Trump Himself Proves My Case!

The first GOP debate is still going on while I write this essay, but right out of the box, the FIRST question asked of the panel by Chris Wallace proves my thesis in my last essay about “The Donald”.

When asked if there was anyone on the floor who could NOT pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee, and forsake running an independent third-party campaign, guess who was the only candidate to raise his hand?

Anyone?… anyone?… Bueller…?

That’s right; gasbag Donald Trump.

It’s a-a-a-a-a-ll about him as far as he himself is concerned. He flat-out said that the only GOP nominee he could “support” was himself if nominated, even after Chris Wallace pointed out that a third-party campaign by him would almost assuredly end up in a Clinton presidency.

Does anybody doubt anymore what I wrote about this lunatic ten days ago?

trumpjackass

 

 

UPDATE: The debate is finished and Trump managed to live down to, if not exceed, my lowest expectations. When asked any questions, he had absolutely no specific answers, nor any actual policy proposals to put on the table, as opposed to EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE there on the stage. His only responses were his usual nonsense and bluster. It was actually pretty funny watching his face get redder and redder as the debate went on. This guy’s a nincompoop. An absolute imbecile.

 

He made Jebbie, Christie, Huckabee and Kasich look good by comparison, guys I actually usually can’t stand.

 

 

 

©Brian Baker 2015

Advertisements

46 comments on “Trump Himself Proves My Case!

  1. Née says:

    Brian–
    I was live blogging and those would have been the words in the bubble over my head….”gasbag!!!”

  2. clyde says:

    Glad you watched the “circular firing squad”. Just goes to show, a REAL candidate COULD go a long way, IF he truly stood by his words, and wasn’t making the process about themselves. Excellent observations, pard.

  3. Crazy as it sounds, I was impressed with Jeb Bush in some of his attitudes, but also Ben Carson.
    Trump lost me, teetotally.

  4. Betty Arenson says:

    I predict this is where his ego finally caught up with him and he’ll start dropping in favor-ability…altho a bit crude, he had the platform to express the frustrations of MANY Americans…but to dismiss the votes of Republicans and Independents who will chose the GOP nominee and go off by himself and jeopardize the presidency just because he didn’t win.

    • BrianR says:

      Hey, Betty! Thanks for dropping by and commenting.

      I completely agree. He revealed his true self. Now the problem will be whether or not he insists on indulging his self-regard to the point of running as an independent and throwing the election to the Dem.

      My money is on him doing it. He’s that scumbaggy enough.

  5. cyn3wulf says:

    The GOPe only have themselves to blame; they created the vacuum for Trump. It’s interesting to see how badly they have alienated their base. As you may or may not know, Townhall took over HotAir, kind of. Allahpundit and Ed still run the place, but Mary Katherine Hamm and Greg Benson write the occasional column over there. Now, back in the day, I don’t think I ever heard anyone complain about MKH. Not about anything major anyway. Today, she is pretty much loathed by the Hot Air crowd and derided as a RINO. The separation of people who just want their team to win and people who actually expect their team to live up to its conservative ideals is growing wider by the day.

    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, Cyne, it’s the same dynamic we saw back in the TH days when we were “Crispies”. Apparently, not much has changed in 8 long years.

      BTW, I did not know about TH taking over HotAir. Interesting…

      • cyn3wulf says:

        Looks like at least some conservatives have decided to co-opt Trump. Comments from Hot Air:

        “You can support a conservative, or Trump is our weapon to destroy the Republican Party.

        dominigan on August 7, 2015 at 11:38 AM
        Yes, I’m supporting Trump mainly as a strategy to break the GOPe’s stranglehold on conservative Repubs.

        Why I Support Donald Trump’s Campaign – And It’s Probably Not What You Think

        petefrt on August 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM”

        Despite holding the House and the Senate (and many, many state governments), the Republican party is in trouble. It is like a weight-bearing beam that looks healthy and strong on the outside but is deeply distressed and ready to buckle on the inside.

