Romney, McCain: Trump a danger for America's future

[GinBoy2]

The problem here is that we are witnessing a civil war within the Republican party.

I'm not sure how it will end up but the reality on the ground is that Trump has, for better or worse tapped into that middle/low class white electorate that is feeling pretty pissed off with life.

Now to the shame of the Democrats, that's an electorate that they should have had a natural affinity for, but for various reasons managed to alienate, and push them into the arms of a 'I'm <deleted> angry' fairground barker AKA trump.

At the end of the day the Democrats, GOP both conspired to create the Frankenstein monster of Trump.

I'm long past my prediction of 6 months ago that Trump would fade, and now into the resignation phase that he's probably going to be the GOP nominee.

As I've said before, democracy (small d) is not served well when you have one alternative that borders on the unhinged

The above contribution borders on the unhinged.

Pray, do explain more. One line isn't exactly a reasoned argument for or against.

Then again in today's form of political discourse which I fear you seem to embrace, which when it appears the size of a candidates genitalia seems to be considered 'reasoned argument' as part of political debate, maybe I'm on the wrong side of history!

The age of reality TV politics is upon us, God help us all

Edited March 6, 2016 by GinBoy2

[boomerangutang]

Two losers who want to save the so called Republican party. Trump is a danger because he calls it like it is. If the so clean Republicans cannot form a party they will lose the election!

Trump did not exactly call it like it is over the KKK questions, but never mind carry on.........

That was just another embellished, exaggerated piece of propaganda... Trump is on record not being associated with the KKK... The question was about David Duke a previous KKK leader back in the day... Duke has not been national news for 25 years - except when some liberal / leftist rag wants to taint a Republican with a phony association. On the other hand the Democrats had a Senator who was at one time a Grand Dragon of the KKK ... even when he died ... he was still honored - and that was not all that long ago ... It is called politics of the ignorant who pony out these ridiculous associations. Bottom line Trump didn't really know who David Duke was - thus the reason he hesitated to answer the question ... Good Grief... is that all you've got?

A mere 8 yrs ago, Trump made a very direct comment about Duke and his ties with KKK. Trump's father knew KKK members personally, and surely spoke with his son about the group. Trump wants to be president but pretends he doesn't remember a large personality (most Americans also know about Duke), and a historic group (All Americans know at least something about the KKK). Trump's lies are on video. His lies and flip-flopping are coming around and nipping him on the butt. Certainly not presidential material, ....but great for late-night talk shows (and ex-Republican presidential candidates) who are skewering Trump like there's no tomorrow.

[iReason]

@Post #149

"these ridiculous associations."

How about (Muslim ) Adnan Khashoggi?

You may have heard of him.

He was the key middle-man in the illegal Iran-Contra arms deal. In fact at the time he was the #1 arms dealer in the world.

"A story that Trump frequently tells is about his purchase of Khashoggi’s yacht, the 282-foot, $70 million Nabila, thought to be the most opulent private vessel afloat."

“Khashoggi was a great broker and a lousy businessman,” Trump said to me that night."

“He understood the art of bringing people together and putting together a deal better than almost anyone—all the bullshitting part"

http://tycoonplaybook.com/2013/07/20/deal-maker-profiles-adnan-khashoggi/

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1989/09/dunne198909

(The Yacht that was purchased by Trump was later repossessed during one of the businessman's numerous bankruptcies.)

"Donald Trump has made a habit of criticizing the United States for allowing foreign countries to continue “eating our lunch,” a message he has pushed for nearly-thirty years."

"In 1991, however, it was Trump’s lunch that was eaten by a foreign competitor, when the real estate mogul, in debt to the tune of $900 million, ceded his 281-foot super-yacht Trump Princess over to creditors."

"The yacht was then purchased by Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz al Saud, mogul and member of the Saudi royal family.

He also happens to have a stake in another forsaken Trump property: the Plaza hotel in New York."

