Trump refuses to debate; calls Fox's moderator 'lightweight'

[Publicus]

I love the way the Democrat clones say the same thing over and over again.

They avoid any discussion about their own slate of candidates. They have a failed Governor, a 73 year old wild eye socialist and a 69 year old pathological liar with 40 years of scandals behind her and in front of her.

Yet on the other hand, we have Trump who refused to debate on Fox News, or as all you Democrat clones prefer to say...Faux News.

So Trump turns down the offer to debate, holds his own event in Iowa and raises over $6 million for the Wounded Warrior Project.

In the eyes of middle America, who's looking like the good guy here?

The national electorate is not going to hire The Apprentice. One does not hire an initiate as chairman of the board. Or as CEO.

Trump does not know anything about being potus. Or about being a US Senator or a governor of a state. Trump wouldn't know how to be a county commissioner if he somehow did manage to get elected. Trump is a muggle.

It is true that good hiring practices mean no or fewer firings.

Trump is The Apprentice and if he might win the Republican party nomination then he'd have an official certificate to prove it.

Then comes the general election in which The Apprentice with his shitmachine get the door slammed in his face.

[SiSePuede419]

"He's a great brander" Bill Clinton, recently, about Trump....

Agreed.

But so were the cowpokes along the Chisholm Trail, but I don't think they were qualified to be POTUS either.

555

[Publicus]

The Donald has outfoxed the Fox. GOP nomination coming up next.

Clinton will be shaking in her boots and no doubt about it.

Trump has to prove he can debate one on one for the office of potus.

He can't.

Trump does not know anything about it.

Still No.1 for the GOP nomination. The risk model is based on that assumption.

Potus is another level and not going to predict the outcome at this juncture. The possibility has been built in, though.

If Trump is indeed nominated then I'm confident of the most bonkers run in. The model favours Trump resident in the Oval Office the more surreal it gets and The Donald unceremoniously launching HRC in to hyperspace.

Debating skills won't get a look in.

00320KillerWhaleTossesElephantSealDB.jpg

Fact is the nominees of the two major parties will need to debate one on one, head to head. It is mandatory in the eyes of the general electorate.

Trump is however already bailing out of debates. It is presently to his benefit with the Iowa Republican carcases caucuses several dayze away. Trump ran from the debate because he got wind of the brutal Faux montages on immigration that hammered Cruz and Rubio and would have clobbered Trump equally. That is anyway in this instance, in the R party, in Iowa, at this point of the nominating process.

Going forward however Trump The Apprentice in politics and government will have to debate HR Clinton if he does become the nominee. Americans expect it and in fact demand it.

Yet Trump The Apprentice does not have the Republican party solidly behind him. This is an historical anomaly given that Republicans reliably support their candidate at a greater percentage than Democrats support their candidate for potus.

As of January 18th:

Republican favorability, average since Nov. 1

CANDIDATE: FAVORABLE -- UNFAVORABLE = NET FAVORABLE

Ben Carson -

37 37 = 0

Marco Rubio -

34 35 = -1

Ted Cruz -

32 39 = -7

John Kasich -

20 27 = -7

Carly Fiorina -

28 36 = -8

Mike Huckabee -

28 40 = -12

Chris Christie -

31 44 = -13

Rand Paul -

26 42 = -16

Rick Santorum -

22 44 = -22

Jeb Bush -

29 51 = -22

Donald Trump -

33 58 =

-25

SOURCE: HUFFINGTON POST POLLSTER

Donald Trump Is Really Unpopular With General Election Voters

JAN 18, 2016

Trump would start at a disadvantage: Most Americans just really don’t like the guy.

Contra Rupert Murdoch’s assertion about Trump having crossover appeal, Trump is extraordinarily unpopular with independent voters and Democrats. Gallup polling conducted over the past six weeks found Trump with a -27-percentage-point net favorability rating among independent voters, and a -70-point net rating among Democrats; both marks are easily the worst in the GOP field.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-really-unpopular-with-general-election-voters/

It is a vital principle of life and work that when you're up you're up and that when you're down you're down. That when one is up in life it's great, but there's only one way to go from there which is down. Once down with associates, bosses, supervisors, voters etc, there's no regaining the lost 'up' status.

Trump The Apprentice hasn't ever been up with the vast swathe of the American electorate. Do not expect the fact to become reversed. It's set in stone.

