Now the rules for those just joining us:
The way this works, I'm going to start with the Candidate I think has the bleakest future and move up. However after each number showing the candidates present prospects, I will also list a second number in () after the name, which is the "number" based on the polls going into the debate. So for example #1 Clinton, (8) would mean the candidate (Clinton in this fictional case) who currently looks the best, came in to the debate with the worst support in the polls.
Also like last time there will be a 3rd number following the second, this is where I placed the candidates standing in my evaluation of the last debate. So using Clinton again #1 Clinton (8/6) would mean I think Clinton did the best, came into the debate in 10th, but I had thought should have been entering at 8th in my previous analysis.
7) Donald Trump. (1/9)
I honestly kinda regret putting Trump on the bottom of my last couple of reviews.....because it means the impact of having him down here is lessened, despite this being by far the worst debate performance Ive seen any candidate have so far. And unlike the last couple times Ive put Trump at the bottom, I have a sense a lot of people will agree with me this time.
First, did you know it took Donald Trump a little over 20 minute to speak this time around?
Thats roughly an entire 5th of the debate in which the Frontrunner for a party apparently had no opinions on any issues.
And then when he did speak, he spoke with a vocabulary that makes Sarah Palin look like a Rhodes Scholar.
For example:
"We are nineteen trillion dollars."
Not sure what we are 19 trillion dollars of? Could it be Trump is literally made of money?
"If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn't have 14 or 15 people dead right now."
Not sure what we are 19 trillion dollars of? Could it be Trump is literally made of money?
"If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn't have 14 or 15 people dead right now."
The words your looking for are "shoot back" or "return fire"......not "bullets go in the different direction"
"We have to protect our 2nd amendment and you cannot do this and certainly what Barack Obama was doing with the executive order."
I'm not even sure what he was TRYING to say with this one. I mean I get it up until the words "do this and" and then its kinda right wing talking point word salad, cause he seems to be saying you cannot protect the second amendment but Obama did?
"And unlike President Obama, where he refuses even to use the term of what's going on, he can't use the term for whatever reason. And if you can't use the term, you're never going to solve the problem"
And WHAT term is that EXACTLY? I have no idea cause apparently you cant even allude to it.....
Or the odd contradictions that ran throughout his answers:
" they killed 15 people in actually 14 -- going to be probably 16"
PICK A FUCKING NUMBER DAMN IT,
PICK A FUCKING NUMBER DAMN IT,
Or
Trump: That's wrong. They were wrong. It's the New York Times, they are always wrong.
[...]
Trump: What I'm saying is this, I'm saying that we do it but if they don't start treating us fairly and stop devaluing and let their currency rise so that our companies can compete and we don't lose all of these millions of jobs that we're losing, I would certainly start taxing goods that come in from China. Who the hell has to lose 505 billion dollars a year?
Cavuto: I'm sorry, you lost me.
[...]
Cavuto: So you're open to a tariff?
Trump: I'm totally open to a tariff. If they don't treat us fairly, hey, their whole trade is tariffed. You can't deal in China without tariffs. They do it to us, we don't it. It's not fair trade."
So yea, as soon as the moderator challenged him, Trump went from "oppose tariff to jibberish to support tariff"
And that wasnt the only time he had some trouble with being challenged
"Trump: And we don't need a weak person being president of the United State, OK? Because that's what we'd get if it were Jeb -- I tell you what, we don't need that.
We don't need that. That's essentially what we have now, and we don't need that. And that's why we're in the trouble that we're in now. And by the way, Jeb you mentioned Boeing, take a look. They order planes, they make Boeing build their plant in China. They don't want them made here. They want those planes made in China.
Bush: They're a mile away from here
Trump: No, the new planes. I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in the future they're building massive plants in China because China does not want Boeing building their planes here, they want them built in China, because China happens to be smart the way they do it, not the way we do it."
See, not the real world, but in the world in Trumps head.....
Finally there was this, which comes mid way though one of the worst evisceration I have ever seen any candidate unleash on another (and I will cover it when we get to Ted Cruz the person who delivered said evisceration)
First the set up, by Ted Cruz:
"You know, back in September, my friend Donald said that he had had his lawyers look at this from every which way, and there was no issue there.There was nothing to this birther issue.
(LAUGHTER)
Now, since September, the Constitution hasn't changed.
(LAUGHTER)
But the poll numbers have.[...]"
Then the denial by Trump (side note check the butchering of the English language)
TRUMP: ... first of all, let me just tell you something -- and you know, because you just saw the numbers yourself -- NBC Wall Street Journal just came out with a poll -- headline: Trump way up, Cruz going down. I mean, so don't -- so you can't -- you can't...
(BOOING)
... they don't like the Wall Street Journal. They don't like NBC, but I like the poll.
(LAUGHTER)
And frankly, it just came out, and in Iowa now, as you know, Ted, in the last three polls, I'm beating you. So -- you know, you shouldn't misrepresent how well you're doing with the polls.
(APPLAUSE)You don't have to say that. In fact, I was all for you until you started doing that, because that's a misrepresentation, number one.
Then the challenge by the moderator:
CAVUTO: Why are you saying this now -- right now? Why are you raising this issue now?
And then the full reversal:
TRUMP: Because now he's going a little bit better. No, I didn't care(inaudible). It's true. No, it's true. Hey look, he never had a chance. Now, he's doing better. He's got probably a four or five percent chance.
