The head clown took his show to another venue last night, and something remarkable happened.
A substantive debate ensued.
No kindergarten responses, no bullying tactics, no childish faces.
Pretty much good old fashioned, on-point debating of the issues voters wanted to hear, without the big blowhard in the middle sucking up all the air in the room. The IQ level of the GOP debate increased exponentially the day Donald Trump surrendered to Megyn Kelly.
And thank God for that.
Sure, Ted Cruz miscalculated and tried to get cute by being what he thought was funny at the beginning, and clearly made an error in complaining about the type of questions being asked of the participants later on (don't give up your day job and try to be a comedian, Ted), but otherwise it was pretty darned good television if you wanted to learn something about the candidates and their positions.
Now I'm sure there are many Trump supporters who think (if they think at all) that their guy won the debate last night by not even showing up, and it's likely that many of their minds will not be changed in the few days before the Iowa caucuses ( we can but hope . . . ), however, the last thing Trump needed was a nationally televised platform showing people what civil and intelligent discourse is all about.
I've always liked the focus groups segments Fox News does with Frank Luntz following debates. Not only do they show the high and low points of certain candidate's responses via their dial-a-meter graphs, but they pick a diverse group of people with differing views to watch and rate the debates. It is always interesting to see the changes in support based upon a particular candidate's performance each night, and last night was no exception. And there is no denying that there was a clear winner last night based on that focus group:
I've written before that Trump will have a certain high water mark once voting begins; that being in the high 20's to low 30's percent, and I still think that's the likely number he'll reach on average, and that it will be interesting how the votes shake out once some of the second tier candidates begin dropping out, but except for Cruz's supporters, I believe that support will go to anyone but Trump, and it's beginning to look as if that someone will be Marco Rubio. He was already climbing the polls into a solid third place, and that trend will likely increase following last night's debate. Rubio stayed on point, answered a difficult and tough question on his immigration stance, and focused on the real enemy - Hillary Clinton.
What else did we learn last night?
Rand Paul was lucky to be on that stage due to Trump's hissy-fit, but the GOP will never embrace his more libertarian viewpoints because the GOP doesn't really believe in individual freedom any more than the Democrats do.
Jeb Bush has a chance to continue his campaign past New Hampshire, but a dismal showing in Iowa could negate some possible life in the Granite State.
Dr. Ben Carson is a good an decent man, but he really has no business being on that stage. He looks like he's just going through the motions right now.
Chris Christie always has a couple of good lines in every debate, but can't string enough of them together into a winning performance overall.
Was John Kasich even there?
Finally, despite Donald Trump's belief, Megyn Kelly showed why she's earned a spot on that panel of moderators. She was prepared with past clips of candidates saying one thing in the past, and espousing differing views today, and asking them how they can square the two viewpoints. She was once again tough, but fair - just as she was in the previous Fox News debate. One can only wonder what she had in store for the Donald had he chosen not to surrender to her this time around; after all, it's not as if he hasn't flip-flopped on policy positions himself.
So welcome back, civility!
You've been sorely missed this campaign season.
Otherwise this clown:
. . . would not be so high up in the polls.
And this clown:
. . . would never have been elected in the first place.
Vote with your heads, America. Your heart hasn't served you very well these past 8 years.
At Thursday night's GOP debate, Ted Cruz once again reiterated and clarified his position on what he called "New York values" and how Donald Trump once had them. And while I'm by no means a Ted Cruz supporter (frankly, I literally can't stand a single person running for President in either party this year), he brings up a valid point on two fronts.
First, the fact that New York values aren't conservative values, as proven time and time again by who they elect to mayoral, governor and U.S. Senate seats, and that back in 1999, Donald Trump was singing a decidedly different tune on various issues of the day during a Tim Russert interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press' than he is singing now. It should be noted that conservatives during the 2012 Presidential election not only eviscerated Mitt Romney for his alleged "flip-flopping" on issues, but they were more than willing to sit on their hands and stay home during the election, assuring another disastrous term of the worst President in American history, Barack Obama.
Yet these same conservatives are just as willing to jump off a cliff if Donald Trump tells them to.
