RNC prematurely declares Mike Pence debate winner two hours before start time

RNC prematurely declares Mike Pence debate winner two hours before start time

The Republican National Committee (RNC) appeared to accidentally declare on its website Tuesday night that Mike Pence was the winner of the vice presidential debate, nearly two hours before it was slated to start.

“Americans from all across the country tuned in to watch the one and only Vice Presidential debate. During the debate we helped fact check and monitor the conversation in real time [MENTION=12110]gop[/MENTION]. The consensus was clear after the dust settled, Mike Pence was the clear winner of the debate,” said the blog post on gop.com, the party’s website.

The post, which went viral nearly two hours before the debate was scheduled to begin at 9 p.m., said that Pence’s top moments were on the “economy” and “highlighting Hillary’s scandals.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rnc-pre...ce-debate-winner-two-hours-before-start-time/

What would one expect from the new Trump GOP.........

Waiting for the debate to conclude..................Why wait when Trump already know the answer

 

What's the big deal? Perhaps RNC guys can predict the future. No? They got it right, didn't they? Pence simply steamrolled poorly behaved Kaine to win the debate. I don't even like Pence, there's something dark about the guy, but he is a very good debater.

 

Well, that's an exaggeration, isn't it? Pence allegedly won simply because he remained calm. He lost on facts. Pence outright lied on a number of occasions during the debate. Sometimes he took positions which are diametrically opposite those of The Donald...the guy who's suppose to be his running mate, the guy who's at the top of the ticket.

The Russian policy and Syrian policy Pence laid out was diametrically opposed to Trump's Russian and Syrian policies. So did Trump change those policies? If so that's diametrically opposed to Trump's previous and often repeated policies. Why the flipflop? On many other occasions Pence didn't even attempt to do his job which was to defend his running mate. What Cane did was to give Democrats fodder for future debates and campaign ads.

I think Pence was looking out for Pence. I think the debate's biggest loser was Cruz. Pence is obviously setting himself up for a presidential run in 2020. Thanks to the debate Cruz now has a rival for 2020.

 

I thought Pence did a great job of defending Trump. When it comes to the lies, well what else can you say that is is just a lie. Kaine lied and lied and lied. He made himself look like an angry mad man. He was over prepped and over scripted. I listen to a lot of different radio shows. They spent the entire next day mocking Tim Kaine. And he kept trying to turn every subject into a discussion about Donald Trump's tax returns.

Donald Trump's tax returns are NOT, NOT the major problem facing our country you fools! WE HAVE A $19 TRILLION DEBT!!! We have a criminal running for president. She's corrupt, and paid for by big business. WE HAVE OPEN BORDERS AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE A MAJOR TERRORIST THREAT SPREADING ACROSS THE GLOBE.

God I hope the democrats lose!

 

Of course you do, it's what the Republican base always think. It doesn't matter who or what the issue is as long as the individual has an "R" somewhere before or after his or her name. But that doesn't make your beliefs factually correct. The fact is Pence refused to defend The Donald a number of times during the debate, and that was his job. For example, Trump is on record as being for nuclear proliferation which is diametrically opposed to the traditional bipartisan US policy against nuclear proliferation. He wants smaller countries like Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and Japan to defend themselves with nuclear weapons. Pence refused to defend The Donald's positions on Russia and Putin. Pence refused to defend Trump's nuclear proliferation policy. In fact, Pence took positions on Russia and Syria which are diametrically opposed to Trump's previously and often repeated stance on Putin, Russia and Syria. It was astonishing. I've never before seen that, and I have been around for a very long time.

https://thinkprogress.org/mike-penc...efending-donald-trump-c13fb6399c1e#.koizi0b97

http://time.com/4519050/vice-presidential-debate-pence-trump/

Well then, if Kaine lied, then you should be able to prove it. So let's see it. What did Kaine lie about exactly? You may not have liked the fact that Kaine was aggressive, but that doesn't it mean he lied or was "over prepped" or "over scripted" or even scripted. I'm sure you listen to a of "different" radio shows. But that's not saying much, because in the end, all those "different" radio shows aren't that "different". And I have no doubt right wing radio spent the entire day mocking a Democrat and Kaine in particular, it's what they do each and every day. There is nothing new or unusual in that. You see, I too listen to right wing radio. I find it entertaining. I like how they like to spin and distort the truth in order to manipulate their listeners. They are truly masterful at it. But when they just dump manure as they often do, the entertainment value ceases for me. But many of their right wing listeners love it; that's one reason why they do it.