Elections are won and lost in the suburbs and the large number of suburban Republicans and Independents are repulsed by Donald Trump. They do not simply dislike Trump, they find him repugnant.

It is thus already unmistakable the swing states have already swung and they have left The Apprentice swinging in the political winds Trump has himself created. Trump is reaping the whirlwind.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Publicus

[chuckd]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

[Pinot]

The whole GOP field is unelectable, what difference does it make?

A very foolish statement, but that is to be expected.

Why is that a 'very foolish' statement? Can you clarify why? what makes it very foolish?

Maybe I should have said a very foolish PARTISAN statement, because that is that it really is. There are a few members here who post little else.

"Because that is that it really is" Really?

And you're above PARTISAN statements, eh mate?

The right finds the truth painful, so they ignore it. Planned Parenthood, Hillary about to be indicted bullshit, Obamacare is a job killer, the Obama record in office, guns, Muslims, Mexicans, women's rights, it's all lies, all the time.

Republicans are an on-going worldwide embarrassment. Partisan statement? I don't think so.

Sitting around having a beer with the boys, the talk soon turns to how insane our politics are. These aren't Americans. People think our politics are crazy. It reflects badly on the US and I agree with them.

If that's being partisan, yeah I'm partisan. Republicans are out of their minds

[Steely Dan]

And the funniest thing of all, Trump won the debate.

[keemapoot]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

Everyone has been waiting for the "ah-ha" moment when he goes down in a ball of flames and so far it hasn't happened. Publicus makes a good case, however, that his lack of political skills will become evident in any debates with Clinton.

Perhaps we're in a new reality where voters no longer care about debate form and substance, and Trump will continue to bluster and "faux-pas" his way to the White House. No one can deny he is a clever, manipulative, smart operator and successful media manipulator and businessman. Whether those skills are then seen as valuable in a POTUS we will have to see.

For sure, I'll generally take a highly skilled businessman over a community organizer to be my chief executive (in theory), but there is much about him that is highly un-Presidential.

[chuckd]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

Everyone has been waiting for the "ah-ha" moment when he goes down in a ball of flames and so far it hasn't happened. Publicus makes a good case, however, that his lack of political skills will become evident in any debates with Clinton.

Perhaps we're in a new reality where voters no longer care about debate form and substance, and Trump will continue to bluster and "faux-pas" his way to the White House. No one can deny he is a clever, manipulative, smart operator and successful media manipulator and businessman. Whether those skills are then seen as valuable in a POTUS we will have to see.

For sure, I'll generally take a highly skilled businessman over a community organizer to be my chief executive (in theory), but there is much about him that is highly un-Presidential.

Clinton should be carrying out her part of the debate over a telephone behind a glass window in a very small room.

[chuckd]

<snip>

"Because that is that it really is" Really?

And you're above PARTISAN statements, eh mate?

The right finds the truth painful, so they ignore it. Planned Parenthood, Hillary about to be indicted bullshit, Obamacare is a job killer, the Obama record in office, guns, Muslims, Mexicans, women's rights, it's all lies, all the time.

Republicans are an on-going worldwide embarrassment. Partisan statement? I don't think so.

Sitting around having a beer with the boys, the talk soon turns to how insane our politics are. These aren't Americans. People think our politics are crazy. It reflects badly on the US and I agree with them.

If that's being partisan, yeah I'm partisan. Republicans are out of their minds

Since you're so big on your version of the Truth.

How about telling us why the Democratic National Committee refused to hold any Democrat debates on Fox News.

We're all ears.

[brewsterbudgen]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

Everyone has been waiting for the "ah-ha" moment when he goes down in a ball of flames and so far it hasn't happened. Publicus makes a good case, however, that his lack of political skills will become evident in any debates with Clinton.

Perhaps we're in a new reality where voters no longer care about debate form and substance, and Trump will continue to bluster and "faux-pas" his way to the White House. No one can deny he is a clever, manipulative, smart operator and successful media manipulator and businessman. Whether those skills are then seen as valuable in a POTUS we will have to see.

For sure, I'll generally take a highly skilled businessman over a community organizer to be my chief executive (in theory), but there is much about him that is highly un-Presidential.

Clinton should be carrying out her part of the debate over a telephone behind a glass window in a very small room.