      • BrianR says:

        Oh, yeah. I mentioned the same issue in my first Trump essay, that the Establishment GOP brought him upon themselves. But interestingly enough, THIS time there ARE some genuine conservatives running, and they’re going to be hurt by this guy.

        Some more of Trump’s “class”:

        http://news.yahoo.com/trump-dont-recognize-insults-women-132404849–election.html

        The guy’s utterly disgusting. Always has been.

      • cyn3wulf says:

        Yeah, he’s definitely a joke. Always has been. Berke Breathed of Bloom County fame recently announced that he was bringing Bloom County out of mothballs pretty much just because Trump provided an irresistible target.

        And he is disgusting. I saw that about Erick Erickson uninviting him from the Redstate gathering because of his comments about Megyn Kelly. And he was otherwise sympathetic to Trump: http://www.redstate.com/2015/08/07/i-have-disinvited-donald-trump-to-the-redstate-gathering/

        And you’re right. He would make a great wrecking ball to use on the GOPe if it wasn’t for the fact that there are several viable conservatives in the running right now. If it was just Bush, Christie, and Kasich up for the nomination, I’d say have at it, Trump. But he’s not going to pull votes from those guys in this crowded field; he’s going to pull votes from Cruz, etc.

      • BrianR says:

        Agreed.

        One of the issues we on the Right regularly harp on is that of “character”; Hillary’s character as a liar; Bill Clinton’s as a liar and philanderer; Obama’s as a liar and despot; etc.

        Yet ALL these non-leftists who are supporting this guy are giving him a complete pass on this very issue that they want to hold the Dem/socialists to. That strikes me as sheer hypocrisy, a trait I find abhorrent wherever I find it, from EITHER side.

        What’s Trump’s character? He’s a massive egotist with a history of doing and saying anything that strikes his fancy, the more outrageous the better, if it serves his primary goal of self-promotion. Always has been, so why is this time any different?

        This time around, he just happened to luck into a couple of topics that resonate with a lot of people frustrated with most politicians. So what does he do? Just like always, he capitalizes on his propitious timing and luck to self-promote, and uses the GOP as his megaphone. That’s EXACTLY why I have little doubt that as soon as he’s bounced in the primaries he’ll declare himself as an independent candidate, other consequences be damned. I’d even bet he KNOWS he won’t be elected, and still couldn’t care less. Such is the world of the self-adoring.

        That is just his nature; his “character”. Yet the very same people who excoriate Hillary, and Biden, and Obama for THEIR shortcomings in the character department are utterly and completely blind to the very same qualities in Trump. I’ve gotta say, I’m baffled.

        There are none so blind as those who will not see.

      • cyn3wulf says:

        You touch on a larger issue here: “That strikes me as sheer hypocrisy…”

        More and more, I’m seeing people on the Right doing the same things they accuse people on the Left of doing. I honestly don’t recall much of that going on a decade ago, though I’m sure it was going on to some degree. But it seems like it’s all over the place now.

        As an example, an update came out a week ago or so about Dan Price in Seattle. He instituted a plan to raise all of his employee’s salaries to at least 70k. So, all over Conservative media, I see headlines about him needing to rent out his house and bullet points pointing out that a couple of his top employees left and that a couple of his customers left, etc. All doom and gloom. Now, these facts were true, but some others went unreported. Like, he gained many more customers than he lost. He had to hire more employees to handle the increase in business. He’s having to rent out his house because he lowered his own salary from over a mil to 70k, not because the business is tanking. Whatever our view on this guy’s business decision, I think we all agree here that the media, especially conservative media, should report the whole story, not just the cherry pickings. For once in my life, I read a NY Times article that was balanced and conservative articles that were not. It was very discouraging.

        The comments at these places were even worse. Most of them didn’t read the story, and even fewer bothered to read the NY Times article that these conservative articles were based on. One, maybe two, out of thousands of commenters, bothered to consult other sources, particularly local ones. Sadly, this commenting while uninformed was the bright spot. Many of the comments were downright, foaming at the mouth hateful. They were behaving like the leftists of ten years ago (and of today for that matter). I was amazed. Factually wrong. Hardcore hatred. Because they didn’t like the way some guy was employing his liberty. What happened to my fellow conservatives?