Oops! Another one of those nasty Muslims.

“Faced with massive debts and increasing cash-flow problems, Trump has been forced to get rid of large chunks of his empire to stay afloat.

Among properties he is ceding to creditors are his 282-foot Trump Princess yacht, a 49% stake in New York’s Grand Hyatt Hotel, the Trump Shuttle airline and his 27% stake in Alexanders Inc., a department store chain,” read a Reuters story in 1991 on Trump’s restructuring of his considerable debts."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/set-an-open-course-for-the-virgin-sea#.de43XWZ5j

[willyumiii]

What could possibly be dangerous about electing a President who has no experience in government and has no idea how the government functions, including what the President has and does not have the authority to do?

Good Luck America!

[iReason]

"Real estate and casino mogul Donald J. Trump worked out a vital restructuring deal on one of his casinos Sunday,

but the agreement forces him to give up more control over his empire, a source close to him said."

"Facing a deadline of today, Trump held weekend talks with creditors at his Trump Castle Casino in Atlantic City to restructure his debt.

He needed cash to make a $41-million payment on the $351.8 million in bonds outstanding."

"On Friday, Trump made a $16.5-million payment on the Trump Plaza Casino with cash from casino operations."

"Many of his holdings were bought with borrowed funds, personally guaranteed by Trump. Now his bankers want the assets in exchange for his debts."

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-17/business/fi-657_1_trump-plaza-casino

Which by the way, (In reverse) is exactly what he is doing with his campaign.

Loaning his money to be paid back.

Trump said, "I'm self-funding my own campaign." Major BS.

"A significant portion of his money comes from individual contributions."

"For several months last year, the campaign received far more dollars from potential voters than they did from Trump."

"Additionally, most of Trump’s contributions have been loans rather than donations, so he may hope to recoup those funds."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/10/donald-trump/donald-trump-self-funding-his-campaign-sort/

The guy is a hack con-man versed in the shell-game of robbing Peter to pay Paul. And a compulsive liar.

Edited March 6, 2016 by iReason

[Scott]

A post with oversized graphic has been removed.

[Boon Mee]

History repeats: Cannot allow an 'outsider' to participate.

Rush Limbaugh: Mitt Romney’s Dad Did the Same Thing
to Goldwater in 1964 as He did to Trump

[GinBoy2]

Hopefully this a a whimsical parody, not a prophetic view!

http://www.onthemedia.org/story/looking-back-trump-presidency/

[chuckd]

What could possibly be dangerous about electing a President who has no experience in government and has no idea how the government functions, including what the President has and does not have the authority to do?

Good Luck America!

Yeah, we proved that didn't work in 2008 and 2012.

[willyumiii]

What could possibly be dangerous about electing a President who has no experience in government and has no idea how the government functions, including what the President has and does not have the authority to do?

Good Luck America!

Yeah, we proved that didn't work in 2008 and 2012.

Excuse me?

Where have you been?

President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President and has followed the book since he has been in office showing that he does understand the responsibilities and limits of the office he holds.

Without a Cheey as a puppeteer standing behind him calling the shots/

[Publicus]

It has been obvious from Trump's start that he and his followers hate mainstream Republicans. They for instance call Republicans RINO.

Trouble is Trump and his Trumpeteers hate institutional Republicans for the wrong reasons, i.e., traditional Republicans are only right of center as opposed to the far out whingenuts who attach to the Republican party and who are now trying to take it over wholesale.

Mainstream Republicans have indeed been giving the wingenut right the run around. The whackjob right have been getting the stiffarm from mainstream Republicans since Reagan started putting them off, telling 'em from Regan's first day in the White House to put off the social issues in favor of the hard issues of economy and national security. It was a fast shuffle from the start as Reagan wisely didn't have any interest in going down that road.