If you think Kaine kept trying to turn the discussion to Trump's tax returns, then you missed 99% of the debate. Because that wasn't the case. There is a lot more to attack The Donald on other than his tax returns as evidence by Trump's prior debate with Clinton.

Well, you know, I don't recall anyone making that argument. But at the same time, that doesn't make Trump's tax returns any less important. Trump's tax returns goes to his transparency and credibility. Trump's unwillingness to disclose his tax returns as all presidential candidates have done for more than a half century calls into question Trump's credibility, and credibility is all important in any leader. If a leader doesn't have credibility, then he really isn't much of a leader. And that's a big problem for the country. That's why Trump's tax returns are important. Now, if Trump had a "D" after his name, I'm sure you would agree. But he has an "R" after his name and that's all you need to believe him or to support him.

Now, let's discuss the national debt. It's important to understand the national debt. But unfortunately, most people don't, because they have never had any formal education on the debt. That's most unfortunate. So let me give you a brief lesson on the national debt. The reported national debt is 19 trillion dollars. But that number is grossly overstated owing to the accounting method used by governments. Governments use an accounting method commonly referred to as "fund accounting". So when the government reports debt it reports debt the government owes to itself as debt. That grossly overstates the true debt of the nation. It's like writing yourself an IOU. If you borrowed a thousand dollars from yourself, would you call that debt when you went down to the bank to borrow money? No, you wouldn't, nor would the bank want you to.

The fact is about 9 trillion of the reported 19 trillion dollars of US debt is money the US government owes to itself. I bet you didn't realize, most people don't, that for the last 30+ years every time they earn a paycheck they contribute to the national debt. That's why the nation's debt has grown so much. Back in the 80's under Reagan's presidency, the government raised payroll taxes to pay for baby boomer retirements and in doing so they created massive Social Security and Medicare surpluses, about 6 trillion dollars of surpluses (i.e. debt) but the government turned around and gave those surpluses to America's richest families by reducing the taxes on America's wealthiest citizens. Capital gains taxes went from 40% to 15% courtesy of the American wage earner. That's something your many Republican radio talk show hosts will never tell you. Social Security tax surpluses were transferred from the Social Security Trust Funds and placed into the general fund which allowed the government to reduce taxes on America's richest families. And in so doing, government created 6 trillion dollars of "debt". I know that might sound a bit complicated to many people. But it really isn't.

The bottom line here is that the reported debt number is overstated. If government used the same accounting method used by businesses the reported government debt would be around 10 or 11 trillion dollars and not the 19 trillion dollars you correctly stated. About 6 trillion of that reported debt is excess Social Security taxes and another 3 trillion dollars of that debt is US debt held by the Federal Reserve. The government has repurchased about 3 trillion dollars of its debt.

And contrary to Republican assertions, contrary to your assertion, WE DON'T HAVE OPEN BORDERS. No president has deported more illegal aliens than Barrack Obama. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661

Unfortunately for Republicans, facts do matter.

Well, I'm sure you do. That's never been in question. But for your sake, for all our sakes, I hope they win. Trump is a very dangerous candidate. I've never witnessed a candidate as dangerous as Trump. Americans need to know about his conflicts of interest and how that would affect a Trump presidency. We need to know where his allegiances are. But more than that, we already know that he is advocating policies which, if he acts on them, will be devastating to the nation and our economy. As an example, Trump is advocating for protectionism. The last time we did that, i.e. Smoot-Hawley, unemployment went from 8% to 16% within a year and ultimately topped out at about 25%. I don't think most Americans think that would be a good outcome.

And then there is the fact that Trump is the biggest narcissist I have ever known. The man's a classic example of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. That's not what the nation needs. His personality disorder makes him very vulnerable to manipulation.

"Donald Trump seems to lack any qualities of perceptiveness or insight that would allow him to read other people, even for nefarious purposes, and in that has the classic stamp of the high narcissist." https://www.theguardian.com/science/shortcuts/2016/aug/23/donald-trump-psychopath-hitler

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

Trump's perceptiveness problems make him a very dangerous prospect for the Commander in Chief office. When a man like Trump can be so easily manipulated by the likes of Putin, that's very dangerous. I lived through the Cold War and the Cuban Missile Crisis. I think Trump risk to the nation and the world would trump - pun intended - even the Cuban Missile Crisis. This time we might not be so lucky, with 2 nuclear armed egomanical maniacs confronting each other things might not end so well for the nation or the world or humanity at large.

