Donald Trump axed from event over Megyn Kelly blood comment

[AzazeltheRuthless]

And this is why we have idiots like Trump running for office some folks actually like that POS idiot

You don't have to like him, that's fine. Though honestly its showing how fed up people are getting with politicians, all this glad handling, behind the curtain BS that goes on. Just a bunch of fakes, not saying Trump is good or ideal. Though he speaks his mind, doesn't sugar coat it, and talks like any regular person does. Oh, he said she had blood coming out of her...yeah...well...she was being a bitch. Everybody else is to nice to call it out though.

[Felya]

And this is why we have idiots like Trump running for office some folks actually like that POS idiot

Not really. The rhetoric is anyone, but Hilary... It being Trump or a ninja turtle, all fit that criteria.

Trump is running because across 17 candidates, if all get nearly the same % during the primaries, the threshold for victory is only around 6%.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't have to like him, that's fine. Though honestly its showing how fed up people are getting with politicians, all this glad handling, behind the curtain BS that goes on. Just a bunch of fakes, not saying Trump is good or ideal. Though he speaks his mind, doesn't sugar coat it, and talks like any regular person does. Oh, he said she had blood coming out of her...yeah...well...she was being a bitch. Everybody else is to nice to call it out though.

How does he speak his mind, when every time he presents an example of speaking his mind, he issues a correction the next day? Remember, he meant to say her nose...

[Lenonis]

OBama has increased the national debt alone (just during his presidency) more than the collective total from George Washington to Bill Clinton's second term as president as a collective total.

And where did the debt come from? What policies and expenses caused that surge in spending?

Obamacare - which was some great opportunity for all Americans, yet not a single gov't employee, senator, or even the President himself uses it. So if its so great and wonderful for the American people why is it to good for you to use?

That blame goes to Congress just as much, if not moreso, than the president. And even people who support Obama generally think he didn't handle that well. However it's hard to say that it's worse than what was in place before. It's not a great solution, but something had to be done.

Economy took a nose dive and gas skyrocketed to $4.00 in a lot of area, during his tenure. I will give him some credit that he has fixed this to degree, though it's still average higher than when Bush was even in office.

The price of gas? Seriously? No president has any real impact on the price of gas. And when did the economy crash again?

Unemployment reached its worse percentage in a decade under his watchful eye. He also has done something to alleviate this, but that it happen doesn't take it away

When did the economy crash? When did the unemployment start spiking?

Your right about Congress, though also remember during his first time Democrats controlled House and Senate, so samething as Bush's first term. If your own party controlled everything in gov't how could you still not get anything done.

http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09...cratic-senate/

It seems your memory is a bit blurry. Most of the economic blame you are laying at Obama's feet is from the previous presidency. The economy crashed in 2008. Obama didn't take office until 2009, and the spike in the deficit which drove up the debt is from wars, Medicare Part D, and other spending in the previous decade. Under Obama the deficit has gone down dramatically.

I really don't want to have to appear I'm white knighting for Obama, but I can't let misinformation go unchallenged.

[araine]

OBama has increased the national debt alone (just during his presidency) more than the collective total from George Washington to Bill Clinton's second term as president as a collective total.

Obamacare - which was some great opportunity for all Americans, yet not a single gov't employee, senator, or even the President himself uses it. So if its so great and wonderful for the American people why is it to good for you to use?

Economy took a nose dive and gas skyrocketed to $4.00 in a lot of area, during his tenure. I will give him some credit that he has fixed this to degree, though it's still average higher than when Bush was even in office.

Unemployment reached its worse percentage in a decade under his watchful eye. He also has done something to alleviate this, but that it happen doesn't take it away

Guess the best thing you can say is he has fixed things that have gone terribly wrong under his presidency but they still aren't in a great state.

I never said he was the worst president ever, as there were plenty that were much worse. He's about the same as Bush Jr....just ineffective. Your right about Congress, though also remember during his first time Democrats controlled House and Senate, so samething as Bush's first term. If your own party controlled everything in gov't how could you still not get anything done.

And it is because he inherited all of the bush policys that were a total DISASTER for the economy

[AzazeltheRuthless]

Not really. The rhetoric is anyone, but Hilary... It being Trump or a ninja turtle, all fit that criteria.

Trump is running because across 17 candidates, if all get nearly the same % during the primaries, the threshold for victory is only around 6%.

- - - Updated - - -



How does he speak his mind, when every time he presents an example of speaking his mind, he issues a correction the next day? Remember, he meant to say her nose...

