Donald Trump Unhinged

Has Donald Trump come completely unglued? He's calling for a total ban on Muslims entering the U.S. He wants the ban to last:

until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on” after the terrorist attacks in San Bernardino, California

He's so ignorant. But maybe he just shot himself in the foot. Having already alienated Black, Latino and female voters, he's just added Muslim voters to the list of votes he'll never get in a general election, should Republicans be foolish enough to nominate him.

While there may not be enough Muslim voters in New York and California to make a difference, according to a report on the 2012 election, there are enough of them in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia, Florida and Ohio to have an impact.

< San Bernadino: No Links to Non-U.S. Terror Groups | McCain and Graham Call for 10k U.S. Troops in Raqqa >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    You know it's Crazy Time... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by desertswine on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 12:49:39 AM EST
    When an arse like Dick "Dick" Cheney shows more humanity than, well, nearly anyone, including Gaulieter Trumpf.

    Former Vice President Dick Cheney (R) on Monday denounced real estate mogul Donald Trump's plan to restrict all Muslims from immigrating to the U.S., pointing out that the U.S. has always welcomed people of all religions.

    "I think this whole notion that somehow we can just say no more Muslims, just ban a whole religion, goes against everything we stand for and believe in," he told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. "I mean, religious freedom has been a very important part of our history and where we came from. A lot of people, my ancestors got here, because they were Puritans."

    I wonder if Cheney would have (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:05:55 AM EST
    objected to this statement if Jeb Bush had made it. I don't recall him denouncing Jeb's statement on only allowing Christain refugees into the country.

    IMO Cheney comdemnation is just another attempted to replace Trump with an establishment candidate.


    I think the bit (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:27:11 AM EST
    That's really sticking in their craw is the part about American citizens who are Muslim who are traveling abroad would not be allowed back in the country.

    Yes, he said that.  And then when pressed his campaign doubled down


    UPDATE (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:42:25 AM EST
    He is now saying NOT citizens only those living here who might be out of the country.

    Sensing a bit of a backlash I expect.


    Interesting question (none / 0) (#27)
    by NYShooter on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 04:54:07 PM EST
    heard some economists discussing what kind of economic damage might be the result if 1.5 Billion, or some large percentage of Muslims boycott, or, substantially cut back buying American products?

    Naturally, nothing can be 100%, but it won't help.


    Follow up.... (none / 0) (#77)
    by NYShooter on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 09:21:09 PM EST
    News last night showed luxury shops in Qatar clearing off their shelves of Donald's, overpriced crap. Voiceover claimed its happening throughout M.E.

    Asked if the storm might blow over, you know, political yakkety-yak, and all? Spokesman said that the people of the M.E. would never forgive, nor, forget.


    Yeah, (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:20:56 AM EST
    I agree. In a lot of ways I don't understand what their problem with Donald is. Exactly how are the others that much different from Donald? Frankly I don't see a whole of difference at all.

    And like Donald says Cheney was actually encouraging torture of people based on their religious beliefs/skin color. I have to say actually what Donald is proposing is kind of benign compared to what Cheney has actually promoted.


    Cheney, W, and the Saudis (none / 0) (#25)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 04:30:49 PM EST
    The oil/oil pipeline boys. Perhaps, Cheney came to "respect" the diversity of the $$$$$ coming from that part of the Mideast.

    ... for years, pandering to its worst fears and instincts about The Other. Now that the monster they helped to create has turned on them, they suddenly remember American values.

    Where was that a$$hole's reaffirmation of American values during the Abu Ghraib scandal, or when CIA NOC Valerie Plame was hung out to dry in a crude and calculate act of political vengeance against her husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson?

    Phuque Dick Cheney and the GOP.


    Where were Cheney's earlier values? (none / 0) (#24)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 04:26:26 PM EST
    Well ... maybe with oil pipeline companies in which, I recall, he had an interest and Blackwater and the corresponding oil politics as well.  So ... today, maybe those loyalties and relationships remain for Dick.  (Somehow I doubt that his new-found focus on rights and diversity evidence a political conversion.)

    Another attempt to clear the (none / 0) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:21:53 AM EST
    the field for an establishment candidate:

    "Donald Trump today took xenophobia and religious bigotry to a new level," Graham said. "It is time for Ted Cruz to quit hiding in the weeds and speak out against Donald Trump's xenophobia and racial bigotry."

    Graham (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:24:46 AM EST
    is the canary in the coal mine. So yeah, that statement is made to put pressure on Cruz. Another trial balloon out of the mouth of Graham.