 

I read the first article, it does show that Pence did defend Trump on the bogus charges that Kaine falsely made. If fact, I went back to check the 2nd article, and it too claimed Pence didn't defend Trump, then they quoted Pence defending Trump. What kind of alternate universe do these liberal Crooked Hillary arsekissing journalists live in?

From your own link:

Did they spin that or what? And when exactly did Kaine defend Hillary Clinton on her email controversy? When did he defend her pay for play? He said that the state department and FBI didn't find anything wrong. Well, that is an indictment of the corruption of the State Dept. and the FBI.

You know, I watched the debate, and I've watched many of Trump's speeches as well. I also watch Hillary's few and far between events. Trump talks about these issues, Hillary doesn't. Trump has said at many of his rally's that nuclear proliferation is a terrible problem. He has said that nuclear weapons is the biggest threat facing this world and mocks that President Obama thinks that it is global warming. So, when he has been quoted as saying that he wants these countries to get nuclear weapons, that is just misconstruing what he has said to be the opposite of what he means. He is either being misquoted or the statements are purposefully being taken out of context. He's saying that North Korea and Iran getting nuclear weapons will force an arms race and Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia will feel they are forced to get them too. So it's a warning about nuclear proliferation, not an endorsement of it.

As for Russia, I don't think they have opposite positions on Putin, Russia or Syria either. What do you think is different? Trump has said that Russia won't get away with invading Ukraine like they did under Obama and Clinton after her disastrous "Russian reset". He has said that he wants to work with Russia, to stop ISIS. What is wrong with that? He says he wants to create a safe zone for Syrians, which is what Pence said. What exactly do they not agree on?

Actually, I stopped listening to the right wing radio shows like Mark Levin who is my favorite and Glenn Beck because they attack Trump more than Hillary. I listed to John and Ken who are in the liberal Los Angeles market, and Armstrong and Getty, also very successful in the liberal San Francisco Bay Area. Yes, they lean right also, but they are not GOP cheerleaders by any means. They are critical of both sides. Sometimes I get the chance to listen to Rush Limbaugh. He's still very good, but I don't get his podcast.

Yeah, but they are issues that don't matter to the public. I don't think that his taxes or Alicia Merchado are in the top 20 of issues that are important to the American people. Hillary are fixated on personality flaws and character assassination of Donald Trump, while completely ignoring the extremely flawed character of Hillary Clinton herself. Sure attack Trump about calling a beauty queen fat, but remember, Hillary Clinton has systematically went after dozens of women who have accused her husband of affairs, harassment, sexual assault and even rape. She has accepted millions of dollars from Middle East dictators and theocracies that abuse women's rights even execute them.

Pence made that argument.

His taxes are not an issue, they are not a requirement, despite past candidates doing it, and frankly, I believe that it shouldn't be disclosed because number one, even politicians should have a right to some privacy, and number two, I don't want him to release them because whatever information is in there will be used to hype up some manufactured controversy and we'll spend a week or two on the issue when there is very little time left in this election.

But, once again, the double standard of the democrats and the media, they aren't asking Hillary to give up the 33,000 deleted emails to meet Trump's challenge. He said he would release them if she releases the emails. The media is not pressuring her to do it, and she isn't offering.

As far as credibility goes, Hillary Clinton deleted 33,000 emails that were under a congressional subpoena and court subpoena and Freedom of Information Act requests. Then she lied to congress about her attorney's reading every email, about turning over all the emails, about not sending or receiving classified emails, about the number of devices she used about receiving subpoenas and more. Hillary Clinton hasn't an ounce of credibility.

This is the most ignorant understanding of how our nations debt works that I have ever seen.

No, this isn't money that the government owes to itself. It is money that is owed to the Social Security Trust Fund. It is money that is owed to Americans when they retire.

