took several minutes, and also demonstrated the danger – even for a skillful debater like Cruz – of tangling with Trump, a trained master of reality TV.

It began with a question for Cruz, who was born in Canada to an American mother, about whether he fit the Constitution’s definition of a “natural born” American citizen, and was eligible to run for president. He said that Trump had dismissed the idea earlier in the race but now was suddenly concerned.

“The Constitution hasn’t changed, but the poll numbers have,” Cruz said. Trump responded first by citing polls showing him ahead, earning a smattering of boos.

When Trump was asked why he had only raised the issue of Cruz’ birth recently, he replied “because now he’s doing a little bit better.”

That exchange was followed by another tense moment when Trump rebuked rival Cruz for talking negatively about “New York values,” offering a tribute to the city’s response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

“When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York,” Trump said.

He continued: “The people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death. Nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell in the air.”

That followed an attack by Cruz in which he said that “New York values” were socially liberal, and tied to money and the media. He said that Trump was representative of those values, and therefore not aligned with the conservative values of early-voting states such as South Carolina, where the debate was held.

“I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made,” Trump said.

It was the second time in this debate that Cruz and Trump – who had once had an unofficial alliance, but now are rivals – had tangled, with Trump having the last word.

Over the course of the two-hour long debate Trump became the commanding figure on the stage, not backing down from his controversial positions he expressed earlier in the campaign.

He has said that he wants a temporary ban on all Muslim foreigners seeking to enter the US, and a wall to keep out undocumented immigrants along the border with Mexico.

Trump did not appear to have changed that tactic: “We can’t let all these people come into our country and break our borders. We can’t do it.”

When Bush criticized Trump for his comments calling them “unhinged”, the son and brother of US president received a verbal spanking from Trump: “The last thing the country needs is a weak president.”


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-01-15

[Silurian]

Yeah, so I watched another one of these Republican debates. It got boring real fast after the third of fourth time of "Obama sucks and here is why" rhetoric. It is always easier to tear down than to build up. I was hoping for some solid evidence of what each candidate stands for other than fear mongering. Wishful thinking I guess.

Fox News afterwards was so proud that the debate got feisty. Feisty? I've seen more energy during a seniors bingo game. These candidates are boring through and through. Not one of them gives off the energy required to excite the undecided voters.

The worst part was the moderator Neil Cavuto stammering and stumbling through his lines. I felt that I was watching a randomly picked audience member instead of a seasoned journalist.

[Somtamnication]

Disgusting individuals, both of them. Good luck, Americans. You will need it. Almost 2 years of campaigning by the time elections are done. Come on!

[soalbundy]

Two intellectual giants having a go at each other,what a treat

[Basil B]

A fight in a cesspit, beats mud wrestling any day.

[phantomfiddler]

As a keen observer of world politics I find the US system quite amusing. Before a candidate is chosen to 'fight' the opposition, they literally tear their own party to pieces in an attempt to gain the nomination. They do this very publicly and will go to great lengths to achieve their goal.

As an Australian I find our system to be somewhat more discreet.

I'm certainly not saying that one system is better than the other, but the contrast is stark.

I find the use of the two words "Australian" and "discrete" (excuse the correction) in the same sentence rather amusing

[chuckd]

Yeah, so I watched another one of these Republican debates. It got boring real fast after the third of fourth time of "Obama sucks and here is why" rhetoric. It is always easier to tear down than to build up. I was hoping for some solid evidence of what each candidate stands for other than fear mongering. Wishful thinking I guess.

Fox News afterwards was so proud that the debate got feisty. Feisty? I've seen more energy during a seniors bingo game. These candidates are boring through and through. Not one of them gives off the energy required to excite the undecided voters.

The worst part was the moderator Neil Cavuto stammering and stumbling through his lines. I felt that I was watching a randomly picked audience member instead of a seasoned journalist.

If excitement is what you are seeking, you must fall asleep during the first minute of the Democrat debates.

A pathological liar, a geriatric Socialist and a failed Governor. The Three Mousekateers in action.

[Publicus]

Dr. Ben Carson was essentially absent during the debate. If it weren't for his snoring he probably wouldn't have been called on to speak so softly. Or maybe he was praying. He's one of the few people who can sleep standing up or while speaking, whichever pays more.

Anyone here buy his book?

When Donald Trump ignores you, you know you're a nothing bore. Not even up to him calling you weak. Saw Carson the other day wearing a green tie made from campaign donations.