    Since I can't say anything non-sarcastic, (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:32:15 AM EST
    I'll post this link to statistics about religion in America.  Check out your state and county, or zip code.  Reports go back to 1980.  Reports include change over decades.

    (Now, if the Donald had advocated eliminating all religions...)

    For My Zip (none / 0) (#14)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 10:12:18 AM EST
    ~7% Muslim, which seems about right.

    Although it used to be rare, now it's not uncommon to see women wearing some sort of headdress, although there seems to be many varieties and I don't believe it's specifically muslims women wearing them.


    Here (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 10:19:16 AM EST
    No Muslims.  Surprise!
    The real surprise for me was while there are far more evangelical Protestants than any thing else there is more than twice that number of "none or unspecified"

    That surprises and pleases me.


    Here also....the number of 'none specified' (none / 0) (#16)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 01:24:21 PM EST
    is more than twice the amount of all the others put together. Matches my experience...I know few churchgoers, even in my relatively conservative workplace.

    Not me (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 02:15:51 PM EST
    I wish.  I will try harder to meet some of these people.

    It might entail a move out of state.. (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 02:45:54 PM EST
    Not according to that site (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:20:51 PM EST
    That is in my zip code

    I think that a lot of older people (none / 0) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:20:28 PM EST
    might not specify what religion they were under the premise of it not being anyone's business. I encountered that attitude among many people particurly from the. Silent Generation when I was canvassing for the Dems a few years back.

    That makes sense to me (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:21:44 PM EST
    Lots of old people but LOTS of religion.

    Again and again, (none / 0) (#34)
    by NYShooter on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:42:41 PM EST
    See the pattern forming. Big, sweeping, grandiose
    pronouncement, not a clue how it will, or, even, can be done.

    "I know how to build walls AND make Mexico pay for it," to "Negotiate? I beat the Chinese every day," "Terrorists? I'll bomb the sh!t out of the terrorists."

    You've got to hand it to him. We've always talked here about the attention span of your typical, Republican, low-brow, bumper sticker voter.

    Donald just took that idea, and, boy, did he ever run with it.


    Just heard Jeb! say that (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:24:47 PM EST
    Donalds Muslim ban was "a dog whistle"


    Goes to show you how out of touch the guy is he's been using dog whistles for decades and doesn't even know what the f$&k it means.

    Dog whistle.  Jeezus.

    You (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:30:19 PM EST
    mean Jeb "anchor baby" Bush? Besides, I would categorize Trump's blast more in the foghorn category.

    Or a dog whistle for really deaf dogs (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:16:15 PM EST
    My old guy barely hears anything anymore. And the GOP base is aging.

    Well (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:33:31 PM EST

    Howard Dean on MSNBC just gave an (none / 0) (#38)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:19:06 PM EST
    excellent synopsis of the dog whistle politics going back to Reagan.

    He also said something I said recently (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:47:12 PM EST
    About exhuming the corpse of Nixons Southern Strategy.

    hey...are you really CaptHoward? (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:17:01 PM EST
    that would be awesome.

    It really was nice to hear someone lay it all out not he TV. We've talked about it forever and seen it in print, but few ever say it. Or maybe they do and I just don't watch political news shows that much anymore. But it is almost the election year and I feel I must get into it.


    There's a reason (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:21:03 PM EST
    Howard was the first politician I ever gave money to

    In Reality... (none / 0) (#58)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 09:16:45 AM EST
    ...it's refreshing to see Trump not using dog whistles and just letting it all hang out so everyone can 'hear' what the GOP has been whistling for years.

    His support is large and loud enough that no one can claim that this isn't what a large faction of the GOP stands for.  Even the politicians, while condoning his behavior, will support a racist if that is what it comes down to, including Jeb.

    For the record, not one of our resident GOPers has condoned anything Trump has said, the silent majority indeed.


    Yes and (3.00 / 3) (#1)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 12:09:16 AM EST
    I think there might be one or two Latino Muslims or Latina Muslims--though the idea seems unlikely.  Perhaps they are murderers and rapists and terrorists  all in one!

    But, realistically . . . worldwide, about 1/3 of Muslims are considered radical and about 2/3 are considered "moderate."  Radical means or meant by those doing the polling that they approved completely or somewhat of the 9/11 attacks and other similar attacks.