Allow me to translate: Trump is basically saying he doesnt care at all about the issue, he's just a political whore who will do whatever he needs to do to win.
And before we move on, one last damning problem for Trump:
BARTIROMO: So you'll put your assets in a blind trust?
TRUMP: I would put it in a blind trust. Well, I don't know if it's a blind trust if Ivanka, Don and Eric run it. If that's a blind trust, I don't know. But I would probably have my children run it with my executives and I wouldn't ever be involved because I wouldn't care about anything but our country, anything.
When your running on your expertise and intelligence as a businessman, your kinda expected to understand these things......
So there was a debate, it was hosted in South Carolina....and surprisingly John Kasich was there. And he named dropped former South Carolina Senator and avowed racist Strom Thurmond....and got a bare smattering of applause, so it basically failed.
He also has no anwser on if hes a Trump like Nazi trying to ban people based on ethnicity or not
"I -- I've been for pausing on admitting the Syrian refugees. And the reasons why I've done is I don't believe we have a good process of being able to vet them. But you know, we don't want to put everybody in the same category."
Ok so is that a yes or a no?
And well, thats it, thats all I've got. Kasich was basically a non factor in this debate, so moving on
3) Ben Carson. (4/7)
So I gotta give it Ben Carson this time around, he brought the funny.
On his first early question:
"Well, I'm very happy to get a question this early on. I was going to ask you to wake me up when that time came."
Or his attempt to inject himself into a conversation:
CARSON: Neil, I was mentioned too.
CAVUTO: You were?
CARSON: Yeah, he said everybody. (LAUGHTER)
Sadly though that was most of the extent of his participation....with one minor policy exception....turning over part of America's sovereignty to Israel
Carson on how to handle Syrian refugees:
Consider that Ben Carson got 3rd for basically showing up and cracking a few jokes and your realize just how low the bar was to actually appear to do really well.
Now Bushes biggest moment was when he got Trump to switch to an alternate future reality when he pointed out some basic facts about the location of the Boeing Plant. and I covered that under Trump so I wont revisit it here.
But generally he sounded pretty solid and sounded like he had reasonable polices and knew what he was talking about.
However that said, he did have two really odd moments
1) "Well first of all, the idea that somehow we're better off today than the day that Barack Obama was inaugurated president of the United States is totally an alternative universe. The simple fact is that the world has been torn asunder."
2) " Well, first of all, under President Jeb Bush, we would restore the strength of the military. Last week, Secretary Carter announced that the Navy's going to be cut again. It's now half the size of what it was prior to Operation Desert Storm."
These are only really odd because Jeb Bush is speaking. See both of these events involve his family (His Brother being the president before Obama and his father as President in Operation Desert Storm) so the fact he used rather evasive obscure language and never mentioned either one by name or familial association at any point in the debate (despise doing so in previous debates) stuck me as a little odd.
One other shining...but also odd moment for Bush, on Guns:
"Look, here's the deal, in this particular case, the FBI made a mistake. The law itself requires a background check, but that didn't fulfill their part of the bargain within the time that they were supposed to do.
We don't need to add new rules, we need to make sure the FBI does its job. Because that person should not have gotten a gun, should not -- would not have passed a background check. The first impulse of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is to take rights away from law- abiding citizens.
That's what they do, whether it's the San Bernardino attack or if it's these tragedies that take place, I think we need to focus on what the bigger issue is. It isn't law-abiding gun owners.
Look, I have an A plus rating in the NRA and we also have a reduction in gun violence because in Florida, if you commit a crime with a gun, you're going away. You're going away for a long, long while.
And that's what we should focus on is the violence in our communities. Target the efforts for people that are committing crimes with guns, and if you do that, and get it right, you're going to be much better off than creating a political argument where there's a big divide.
The other issue is mental health. That's a serious issue that we could work on. Republicans and Democrats alike believe this."
It's odd because he alternates between being completely correct and talking out of his ass.
For example, hes actually right on the FBI background check, and how you get a gun if the FBI cant complete the check on time. He's also right when he says Republicans and Democrats both want to work on mental health. In fact he makes a very good case as to WHY something needs to be done....and even what could be done.
But then again, in between those two points he's lying when he says Obama wants to take your guns away. In fact what Obama did was address and fix the very points Jeb just said need to be fixed...
Also that bit where he said Florida is safer, not so much actually.
So you look at the chart, you'll notice the number of gun murders WAS falling, from 1991 to 2000.
But then started to climb again after 2000, peaking in 2007 I mention this because Jeb Bush was in office between 1999 and 2007. Also worth noting he didnt pass any laws to address any of the issues he mentioned could reduce gun violence.
But see thats what happens when you want an A+ Rating from the NRA....you KNOW what you have to do....then you do the opposite.
1) Ted Cruz (2/5)
(LAUGHTER) I'll tell you what. If this all works out, I'm happy to consider naming you as V.P. So if you happen to be right, you could get the top job at the end of the day.
TRUMP: No -- no...
(LAUGHTER)
... I think if it doesn't...
(APPLAUSE)
I like that. I like it. I'd consider it. But I think I'll go back to building buildings if it doesn't work out.
CRUZ: Actually, I'd love to get you to build a wall."
And just so -- if I could, because he insulted a lot of people. I've had more calls on that statement that Ted made -- New York is a great place. It's got great people, it's got loving people, wonderful people.