The radical wildman Trump suits the uninstitutionalsed extremists just fine however. They've never been institutionalised in the way they should have been from long ago.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Publicus

[chuckd]

What could possibly be dangerous about electing a President who has no experience in government and has no idea how the government functions, including what the President has and does not have the authority to do?

Good Luck America!

Yeah, we proved that didn't work in 2008 and 2012.

Excuse me?

Where have you been?

President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President and has followed the book since he has been in office showing that he does understand the responsibilities and limits of the office he holds.

Without a Cheey as a puppeteer standing behind him calling the shots/

Been right here all the time, wondering how you liberals could possibly continue having any confidence in Obama and the Democrats after seeing seven years of his, and his administration's, actions.

You claim..."President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President..."

​Obama became a US Senator on 4 January 2005, Declared for the Presidency two years later and began his run for that office then. Politifact has this to say about his voting record and, presumably, attendance in the Senate...

"In 2008, Obama missed 137 out of 213 votes, or 64.3 percent of votes. (His career absentee rate is 24.2 percent.)

​With a career absentee rate of 24.2 percent, it is highly unlikely his on the job experience would qualify him for anything much higher than hall monitor in most establishments. The US Presidency would be one of those for which he would not be qualified, on the basis of his "experience" as a US Senator.

As far as knowing the responsibilities of his office, I refer you to the night of 11 September 2011. Where was he, what was he doing and why did he not take a more active role than he did?

His performance that night was a classic case of dereliction of duty. The UCMJ Article 92 describes dereliction of duty as...

(a) That the accused had certain duties;

(b ) That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and

© That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.

He failed all three tests.

You can keep believing all that swill coming out of the White House if you wish. Just don't expect everybody else to be so gullible.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/28/marco-rubio/when-attacked-missed-votes-marco-rubio-calls-out-b/

[willyumiii]

What could possibly be dangerous about electing a President who has no experience in government and has no idea how the government functions, including what the President has and does not have the authority to do?

Good Luck America!

Yeah, we proved that didn't work in 2008 and 2012.

Excuse me?

Where have you been?

President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President and has followed the book since he has been in office showing that he does understand the responsibilities and limits of the office he holds.

Without a Cheey as a puppeteer standing behind him calling the shots/

Been right here all the time, wondering how you liberals could possibly continue having any confidence in Obama and the Democrats after seeing seven years of his, and his administration's, actions.

You claim..."President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President..."

​Obama became a US Senator on 4 January 2005, Declared for the Presidency two years later and began his run for that office then. Politifact has this to say about his voting record and, presumably, attendance in the Senate...

"In 2008, Obama missed 137 out of 213 votes, or 64.3 percent of votes. (His career absentee rate is 24.2 percent.)

​With a career absentee rate of 24.2 percent, it is highly unlikely his on the job experience would qualify him for anything much higher than hall monitor in most establishments. The US Presidency would be one of those for which he would not be qualified, on the basis of his "experience" as a US Senator.

As far as knowing the responsibilities of his office, I refer you to the night of 11 September 2011. Where was he, what was he doing and why did he not take a more active role than he did?

His performance that night was a classic case of dereliction of duty. The UCMJ Article 92 describes dereliction of duty as...

(a) That the accused had certain duties;

(b ) That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and

© That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.

He failed all three tests.

You can keep believing all that swill coming out of the White House if you wish. Just don't expect everybody else to be so gullible.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/28/marco-rubio/when-attacked-missed-votes-marco-rubio-calls-out-b/

"the night of 11 September 2011"?????

The September 11th the world remembers was in 2001, when the Presidentdrew a blank and sat on his ass and did nothing when he was informed our country was under attack.

When he finished peeing his pants and decided to do something, he decided to attack two countries that had nothing to do with the attach, destabalized the entire middle east and gave birth to ISIS who we are not thanking him for today.. Allt tthis when he should have gone after Bin Laden, the man behind the attacks.

Remember Bin Laden? The guy Bush soon forgot and left for Obama to take out when he became President?