[Pinot]

Yeah, so I watched another one of these Republican debates. It got boring real fast after the third of fourth time of "Obama sucks and here is why" rhetoric. It is always easier to tear down than to build up. I was hoping for some solid evidence of what each candidate stands for other than fear mongering. Wishful thinking I guess.

Fox News afterwards was so proud that the debate got feisty. Feisty? I've seen more energy during a seniors bingo game. These candidates are boring through and through. Not one of them gives off the energy required to excite the undecided voters.

The worst part was the moderator Neil Cavuto stammering and stumbling through his lines. I felt that I was watching a randomly picked audience member instead of a seasoned journalist.

If excitement is what you are seeking, you must fall asleep during the first minute of the Democrat debates.

A pathological liar, a geriatric Socialist and a failed Governor. The Three Mousekateers in action.

When you ain't got nothing (and believe it, none of these wingnuts have a thing) go after the opposition

Get use to it. You'll be hearing a lot of it, "Madame President"

Oh, and you misspelled "Mouseketeers"

[pomchop]

Seven long years of WHINING about anything, everything, all things Obama did or did not do to dig us out of the MESS that W left behind.

If the "fixes" were half as simplistic as the Republicans claim then Obama or W or someone would have solved the middle east mess, gay marriage, health care, climate change, gun violence, racism, and the laundry list of problems long ago.

So easy to sit in the bleachers and boo the quarterback who can't score a touchdown because half of his line refuse to EVER block for him even if it means the team loses.

[Jingthing]

Cruz isn't eligible to be president under the law. He is a U.S. citizen but he is not eligible to be president. Unlike the lies against Obama, his problem is REAL. He really ought let go of his ego and withdraw and let someone else more sensible and eligible to be president have a shot against the elephant in the room, Trump. Such as Kasich who is apparently on the rise again in New Hampshire.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Jingthing

[TommyUK1960]

Trump will win. He's a winner. Then I will have a laugh when he visits the UK and deals with our incompetent politicians.

Just wish we had a Donald Trump in the UK

[brewsterbudgen]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

[Jingthing]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

It looks good for him being NOMINATED, yes. That's not the same as being elected president.

[brewsterbudgen]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

It looks good for him being NOMINATED, yes. That's not the same as being elected president.

I hope you're right but I think Hillary is vulnerable. The best bet would a GOP Establishment fix, forcing Trump to go 3rd party.

[Publicus]

Disgusting individuals, both of them. Good luck, Americans. You will need it. Almost 2 years of campaigning by the time elections are done. Come on!

Fewer than ten months actually to the election. The nominating process will be over in the summer, if not before. Tuff going after then, yes, but just not like this.

Once the nominations are decided, each major candidate does very much need to "be" presidential, which is another glaring inability of Donald Trump if he might be the R party nominee.

And most of the comments come after the Republican debates.

Although the Democratic party debates are lively, and Bernie is beginning to lose his composure as things heat up on that side, Republicans are just fierce and aggressive. Which is another way of saying they are vicious and, frankly, mean spirited. Starting with one another.

Political wolves.

[Publicus]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

This is the nominating process and this is the wolf pack the Republican party has produced.

This is not the general election.

Donald Trump has zero chance of being elected if he turns out to be the Republican party nominee.

Zilch.

[Jingthing]

I wouldn't say zero chance, but if it's HRC vs. Trump, I think HRC will win. It's dangerous to think Trump isn't a threat. He's a crafty old orange haired bugger, that one.

[brewsterbudgen]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

This is the nominating process and this is the wolf pack the Republican party has produced.

This is not the general election.

Donald Trump has zero chance of being elected if he turns out to be the Republican party nominee.

Zilch.

I hope you're right. But much the same was said of Reagan!

[chuckd]

Yeah, so I watched another one of these Republican debates. It got boring real fast after the third of fourth time of "Obama sucks and here is why" rhetoric. It is always easier to tear down than to build up. I was hoping for some solid evidence of what each candidate stands for other than fear mongering. Wishful thinking I guess.

Fox News afterwards was so proud that the debate got feisty. Feisty? I've seen more energy during a seniors bingo game. These candidates are boring through and through. Not one of them gives off the energy required to excite the undecided voters.

The worst part was the moderator Neil Cavuto stammering and stumbling through his lines. I felt that I was watching a randomly picked audience member instead of a seasoned journalist.

If excitement is what you are seeking, you must fall asleep during the first minute of the Democrat debates.

A pathological liar, a geriatric Socialist and a failed Governor. The Three Mousekateers in action.