When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York. You had two one hundred...
(APPLAUSE)
... you had two 110-story buildings come crashing down. I saw them come down. Thousands of people killed, and the cleanup started the next day, and it was the most horrific cleanup, probably in the history of doing this, and in construction. I was down there, and I've never seen anything like it.
And the people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death -- nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell, the air.
TRUMP: And we rebuilt downtown Manhattan, and everybody in the world watched and everybody in the world loved New York and loved New Yorkers. And I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made.
Thing is, Cruz was pretty clear what he was talking about.....the Liberal political values usually associated with New York.
Which happen to have nothing to do with 9/11. Trump just had no other defense, so he basically exploited the reverence people hold for 9/11 to make Cruz look bad for allegedly attacking the people who survived 9/11 (which again, its clear what Cruz meant, and he wasnt doing that).
Now like I said, most of the media saw this a "masterful attack" by Trump, I see it as a cheap exploitative deflection, hence his standing in this rating and Cruz's.
Cruz by the way as masterfully handled his other potentially disqualifying scandal, in which he may have failed to disclose a large sum of money in violation of election law, claiming that while he did accidentally forget to list it on one form, it is listed on another, and was basically a typo. I havnt bothered to check if thats true, but it sounds believable and makes the whole story seem minor, so point to him.
Now I dont want to give the false idea, Cruz had a great debate. he didnt. Like many of the other candidates he also favors violating the first amendment and barring people of specific ethnic groups from entering the US.
He was also attacked by Marco Rubio for being a flip flopper a liar and untrustworthy on many issues, which led this attempted defense:
"CRUZ: -- at least half of the things Marco said are flat-out false. They're absolutely false."
presumably this means the other half are TRUE...not exactly a steller defense. Its clear to me at least that while Cruz was prepared for Trump's attack's hes clearly not prepared for unexpected attacks on him....and given that I think this debate may cause him to pass Trump in the polls, it may be hard for him to hold that position long given this weakness.
"You know, back in September, my friend Donald said that he had had his lawyers look at this from every which way, and there was no issue there.There was nothing to this birther issue.
(LAUGHTER)
Now, since September, the Constitution hasn't changed.
(LAUGHTER)
But the poll numbers have.[...]"
Then the denial by Trump (side note check the butchering of the English language)
TRUMP: ... first of all, let me just tell you something -- and you know, because you just saw the numbers yourself -- NBC Wall Street Journal just came out with a poll -- headline: Trump way up, Cruz going down. I mean, so don't -- so you can't -- you can't...
(BOOING)
... they don't like the Wall Street Journal. They don't like NBC, but I like the poll.
(LAUGHTER)
And frankly, it just came out, and in Iowa now, as you know, Ted, in the last three polls, I'm beating you. So -- you know, you shouldn't misrepresent how well you're doing with the polls.
(APPLAUSE)You don't have to say that. In fact, I was all for you until you started doing that, because that's a misrepresentation, number one.
Then the challenge by the moderator:
CAVUTO: Why are you saying this now -- right now? Why are you raising this issue now?
And then the full reversal:
TRUMP: Because now he's going a little bit better. No, I didn't care(inaudible). It's true. No, it's true. Hey look, he never had a chance. Now, he's doing better. He's got probably a four or five percent chance.
Allow me to translate: Trump is basically saying he doesnt care at all about the issue, he's just a political whore who will do whatever he needs to do to win.
And before we move on, one last damning problem for Trump:
BARTIROMO: So you'll put your assets in a blind trust?
TRUMP: I would put it in a blind trust. Well, I don't know if it's a blind trust if Ivanka, Don and Eric run it. If that's a blind trust, I don't know. But I would probably have my children run it with my executives and I wouldn't ever be involved because I wouldn't care about anything but our country, anything.
When your running on your expertise and intelligence as a businessman, your kinda expected to understand these things......
6) Marco Rubio. (3/3)
So if you were one of the many republicans who supported Marco Rubio because he seemed like a reasonable candidate.....
Yep thats right....the answer to a question about Christie by blaming Obama.....at least he was until even the FOX moderator cut him off for being full of shit.
Or this one:
"Cavuto: Senator Rubio, you said that President Obama wants to take people's guns away. Yet under his presidency, gun sales have more than doubled. That doesn't sound like a White House unfriendly to gun owners."
Thats actually a fair question by Cavuto......but back to Rubio's reply
"Rubio: That sounds like people are afraid the president's going to take their guns away.
Look, the Second Amendment is not an option. It is not a suggestion. It is a constitutional right of every American to be able to protect themselves and their families. I am convinced that if this president could confiscate every gun in America, he would. I am convinced that this president, if he could get rid of the Second Amendment, he would. I am convinced because I see how he works with his attorney general, not to defend the Second Amendment, but to figure out ways to undermine it."
Which basically translate to "I reject the reality of your question in favor of right wing talking point"
Also as a side note, Republicans have been saying for 7 years now we are in immanent danger of losing our guns. To which I say to the President....whats talking so long? how bad at this are you that in 7 years you cant do something the GOP said you could have done before you even got off the inauguration stage?
Oh and on the question of letting Muslims into the country (which is you know protected under the first amendment)
"If we do not know who you are, and we do not know why you are coming when I am president, you are not getting into the United States of America."