Maybe it is what he meant? I don't know, nor do I really care. I found it funny when he said it and I agreed with him on it. She tried derailing every candidate on that debate that wasn't named Bush or the female (forgot her name as she's irrelevant.) Have to issue correction for this PC state that America is in.

[araine]

And where did the debt come from? What policies and expenses caused that surge in spending?

That blame goes to Congress just as much, if not moreso, than the president. And even people who support Obama generally think he didn't handle that well. However it's hard to say that it's worse than what was in place before. It's not a great solution, but something had to be done.

The price of gas? Seriously? No president has any real impact on the price of gas. And when did the economy crash again?

When did the economy crash? When did the unemployment start spiking?

http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09...cratic-senate/

It seems your memory is a bit blurry. Most of the economic blame you are laying at Obama's feet is from the previous presidency. The economy crashed in 2008. Obama didn't take office until 2009, and the spike in the deficit which drove up the debt is from wars, Medicare Part D, and other spending in the previous decade. Under Obama the deficit has gone down dramatically.

I really don't want to have to appear I'm white knighting for Obama, but I can't let misinformation go unchallenged.

Right wingers are so happy to say obama increased the debt but when asked to point on which legislation and back it up with FACTS well they cant find anything but old bush policies that wrecked the economy so dont expect them to answer what piece that wrecked the eocnomy

[AzazeltheRuthless]

And it is because he inherited all of the bush policy's that were a total DISASTER for the economy

He was president and had a democratic controlled HOuse and Senate during his first term. He could reverted any one of them if he wanted, though chose to extend a bunch of them instead. Weird, choice for him to extend the tax break instead of repeal. All Bush did that tanked the economy was the war...(not arguing on if it was right or wrong.) Obama could have done things to repair any of that and didn't. So that's puts the ball in his court and the state of economy on him and no one else. It cratered, its his fault. How the job works.

Herbert Hoover was in office, when the stock market crashed in 1929, wasn't his fault it crashed as he didn't start it in that spiral. They blamed him nonetheless as he didn't do anything to get in front of it. Neither did Obama, and that's what his presidency will be remembered for. No one cares about what happen beforehand, it's what you did with it when it was your chance, and he failed to deliver.

[Felya]

Maybe it is what he meant? I don't know, nor do I really care. I found it funny when he said it and I agreed with him on it. She tried derailing every candidate on that debate that wasn't named Bush or the female (forgot her name as she's irrelevant.) Have to issue correction for this PC state that America is in.

Maybe he meant it? That aligns with him speaking his mind? Him issuing a correction to appeal to the PC state of America is speaking his mind? No, if he spoke his mind he would call her a bitch... What he did is imply she is PMSing and then corrected it to fuming. The speaking his mind and appealing to PC makes no sense. To quote the brilliant Bartgolomew Simpson, according to Trump supporters he "can do both, suck and blow at the same time".

[Lenonis]

He was president and had a democratic controlled HOuse and Senate during his first term.

So it's really congress then. You are ignoring the political realities of the blue dog democrats and independents who wouldn't go along with some of the more progressive policies. Plus the filibuster proof majority was for 76 days. Not exactly a huge window.

All Bush did that tanked the economy was the war...

Wrong. Tax cuts and Medicare part D were huge expenses.

I swear to god people never blame congress. Always the president. The president is powerless on many issues if congress won't send him a bill.

[Felya]

He was president and had a democratic controlled HOuse and Senate during his first term. He could reverted any one of them if he wanted, though chose to extend a bunch of them instead. Weird, choice for him to extend the tax break instead of repeal. All Bush did that tanked the economy was the war...(not arguing on if it was right or wrong.) Obama could have done things to repair any of that and didn't. So that's puts the ball in his court and the state of economy on him and no one else. It cratered, its his fault. How the job works.

The Dodd-Frank act cut TARP in half, set up a consumer protection agency and reinstated Glass-Steagall, be it with with a 1% limit.

Herbert Hoover was in office, when the stock market crashed in 1929, wasn't his fault it crashed as he didn't start it in that spiral. They blamed him nonetheless as he didn't do anything to get in front of it. Neither did Obama, and that's what his presidency will be remembered for. No one cares about what happen beforehand, it's what you did with it when it was your chance, and he failed to deliver.

Yeah, and the Dow is at 3 times the post Bush recession bottom and unemployment is halved. If current trend remains, Obama will preside over the largest increase in the Dow in history. Yet, you still blame Obama...

[Arthas242]

The fact is with the LASTEST POLL NUMBERS

#1 is Donald Trump
#2 is Scott Walker
#3 is Ben Carson
#4 i forget that ladies name that was not even in the prime time debate

all of them are considered *insurgent* candidates as they do follow the republican party and are basically independents naming them self's republicans.

