Discussion for article #244978
Anyone who disagrees with Poodlehead is âfailingâ, a âloserâ, âdyingâ, âdecayingâ, âfalling offâ, etc.
We get it, Don. Your stupid, predictable routine is old and worn-out. Go fuck yourself.
This is the face of âleadershipâ: throwing more insults per minute than the next asshole.
NCSteve
Well they had no choice. They werenât treating Trump fairly. He might have fired off Tweets calling them business failures and losers if they hadnât ditched the liberal National Review. Which someone very close to them told me is failing miserably. Listen, their circulation is awful. Iâm not judging, thatâs just what someone told me.
Trump: If National Review were to endorse me, I would say its the most influential publication, thanks to Sir Buckley.
âŚand the classiest publication.
Trump supporters donât just get their information from the National Review. They read, you know all of them Katie.
obsession is with âwinning,â regardless of the means
If irony was oxygen Iâd be a dead man. If The NR was underwear it would have a skidmark.
A) Given the National Reviewâs role in pushing Sarah Palin to glory, with the ever creepy Rich Lowry saying the first time he saw her on tv it was as if she winked directly at him and he saw fireworks, itâs a bit much for them to suddenly try to be the voice of reason.
B) Since Bill Kristol is in the esteemed anti-Trump group, and given that he is wrong about everything, Iâd have to go with Trump in the battle against Cruz.
C) I am getting much enjoyment watching the GOP establishment shit their collective adult diapers this election cycle.
âŚbut itâs not. It works. Like it or not.
The Republican National Committee on Thursday removed the National Review as a moderator of a February Republican presidential debate following the publication of the anti-Trump edition, stating that moderators "canât have a predisposition."
So no more âmoney honeyâ on any moderators panel, right?
Megyn Kelly can have the day off, because everyone knows whatâs coming, right?
National Review is a failing publication that has lost itâs way. Itâs circulation is way down w its influence being at an all time low. Sad!
It is still worth a rant, thoughâŚ
Hats off to NC Steve
Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, Bill Kristol, and Dana Loesch
Seeing those names hurts my eyes and my human sensibilities. What a distasteful bunch they are.
Whatâs funny is that Trump could be even worse. Heâs certainly no better.
The National Review editors said that when it comes to immigration, Trump âmakes no sense and canât be relied upon,â and that he knows âalmost nothingâ about national security.
None of that lot makes any sense on either issue and Rubio flipflopped on the immigration issue.
His obsession is with âwinning,â regardless of the means â a spirit that is anathema to the ordered liberty that conservatives hold dear and that depends for its preservation on limits on government power. The Tea Party represented a revival of an understanding of American greatness in these terms, an understanding to which Trump is tone-deaf at best and implicitly hostile at worst
This country was built on expansion. The Revolutionary War started in regards to lots of reasons and not moving west (alebit at the time:Kentucky,Alabama,Miss,etc) was one of those reasons. The majority of past leaders didnât care much on putting handcuffs on government power (yes that includes Jefferson) and those few that exercised caution (Tyler in regards to the Texas annexation) were pushed aside for more âmanlyâ guys (James Polk). By stating that the Tea Party represented a revival of American greatness (which strangely stayed silent as Osama ran free in Pakistan) suggests that there was no such thing as manifest destiny.
That belief from the Review is of course a lie. However seeing how the modern GOP is slowly marching along the path that was trail-blazed by the Federalists and the Whigs, within reason, its going to be fun to watch the GOP go âboomâ in November.
He certainly seems to have most everyone cowed in the republican party and much of the msm.
What a bunch of cowards.
Some of the people listed in this article are big sillies, no doubt about it. But my guess is this hurts Trump. A lot of people think sensible, moderate conservatism is still a thingâI talk to them, and believe it or not, itâs trueâand theyâll occasionally check in with pubs like NR to see what the opinion leaders, such as they are, are saying. And this time theyâre saying, âYep, heâs a big crazy goof, feel free to sit this one out with our blessing.â Thereâs a lot of country club Republicans, middle managers, suburban dads, and regular-fella types, people who lean conservative without thinking about it much, who have no respect for Donald Trump and think heâs a joke. I know this much from talking to people as well. They know instinctively heâs too ignorant, narcissistic, and erratic to be anything but a catastrophically bad leader. And now they have validation for that view straight from the headquarters.
We havenât even had the first primary, and people are âendorsingâ Trump over Cruz as if heâs going to be the nominee. A bit premature, isnât it?
I doubt those people who you talk to want either Trump or Cruz. But the other candidates, who are also unpalatable, arenât gaining enough support yet. Maybe when weâre past the crazy states, things will get more interesting.
I canât imagine an election season with the Donald. Horrible. Other than Cruz, more horrible than the pathetic leftovers currently at the bottom.
Hahahaha. Poor republicans.
Be nice if these folks could make up their minds:
âAnyone But Him!: Top GOPers Openly Support Donald Trump Over Ted Cruzâ
His obsession is with âwinning,â regardless of the means â a spirit that is anathema to the ordered liberty that conservatives hold dear and that depends for its preservation on limits on government power.
Have they ever met a Republican before?