Except, I assume for Cubans? just saying, if these policies had been in place 40 or so years ago, someone wouldnt be running for president right now.....
Or on to question about tariff with China:
"It continues with regulatory reform. Regulations in this country are out of control, especially the Employment Prevention Agency, the EPA, and all of the rules they continue to impose on our economy and hurting us."
Because I'm Marco Rubio and I answer the question I want to answer not the one you asked god damn it. Also see there I made a funny by linking the Environment to Employee which are clearly linked via my head up my ass.
By the way, want to know how ISIS gets into this country well Per Rubio:
"They've contacted the trafficking networks in the Western Hemisphere to get people in through the southern border. "
Except you know, not so much....but I guess all brown people look alike. And again the guy worried about people just washing up on our southern border is you know, a self professed proud Cuban-America. Irony abounds.
Except you know, in the Constitution, the document written "200" years ago....but hey, again Reality < Right wing talking point.
Also, some one might want to ask Ben Carson about how free his people were 200 years ago, when we became the freest people ever....just saying.
In short there was basically NOTHING that left Marco Rubio's mouth this debate that wasnt a far right wing talking point in what can only be seen as a desperation play for relevance and poll support.
How would you do that and how would other countries learn? who knows, I mean why let little things like details or policy slow you down. It appears the transitive power of Christie answers all
Also there was this odd claim:
"Hillary Clinton cannot be president. It will lead to even greater war in this world. And remember this, after Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have had nearly 8 years, we have fewer democracies in the world than we had when they started."
Which ones would those be? Maybe I missed something but I dont remember any democratic governments falling in the last 8 years.
In fact I remember the emergence of South Sudan as the newest democracy just a few years ago.
I mean maybe Christie meant the military Coup in Egypt....you know the one against the dictator in all but name.....except oddly they installed a presidential democracy in 2014.
Or maybe Christie just has no clue about foreign policy at all, and resorts to pulling things out of his rather ample ass.
Also is Chris Christie in favor of banning Muslim immigrants?
Well: "Now Maria, listen. I said right from the beginning that we should take no Syrian refugees of any kind. And the reason I said that is because the FBI director told the American people, told Congress, that he could not guarantee he could vet them and it would be safe. That's the end of the conversation.
I can tell you, after spending seven years as a former federal prosecutor, right after 9/11, dealing with this issue. Here's the way you need to deal with it. You can't just ban all Muslims. You have to ban radical Islamic jihadists. You have to ban the people who are trying to hurt us."
So that sounded like a YES, then a NO and then a YES. Maybe the next time Christie says something is the end of the conversation he will actually learn to stop talking?
So if you were one of the many republicans who supported Marco Rubio because he seemed like a reasonable candidate.....
It appears Marco Rubio has gotten desperate.....so desperate in fact, he's decided to become a right wing talking point factory
For example:
For example:
On Hillary Clinton:
"Someone who cannot handle intelligence information appropriately cannot be commander in chief and someone who lies to the families of those four victims in Benghazi can never be president of the United States. Ever."
Yea, you know, those lies, the one something like 8 republican congressional committees, including the longest running committee in US history and 11 hours of direct questioning couldnt find?
Or on Obama:
"And that's how you get a foreign policy where we cut deals with our enemies like Iran and we betray our allies like Israel and we gut our military and we go around the world like he has done on 10 separate occasions and apologized for America."
Why only 10? I mean if your pulling random numbers out of your ass why not make it 20? or 50?
Also did I miss something? are we no longer allied with Israel? We are?.....weird
Or on ISIS:
When I'm president of the United States, we are going to win this war on ISIS. The most powerful intelligence agency in the world is going to tell us where we are, the most powerful military in the world is going to destroy them. And if we capture any of them alive, they are getting a one-way ticket to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and we are going to find out everything they know.
"Someone who cannot handle intelligence information appropriately cannot be commander in chief and someone who lies to the families of those four victims in Benghazi can never be president of the United States. Ever."
Yea, you know, those lies, the one something like 8 republican congressional committees, including the longest running committee in US history and 11 hours of direct questioning couldnt find?
Or on Obama:
"And that's how you get a foreign policy where we cut deals with our enemies like Iran and we betray our allies like Israel and we gut our military and we go around the world like he has done on 10 separate occasions and apologized for America."
Why only 10? I mean if your pulling random numbers out of your ass why not make it 20? or 50?
Also did I miss something? are we no longer allied with Israel? We are?.....weird
Or on ISIS:
When I'm president of the United States, we are going to win this war on ISIS. The most powerful intelligence agency in the world is going to tell us where we are, the most powerful military in the world is going to destroy them. And if we capture any of them alive, they are getting a one-way ticket to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and we are going to find out everything they know.
Wait you mean we can find and bomb ISIS? BRILLIANT! why didnt anyone else think of that?
Also glad to see we are going back the good ol days of torturing people.
By the way, anyone else notice the irony of a guy who claims to be the son of people who fled Castro to avoid torture advocating to send people to Cuba to be tortured? Im just saying...(in his defense, he is lying about his parents fleeing Castro)
By the way, buckle up folks, this could take a while......these 3 quotes are just from his opening remarks.
And yea, he basically kept this up for the whole debate....no matter what the question "watch this"
"Cavuto: Marco Rubio. I'm sorry, it's the time constraints. You and Governor Christie have been exchanging some fairly nasty words of late, and I will allow the governor to respond as well.
