Where does the GOP stand?

[CCTAU]

Trump blasts W. Was it merited? And did he really blast W, or the direction of the GOP?

There was an uninvited guest onstage Saturday night at the latest and most brutal Republican presidential debate: George W. Bush.
The focus on Bush 43's legacy signals a big problem for the GOP. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who declared in a prior debate that he missed the bygone president, pronounced W the winner last night. But no matter how much Jeb Bush defended his brother, or Marco Rubio came to the former president's aid, that Bush's legacy abruptly became a question at all, at this very late date, dealt the establishment a potentially crippling blow.
Yes, the establishment — there's that word again, used advisedly but of necessity. For what was supposed to be more established a fact in the Republican Party but that George W. Bush — at a bare, bare minimum — was the right man in office on Sept. 11? Yet here was Donald Trump, naked in a way few have really seen him before, slamming home the message again and again: W messed up. He hurt the party. And he hurt the country.
"The World Trade Center came down during the reign of George Bush," Trump growled. "He kept us safe? That is not safe." Technically true, but, as is so often the case with Trump, the details came second to theme, and the theme went far beyond 9/11 or the gasps and boos Trump's comments brought. Trump slapped W on Iraq, too. "The war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. They lied," he said of Dubya's administration. "They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none."
   Leave aside the particulars. (Saddam's men, ruled by fear and deceit, habitually lied and believed lies about their own WMD and other special weapons.) Trump's eye-popping broadsides against the Bush administration far exceeded some kind of coming-out party as a Democrat. Nor were they animated by a longing to merely belittle Jeb Bush or exact juvenile revenge. Rather, they were illustrative of the sweeping but specific theme of Trump's night and his campaign, revealed with typical deadpan cockiness in his closing remarks.
"Politicians are all talk, no action."
But wait, you say. George W. Bush took lots of action!
"You've seen where they've taken you to," Trump says. "We are [at a budget of] 19 trillion dollars right now […]. We need a very big change." Because, of course, "we don't win anymore."
Vacuous, you say. Pablum.
But consider the logic within. In a culture where "politics" has become an echo chamber — a vain hall of mirrors installed by the worship of rhetoric and self-regard — true politics, the art and science of victory, is dead. The kinds of action that arise from a corrupt political culture, from the corrupted idea that politics is a game of semiotics first, are, therefore, also corrupted: fake actions, actions without integrity, actions born to lose.
Trump is saying that, under George W. Bush, the Republican Party allowed its understanding of politics to be corrupted. For whatever reason, under Bush, the GOP became a party that let self-aware rhetorical posturing dictate the way policy was formulated. The result was failure across the board. Worst of all was the ensuing failure of memory as Republicans forgot the winning arts and sciences. In so doing, they enabled America to lose its way in the hall of mirrors — and lose its greatness.
This is a dagger to the heart of the Bush legacy.
But Trump is not just running against Bushism. He's running against what it's a symptom of — the certain kind of insider sophistry that he says defines the political class. That's why he was onstage at all last night. That's why he's in first place now. And that's why he's more at home in the GOP than so many want to admit.
To understand how that could possibly be, understand what he's not arguing.
The typical critique of politics today is that the ruling class has been corrupted by privilege. There's too much money in politics; there's too much of a cult of access; the tropes go on and on. Trump's not saying that. Instead, he's saying, the ruling class has been corrupted by foolishness. The problem isn't that "the politicians" have vanished behind the velvet rope. It's that they've vanished up their own rear ends. Obsessed with themselves, they have forgotten who they are. They have lost their way — and ours.
Hard as it is to stomach or say, that is a kind of wisdom so deep, so populist, and so potent that many conservatives can't help but flutter toward it. Then again, neither can many moderate or liberal Republicans, which is why Trump performs well across all groups.
To be sure, in some ways Trump is a dreadful messenger for this dreadful message. Then again, watching him work up there like a Soviet wrestler, it's clear this man is not riding a fad or indulging a fantasy. An immense physical and mental strain is involved in hitting his fellow candidates — hungry, disciplined men — on issue after issue. He is delivering an intense message that no one else has proven capable of delivering with the requisite intensity: a shocking insight, when you pause to think about it, but for the fact that in this election year, nothing can shock anymore.


http://theweek.com/articles/606035/why-donald-trumps-vicious-attack-george-w-bush-brutally-effective--brilliant

[GH2001]

You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.

Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.

Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.

I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.

But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me

Pretty much his platform ^^

[The Six]

You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.

Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.

Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.

I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.

But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me

Pretty much his platform ^^

[CCTAU]

You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.

Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.

Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.

I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.

But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me

Pretty much his platform ^^

But it did happen on Bush's watch. I agree it was not on him, but in most businesses and even the military, it matters not if it was your fault, only that you were in charge. I see where he comes from in that regard. I don't agree that it was Bush's fault, but that is not what Trump said.

And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.

So this is not about whether or not Trump is worthy. It is about why he is in the position he is in today. Your hatred of all things Trump do not even allow you to have a civil conversation about the state of affairs today.

I am flabbergasted that Trump is getting the support he has. This article attempt to analyze that.

In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.

[WiregrassTiger]

I the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.

Unfortunately, this is the absolute truth.  He has run an incredibly effective campaign and I guess that if he is able to continue to swashbuckle his way through the primaries, then I will hold my nose when I pull the lever.

But I really do hope that it doesn't come to this.

[AUChizad]

In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.

OR.

You vote for the grown-up.

[GH2001]

But it did happen on Bush's watch. I agree it was not on him, but in most businesses and even the military, it matters not if it was your fault, only that you were in charge. I see where he comes from in that regard. I don't agree that it was Bush's fault, but that is not what Trump said.

And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.