Your version of history is the worst most stupidest version I've ever read in my life. Reagan actually worked very hard for a bi-partisan agreement to create the Social Security Trust Fund. Before then, Social Security was just a part of the general fund. The money was never ever separated. Now, the money in the trust fund has always gone to buying US bonds, so the government is still spending that money, but that didn't create the our debt at all. Here is what creates debt, it is one thing and one thing only = Spending more than you take in. It's that simple of a formula. Reagan did cut taxes, which resulted in spurring economic growth, which in turn increased revenues to the treasury by double in his eight year presidency. Unfortunately, budget cuts that was agreed to and the democrats promised never came. Instead, spending increased every year at a faster rate than the tax cut related revenue increases came into the treasury.

Our national debt is $19 trillion. But that number is not overstated, it is by far, vastly understated. That number does not take into account unfunded liabilities. That is to say, money that is owed to the future. We are actually more than $205 trillion dollars in debt.

Once again, this is just a stupid statement. If we didn't have open borders, how is it possible that we have 11 to 30 million illegal aliens living among us? And everyone know that the new stats on deportations is rigged to reflect the number turned away at the border, which was never before counted as deportations. I can find plenty of articles on the surge of people coming in the last couple of summers, and it is going on now. Here is just one from the New York Times:

U.S. Moves to Stop Surge in Illegal Immigration

What about Hillary's allegiances? She owes millions to the Saudis and other Middle Eastern dictators and Muslim theocracies. She sold our uranium to the Russians. She has no loyalty to the US. Neither does traitor Barack Hussein Obama either.

I can't think of a single presidential candidate that didn't have that narcissistic quality, except for maybe the George W. Bush and Reagan. They are all narcissistic, including "why am I not 50 points ahead" Crooked Hillary.

Hillary is extremely narcissistic, admit it.

What about Hillary once again? What about her lack of judgement, Benghazi, Russia, Crimea, China and the South China Sea, and especially Libya and Syria and Iraq and Iran! She is compromised in so many ways it unimaginable. With the money that has been committed to her from foreign countries, and money given to her and her husband from home and abroad, with her scandals, and his sexual addiction, they are perfect extortion material these two.

 

Oh, well you should be able to prove it then. So let's see it. I gave you 2 specific examples in which Pence failed to defend Trump as validated by my references.

It not only claimed, it showed where Pence failed to defend Trump's policies. In the case of Russia and Syria Pence invented his own policy which is completely and diametrically opposed to Trump's previous and often repeated policies on the same.

Unfortunately for you, these journalists, and most of the civilized world live in the real world. They don't live in your right wing fantasy world. There is a big difference. And here is the problem, you can't prove any of your many assertions about "crooked Hilary" or "ass kissing journalists". because they aren't true.

Truth and honest aren't spin. If you think Kaine didn't defend Hilary, then prove it. Kaine did defend Hilary and you just inadvertently admitted it when you wrote, "He (referring to Kaine) said that the state department and FBI didn't find anything wrong". There is no evidence of "pay to play". That should be problem for you and those like you. But it isn't, because you guys are not bound by honesty. If you were, you wouldn't make these baseless assertions.

No, I don't know you watched the debate or that you have watched many of Trump's speeches or some of Hilary's speeches. If you did what you claim to have done, then you should know Trump rarely speaks about policy issues. He has 9 policy papers posted on his web page and one of those is his much vaunted wall which I don't think Trump even believes he will build. In comparison, Hilary has 39 policy papers at last count and may have even more by now.

If you have watched and listened to Trump then you should know he didn't even know what the Triad is and he wondered why we don't use nuclear weapons. The fact is Trump has advocated the use of nuclear weapons. Where has Trump said, " He has said that nuclear weapons is the biggest threat facing this world and mocks that President Obama thinks that it is global warming". Trump has mocked global warming, but that's another discussion. Trump's web page says nothing about nuclear weapons being the biggest threat facing this world as you have alleged. If he really believed that you would think he would post it on his web page.

The unfortunate fact for you is per previous references Trump has endorsed nuclear proliferation on a number of occasions. That's probably why Pence invented his own policy during the debate.

http://realnewsrightnow.com/2015/08/trump-i-will-absolutely-use-a-nuclear-weapon-against-isis/

Two months ago, Trump didn't even know Russia had invaded Ukraine.

"Washington (CNN)Donald Trump said Sunday that Russian President Vladimir Putin won't make a military move into Ukraine -- even though Putin already has done just that, seizing the country's Crimean Peninsula.