        My guess is that it stems from the same place that this infatuation with Trump comes from. We’ve long held that Republicans are not fighters and that the few times they bother to, they do so with one hand (sometimes both) tied behind their backs. Not saying what needs to be said. Not defending yourself or your views. Not following through on your campaign promises. Not using your majority in the House or the Senate or both when you have them. All of this and more has created this vacuum where someone like Trump can play the Pied Piper role and conservative internet warriors start acting like raving lunatics. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but if we don’t get some actual leaders in leadership positions soon, things are going to get far uglier than they already are. Was it this messy when the Whigs imploded? I imagine it was.

      • BrianR says:

        Beautifully said, Cyne. And your example of that guy in Seattle was a perfect illustration of the phenomenon.

        I remember reading about him when he first did that, and thinking it was a pretty stupid business move. But, like you, I was totally surprised to read all the venom from allegedly “conservative” people who had absolutely no financial stake in the outcome for his business. I kept wondering why they were so personally invested in the issue. It made no sense to me at all. I could understand why his brother — who was a minority partner — was ticked. But why would Joe Sixpack care?

        Now we have the same thing happening with Trump, by otherwise sane people, all acting toward him the same way Hillary supporters act toward HER, with not a hint of self-awareness or irony. And now that I’ve pointed it out, I’M the one getting the flack. Sometimes I feel like Cassandra at Troy, if you remember your classics.

        BTW, that was a hint of the topic of my next essay, maybe coming out tomorrow.

        From what I’ve read, the end of the Whigs actually was this messy, too. The death throes of a dinosaur.

  6. captbogus2 says:

    Gotta admit. He wasn’t very impressive.

  7. Nee says:

    All in all, it was at least tolerable. I did not really appreciate the deliberate attempts at humor or ridicule, either. Carson impressed me with his answer about racism. “The Brain is what makes you who you are, not the color of your skin.” And, I liked his answer on taxes. Huckabee ticked me off on the SS question because he seemed to be missing that until you make that “fund” inaccessible to any other borrowing, it will continue to remain an unfunded liability. If the government is insistent on taking this from people, they must grow it, not rape it.

    • BrianR says:

      I think the trouble with Carson was somewhat along the same lines as with Trump, in that he had knowledge of some of the problems, but no real specific solutions he could propose. His lack of actual political experience showed, and didn’t do him any favors. But at least he’s not a Trumpian jackass about it.

  8. Sgt Relic says:

    As I said previously, I just can’t take Trump seriously and last night didn’t change that opinion. That said, I’ve got to say that I really hate the format for this debate. The idea that any candidate can articulate the solution any problem facing the country in 60 seconds is ridiculous. This format is designed strictly to obtain sound-bites,IMO.

    I understand from reading the fox piece on the question selection process that the moderators were trying to throw the candidates off balance and cut-off escapes into prepared responses, but, with a 60 second time limit that plan can’t work.

    The adversarial, and sometimes vitriolic questions, particularly by Megyn Kelly, seemed to me to take attention away from the candidates. I have been reading some of the comments on the Fox website and they all seem to focus on what many considered to be an unprofessional performance by the moderators.

    Megyn Kelly may have turned Trump into a sympathetic character since her disdain for him certainly came across to me and the Mrs. Giving credence to the so-called “War on Women” lost her credibility points with me. I didn’t have her down as a big time feminist. Disappointing.

    Bottom line: I didn’t find out anything about these candidates that I didn’t already know.

    After thought: Points to Cruz for reminding the moderators that Trump might be an idiot but he is the reason that illegal immigration was even being talked about.

    • BrianR says:

      Good points, Sarge.

      I think the format last night was probably unavoidable when you’re dealing with that many “debaters”. As the process continues and the field is weeded down, then I think we can expect to see actual debates with more meat on the bone.