    A "moderate" Muslim is one that does not justify the 9/11 attacks, but statistically a so-called moderate-Muslim believes in honor killings, imposing Sharia law and punishing or killing those who insult Mohammed or Islam.  Statistically speaking, to be a moderate Muslim is not compatible with American values.  Note that the polling organizations such as Gallup and Pew use one definition for a moderate Muslim that Ben Shapiro believes means that they should be considered radical anyway.

     There is no reason that we should be taking most any of them into the country.  I suppose that someone could create some strange exceptional reason for a handful of them . . .


    Abdullah al-Muhajir (none / 0) (#68)
    by ragebot on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:30:51 PM EST
    may be a Latino Muslim since his former name was Jose Padilla.

    The wikipedia (none / 0) (#69)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 06:00:44 AM EST
    article on Padilla, including the 1984ish photo of Padilla's sensory-deprivation dental trip, is here.

    Padilla is currently stored at America's Homeland Hell, ADX - Florence.


    Oh, this (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 06:49:25 AM EST
    has moved way past The Donald into the entire GOP. Tell me the difference between The Donald and Ted Cruz or Ben Carson? I guess the only difference is that The Donald does not gay bash.

    Didn't see this thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:53:56 AM EST
    Posted a long comment about this in the open.

    Short version, it won't stop him from winning the nomination but it will split the party.

    "Troll in Chief" (none / 0) (#13)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:37:15 AM EST
    uh, yeah...

    Ha! Florida mayor bans Trump from city (none / 0) (#17)
    by shoephone on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 01:29:50 PM EST
    on Twitter using Trump's own nonsense words against him. Pretty funny. Also a very creepy/funny picture of Trump as you scan down the tweets.

    Trump can (none / 0) (#20)
    by KeysDan on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 02:49:56 PM EST
    begin to vet candidates for running mate.  His ban on Muslims should clinch the deal.  Of course, there is the reaction of some Republicans ranging from sternly worded statements to tsk tsking at various levels. Followed up by a statement to support the Republican nominee, even if Trump since he is better than Mrs. Clinton or Senator Sanders.

     But, actually, Trump's Muslim statement is not that far away from previous outrageous pronouncements. And, it is one that will be seen by his followers as addressing the San Bernardino terrorist attack. Mass terror attacks that are not by Muslims don't count, or, certainly, not so much to worry about because the second amendment is more important than the fifth commandment.

      And, like the initial horror expressed by the rounding up and deporting millions of undocumented immigrants and their families, building a wall with a beautiful door for possible re-entry for the good ones, the Muslim ban will soon be seen as "terrific." by all Republicans.  Or, not so bad as not to vote for him.

    Don't know about Cruz for the VP slot. Trump is not one to share the spotlight, or have to have a taster.  Probably not a woman--an all male ticket.  

    A woman, interesting theory (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 02:56:58 PM EST
    and probably right on the money.

    Carley's already been petting the Planned Parenthood-shooter crowd, almost as if she were looking ahead to that scenario..


    He'll be his own VP (none / 0) (#22)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 03:57:47 PM EST
    Trump-Trump. Let Ryan as Speaker be next in line in case of his demise.

    It is not the craziest scenario.


    Or maybe that will be his sop to the (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 03:58:25 PM EST
    party establishment at the convention. Let them choose the VP.

    If Trump, then (none / 0) (#26)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 04:41:12 PM EST
    what about New Mexico's Governor Susanne Martinez or South Carolina's Governor Nikki Haley?  They could provide the political sub for onetime Apprentice favorite--and current Trump candidacy supporter--Omarosso (sp?)

    I was also (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 05:46:57 PM EST
    thinking of Haley, she comes off as human at least.
    I don't know much about Martinez.

    The problem being taking the VP slot might be political suicide. Anybody with future political ambitions might be adverse to take the chance on be part of a potential debacle.


    Nikki Haley (none / 0) (#52)
    by jbindc on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:22:14 AM EST
    Has blasted Trump's latest comments about banning Muslims from traveling here.  Martinez slammed him a while ago for his comments about Mexicans.

    It depends n hiw it goes (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 06:56:35 PM EST
    Trump/Cruz could make a lot of sense.  If in the end they are one and two you got Reagan/Bush.  Uniting the party and all that plus Curz shores up his right flank.  Remember the deeply religious might be put off by his past and his remarks on religion.
    And Cruz seems perfect.  He is probably the only one who could be counted on the parrot whatever he says no matter how crazy.
    Notice he was the only he who didn't really criticize the Muslim ban.  His remarks about it were very careful.  "I disagree,  Donald Trumo is great but my policy would be a bit ... Blah blah"
    Not one word of criticism.  Even going out of his way to talk about how he refuses to criticize him.