"He's not going into Ukraine, OK, just so you understand. He's not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want," Trump said in an interview on Sunday with ABC's George Stephanopoulos on "This Week."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-russia-ukraine-crimea-putin/

I've already explain to you what different between Trump's policies and the policies announced by Pence during the debate. I suggest you go back and read, this time more slowly, and read the references as well.

Does it make a difference? You listen to right wing entertainers and you unquestioningly believe whatever they tell you and they are all very conservative. You, like many self described "conservatives" eschew mainstream media, i.e. unbiased sources of information in favor of right wing partisan sources which frequently lie and misrepresent the truth.

Trump's tax return disclosure wasn't listed on the survey you cited. Don't you think that's a little dishonest? How can you honestly use that survey to make a conclusion about something that wasn't even listed on the survey? Whether you want to admit it or not, and clearly you don't, Trump's transparency is an issue of importance.

There is no double standard the mainstream media and you can't prove that there is, because it doesn't exist. Hilary's emails were widely reported for months, and Hilary's emails were never under subpoena. Hilary turned willingly turned over both the emails and her server the the FBI willingly. Unfortunately for you and your self describle "conservatives" who are anything but, the truth matters.

Hilary cannot give up what she doesn't have. No one can give you something they don't have. Think for God's sake.

Is it? Then prove it. But you can't. Because that is how the national debt works.

Yes, it is money the government owes itself. That's why the US Treasury separately reports these numbers. Who owns the Social Security Trust Fund? Do you have an equity account in the Social Security Trust Fund? No you don't. You have no special ownership stake in the Social Security Trust Fund. The Social Security taxes you have pay are taxes, they aren't savings deposits. The Social Security program has always been a pay as you go system. Social Security taxes are taxes. Taxes aren't debt. It really is that simple.

Well, my version of history is reality,and I have evidence to back it up. You don't. Taxes are not savings deposits. Yes Reagan cut taxes, mostly on the wealthy, but he also raised taxes. But that has nothing to do with the fact that he raised payroll taxes and cut taxes for America's wealthiest citizens. It's the old trickle down thingy which has been thoroughly discredited.

The unfortunate fact for you is that debt the government owes to itself isn't debt. The government can call it whatever it wants. The excesses taxes sitting in the Social Security Trust Funds aren't debt. They are excess taxes, and when those excess taxes are transferred to the general fund in order to pay for tax cuts for America's richest citizens that transfer is recorded as debt owing to the accounting method used by the federal government. But that doesn't make the transfer debt in the traditional sense. As I told you before, if the federal government used the same accounting methods used by private industry, that intragovernment debt would be netted out in the consolidation process and never reported as debt.

"Unfunded liabilities"...really? What does that mean? The government will spend trillions of dollars over the course of the next century, does that make all of those future "unfunded" liabilities debt? No it doesn't. Unfortunately for Republicans words have real meanings even if those meanings doesn't suit their ideological beliefs. The reported national debt number is over stated for the reasons previously given.

Let's try to keep it simple for you. The Defense Department intends to spend hundreds of billions of dollars next year. Should that future Defense Department spending be considered debt? If your answer is no, then why should you expect Social Security funding be treated as debt? The only difference between the Defense Department and Social Security is the Social Security program has a special tax to fund its operations. That's it. That doesn't turn the excess taxes it has collected into debt.

The fact is contrary to your assertions we don't have open borders, and the fact remains Obama has deported more illegal aliens than any president in American history. It is possible that we have 11 to 12 million illegals because they didn't all get here over night. Those 11 to 12 million illegal aliens got her over the course of nearly a half century.

Now if you have evidence that the numbers are "rigged" now is the time to show it. But you as with everything else with you, you don't. Because the numbers aren't rigged. That "everybody knows" routine works for the Republican base, but that's only where it works. Unfortunately for Republicans, in the real world, you need evidence and reason, and unfortunately Republicans rarely have it.

What about them? She has fully disclosed everything. She doesn't owe any money, much less millions to the Saudi's or other Middle Eastern dictators and Muslim theocracies and she didn't sell uranium to the Russians. In fact up until a few days ago, the US has been purchasing uranium from the Russians.

You have no evidence Hilary has absolutely no evidence Hilary or Obama are traitors. But the again, you really don't care about evidence and reason. Do you?

Well there is a difference between normal people and Narcissistic Personality Disorder. There is absolutely no evidence Hilary suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. There is a mountain of evidence demonstrating Trump's affliction.