Did they learn their lesson (I doubt it), or are they just buying into the biggest huckster since P.T. Barnum. You remember Barnum - he of the "There's a sucker born every minute" fame?
But back to the main topic. Cruz was entirely correct when he claimed that you just don't find many conservatives in New York. What Trump did after that was both disgusting in it's pre-arranged response, and disingenuous. By playing the 9/11 card in a political debate, Trump lowered himself to the level of a sleaze master, willing to use the deaths of over 3,000 people to further his ambition. Telling us how great New Yorkers were to come together after the twin towers came down? Really? First of all, THE COUNTRY came together and rebuilt New York - it wasn't just New Yorkers that made that happen. And I would submit that ANY American city attacked as New York was would come together and rebuild itself with American help.
New York ain't that special in that regard.
Ted Cruz missed an opportunity to interrupt Donald J. Bluster during his disgusting response and shut him down. I expected better of someone who has shown as much talent as Cruz has during these debates. Maybe he didn't think Trump wold stoop so low as to use the attacks of 9/11 as a political card to be played, like - well - Democrats usually do.
Shame on him if he did.
And shame on Trump. If he had any, that is.
just as long as it stays in place.
This is a short and sweet post about the illogic and futility that encompasses and consumes our laughable President.
Riddle me this, Batman:
If it is so important to keep Obamacare the law of the land by vetoing a vote to repeal it, why is Obama still refusing to implement the largest and potentially most detrimental portion of the law, that being the (illegally, in my view) delayed employer mandate?
Why are you so afraid to implement your own law, Mr. President?
"WASHINGTON, Jan. 1 (UPI) -- President Barack Obama will meet with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Monday to finalize executive actions on gun control to be released in the coming weeks, including a measure that expands background checks on gun sales.
Numerous news outlets are reporting the expanded background checks may involve requiring licensing for a broader range of small-scale gun sellers, narrowing weapons availability through the so-called gun show loophole. The president is expected to use his executive authority on several other areas, but the actions are not yet complete.
The measures could happen as soon as next week, when he returns from vacation in Hawaii, or ahead of his annual State of the Union address on January 12."
The "Let's DO SOMETHING!" mentality of any politician, but inbred in our current President.
Let's look at the statistics regarding gun deaths provided by Obama's own Centers for Disease Control (CDC), shall. we?
There are approximately 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States. Taken by itself, that might be a national tragedy, even though we're only taking about 1% of the population. But breaking them down further we see that 19,200 are suicides, comprising 60% of all gun deaths. Again, a tragedy, but also an individual choice. Looking further, 10,560 are due to homicides, however 80% of those homicides are gang-related. Take out accidental deaths at 960, and justifiable homicides at 1,280, and you're down to approximately 2,100 deaths by gun violence where some kind of gun law could be applied that might lower the number.
Doing the math, unless you're planning suicide or hanging out with a gang, the odds are shockingly small that you will be killed in some random act of gun violence - on the order of 0.0000067741.
But don't worry; Obama's gonna fix it. Yet even after all this upcoming wasted effort to DO SOMETHING, most of his efforts will likely be challenged in court, and most will likely be overturned, because one thing we've learned during the last 7 years of his presidency, this so-called "constitutional scholar" is stunningly ignorant of constitutional principles.
Which is probably why we've never seen his college transcripts. And likely never will.
But Obama will focus on the METHOD of violence, not the actual people responsible for the violence. Why bother putting together better laws against gang-related violence (or just enforcing the existing ones on the books), when that might target a potential voting bloc (not saying gang members vote, but their families do). Don't bother putting some money towards researching ways to prevent suicide, especially by those of our military, because you'd rather waste money fighting a climate change problem that doesn't actually exist as far as you can affect what is happening, right? Let's focus the entire effort on the United States Federal Government on keeping 2,100 people alive.
Don't worry - Obama's gonna DO SOMETHING.
And fix nothing.
Hi! I'm Dave Richard, your host. I hope you enjoy your visit. We'll be talking about current events, politics, the occasional sports (I'm a HUGE New England Patriots fan, so get over it), and some "Get off my lawn!" issues.