When you ain't got nothing (and believe it, none of these wingnuts have a thing) go after the opposition

Get use to it. You'll be hearing a lot of it, "Madame President"

Oh, and you misspelled "Mouseketeers"

Maybe we should start a poll with the following question.

" If Hillary Clinton is indicted on criminal charges, should the Democrats still propose her as their candidate for President?"

Reduced to being one of the grammar police now?

But since you brought it up..."Get use to it."...is not proper grammar.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/get-used-to-it.html

[Publicus]

The thought of President Trump is truly frightening, but the way things are going it's looking more likely. He certainly got the better of the idiot Cruz in that debate.

This is the nominating process and this is the wolf pack the Republican party has produced.

This is not the general election.

Donald Trump has zero chance of being elected if he turns out to be the Republican party nominee.

Zilch.

I hope you're right. But much the same was said of Reagan!

Your dog in your avatar could have beat Jimmy Carter.

He's the only Democrat for POTUS I've never voted for since I began voting in 1968. I voted for Carter in 1976 then wholly rejected him for reelection in 1980 (and I certainly did not vote for Reagan).

Given the choice in the general election between HR Clinton and any one of these les enfants terribles, voters of the Obama coalition will vote for HR Clinton. They will vote out of survival and self-preservation if nothing else. A quarter of Republicans still say they can't ever vote for Trump. That's a show stopper right there.

[Publicus]

Yeah, so I watched another one of these Republican debates. It got boring real fast after the third of fourth time of "Obama sucks and here is why" rhetoric. It is always easier to tear down than to build up. I was hoping for some solid evidence of what each candidate stands for other than fear mongering. Wishful thinking I guess.

Fox News afterwards was so proud that the debate got feisty. Feisty? I've seen more energy during a seniors bingo game. These candidates are boring through and through. Not one of them gives off the energy required to excite the undecided voters.

The worst part was the moderator Neil Cavuto stammering and stumbling through his lines. I felt that I was watching a randomly picked audience member instead of a seasoned journalist.

If excitement is what you are seeking, you must fall asleep during the first minute of the Democrat debates.

A pathological liar, a geriatric Socialist and a failed Governor. The Three Mousekateers in action.

When you ain't got nothing (and believe it, none of these wingnuts have a thing) go after the opposition

Get use to it. You'll be hearing a lot of it, "Madame President"

Oh, and you misspelled "Mouseketeers"

Maybe we should start a poll with the following question.

" If Hillary Clinton is indicted on criminal charges, should the Democrats still propose her as their candidate for President?"

Reduced to being one of the grammar police now?

But since you brought it up..."Get use to it."...is not proper grammar.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/get-used-to-it.html

...if...if...if...

The right whingers wet dream.

[Prbkk]

One hopes that in the American terminology this is "mutually assured destruction" (MAD) or at best a Pyrrhic victory. They are both God Awful.

[Linzz]

When you run for office, you are BY LAW required to disclose the source of your funds. It just does not cut it to say – oh, I forgot. Sorry, that disqualifies you from holding office and others have been seriously investigated for such lapses of memory.

Putting that aside, the source of the funds was the notorious Goldman Sachs. The dishonesty here is that Cruz has pretended to stand against the bankers. “Like many other players on Wall Street and big business, they seek out and get special favors from government,” Cruz told the New York Times previously. How dishonest is this statement and the forgetting to report a loan from Goldman Sachs? His wife Heidi, is amanaging director at Goldman Sachs and has taken a temporary “leave” during his presidential campaign.

I am sorry. But Cruz is bought and paid for and would be in the pocket of the New York Banks no different than Hillary, Bush, or the rest of them who take money from this crowd. You do not forget to report a loan from Goldman Sachs when your wife is a managing director. Come on. How stupid do we have to be to entertain this excuse?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by Martin Armstrong. Bookmark the permalink.

While I don't particularly like Trump's extravagant rhetoric, he is at least not in anyone's pocket

[Jingthing]

That's exactly what Thais said about Thaksin ...

[Cynical Sailor]

As a keen observer of world politics I find the US system quite amusing. Before a candidate is chosen to 'fight' the opposition, they literally tear their own party to pieces in an attempt to gain the nomination. They do this very publicly and will go to great lengths to achieve their goal.

As an Australian I find our system to be somewhat more discreet.

I'm certainly not saying that one system is better than the other, but the contrast is stark.

I find the use of the two words "Australian" and "discrete" (excuse the correction) in the same sentence rather amusing

As a rule I choose not to generalise. Discretion is the better part of valour (English spelling). [emoji12]