  9. Hardnox says:

    Sorry bro. I ain’t buying into the notion that Trump would run 3rd party. He knows the consequences. Why would he pledge loyalty to the very organization that is helping wreck this county? We’ve been bashing the establishment hacks for decades, why would Trump be any different? Besides why would he show all his cards? I wouldn’t either if people kept trying to kick me in the nads.

    Hannity interviewed him after the debate. Take a look.

    • BrianR says:

      Trump doesn’t believe in “consequences”. He’s the compleat egotist and megalomaniac.

      As to “pledging loyalty”, why’s he then running in the GOP as a self-proclaimed Republican? You’re letting him have his cake and eat it, too.

      What “cards” does he have to “play”? He claims to be a legitimate (cough, cough) GOP candidate. The only cards a LEGITIMATE candidate plays is to run in the primaries, then support whoever ends up winning. But he said flat-out that the ONLY GOP nominee he’d support is himself. If that’s the case, then he should have run as an independent, but he didn’t. Why? I’ll tell you why: because he’s using the GOP debate platform as a megaphone he wouldn’t have as an independent. In plain English, he’s a douchebag.

      I’ll say it again, if the guy had ANY history as a legitimate conservative, I might think of him differently, but he doesn’t. He’s been a big Dem contributor; he’s been anti-gun; he’s been for single-payer healthcare; he’s been for amnesty; he’s been a member of the Dem Party; he ran for president as a member of the Reform party. He’ll be FOR whatever suits him at the moment. That’s like trusting your life to a gun you bought for three dollars; probably not very dependable.

      I watched the interview you linked, and all I saw was just more of the same. SSDD.

      • Hardnox says:

        Relax bro. Take deep breaths. Repeat…
        🙂

        Ask yourself this question: why has the establishment republicans, the entirety of the left, the media, and the pundits jumped on the dump Trump bandwagon?

        It’s not ONLY because he is an egotistical megalomaniacal douchebag. He stands to upset the feeding trough in Washington.

      • BrianR says:

        None of which is relevant, bro.

        He’s a liar, a fraud, a snake-oil salesman, an Elmer Gantry, and all of you guys are falling for it.

        If we were talking about, say, Ted Cruz going third-party, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. He’s a REAL conservative, and has proven chops and creds.

        But no, we’re talking about Trump. And if you’re happy with the “feeding trough” in Washington being upset, then you must also have been pretty happy with Ross Perot. He did the same thing. And because of him, we had to say “President Clinton” for eight years.

        This time it’ll maybe be “President Biden”, or worse yet “President Sanders”.

        Trump is an opportunist who’s happened to latch onto something that has people in an uproar, and it’s all about Trump to Trump. You think he cares about anything OTHER than Trump?

        Good luck on that.

  10. Hardnox says:

    We’ll need to politely disagree.

    There’s no question about Trump’s ego. That much is certain. On that note, it is doubtful that he’d risk the chance of being Perot 2.0 and be responsible for the scenario you outlined and have that as his legacy.

    Honestly, do you think that Trump wouldn’t be better than any lefty?

    I hope he doesn’t get the nomination but he is forcing the conversation on topics otherwise ignored.

    ANY 3rd party run would be a disaster.

    • BrianR says:

      You probably didn’t read a response I just wrote to Cyne, so I’ll copy it here:

      One of the issues we on the Right regularly harp on is that of “character”; Hillary’s character as a liar; Bill Clinton’s as a liar and philanderer; Obama’s as a liar and despot; etc.

      Yet ALL these non-leftists who are supporting this guy are giving him a complete pass on this very issue that they want to hold the Dem/socialists to. That strikes me as sheer hypocrisy, a trait I find abhorrent wherever I find it, from EITHER side.

      What’s Trump’s character? He’s a massive egotist with a history of doing and saying anything that strikes his fancy, the more outrageous the better, if it serves his primary goal of self-promotion. Always has been, so why is this time any different?