Talk about being partisan! The whole email saga has (like Benghazi) been blown up by the Republicans and has little interest beyond the Beltway and the right-wing media/talk shows.

[chuckd]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

Everyone has been waiting for the "ah-ha" moment when he goes down in a ball of flames and so far it hasn't happened. Publicus makes a good case, however, that his lack of political skills will become evident in any debates with Clinton.

Perhaps we're in a new reality where voters no longer care about debate form and substance, and Trump will continue to bluster and "faux-pas" his way to the White House. No one can deny he is a clever, manipulative, smart operator and successful media manipulator and businessman. Whether those skills are then seen as valuable in a POTUS we will have to see.

For sure, I'll generally take a highly skilled businessman over a community organizer to be my chief executive (in theory), but there is much about him that is highly un-Presidential.

Clinton should be carrying out her part of the debate over a telephone behind a glass window in a very small room.

Talk about being partisan! The whole email saga has (like Benghazi) been blown up by the Republicans and has little interest beyond the Beltway and the right-wing media/talk shows.

MSNBC ain't Fox News. Out today...

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/29/msnbc-fbis-hillary-investigation-far-more-advanced-than-public-knows/

[Pinot]

<snip>

"Because that is that it really is" Really?

And you're above PARTISAN statements, eh mate?

The right finds the truth painful, so they ignore it. Planned Parenthood, Hillary about to be indicted bullshit, Obamacare is a job killer, the Obama record in office, guns, Muslims, Mexicans, women's rights, it's all lies, all the time.

Republicans are an on-going worldwide embarrassment. Partisan statement? I don't think so.

Sitting around having a beer with the boys, the talk soon turns to how insane our politics are. These aren't Americans. People think our politics are crazy. It reflects badly on the US and I agree with them.

If that's being partisan, yeah I'm partisan. Republicans are out of their minds

Since you're so big on your version of the Truth.

How about telling us why the Democratic National Committee refused to hold any Democrat debates on Fox News.

We're all ears.

I'd be happy to explain it.

BECAUSE IT ISN'T A LEGITIMATE NEWS ORGANIZATION - IT'S THE ENTERTAINMENT CHANNEL FOR WINGNUTS

Yeah, the DNC is going to let the Republican Ministry of Propaganda run a Democratic debate. That was your question? Pfffft

Anything else you want explained?

[chuckd]

<snip>

"Because that is that it really is" Really?

And you're above PARTISAN statements, eh mate?

The right finds the truth painful, so they ignore it. Planned Parenthood, Hillary about to be indicted bullshit, Obamacare is a job killer, the Obama record in office, guns, Muslims, Mexicans, women's rights, it's all lies, all the time.

Republicans are an on-going worldwide embarrassment. Partisan statement? I don't think so.

Sitting around having a beer with the boys, the talk soon turns to how insane our politics are. These aren't Americans. People think our politics are crazy. It reflects badly on the US and I agree with them.

If that's being partisan, yeah I'm partisan. Republicans are out of their minds

Since you're so big on your version of the Truth.

How about telling us why the Democratic National Committee refused to hold any Democrat debates on Fox News.

We're all ears.

I'd be happy to explain it.

BECAUSE IT ISN'T A LEGITIMATE NEWS ORGANIZATION - IT'S THE ENTERTAINMENT CHANNEL FOR WINGNUTS

Yeah, the DNC is going to let the Republican Ministry of Propaganda run a Democratic debate. That was your question? Pfffft

Anything else you want explained?

Then why are all you liberal progressive UFO hunters attacking Trump for agreeing with you?

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed. This isn't about Hillary Clinton's emails.

[Publicus]

<snip>

"Because that is that it really is" Really?

And you're above PARTISAN statements, eh mate?

The right finds the truth painful, so they ignore it. Planned Parenthood, Hillary about to be indicted bullshit, Obamacare is a job killer, the Obama record in office, guns, Muslims, Mexicans, women's rights, it's all lies, all the time.

Republicans are an on-going worldwide embarrassment. Partisan statement? I don't think so.

Sitting around having a beer with the boys, the talk soon turns to how insane our politics are. These aren't Americans. People think our politics are crazy. It reflects badly on the US and I agree with them.

If that's being partisan, yeah I'm partisan. Republicans are out of their minds

Since you're so big on your version of the Truth.