Now, can you tell us a little about what happened on December 7th 1951?

Edited March 8, 2016 by willyumiii

[chuckd]

Excuse me?

Where have you been?

President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President and has followed the book since he has been in office showing that he does understand the responsibilities and limits of the office he holds.

Without a Cheey as a puppeteer standing behind him calling the shots/

Been right here all the time, wondering how you liberals could possibly continue having any confidence in Obama and the Democrats after seeing seven years of his, and his administration's, actions.

You claim..."President Obama was a U.S. senator before he ran for the office of President..."

​Obama became a US Senator on 4 January 2005, Declared for the Presidency two years later and began his run for that office then. Politifact has this to say about his voting record and, presumably, attendance in the Senate...

"In 2008, Obama missed 137 out of 213 votes, or 64.3 percent of votes. (His career absentee rate is 24.2 percent.)

​With a career absentee rate of 24.2 percent, it is highly unlikely his on the job experience would qualify him for anything much higher than hall monitor in most establishments. The US Presidency would be one of those for which he would not be qualified, on the basis of his "experience" as a US Senator.

As far as knowing the responsibilities of his office, I refer you to the night of 11 September 2011. Where was he, what was he doing and why did he not take a more active role than he did?

His performance that night was a classic case of dereliction of duty. The UCMJ Article 92 describes dereliction of duty as...

(a) That the accused had certain duties;

(b ) That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and

© That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.

He failed all three tests.

You can keep believing all that swill coming out of the White House if you wish. Just don't expect everybody else to be so gullible.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/28/marco-rubio/when-attacked-missed-votes-marco-rubio-calls-out-b/

"the night of 11 September 2011"?????

The September 11th the world remembers was in 2001, when the Presidentdrew a blank and sat on his ass and did nothing when he was informed our country was under attack.

When he finished peeing his pants and decided to do something, he decided to attack two countries that had nothing to do with the attach, destabalized the entire middle east and gave birth to ISIS who we are not thanking him for today.. Allt tthis when he should have gone after Bin Laden, the man behind the attacks.

Remember Bin Laden? The guy Bush soon forgot and left for Obama to take out when he became President?

Now, can you tell us a little about what happened on December 7th 1951?

Is that really the best you can do?

Typical liberal Democrat knee jerk reaction.

You have no answers on Obama's incompetence so you can only attack Bush.

You liberals are so predictable.

[lannarebirth]

It has been obvious from Trump's start that he and his followers hate mainstream Republicans. They for instance call Republicans RINO.

Trouble is Trump and his Trumpeteers hate institutional Republicans for the wrong reasons, i.e., traditional Republicans are only right of center as opposed to the far out whingenuts who attach to the Republican party and who are now trying to take it over wholesale.

Mainstream Republicans have indeed been giving the wingenut right the run around. The whackjob right have been getting the stiffarm from mainstream Republicans since Reagan started putting them off, telling 'em from Regan's first day in the White House to put off the social issues in favor of the hard issues of economy and national security. It was a fast shuffle from the start as Reagan wisely didn't have any interest in going down that road.

The radical wildman Trump suits the uninstitutionalsed extremists just fine however. They've never been institutionalised in the way they should have been from long ago.

Clever propaganda. Separating the extremist Republicans from the natural Republicans, who are Hillary's core constituency.

[Publicus]

Not many RINOs in these parts.

For sure

[CWMcMurray]

With this much money by super PACs trying to do everything to stop Trump... Just makes me think I like him more

You can learn a lot by seeing a man's enemies... And to see all the conservatives on the Right rather to have a complete meltdown rather than let Trump get the nomination, is actually a bit of a selling point to me

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/patrick-j-buchanan/will-oligarchs-kill-trump/

[CWMcMurray]

An interesting take on Trump phenomenon

http://takimag.com/article/the_american_hitler_or_the_american_netanyahu_steve_sailer/page_2#axzz42PstgPDY