      This time around, he just happened to luck into a couple of topics that resonate with a lot of people frustrated with most politicians. So what does he do? Just like always, he capitalizes on his propitious timing and luck to self-promote, and uses the GOP as his megaphone. That’s EXACTLY why I have little doubt that as soon as he’s bounced in the primaries he’ll declare himself as an independent candidate, other consequences be damned. I’d even bet he KNOWS he won’t be elected, and still couldn’t care less. Such is the world of the self-adoring.

      That is just his nature; his “character”. Yet the very same people who excoriate Hillary, and Biden, and Obama for THEIR shortcomings in the character department are utterly and completely blind to the very same qualities in Trump. I’ve gotta say, I’m baffled.

      There are none so blind as those who will not see.

      Also, in response to your question, “Honestly, do you think that Trump wouldn’t be better than any lefty?”

      I think he’d be absolutely the worst president, from either party, maybe in the history of the country. He’d be a disaster for this country. There are absolutely no circumstances under which I’d ever consider voting for him. It would be safer to put a 5-year-old behind the wheel of a Porsche.

  11. Nee says:

    I have been engaging in a discussion where I am asked whom I would support. I really cannot say at this point. The debate format was not conducive to learning anything new…Rubio said the same thing several times, and some avoided the answers altogether. I liked Walker, and I like Cruz. Rubio will never get a yes from me…Huckabaee, either. A conundrum to be sure.

    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, I know what you mean. I’m in the same boat.

      I, too, like Walker and Cruz. Rubio spent all his time trying to woo back conservatives after his Gang of Eight fiasco, which will continue to haunt him, so his answers weren’t at all helpful.

      And, of course, all the post-debate discussions and analyses revolve around gasbag Trump, once again wrecking the process, because of course, it’s all about HIM.

      Wait until you see my next essay. It’s already written, and I submitted it to my local newspaper as a Guest Column. I always give them a couple of days to decide to run it before I publish here because they won’t run it at all if I post it here first. But if by Wednesday they don’t run it, it’s going up here anyway.

  12. gunnyginalaska says:

    I like the Donald’s outspokenness. We NEED someone who isn’t afraid to tell some douchebag reporter that “they’re done talking.” That said, I’m in the Cruz, Walker, Fiorina group. Sent her 25 bucks yesterday. Seeing a Cruz/Fiorina ticket would be outstanding. Good essay and good comments all.

  13. captbogus2 says:

    Aw, BB… You wouldn’t go for a Trump/Graham ticket???

  14. captbogus2 says:

    The first question asked of the panel????? Aw, C’mon, BB. The moderators, panel, tv cameramen, you, me and half the class for challenged kids knew the answer to that before the question was even asked.

  15. captbogus2 says:

    But the question would never have been asked but for Trump. And just why did they beat around the bush with it? Why did they ‘direct’ the question to all the panel? That, to me, was the BS part of it. Had they asked The Donald as his first question it would’ve been a valid question. The way they did it came across as a, “Gotcha!”

    • BrianR says:

      The GOP is a “party”, a closed club. As such they have an absolute OBLIGATION to ask the entire panel as a whole what their plans are if they don’t win the nomination, as only ONE person WILL win it.

      That accomplishes a couple of things. It gives the party’s voters a chance to judge the credibility of the candidates as actual people committed to supporting their party, including whomever the actual nominee ends up being. It also gives the party’s financial backers an opportunity to see whether or not they want to commit money to any one candidate, based on how and what they’ll do with those contributions if they DON’T win the nomination.

      Regardless of whatever Trump says, he does NOT have enough of his own money to run an effective national campaign as an independent. All he could do was end up being another Perot, getting just enough votes to ASSURE that the Dem/socialist candidate will win.

      The only reason that comes across to anyone as a “gotcha” moment is because of Trump’s whiny bleating about it, like a little girl who didn’t get asked to the prom. What a pussy.

  16. captbogus2 says:

    In which of the debates of 2012 or 2008 did they ask the panel?

    • BrianR says:

      Who cares? What does that have to do with anything?

      Which of the elections of 2012 or 2008 did the Republicans win?

  17. captbogus2 says:

    They haven’t won 2016 either, if you notice. It has to do with the “conservative” media proving itself in the bag with the establishment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s