    I'm thinkin Trump/Cruz might be a real possibility.


    Cruz (none / 0) (#40)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:48:57 PM EST
    make sense, he has nothing to lose regarding the Republican establishment.

    I am getting more and more certain that if Trump wins the nomination we will see a self financed third party candidate. I know for a fact that someone is seriously considering it. I hope he does, more business for us.

    IMO a Trump nomination would split the party, with most of the big money boys and probably and in the end most of the Republican establishment abandoning him and coalescing around a more moderate candidate, not in the hope of defeating Hillary but rather trying to salvage  hope for the future. I mean the Koch brothers got to spend their money somewhere and they don't have too many cycles left to play kingmaker, damn you Scott Walker.

    Just idle speculation of course



    You know (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 07:53:22 PM EST
    A couple f days ago I would have said that but what I've been hearing since the Muslim ban thing is oh my goodness isn't that terrible,  but I will support the republican nominee.

    I have no doubt that many republicans will vote for Hillary if Trump is the nominee but I suspect much of the fainting couch stuff is self serving BS.


    I honestly (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:14:09 PM EST
    don't think there's going to be a party split. More than likely if Trump is the nominee they let him run but sit on their hands and let him lose big. Then they can go back to the tea party nuts and say look Trump ran. He ran on your beloved issues and he lost big. Sorry kids now the grown ups are going to start running things. Of course that doesn't bode well for 2020 either since I imagine the tea nuts are not going to be happy enough to show up.

    Long term though they can probably come back from that. I'm not sure a party split does much because if they run a moderate and lose what exactly is that going to prove to the tea nuts? Nothing.


    Probably they will take a look (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:19:58 PM EST
    at how the Dem nominee is doing at the time. If she(!) is showing strong support and they are looking like they will lose anyway, they may do just as you say. Let the tea fever run its course.

    It seems (none / 0) (#50)
    by FlJoe on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 06:11:53 AM EST
    that some kind of schism is inevitable, If the money men and the power brokers "sit on their hands" and allow Trump to flame out, the base will not ascribe the loss to Donald and his issues but rather blame the lack of support on the Republican party itself. Conservatism of any flavor, but most especially the rabid types, can never fail, it can only be failed.

    I just do not think that the Republican's unholy alliance can hold together for much longer. Will the tea party/nativist nuts abandon the party or will the 1% and other "Third way" dreamers' punt on the party?

    Right now the monster that the Republican party has created is in control, and the recent past has shown that losing Presidential races has only made them stronger, they will not go quietly into exile.


    The truth (none / 0) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:41:14 AM EST
    is the GOP coalition has been cracking since the end of the Cold War. The Cold War was their one unifying theme. When that ended people started looking around and saying I don't like these religious nuts.

    Well, the excuses for Romney and McCain was they were moderates. I guess they could find something else to blame on a Trump loss.

    Right now it looks like the moderates are going to bolt the party if the tea party gets their way.


    Actually (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 08:00:50 AM EST
    Right now it looks like the moderates are going to bolt the party if the tea party gets their way.

    If that just results in two increasingly polarized parties that might be the worst out come.  Truth is the wing nuts are doing very well at the state and local level since liberals tend to be concentrated in a few areas and the rest of the country is red.   They have the house so they can stop pretty much anything good from happening nationally.

    A split forming a truly centrist/right of center party would be the best thing that could happen at this point.  For the future of the country.


    Well (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 08:19:27 AM EST
    mostly I was talking about on the presidential level and those moderates are already openly declaring that they will vote for Hillary.

    Yeah, they've gerrymandered themselves into control but if you take the gerrymandering away from them what happens is the question?


    via Digby (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:37:10 PM EST
    Jay Rosen takes it to the press re their role in creating the monster. Very well said.

    Every time you had to "leave it there" after ideologies clashed mindlessly, fruitlessly. Every dubious truth claim you had to let pass because challenging it might interrupt the flow or make you sound too partisan. Every time you defaulted to "will it work?" when the bigger question was "is it so?" Every dutiful effort you made to "get the other side" without asking if the number of sides was really two. Every time you asked each other "what's the politics of this?" so you could escape the tedium and complexity of public problem-solving.

    Interesting conversation about Trump on Lawerence (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:25:35 PM EST
    With Rachel.  I was very skeptical at first but the more I listened and thought about it..