The governor went so far to say, you won't be able to slime your way to the White House. He's referring to a series of ads done by a PAC, speaking on your behalf, that say quote,"One high tax, Common Core, liberal, energy-loving, Obamacare, Medicaid-expanding president is enough. You think you went too far on that and do you want to apologize to the governor?"
So Rubio is asked a question about Christie.....and the answer is:
Rubio: You know, as I said already twice in this debate, we have a very serious problem in this country.
We have a president of the United States that is undermining this country's security and expanding the role of...
Cavuto: That is not my question."
Yep thats right....the answer to a question about Christie by blaming Obama.....at least he was until even the FOX moderator cut him off for being full of shit.
Or this one:
"Cavuto: Senator Rubio, you said that President Obama wants to take people's guns away. Yet under his presidency, gun sales have more than doubled. That doesn't sound like a White House unfriendly to gun owners."
Thats actually a fair question by Cavuto......but back to Rubio's reply
"Rubio: That sounds like people are afraid the president's going to take their guns away.
Look, the Second Amendment is not an option. It is not a suggestion. It is a constitutional right of every American to be able to protect themselves and their families. I am convinced that if this president could confiscate every gun in America, he would. I am convinced that this president, if he could get rid of the Second Amendment, he would. I am convinced because I see how he works with his attorney general, not to defend the Second Amendment, but to figure out ways to undermine it."
Which basically translate to "I reject the reality of your question in favor of right wing talking point"
Also as a side note, Republicans have been saying for 7 years now we are in immanent danger of losing our guns. To which I say to the President....whats talking so long? how bad at this are you that in 7 years you cant do something the GOP said you could have done before you even got off the inauguration stage?
Oh and on the question of letting Muslims into the country (which is you know protected under the first amendment)
"If we do not know who you are, and we do not know why you are coming when I am president, you are not getting into the United States of America."
Except, I assume for Cubans? just saying, if these policies had been in place 40 or so years ago, someone wouldnt be running for president right now.....
Or on to question about tariff with China:
"It continues with regulatory reform. Regulations in this country are out of control, especially the Employment Prevention Agency, the EPA, and all of the rules they continue to impose on our economy and hurting us."
Because I'm Marco Rubio and I answer the question I want to answer not the one you asked god damn it. Also see there I made a funny by linking the Environment to Employee which are clearly linked via my head up my ass.
By the way, want to know how ISIS gets into this country well Per Rubio:
"They've contacted the trafficking networks in the Western Hemisphere to get people in through the southern border. "
Except you know, not so much....but I guess all brown people look alike. And again the guy worried about people just washing up on our southern border is you know, a self professed proud Cuban-America. Irony abounds.
Which finally at long last brings us to closing statements:
Rubio: You know, 200 years ago, America was founded on this powerful principle that our rights don't come from government. Our rights come from God. That's why we embraced free enterprise, and it made us the most prosperous people in the history of the world. That's why we embraced individual liberty, and we became the freest people ever, and the result was the American miracle."
Except you know, in the Constitution, the document written "200" years ago....but hey, again Reality < Right wing talking point.
Also, some one might want to ask Ben Carson about how free his people were 200 years ago, when we became the freest people ever....just saying.
In short there was basically NOTHING that left Marco Rubio's mouth this debate that wasnt a far right wing talking point in what can only be seen as a desperation play for relevance and poll support.
5) Chris Christie (5/2)
So Christie didnt particularly have a good debate, he just didnt particularly have a bad one either.
Granted he lied about not supporting Justice Sotomayor or giving money to planned parenthood, but that stuff is obscure enough no one notices.
So Christie didnt particularly have a good debate, he just didnt particularly have a bad one either.
Granted he lied about not supporting Justice Sotomayor or giving money to planned parenthood, but that stuff is obscure enough no one notices.
However there is a problem that he's starting to sound trumpesque, in that his explanations for things sound like the logic a 7 year old uses:
"And the problem, Maria, is that the military is not ready, either. We need to rebuild our military, and this president has let it diminish to a point where tinpot dictators like the mullahs in Iran are taking our Navy ships. It is disgraceful, and in a Christie administration, they would know much, much better than to do that."
or later:
"We need to make the government run smarter and better, and reform this corporate tax system, bring that money back to the United States to build jobs and rebuild our infrastructure, and we need to use it also to protect our grid from terrorists.
All of those things are important, and all those things would happen in a Christie administration.
"And the problem, Maria, is that the military is not ready, either. We need to rebuild our military, and this president has let it diminish to a point where tinpot dictators like the mullahs in Iran are taking our Navy ships. It is disgraceful, and in a Christie administration, they would know much, much better than to do that."
or later:
"We need to make the government run smarter and better, and reform this corporate tax system, bring that money back to the United States to build jobs and rebuild our infrastructure, and we need to use it also to protect our grid from terrorists.
All of those things are important, and all those things would happen in a Christie administration.
How would you do that and how would other countries learn? who knows, I mean why let little things like details or policy slow you down. It appears the transitive power of Christie answers all
Also there was this odd claim:
"Hillary Clinton cannot be president. It will lead to even greater war in this world. And remember this, after Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have had nearly 8 years, we have fewer democracies in the world than we had when they started."
Which ones would those be? Maybe I missed something but I dont remember any democratic governments falling in the last 8 years.