So this is not about whether or not Trump is worthy. It is about why he is in the position he is in today. Your hatred of all things Trump do not even allow you to have a civil conversation about the state of affairs today.

I am flabbergasted that Trump is getting the support he has. This article attempt to analyze that.

In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.

I get that.

But they are related. Trump can point out the flaws of W all he wants but he himself is an issue just as bad. Trump is using W and the dissatisfaction of the establishment to elevate himself when ideologically he is actually worse. He is pandering to a group of older white people who feel they've been betrayed. And they are right in that regard as far as their leaders go (GOP congress). But the answer ain't Trump. No one changes course on policy in 6 months time. No one. We're talking full about face 180s. And on some things he hasn't changed course if you listen close enough. He is an authoritarian at his core. Which is the very thing people complain about with the establishment. And Hillary. All the same house painted a different color. Again I don't like W all that much but the stuff trump is spewing just isn't factual. And frankly it's not smart.

I know you and K are not idiots. Which is why it is frustrating for someone like me to watch all of this unfold like a train wreck. This is the rights version of Obama all over again. The slogans, the same talking points, the same pandering to an angry demographic, the style over substance, the Teflon nature. All of it. That's what is frustrating.

[GH2001]

OR.

You vote for the grown-up.

If someone wants a Constitutionalist, they should go to Cruz.

If they want pragmatism and appeal, go to Rubio.   

If they want pragmatism with actual experience and results, go to Kasich.

If they want establishment and someone "safe", go to Bush.

I don't see where Donald trump has a place. There is always someone else. All more viable and adult acting than him. Agree or disagree with any of them but they are who they are and I would take any of them over trump. Sorry but I'm just not buying what he is selling.

[AUTiger1]

And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.

That actually started in 1996 to 2000.  It started before Bush was nominated.  He just did nothing to stop it.

[AUChizad]

If someone wants a Constitutionalist, they should go to Cruz.

If they want pragmatism and appeal, go to Rubio.   

If they want pragmatism with actual experience and results, go to Kasich.

If they want establishment and someone "safe", go to Bush.

I don't see where Donald trump has a place. There is always someone else. All more viable and adult acting than him. Agree or disagree with any of them but they are who they are and I would take any of them over trump. Sorry but I'm just not buying what he is selling.

Agree. But I know of one guy who is all of those things you mention (maybe except "safe").

I voted for him last year, and Bob Barr before that. I didn't feel as good about voting for Barr (honestly I kind of think he's a bit of a dick), but Gary Johnson is pretty much the only politician out there that I am simpatico with.

It was futile as shit last year. I'm hoping in this bizarro election, where the top choices are all truly, truly terrible, rules are completely out the window, and we appear to be trying out to "alternative" candidates, why is Gary Johnson not getting more attention? They need to put him up on the debate stage when the Presidential debates roll around. If Perot and Nader were able to get the kind of support they did in those years, I see no reason Johnson couldn't pull in plenty from both sides and the center in this year of all years.

[CCTAU]

OR.

You vote for the grown-up.

That's what I said, A VOTE FOR THE OTHER SIDE!

[GH2001]

Agree. But I know of one guy who is all of those things you mention (maybe except "safe").

I voted for him last year, and Bob Barr before that. I didn't feel as good about voting for Barr (honestly I kind of think he's a bit of a dick), but Gary Johnson is pretty much the only politician out there that I am simpatico with.

It was futile as shit last year. I'm hoping in this bizarro election, where the top choices are all truly, truly terrible, rules are completely out the window, and we appear to be trying out to "alternative" candidates, why is Gary Johnson not getting more attention? They need to put him up on the debate stage when the Presidential debates roll around. If Perot and Nader were able to get the kind of support they did in those years, I see no reason Johnson couldn't pull in plenty from both sides and the center in this year of all years.

It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.

That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.

[CCTAU]

It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.

Them damn gravoids will scare the hell out of you...

[War Eagle!!!]

It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.

That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.

That's where I am leaning.

I don't like expanding medicare either, however, some social programs are fine if you have a balanced budget, without raising taxes, to do it.

[AUChizad]

It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.

That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.

Completely agree. If Kasich can get the nomination, I'm all for him. This hysteric search for partisan purity is what has destroyed both sides, IMO. Governance Life is nuanced and you've got to be able to bend a little bit to make things work. PURE left or right-wing ideology is not what got us this far. If you think he'd be a pinko commie disaster that will bring us to ruins, you're a tinfoil hat nutjob. Unfortunately, I think there are too many of those in the GOP's base right now for him to have a shot.

So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.

[Kaos]

So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.

You've ridden a train of johnsons before, haven't you?

[Snaggletiger]

You've ridden a train of johnsons before, haven't you?

Well who hasn't.....I mean...err, good one.  You got him with that one.

[wesfau2]

So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.

Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.

[AUTiger1]

So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.

Same.  Alabama is going red anyways.  I will write his name in that little spot on the ballot if he is not on it.

[AUChizad]

Same.  Alabama is going red anyways.  I will write his name in that little spot on the ballot if he is not on it.

He is on the ballot in all 50 states.

Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.

Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.

Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste? Wouldn't it have been considered a waste to vote for an open Socialist not too long ago? Or a Fascist reality show billionaire like Trump?

WHY is common sense being treated as such a ridiculous notion? I realize I "wasted" my vote in the past. Two reasons I don't care. 1) It was who I agreed with more, and I was voting my conscious. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit notion if they're both evil. 2) I wanted to lay some foundation and try to dispel this notion that a third party can't get any traction whatsoever. #2 was a pretty big fail, as I remember no news coverage even reported on Johnson's numbers.

But I've been fed up with this bullshit for over a decade, and with this clown show going on this cycle I'm beyond fed up by a few lightyears. Everything is out the window now. So why the fuck not?