but the most important takeaway I saw on video this morning is this:
Every single candidate EXCEPT Chris Christie (and Asa Hutchinson -- thanks, Dave.) raised his/her hand when asked by the moderator if Trump were found guilty of the felons he's charged with, would you still support him for POTUS.
And THAT, my friends, is all you need to know about that slate (minus Christie and Hutchinson) of presidential hopefuls:
All of them, save Christie and Hutchinson, would be in favor of having a convicted felon AND a man who was credibly found liable for rape as the leader of their party and representative of the values and aspirations of the Republican Party.
A convicted felon and rapist would, in their opinion, make America great.
Hard pass on that hideously shameful display of sycophantic pandering to the MAGA voters.
The Republican Party does not exist. It's a cult, and its leader is a Liar, a Cheat, a Fraud, a Rapist, and facing 91 felony counts.
What the hell happened to America?
This is hilarious. Charlie Sykes:
"Vivek is a facile, clownish, shallow, shameless, pandering demagogue, but he is exactly what GOP voters crave these days. So, he will likely get a bump in the polls, at least in the short-run.
Last night, Vivek was Trumpier than Trump. He touched all the erogenous zones of the MAGAverse with a fluency and zeal unmatched by anyone on the stage, from his anti-Ukraine memes to his fawning praise of the absent God King."
18 comments:
Never would i have believed the party i once belonged to would fall so far as to support a convicted candidate for president if nominated. Hell, the party i belonged to would have ostracized such a person and probably would have booted their criminal a*s from the party.
America has fallen as DeSantis pointed out. What he failed to say is that his jerk water party is MOST responsible for that decline.
Given the sick unreality that the present Grand Old Poop party is wallowing in anyone supporting their agenda must be a certain shade of deluded themselves.
PS: Chris Christie is the ONLY candidate that a truly objective rational republican should consider voting for.
Unfortunately the GOP is apparently in short supply of characters of that description these days.
I thought that Ron DeSantis snd Nicki Haley both had VERY strong performances, Vivek was fine, and Pence, and Christie were the real long shots and neither helped their chances.In fact they were terrible.
And if you asked all the democrats in congress will they support joey b, 100% of them would say yes even those who don't want him to run because the most important thing to them is they are not Americans they are democrats. I know trump is indicted but being indicted is not the same as being guilty. You seem to forget that everyone is innocent until Proven guilty, even trump.
Nikki was the standout last night and should be the nominee but doubt she will be. Her knowledge of world events and total knowledge put the others to shame. I can't wait to see the democrat debates.
Asa Hutchinson did not raise his hand either.
DeSantis sort of looked around to test the wind, then raised his hand.
How 6 of 8 GOP Presidential candidates could say they would vote for and support a felon convicted of stealing nuclear secrets, lying to law enforcement, cover up of a crime and more is beyond me.
And it should, for a party that has historically says they back the blue and support law and order, be beyond everyone.
But sadly, it's not.
Once again, maybe our conservative trolls can explain why. In some cogent, logical manner.
Speaking of the debate, let's hear what Nikki Haley had to say about the debt, long a concern of conservatives who call Dems and progressives the big spenders. Here's what she had to say, even giving Biden a pass on deficit spending...
"The truth is, Biden did not do this to us, our Republicans did this to us."
She went on explaining how to fix the problem... "They [the Republicans] need to stop the spending, stop the borrowing they need to eliminate the earmarks the Republicans brought back in... and Donald Trump added 8 trillion to our debt... and so at the end of the day, you look at the 2024 budget, Republicans asked for 7.4 billion in earmarks, Democrats asked for 2.8 billion."
Then she asked this question...
"So you tell me who are the big spenders?"
Once again, perhaps our conservatives friends and trolls can answer her questions...
The Toms, FJs, Theresites, Skuds and the usual sock puppet folks.
Was she lying? Wrong on the facts, which are all in the public record? Out of turn for being critical of her own party?
Tell us folks...
Rev, As a suppose christian you should start telling the truth although that does not seem to matter. Trump has not been convicted of those felonies in court just in the minds of democrats and the media. Until he is convicted he is still just accused.
skudrunner: "And if you asked all the democrats in congress will they support joey b, 100% of them would say yes even those who don't want him to run because the most important thing to them is they are not Americans they are democrats. I know trump is indicted but being indicted is not the same as being guilty. You seem to forget that everyone is innocent until Proven guilty, even trump."
First of all, 100% of Democrats DO NOT support Pres. Biden.
Second. Nowhere on my blog have I ever written that Trump is GUILTY of any of the felonies he's been indicted for. I have always written INDICTMENT or INDICTED. You are sorely mistaken in accusing ME of claiming Trump is guilty. So stop claiming that which is not true, please.
According to what I read about the "debate," Haley was not afraid to call out the Republicans on their shortcomings, good for her. But what is indefensible is that Haley put up her hand confirming that she would support Trump EVEN IF HE IS CONVICTED OF HIS 91 FELONIES. What was implied in her raising her hand is that she's also okay with supporting A RAPIST for the presidency -- A RAPIST! Trump was found liable for that crime. He's a rapist, according to the judge who presided over the civil trial. Trump is a rapist.