In fact I remember the emergence of South Sudan as the newest democracy just a few years ago.
I mean maybe Christie meant the military Coup in Egypt....you know the one against the dictator in all but name.....except oddly they installed a presidential democracy in 2014.
Or maybe Christie just has no clue about foreign policy at all, and resorts to pulling things out of his rather ample ass.
Also is Chris Christie in favor of banning Muslim immigrants?
Well: "Now Maria, listen. I said right from the beginning that we should take no Syrian refugees of any kind. And the reason I said that is because the FBI director told the American people, told Congress, that he could not guarantee he could vet them and it would be safe. That's the end of the conversation.
So that sounded like a YES, then a NO and then a YES. Maybe the next time Christie says something is the end of the conversation he will actually learn to stop talking?
Then there was this:
" And this president turns his back -- this president doesn't enforce the marijuana laws in this country because he doesn't agree with them."
I'm actually not sure what this is in reference too. I assume it has something to do with the laws in Oregon and Colorado.
Which is odd, cause Im pretty sure this means Chris Christie is now promising to use the power of the federal government to crush state authority, and force states to change their laws against the will of the people. Is it just me, or does anyone else remember when Conservatives were against that? (I guess unless they dont get their way?)
Also, Colorado is a swing state......so Im sure their is no possible way pissing off their voters could ever end badly for the GOP.....
4) John Kasich (7/8)" And this president turns his back -- this president doesn't enforce the marijuana laws in this country because he doesn't agree with them."
I'm actually not sure what this is in reference too. I assume it has something to do with the laws in Oregon and Colorado.
Which is odd, cause Im pretty sure this means Chris Christie is now promising to use the power of the federal government to crush state authority, and force states to change their laws against the will of the people. Is it just me, or does anyone else remember when Conservatives were against that? (I guess unless they dont get their way?)
Also, Colorado is a swing state......so Im sure their is no possible way pissing off their voters could ever end badly for the GOP.....
So there was a debate, it was hosted in South Carolina....and surprisingly John Kasich was there. And he named dropped former South Carolina Senator and avowed racist Strom Thurmond....and got a bare smattering of applause, so it basically failed.
He also has no anwser on if hes a Trump like Nazi trying to ban people based on ethnicity or not
"I -- I've been for pausing on admitting the Syrian refugees. And the reasons why I've done is I don't believe we have a good process of being able to vet them. But you know, we don't want to put everybody in the same category."
Ok so is that a yes or a no?
And well, thats it, thats all I've got. Kasich was basically a non factor in this debate, so moving on
3) Ben Carson. (4/7)
So I gotta give it Ben Carson this time around, he brought the funny.
On his first early question:
"Well, I'm very happy to get a question this early on. I was going to ask you to wake me up when that time came."
Or his attempt to inject himself into a conversation:
CARSON: Neil, I was mentioned too.
CAVUTO: You were?
CARSON: Yeah, he said everybody. (LAUGHTER)
Sadly though that was most of the extent of his participation....with one minor policy exception....turning over part of America's sovereignty to Israel
Carson on how to handle Syrian refugees:
"Well, first of all, recognize it is a substantial problem. But like all of our problems, there isn't a single one that can't be solved with common sense if you remove the ego and the politics. And clearly, what we need to do is get a group of experts together, including people from other countries, some of our friends from Israel, who have had experience screening these people and come up with new guidelines for immigration, and for visas, for people who are coming into this country."
So I guess in a Carson administration we are going to out-source our countries security and immigration to Israel? cause you know....why bother doing things ourselves instead of having a country we blindly back for religious purposes can do it for us?
2) Jeb Bush (6/1)Consider that Ben Carson got 3rd for basically showing up and cracking a few jokes and your realize just how low the bar was to actually appear to do really well.
Now Bushes biggest moment was when he got Trump to switch to an alternate future reality when he pointed out some basic facts about the location of the Boeing Plant. and I covered that under Trump so I wont revisit it here.
But generally he sounded pretty solid and sounded like he had reasonable polices and knew what he was talking about.
However that said, he did have two really odd moments
1) "Well first of all, the idea that somehow we're better off today than the day that Barack Obama was inaugurated president of the United States is totally an alternative universe. The simple fact is that the world has been torn asunder."
2) " Well, first of all, under President Jeb Bush, we would restore the strength of the military. Last week, Secretary Carter announced that the Navy's going to be cut again. It's now half the size of what it was prior to Operation Desert Storm."
These are only really odd because Jeb Bush is speaking. See both of these events involve his family (His Brother being the president before Obama and his father as President in Operation Desert Storm) so the fact he used rather evasive obscure language and never mentioned either one by name or familial association at any point in the debate (despise doing so in previous debates) stuck me as a little odd.
One other shining...but also odd moment for Bush, on Guns:
"Look, here's the deal, in this particular case, the FBI made a mistake. The law itself requires a background check, but that didn't fulfill their part of the bargain within the time that they were supposed to do.
We don't need to add new rules, we need to make sure the FBI does its job. Because that person should not have gotten a gun, should not -- would not have passed a background check. The first impulse of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is to take rights away from law- abiding citizens.
That's what they do, whether it's the San Bernardino attack or if it's these tragedies that take place, I think we need to focus on what the bigger issue is. It isn't law-abiding gun owners.
Look, I have an A plus rating in the NRA and we also have a reduction in gun violence because in Florida, if you commit a crime with a gun, you're going away. You're going away for a long, long while.
