The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[Route 45]

Who wins this debate?

Cruz won the debate. He literally ate a booger while debating, and didn't miss a beat. I'm not a Cruz fan, but that is impressive.

[video=youtube;S4BNtP7tN8I]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4BNtP7tN8I&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Fact checking last night's debate

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Huh..

Super-PAC forms to 'Draft Ryan' for the White House | TheHill

 

[jamil]

Huh..

Super-PAC forms to 'Draft Ryan' for the White House | TheHill

The establishment is so out of touch. They haven't yet discovered reality.

 

[Super Bee]

I found this comment from the debate last evening disturbing. He said it twice, so there is no mistaking what he said.


" Mr Trump has suggested that he’d order the U.S. military to kill families of Muslim terrorists and institute interrogation techniques worse than waterboarding, itself widely condemned as torture. Torture and retaliatory executions are both war crimes under international law".

“They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he said. “If I say do it, they’re going to do it.”

Donald Trump says he'd force U.S. military to commit war crimes - Washington Times

 

[T.Lex]

He has never commanded military people before, or ever been involved in sending them into action. He has no clue what that is like. At least Congress votes in military deployments (War Powers Act, constitutionality notwithstanding). He's never even had that kind of indirect role.

 

[Landon]

He has never commanded military people before, or ever been involved in sending them into action. He has no clue what that is like. At least Congress votes in military deployments (War Powers Act, constitutionality notwithstanding). He's never even had that kind of indirect role.

Which candidate has?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Which candidate has?

Eh, I'd rather a politician that has a bit of history and knowledge about the process of military action and it's repercussions to make those calls than... say... a CEO of Walmart.

Ideally, though, those calls are made with much discussion and guidance from seasoned generals.

 

[T.Lex]

Which candidate has?

As members of Congress, HRC, Sanders, Cruz and Rubio, I believe, have all been involved in votes to support (or not) the executive's deployment of forces. While indirect, it is more than Trump.

As a governor, Kasich has commanded the National Guard and been involved in their deployments. I'm pretty sure Kent State was before his time but again, that's more than Trump.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

AoSHQ grades the debate:

Ace of Spades HQ

Cruz (A-): "Generally stayed out of the Rubio-Trump tangles, which is tactically smart, but gets few points for courage. Had good understated line, though: "Donald has a tenuous relationship with the truth.""

Rubio (B): "Had the flu and it showed, but hard to deduct points for that. Continued attacking Donald Trump, which was the right thing to do, but will probably wind up benefiting Ted Cruz or even (my God) John Kasich more."

Kasich (D-): "Debate moderators allowed him to glide out of his previous answer on coercing bakers to bake gay wedding cakes -- he was an enthusiastic supporter of forcing them to doing so -- by simply saying one shouldn't force them to do so, but should seek another baker."

Trump (Red X carved crudely through the face of a rotting pig with a bunch of stripper-glitter tossed on it.): "Kept talking about his hand-size and then, just when you thought this was getting weird, brought it back into a more sensible area by assuring the world that his penis size was sufficient for most."

 

[Landon]

As members of Congress, HRC, Sanders, Cruz and Rubio, I believe, have all been involved in votes to support (or not) the executive's deployment of forces. While indirect, it is more than Trump.

Do you think that truly gives them anymore experience in making military decisions than Trump? Or is the vote merely a formality and they are voting based on the guidance of top military personnel?


I don't believe any President is going to pull a decision out of a hat and command the military to do it. Yes, I believe there will be times when the President gives the final ok, but it will be after much guidance from top ranking military personnel.

 

[T.Lex]

Do you think that truly gives them anymore experience in making military decisions than Trump?

Yes. How can it not be considered more experience? A little is more than none. It isn't much more, but it is more.

Or is the vote merely a formality and they are voting based on the guidance of top military personnel?

For legislators I know, it is a personal decision made with many factors in mind. That kind of thing - particularly at the federal level - is never a formality.

But, that is just my informed experience.

I don't believe any President is going to pull a decision out of a hat and command the military to do it. Yes, I believe there will be times when the President gives the final ok, but it will be after much guidance from top ranking military personnel.

That depends greatly on the kind of person we elect to make those decisions. Look, being elected president doesn't magically convey insight or experience for the job. Heck, having insight and experience doesn't even fully prepare someone for the job.

Being commander in chief is not simple. It is not easy. At least, it isn't if you are doing it right.

 

[Landon]

I don't have cable so I didn't watch the debate. After reading several reviews of the debate, I have to ask at this point (11 debate) what the point is of continuing future debates. We all know where the candidates say they stand. What more is there to debate? Maybe that's why the last two have turned into more of a bashfest of each other than an actual debate. I did find it ironic that Cruz and Rubio both said they would support Trump after spending the last two hours saying he is not qualified and would ruin America.

 

[T.Lex]

I generally agree - too many debates. But, I also can't figure out which ones to get rid of. The early ones were necessary to weed out candidates that REALLY didn't have a chance. One or 2 less of the 5+ candidate ones would've been good. Once it got down to 5, there've probably been the right number.

But, part of the issue is that I don't feel like Trump was properly pressed early on. He was given too much latitude - by the media and other candidates - to get by without really answering questions.

Plus, there's the issue of ratings. The networks are loving the debates this cycle because they are bringing eyeballs.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Byron York: Confusion follows Trump flip-flop on key immigration issue | Washington Examiner

 

[Landon]

I know the early debates were bringing in record viewers. Are they still doing that or has viewership dropped off?

 

[pudly]

TV Ratings: Fox News' GOP Debate Surges to 2016 High - Hollywood Reporter

 

[JettaKnight]

“They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he said. “If I say do it, they’re going to do it.”

I heard that on Morning Edition - didn't know if I should laugh or cry. Instead I was amazed at the ego and gall of this guy.


But hey, INGO has told me he can't be dictatorial.

 

[JettaKnight]

TV Ratings: Fox News' GOP Debate Surges to 2016 High - Hollywood Reporter

Well Trumpers, how's it feel to love the same guy as the MSM?

 

[T.Lex]

Well Trumpers, how's it feel to love the same guy as the MSM?

You don't get it. He's middle fingering them (with short stubby fingers) and they love him for it. He's brilliant. And approachable. And has all the solutions, from the first to the final.