When she did that, it is reasonable to say she's a coward and a sniveling sycophant to Trump's cultists. I wouldn't trust her judgement as POTUS for one second.
BTW, it's the DEMOCRATIC debates. There's no such thing as the "Democrat" Party.
If you insist on calling it that wrong name, we should all start calling the GOP the Banana Republic Party. It is fitting, isn't it.
Holy Crap! Moderators asked for a show of hands of how many candidates believe in human-caused climate change. Not a single candidate raises their hand!
If you have been found guilty of a crime, you should be disqualified from running for President. Similarly, if you admit that you would support and VOTE for someone convicted of a crime, you should ALSO be disqualified. Your judgment is too poor to lead 335 million.
SKUD: "Rev, As a suppose christian you should start telling the truth although that does not seem to matter. Trump has not been convicted of those felonies in court just in the minds of democrats and the media. Until he is convicted he is still just accused."
Dave did not say Trump was convicted of anything. This is what he wrote:
"How 6 of 8 GOP Presidential candidates could say they would vote for and support a felon convicted of stealing nuclear secrets, lying to law enforcement, cover up of a crime and more is beyond me."
Dave's post was about the Republican candidates who answered the moderator's question: "IF TRUMP WERE CONVICTED of FELONIES WOULD YOU STILL SUPPORT HIM FOR POTUS?" All but Christie and Hutchinson raised their hands in support of that hypothetical. Dave was referring to the hypothetical premise that IF TRUMP WERE FOUND GUILTY...etc.
Skud... once again, you have lied and misrepresented my words.
Why?
You've been caught lying about my words many times before, but this time have gone too far questioning my faith.
The debate question that was posed was If Trump was convicted in a US court of law, and then nominated, would you still vote for him?
So now, tell me where I am talking about a person who has been only indicted? Like those on the stage last night, I was responding to a hypothetical.
You however, as is your style, made stuff up about me and my faith.
Why is that?
Were you wrong, or lying? Because it has to be one or the other.
Now, Skud posted a question regarding Biden and his Dem support. of course Dems, even if Biden is their third, fourth or fifth choice, will support Biden if he is the nominee.
That's politics.
Now, if Biden falls gravely ill or is convicted, or found guilty in an impeachment proceeding, then no, Dems will not continue their support.
And as for Dem debates, there won't be any. Just like in 2020, there were no GOP debates. incumbents rarely debate the far off challengers. It's just not politically savvy.
Shaw... thanks. Skud seems to have reading comprehension problems when he reads my words. Not sure why, but it is what it is.
I've found precision in language is hard for conservatives to understand and grasp.
I'm willing to bet It's not that skud has reading issues Dave. I'm thinking its related to a reified belief that conservative good, democrat bad. Right down the line.
skud also gave you a back handed slap Dave. You should consider it a high compliment coming from skud. He's simply attempting to project his own (mind) issues onto you.
What struck me about the "debate" was how really second rate the candidates responses were and how utterly disappointing the 2 hours were. Christie, Haley, and Hutchinson were, imo, the three that belonged on the stage...
Wish democrats had a better candidate to run. But Biden is still better than what the alternative is. In any case.
Ms. Shaw, I didn't say you but you should read the Rev's post where he said " a felon convicted of stealing nuclear secrets, lying to law enforcement" Just as I didn't say all the democrats in congress support joey b but I did say they would support him. I know some people have a hard time with presenting facts but where did you get there is no such thing as the democrat party. According to Wiki "Democrat Party is an epithet for the Democratic Party of the United States"
You seem to read the Rev's post different because he did say convicted not if he was so it is all semantics or I read what he said and you interpreted what he meant.
Rev, I was raised that Christians and Buddhists are are forgiving faith yet you and the monk call others that disagree with you demeaning things which do not support your religious beliefs. I disagree with you on the joey b statement. If he is the nominee, which he will probably be, 100% of democrats in congress will support hum.
skud: "...a felon convicted of stealing nuclear secrets, lying to law enforcement"
I'll just explain one more time. Dave M. was talking about the hypothetical the GOP debate moderator put to the GOP candidates: If convicted of the felonies he's charged with, would you still support Trump for president. All but 2 raised their hands.
Dave was taking those raised hands to MEAN THAT THEY ADMITTED THAT THEY WOULD THEN BE SUPPORTING "a felon convicted of stealing nuclear secrets, lying to law enforcement..."
If you still don't understand that Dave M. was projecting what those raised hands meant, then there's no point in continuing the discussion.
What do Dave M., and I suppose you mean Les, have to forgive Trump for? Trump has NEVER ADMITTED DOING ANY WRONG! So, if Trump himself denies any wrong-doing, what does ANYONE have to forgive him him for?
“With a few notable exceptions, the Republican Party’s surrender to every diseased, autocratic aspect of Trumpism was on dutiful display during the two-hour “debate” among the grasping roster of also-rans on Wednesday evening. Their faint prospects of becoming the nominee rest – whether they are prepared to admit it or not – with the sometimes-sudden vagaries of time and nature and, ironically, the success of prosecutors whose dogged work they have almost universally and hysterically decried as an affront to fairness and a retributive assault on the Republican Party.”
Post a Comment