And that's what we should focus on is the violence in our communities. Target the efforts for people that are committing crimes with guns, and if you do that, and get it right, you're going to be much better off than creating a political argument where there's a big divide.
The other issue is mental health. That's a serious issue that we could work on. Republicans and Democrats alike believe this."
It's odd because he alternates between being completely correct and talking out of his ass.
For example, hes actually right on the FBI background check, and how you get a gun if the FBI cant complete the check on time. He's also right when he says Republicans and Democrats both want to work on mental health. In fact he makes a very good case as to WHY something needs to be done....and even what could be done.
But then again, in between those two points he's lying when he says Obama wants to take your guns away. In fact what Obama did was address and fix the very points Jeb just said need to be fixed...
Also that bit where he said Florida is safer, not so much actually.
But then started to climb again after 2000, peaking in 2007 I mention this because Jeb Bush was in office between 1999 and 2007. Also worth noting he didnt pass any laws to address any of the issues he mentioned could reduce gun violence.
But see thats what happens when you want an A+ Rating from the NRA....you KNOW what you have to do....then you do the opposite.
1) Ted Cruz (2/5)
Ok, this one hurts....I really really really really really dont want to do it. But the winner of the 6th GOP debate was Ted Cruz.
And mostly for eviscerating Donald Trump on the birther thing. I know I quoted some of this before with Trump but this time around, the full ass kicking.
"You know, back in September, my friend Donald said that he had had his lawyers look at this from every which way, and there was no issue there. There was nothing to this birther issue.
(LAUGHTER)
Now, since September, the Constitution hasn't changed.
(LAUGHTER)
But the poll numbers have.
(APPLAUSE)
And I recognize -- I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa. But the facts and the law here are really quite clear. Under longstanding U.S. law, the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural-born citizen.
If a soldier has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why John McCain, even though he was born in Panama, was eligible to run for president.
If an American missionary has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why George Romney, Mitt's dad, was eligible to run for president, even though he was born in Mexico.
At the end of the day, the legal issue is quite straightforward, but I would note that the birther theories that Donald has been relying on -- some of the more extreme ones insist that you must not only be born on U.S. soil, but have two parents born on U.S. soil.
Under that theory, not only would I be disqualified, Marco Rubio would be disqualified, Bobby Jindal would be disqualified and, interestingly enough, Donald J. Trump would be disqualified.
(APPLAUSE)
(UNKNOWN): Not me.
CRUZ: Because -- because Donald's mother was born in Scotland. She was naturalized. Now, Donald...
TRUMP: But I was born here.
CRUZ: ... on the issue -- on the issue of citizenship, Donald...
TRUMP: (inaudible). Big difference.
CRUZ: ... on the issue of citizenship, Donald, I'm not going to use your mother's birth against you."
Note to all future candidates, thats what it looks like when your opponent totally bitch slaps you. Cruz not only effectively deflected the issue, he turned it around on Trump AND got a shot in a John McCain (whos also questioned his eligibility) for good measure. Oh and by the way....he's not done. Trump did try to fire back, which led to this
"CRUZ: And I'll tell you what, Donald, you -- you very kindly just a moment ago offered me the V.P. slot.And mostly for eviscerating Donald Trump on the birther thing. I know I quoted some of this before with Trump but this time around, the full ass kicking.
"You know, back in September, my friend Donald said that he had had his lawyers look at this from every which way, and there was no issue there. There was nothing to this birther issue.
(LAUGHTER)
Now, since September, the Constitution hasn't changed.
(LAUGHTER)
But the poll numbers have.
(APPLAUSE)
And I recognize -- I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa. But the facts and the law here are really quite clear. Under longstanding U.S. law, the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural-born citizen.
If a soldier has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why John McCain, even though he was born in Panama, was eligible to run for president.
If an American missionary has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why George Romney, Mitt's dad, was eligible to run for president, even though he was born in Mexico.
At the end of the day, the legal issue is quite straightforward, but I would note that the birther theories that Donald has been relying on -- some of the more extreme ones insist that you must not only be born on U.S. soil, but have two parents born on U.S. soil.
Under that theory, not only would I be disqualified, Marco Rubio would be disqualified, Bobby Jindal would be disqualified and, interestingly enough, Donald J. Trump would be disqualified.
(APPLAUSE)
(UNKNOWN): Not me.
CRUZ: Because -- because Donald's mother was born in Scotland. She was naturalized. Now, Donald...
TRUMP: But I was born here.
CRUZ: ... on the issue -- on the issue of citizenship, Donald...
TRUMP: (inaudible). Big difference.
CRUZ: ... on the issue of citizenship, Donald, I'm not going to use your mother's birth against you."
Note to all future candidates, thats what it looks like when your opponent totally bitch slaps you. Cruz not only effectively deflected the issue, he turned it around on Trump AND got a shot in a John McCain (whos also questioned his eligibility) for good measure. Oh and by the way....he's not done. Trump did try to fire back, which led to this
(LAUGHTER) I'll tell you what. If this all works out, I'm happy to consider naming you as V.P. So if you happen to be right, you could get the top job at the end of the day.
TRUMP: No -- no...
(LAUGHTER)
... I think if it doesn't...
(APPLAUSE)
I like that. I like it. I'd consider it. But I think I'll go back to building buildings if it doesn't work out.