    Short version-
    What he is up to is
    He knows he would lose a general election.
    He has to find a "reason" for that
    He never really wanted to be president probably
    He's trying to get the republicans to run him out of the party so he can run as an independent
    That does two things
    It gives him a good reason for losing AND lets him screw the party by making them lose.


    I recommend watching it when it's up later tonight.

    Admittedly, I've been a proponent (none / 0) (#48)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 10:19:07 PM EST
    of that approach.  What Trump wants eventually--who knows? In this case, it may not be the motive that is as relevant as the goal, the projected result.  IF the goal has been and is a gain of something apart from the Presidency (e.g., PR to be cashed in at a later date for a new financed show or whatever), then the way to maneuver away from the two-party dynamic is to set up a reason to move into a landscape that would be more preferable.  

    Maybe--for Trump--a third-party strategy brings more guaranteed publicity, attention without the threat of big loss on the presidential stage ...because, arguably, he would have a freer hand as an Independent ... and, because he would be credited with success for every vote above the recent measurement set by Ross Perot.


    I (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by FlJoe on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 04:52:41 PM EST
    am coming to think that Trump himself does not know what he wants. As far as I can tell he has been winging it for the entire campaign, and it works!

    Right now he has no end game in mind, he is like a gambler on a hot streak just thinking about the next roll of the dice and he is still playing with house money.

    If the Republicans manage to oust him he might just declare himself the winner and claim he was cheated out of it, He will probably sue them if he can.

    When it comes to a third party he might be reluctant to pony up the needed stakes out of his own pocket to seriously stay in the game.


    In (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 06:04:18 PM EST
    the end it might not matter whether Trump is the nominee or if he runs independent. He has done large damage to the GOP. It's not like congress has done anything to help with their hysteria but everybody now knows what the GOP is about. I mean you would have to be living in cave to miss it.

    In what manner is the Republican Party (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 12:17:21 AM EST
    keeping Trump's hand from being "free"?

    They wish (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:05:09 AM EST
    Why (none / 0) (#59)
    by NYShooter on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 01:49:14 PM EST
    do you always beat me to the punch?

    So, to make a long story short (none / 0) (#60)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 01:58:09 PM EST
    he wants to screw the party?

    Or did I miss something?

    It almost sounds like the pundits can't wrap their minds around the possibility that a republican frontrunner could be cracked, so they have to explain it all by attributing some fiendishly devious motive to him.


    I don't know about those other things, but, (none / 0) (#61)
    by NYShooter on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 02:29:56 PM EST
    I would question the meme, " He never really wanted to be president........"

    During the Watergate era, towards the end, when there was much speculation as to whether Nixon would resign, or, possibly, try something crazy, a group of psychiatrists/psychologists were discussing it on TV.

    The take-a-way I got was that power for very ambitious men is a, virtually, uncontrollable aphrodisiac.....way more than sex, money, etc.

    For Trump, his "power" is publicity, recognition, the #1 topic on every pair of lips in the world. And, I can't think of any situation that would quench his thirst for these things more than the Presidency.


    Trump seems to me to have such an (none / 0) (#62)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 02:46:44 PM EST
    inflated sense of himself that, were he to be elected president, it wouldn't be long before that wasn't enough for him - I mean, even third-rate, loser countries have presidents, right?  So, he'd pretty soon want to be the Supreme Leader, I think.

    Surely, I must not be serious...well, I don't know how anyone who spends a little time listening to Trump can come away thinking his ego has any boundaries.

    If the media and the GOP really want to stop Trump, they can just stop giving him any coverage.  No more call-ins to TV shows, no more covering his appearances and rallies, nothing.  Let him have to dig into his own resources instead of mooching off all the free air time - time he keeps generating by coming up with more and more crazy, fascist ideas.  

    We'll see how long this little ego adventure lasts when Donald's fronting the costs.


    IN Britain (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 06:34:31 PM EST
    They a debating in parliament banning Trump from the country.

    How cool is that?


    Same With Israel... (none / 0) (#70)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 12:49:28 PM EST
    ...and muslims have put Trump on warning if he visits the Temple Mount, which he had planned to do, that the violence will be on him.

    The Trump Tower developer is "strongly considering" a trip to the revered Temple Mount, a longtime area of contention between the Arab world and Israel, according to a Wednesday report in The Jerusalem Times.