How about telling us why the Democratic National Committee refused to hold any Democrat debates on Fox News.

We're all ears.

That's not all.

1) Faux viewership are not a Democratic party constituency. It's not an Independent voter viewing constituency either. It is a network for grumps and other rightwhinge couch potatoes aged 65 and older (primarily). They could be called the Rocking Chair Debates.

2) Did Fox invite the Democratic party to consider Faux as a debate venue? Did Fox compete to be a Democratic party venue? Haven't seen anything that indicates any interest by Fox. Nothing indicating any mutual interest either.

3) Democratic party signed with the following networks to host their televised debates: CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, PBS, Univision. Democrats might well prefer Univision over Fox or any other anti-Hispanic media. HR Clinton is going to get 75% of the record 2016 turnout of Hispanic voters (Pres Obama got 72% in 2012.) Why offend Hispanics by patronising a network such as Faux that bashes Latinos.

4) Why should the D party promote or boost Robert Murdoch or Roger Alles in their income, status, standing among rightwhingers. Faux interviewers of Democratic candidates for potus would be eons worse than the CNBC sponsored Republican debate turned out to be.

Besides, as I'd mentioned elsewhere, Roger Alles is the only known instance in all of recorded social services history whose parents asked him to run away from home.

Even Donald Trump regards Alles and Faux as losers and boycotted their debate the other day. Nobody likes or respects Faux outside of their own incestuous circles. The way it's been going for Faux it's going to take Fox a while to recover from this election cycle....if it can recover at all.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Publicus

[SiSePuede419]

"Roger Alles is the only known instance in all of recorded social services history whose parents asked him to run away from home."

555. It's worse than that, Ailes parents ran away from him. He was an alcoholic in high school, his father kicked him out of the house. He went to a college where they "told him he could drink". His parents sold the house and threw or gave away all his stuff.

What a sweetheart Ailes must have been!

Sounds like Trump is one of those "college boys" Roger Ailes father hated.

Trump's parents sent him to military school.

I bet America's war fighters love to get lectured about military strategy from College Boy Trump, 555

Edited January 30, 2016 by SiSePuede419

[Mojomor]

Interesting that his alternative was a fundraising event for veterans, given that he avoided the draft, and is therefore not a veteran himself.

Smoke and mirrors. People have short memories.

[Publicus]

In spite of the overly rhetorical complaint that Trump doesn't have the necessary skills and experience to act as President, my take on his candidacy is that he has been one hell of a great community organizer.

The Apprentice Trump is not a US Senator. He's not a governor. Never been elected to anything. Nor has The Apprentice been appointed to anything in government. He's a showman.

Rightwhingers have complained about Barack Obama's background, to include Trump's crackpot swill about birth, but also about "community organizer." That's always been a rightwing thing.

For a natural born showman The Apprentice Trump is mortified by any one-on-one debate whether it's the offer by Sen Ted Cruz or the real and upcoming ones against HR Clinton in the fall. Three of 'em in the fall. The Fall.

The one thing we can be sure of is that The Apprentice will have to spend his time in one on one debate against HR Clinton doing a lot of hollering blustering and thundering. HRC will meanwhile discuss the issues that are important to America and American voters.

That is good news for the good guyz; bad newz for the other side. Very bad news. Worse, The Apprentice might have to be a debate no-show.

[wooloomooloo]

For all the bluster and apprenticeship value, Trump would make the best POTUS in history.

[keemapoot]

For all the bluster and apprenticeship value, Trump would make the best POTUS in history.

Given the dismal performance of the last two (Obama and George W), it's tempting to make optimistic remarks about a business leader who is as yet unproven in government leadership. In terms of surveys of our most contemporary Presidents, Bill Clinton, Reagan, Jack Kennedy, and sometimes George H. are usually at the top of those polls. Those guys all had prior government or governing or law-making experience.

The untested hypothesis implicit in everyone's excitement about Trump seems to be "a proven results-getting rich business leader will be a better political leader POTUS than just a regular old run-of-the-mill politico." That hypothesis has never been tested. Ross Perot didn't get close. Mitt Romney had some elements of that and got closer, but no cigar.

Are we willing to gamble with this shoot-from-the-hip, loose-with-the-tongue, head-squirrel wearing billionaire? Dunno. We'll see.