CRUZ: Actually, I'd love to get you to build a wall."
So yea, Cruz asked Trump to put his money where his mouth is, reduced trump to a incoherent mess for a moment, and when trump recovered.....bitch slapped him again with some other crazy shit hed said.
Now this wasnt the only Trump/Cruz fight of the night, and lots of people say Trump won the other one, I disagree, and one I lay it out I'll explain:
BARTIROMO: "Senator Cruz, you suggested Mr. Trump, quote, "embodies New York values." Could you explain what you mean by that?
CRUZ: You know, I think most people know exactly what New York values are.
(LAUGHTER)
BARTIROMO: I am from New York. I don't.
CRUZ: What -- what -- you're from New York? So you might not.
(LAUGHTER)
But I promise you, in the state of South Carolina, they do.
(APPLAUSE)
And listen, there are many, many wonderful, wonderful working men and women in the state of New York. But everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal or pro-abortion or pro- gay-marriage, focus around money and the media.
And -- and I would note indeed, the reason I said that is I was asked -- my friend Donald has taken to it as (ph) advance playing Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA", and I was asked what I thought of that.
And I said, "well, if he wanted to play a song, maybe he could play, 'New York, New York'?" And -- and -- you know, the concept of New York values is not that complicated to figure out.
Not too many years ago, Donald did a long interview with Tim Russert. And in that interview, he explained his views on a whole host of issues that were very, very different from the views he's describing now.
And his explanation -- he said, "look, I'm from New York, that's what we believe in New York. Those aren't Iowa values, but this is what we believe in New York." And so that was his explanation.
And -- and I guess I can -- can frame it another way. Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I'm just saying.
Trump retaliated with this
Now this wasnt the only Trump/Cruz fight of the night, and lots of people say Trump won the other one, I disagree, and one I lay it out I'll explain:
BARTIROMO: "Senator Cruz, you suggested Mr. Trump, quote, "embodies New York values." Could you explain what you mean by that?
CRUZ: You know, I think most people know exactly what New York values are.
(LAUGHTER)
BARTIROMO: I am from New York. I don't.
CRUZ: What -- what -- you're from New York? So you might not.
(LAUGHTER)
But I promise you, in the state of South Carolina, they do.
(APPLAUSE)
And listen, there are many, many wonderful, wonderful working men and women in the state of New York. But everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal or pro-abortion or pro- gay-marriage, focus around money and the media.
And -- and I would note indeed, the reason I said that is I was asked -- my friend Donald has taken to it as (ph) advance playing Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA", and I was asked what I thought of that.
And I said, "well, if he wanted to play a song, maybe he could play, 'New York, New York'?" And -- and -- you know, the concept of New York values is not that complicated to figure out.
Not too many years ago, Donald did a long interview with Tim Russert. And in that interview, he explained his views on a whole host of issues that were very, very different from the views he's describing now.
And his explanation -- he said, "look, I'm from New York, that's what we believe in New York. Those aren't Iowa values, but this is what we believe in New York." And so that was his explanation.
And -- and I guess I can -- can frame it another way. Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I'm just saying.
Trump retaliated with this
TRUMP: So conservatives actually do come out of Manhattan, including William F. Buckley and others, just so you understand.
(APPLAUSE)And just so -- if I could, because he insulted a lot of people. I've had more calls on that statement that Ted made -- New York is a great place. It's got great people, it's got loving people, wonderful people.
When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York. You had two one hundred...
(APPLAUSE)
... you had two 110-story buildings come crashing down. I saw them come down. Thousands of people killed, and the cleanup started the next day, and it was the most horrific cleanup, probably in the history of doing this, and in construction. I was down there, and I've never seen anything like it.
And the people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death -- nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell, the air.
TRUMP: And we rebuilt downtown Manhattan, and everybody in the world watched and everybody in the world loved New York and loved New Yorkers. And I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made.
Thing is, Cruz was pretty clear what he was talking about.....the Liberal political values usually associated with New York.
Which happen to have nothing to do with 9/11. Trump just had no other defense, so he basically exploited the reverence people hold for 9/11 to make Cruz look bad for allegedly attacking the people who survived 9/11 (which again, its clear what Cruz meant, and he wasnt doing that).
Now like I said, most of the media saw this a "masterful attack" by Trump, I see it as a cheap exploitative deflection, hence his standing in this rating and Cruz's.
Cruz by the way as masterfully handled his other potentially disqualifying scandal, in which he may have failed to disclose a large sum of money in violation of election law, claiming that while he did accidentally forget to list it on one form, it is listed on another, and was basically a typo. I havnt bothered to check if thats true, but it sounds believable and makes the whole story seem minor, so point to him.
Now I dont want to give the false idea, Cruz had a great debate. he didnt. Like many of the other candidates he also favors violating the first amendment and barring people of specific ethnic groups from entering the US.
He was also attacked by Marco Rubio for being a flip flopper a liar and untrustworthy on many issues, which led this attempted defense:
"CRUZ: -- at least half of the things Marco said are flat-out false. They're absolutely false."
presumably this means the other half are TRUE...not exactly a steller defense. Its clear to me at least that while Cruz was prepared for Trump's attack's hes clearly not prepared for unexpected attacks on him....and given that I think this debate may cause him to pass Trump in the polls, it may be hard for him to hold that position long given this weakness.
No comments:
Post a Comment