THE PARTY WANTS BUSH

same goes for dem's

Bernie is doing better everyday while Hillary's numbers keep going down

LIBERALS want Bernie, not Hillary

BUT THE PARTY WANTS HILLARY


what this means is THE AMERICAN PEOPLE are tired of politicians who never do anything but follow the *ESTABLISHMENT*

and honestly there is no difference between BUSH and HILLARY, they will literally do everything the same other then what they speak to the people

[araine]

The fact is with the LASTEST POLL NUMBERS

#1 is Donald Trump
#2 is Scott Walker
#3 is Ben Carson
#4 i forget that ladies name that was not even in the prime time debate

all of them are considered *insurgent* candidates as they do follow the republican party and are basically independents naming them self's republicans.

THE PARTY WANTS BUSH

same goes for dem's

Bernie is doing better everyday while Hillary's numbers keep going down

LIBERALS want Bernie, not Hillary

BUT THE PARTY WANTS HILLARY


what this means is THE AMERICAN PEOPLE are tired of politicians who never do anything but follow the *ESTABLISHMENT*

and honestly there is no difference between BUSH and HILLARY, they will literally do everything the same other then what they speak to the people

Hillary for me is the last resort. sure better than anything hte republicans will get but that doesnt make here the 1st choice by any means rather have Bernie Sanders or another progressive before hillary

[Lenonis]

and honestly there is no difference between BUSH and HILLARY, they will literally do everything the same other then what they speak to the people

Yes there is. There are quite a few differences, especially around social issues.

It's just lazy to claim they are identical. Just because they are both establishment corporate candidates doesn't mean they will act the same in office. Similar is not "the same".

[Felya]

all of them are considered *insurgent* candidates as they do follow the republican party and are basically independents naming them self's republicans.

They are just as republican as Bush is. They are not independent, but are the same establishment as everyone else running. You can't be both republican and independent, because by being republican you are part of the caucus, not independent from it.

THE PARTY WANTS BUSH

Do not confuse the caucus not believing the others stand a chance in general elections, as them wanting Bush. If any if the others become more likely to do better than Bush in general elections, the party will align with them. Don't for a second think that who ever wins the primary, will not receive the same support as Bush would. The point isn't them not wanting them to win, the point is not believing they can win.

Bernie is doing better everyday while Hillary's numbers keep going down

Which is completely irrelevant when any gains Bernie is making are still nowhere near the juggernaut Hilary is. If Bernie pulls an Obama, by actually overtaking her lead in the poles, the same thing will happen as it did with Obama.

LIBERALS want Bernie, not Hillary

Democrats are not liberals...

BUT THE PARTY WANTS HILLARY

Just like they did at this time during the run that lead to Obama winning.

[ati87]

He was president and had a democratic controlled HOuse and Senate during his first term. He could reverted any one of them if he wanted, though chose to extend a bunch of them instead. Weird, choice for him to extend the tax break instead of repeal. All Bush did that tanked the economy was the war...(not arguing on if it was right or wrong.) Obama could have done things to repair any of that and didn't. So that's puts the ball in his court and the state of economy on him and no one else. It cratered, its his fault. How the job works.

Herbert Hoover was in office, when the stock market crashed in 1929, wasn't his fault it crashed as he didn't start it in that spiral. They blamed him nonetheless as he didn't do anything to get in front of it. Neither did Obama, and that's what his presidency will be remembered for. No one cares about what happen beforehand, it's what you did with it when it was your chance, and he failed to deliver.

You can attack Obama maybe from the left and ask why he tried to compromise with the Republicans but in no way can you attack him from the right in every single case.

What your argument is at least (judging by your Sarah Palin talking points) is that you complain about damage he allowed to happen by compromising with politicians you most likely voted for (or at least would vote for).

Is their any major policy from the Bush era that didn't end up as a disaster anyway?


Also in regards to Trump. This row doesn't really hurt him at all in regards to the primary itself, he has the underdog role by being kept out of these type of events.

Also his comments towards women doesn't really hurt him given that we are talking about a party that where half the voters probably think that a women's place is the kitchen. This is the GOP primary voters we are talking about, 2 years ago they cheered Perry because Texas executed the most people (or something like that).

[Felya]

This is the GOP primary voters we are talking about, 2 years ago they cheered Perry because Texas executed the most people (or something like that).

This is another point that contradicts the idea of an anti-establishment candidate making it out of primaries. In several states, like Washington, you cannot even vote for a party you are not registered to in the primaries. To say that registered republicans will vote someone not part of the establishment, is just strange.