[SiSePuede419]

"Those guys all had prior government or governing or law-making experience."

Anyone that thinks a businessman can run the government like a business is mistaken.

Big difference.

A business is a dictatorship. You order your cronies to do something and they do it or you fire them.

The American government consists of three co-equal branches of control. The President doesn't get to order Congress or the Supreme Court what to do.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is foolish and naive.

In other words, a Trump supporter.

555

[Scott]

Troll post removed.

[keemapoot]

The American government consists of three co-equal branches of control. The President doesn't get to order Congress or the Supreme Court what to do.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is foolish and naive.

Or someone who has watched Obama circumvent the constitution repeatedly with illegal executive actions.

In fairness to Obama (not that I care about defending him), he has been merely continuing the expansion of the use, frequency and scope of the Executive Order power. George W. really was the one who started down that path and laid the foundation for further exploitation of that.

[NeverSure]

It's going be fun around here the day after Trump wins the general election. Then on the day he's sworn in as POTUS the suicide rate among farangs in Thailand will surely skyrocket.

[brewsterbudgen]

The American government consists of three co-equal branches of control. The President doesn't get to order Congress or the Supreme Court what to do.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is foolish and naive.

Or someone who has watched Obama circumvent the constitution repeatedly with illegal executive actions.

In fairness to Obama (not that I care about defending him), he has been merely continuing the expansion of the use, frequency and scope of the Executive Order power. George W. really was the one who started down that path and laid the foundation for further exploitation of that.

And all the main GOP contenders have stated that on their first day in office they will issue Executive Orders to undo all of Obama's Executive Orders!

Edited January 31, 2016 by brewsterbudgen

[boomerangutang]

Interesting that his alternative was a fundraising event for veterans, given that he avoided the draft, and is therefore not a veteran himself.

Smoke and mirrors. People have short memories.

Trump dodged the draft by claiming he had a bad foot. More recently, when a reporter asked him which foot it was, Trump threw back, "I don't know. Look it up, it's in the public record."

[boomerangutang]

Sarah Palin quit being governor. Later, she endorsed Trump.

Trump quit the debate.

They're made for each other - both quitters.

[keemapoot]

Instead of promising a chicken in every pot, or world peace, Trump has an interesting closing argument for Iowa. Wow, this guy is really tuned into the needs of the voters in America.

In his final speech before Iowa caucus day, Donald Trump renewed his old promise to build a lavish White House ballroom and pay for it himself.

Whatever seemingly nonsense he spews his ratings just go higher. Genius, madman, or meglomaniac?

[Publicus]

For all the bluster and apprenticeship value, Trump would make the best POTUS in history.

Given the dismal performance of the last two (Obama and George W), it's tempting to make optimistic remarks about a business leader who is as yet unproven in government leadership. In terms of surveys of our most contemporary Presidents, Bill Clinton, Reagan, Jack Kennedy, and sometimes George H. are usually at the top of those polls. Those guys all had prior government or governing or law-making experience.

The untested hypothesis implicit in everyone's excitement about Trump seems to be "a proven results-getting rich business leader will be a better political leader POTUS than just a regular old run-of-the-mill politico." That hypothesis has never been tested. Ross Perot didn't get close. Mitt Romney had some elements of that and got closer, but no cigar.

Are we willing to gamble with this shoot-from-the-hip, loose-with-the-tongue, head-squirrel wearing billionaire? Dunno. We'll see.

Gallup polling over the past eight weeks finds Trump negative 27% among Independent voters and negative 70% among Democrats, negative 25% among Republican party voters.

It is self-evident Donald Trump is an HR Clinton figure, i.e., love or hate the person. The emotion does not lend itself to modification or adaptation, much less to change. And any change would have to be a radical change.

In other words, if one is a rightwhinger the hate is of HR Clinton. If one is a mainstream Independent voter, then one of four finds Donald Trump repugnant and repulsive. Certainly one of four Republicans find Donald Trump repugnant and unacceptable.

It is highly unlikely these views would change between now and Donald Goes Down Day November 8th. Really highly unlikely. Very really highly unlikely. So very really highly unlikely. A snowball's chance in climate change unlikely.

[howto]

OHHH boo hou to the liberal bedwetters...

Get a grip on some facts...

The Untruth About Donald Trump

Get ready to eat crow.