    "If Trump the racist plans to visit ... the holiest place in the world for Muslims, to harm the sensitivities of the people who he incites, he and (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu will be responsible," said Knesset Member Tabel Abu Arrar.

    He cancelled the trip, and tweeted:

    "I have decided to postpone my trip to Israel and to schedule my meeting with @Netanyahu at a later date after I become President of the U.S.,"

    What a jack@ss.

    Netanyahu has also condemned Trump's statements.

    Trump, bringing jews and muslims together in their condemnation of Trump.  But you have to love a presidential candidate getting black listed form entering the countries of our allies.


    Why in the hell would Netanyahu (none / 0) (#71)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:41:28 PM EST
    be meeting with him in the first place?

    Explain that one to me.


    Why Did He... (none / 0) (#72)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:50:53 PM EST
    ...appear in front of Congress, why do we give them aid and military equipment.

    Because Republicans heart any one that wants war in the Middle East.


    One of the old definitions of chutzpah (none / 0) (#75)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 02:06:00 PM EST
    is the man who kills both parents and then pleads for mercy on the grounds that he's an orphan..

    Trump and Bibi both have it in spades.


    He's not (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 01:58:03 PM EST

    I imagine Trump would answer that this way: (none / 0) (#74)
    by Anne on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 02:04:19 PM EST
    "Look, everyone knows that I'm a great businessman, I know how to get things done.  I can talk to anybody, Bibi, he's great, I like him a lot, and believe me, he respects my skills, I know how to negotiate, he likes that, we're alike that way.

    I have to start meeting with these people, we can't go another year diddling around with this administration, people need to be ready to act when I take the oath.  I'll be ready, Bibi will be ready.  We're going to solve this like no one has ever been able to - that's why he wants to talk to me, I'm Trump, I have all these great businesses, and I act, I don't just wimp out.

    And listen, I know people in that part of the world, I can talk to them.  It's not a problem what I've said about the Muslims - look I know a lot of good Muslims and believe me, they know there's a problem and they know I can fix it."

    Can you even imagine a day of listening to that, much less listening to it day after day, year after year?  My ears hurt just hearing his braggadocious voice and I'm dizzy from imagining all the hand and arm motions.



    Your Forgot... (none / 0) (#76)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Dec 10, 2015 at 02:40:08 PM EST
    ...his bit about friends, no matter the situation he always has lots of friends that in some way back his point.

    With someone like Trump, it'll (none / 0) (#63)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 03:06:41 PM EST
    last as long as he can still fill a hall full of a few thousand people shouting his name and gazing up at him starry-eyed.

    Kissinger was talking as much about himself (none / 0) (#64)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 03:17:05 PM EST
    when he said that about "the greatest aphrodesiac" as he was about people he knew..

    Me, I just wanna have a thorough-going, definitive evacuation in the morning. That and a pair of loose shoes.


    The Detroit Free Press (none / 0) (#53)
    by jbindc on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:28:47 AM EST
    Posts a front page editorial, like the New York Times did a few days ago, calling out Trump for his bigoted and ignorant comments.

    Trump's goal is political, and craven -- near-universal outcry from across the political spectrum reinforces his identity as an outsider, and every criticism proves to supporters that Trump is a man who'll say what others fear to speak.

    And so we were reluctant to lend this institution's voice to a denunciation that might further Trump's cause.

    But some slurs are so heinous that they must be answered. And some lies are so vile that they become dangerous if not met with truth, and strength.

    Trump's indictment of Muslims en masse is nothing more than rank bigotry and racism, a reach back to the darkest chapters of America's history and a betrayal of the founding principles of our nation.


    Contrast Trump's statements to President Barack Obama's Sunday night address from the Oval Office:

    "Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our coworkers, our sports heroes -- and, yes, they are our men and women in uniform who are willing to die in defense of our country. We have to remember that."

    And so: We stand with San Bernardino. We stand with Paris. We stand with Beirut. We stand with Syrian refugees, seeking a safer life in our country, still a beacon of democracy and freedom, despite Trump's efforts to the contrary. We stand with the Christians, Muslims, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists and all others who make up our community.

    We stand with America.

    Mr. Trump, with whom do you stand?

    That's (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 09, 2015 at 07:47:01 AM EST
    a good editorial. And since Trump is the front runner he gets the heat. However Bush said we should only let Christian refugees in from Syria advocating for a religious litmus test and Rubio agreed with Trump that all the mosques in the country should be shut down. So while Trump is loudly saying all these things there are others agreeing with what he is saying. The virus has infected the entire GOP.