What about Hilary again? There is nothing in her background to suggest she is in anyway compromised or that her judgement is in anyway defective. Has she made mistakes? Yes, she has. But who hasn't? There hasn't been a president who hasn't made mistakes. That's not the goal post. In case you don't know it, everyone makes mistakes. The difference between Trump and Hilary is that Hilary has the ability to admit it and learn from her mistakes. Trump doesn't.

The problem is and it's a big one, is you have no evidence to support your many assertions. You have no evidence Hilary's husband is a sex addict, and most of her "scandals" aren't scandals. They are unfounded partisan charges against her made by Republicans. Republicans have charged Hilary of everything from simple malfeasance to serial murder all without a shred of evidence. And they have spent tens if not hundreds of millions of government money over the course of 3 decades investigating her and found not even an iota of evidence to back up their many accusations.

I guess you haven't learned about Trump's sexual addictions and sex tapes and extramarital dalliances. That's what happens when you get your information from so called "conservative sources like Fox News. There's an old adage about people who live in glass houses. They shouldn't be throwing stones.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...n-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-

3d26847eeed4_story.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ump-porn-softcore-playboy-movie-a7340376.html

http://www.esquire.com/lifestyle/sex/news/a49300/donald-trump-playboy-movies/

 

Too Long To Read.

Let me just say, that I disagree with everything you've said above. You are wrong on every issue, and you are making things up. Unfortunately, my time is too valuable to dispute every accusation line by line, particularly when they are vague accusations like "They don't live in your right wing fantasy world." If you wish, I can address your concerns, but you need to really work on brevity and try to break it down to 2 or 3 main points or ideas. If you can't do it in one post, do it in several.

Thank you.

 

(VP Pence) Virginal Probe Pence lost that debate

 

How to you know you "disagree with everything" I wrote or that I'm "wrong on every issue" if you didn't read it? If I'm making things up, then you should be able to easily prove it. But you can't, hence your obfuscation. Whether you agree with what I wrote or not, it's all true. And that's very problematic for you, so you summarily and without merit dismiss everything. I understand, the truth rattles your world. That's not a bad thing. That's a good thing. Maybe, just maybe, if enough worlds are rattled people will start thinking critically instead of just mindlessly repeating and believing what entertainers and part officials tell them. We can hope.

 

I don't have to read it to know your mind set. You will excuse all things
liberal. You have no idea you are being manipulated and brainwashed
by corrupt government and their corporate overlords.

 

No, I think you are afraid of the truth. Unlike you, I won't excuse all things. You cannot prove your assertions. You have no evidence to support your assertions. That's the bottom line here. So you make excuses, evade the issues, project your insecurities onto others, and call me names. But that's not going to change the truth. Instead of dealing with the truth,with reality, you simply go into denial and projection mode lest your world be rocked by the truth. It's like trying to convert a religious zealot. It ain't going to happen,. But at least others many see, read, and know that the emperor has no clothes.

If your assertions were true, you could prove them. But you can't and that should be a problem for you. But it isn't, because this is religion with you and those like you. This isn't about facts and reason with you and folks like you; it's about blind belief and blind faith in your ideology. That's a dangerous place for Republicans, i.e. self described "conservatives" who are anything but conservative and more importantly, it's a dangerous place for the nation.

By the way, just so you know, I'm a independent. I left the Republican Party back in 1992. Up till then I had been a life long Republican. But with the rise of the Republican entertainment industry, the Republican Party I had known died. Republican entertainment allowed the Republican base to avoid any and all inconvenient facts and as a result the Republican Party has become more extreme and out of touch with reality. With each election cycle, and with each party purge, the Republican Party has become more extreme. That's not good for the Republican Party or the country. The country needs to healthy parties, and that's not what we have today, courtesy of Republican entertainers. As Daniel Moynihan, a Republican, is attributed with, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.". With the rise of the Republican entertainment industry, Republicans have broken Moynihan's rule. Republicans can invent their own facts, i.e. fictions, and they do. That's a problem for not only Republicans but the nation. That's who you can get someone like The Donald at the top of the Republican ticket.

Just so you know, I supported McCain in 2000 when McCain first represented himself to be a maverick. Two years ago, I gave money to and voted for a Republican. I care about the truth, and I care about reason more than I care about party affiliation or an established ideology. Democrats in my view have their share of problems, but hey are dwarfed by the problems currently vexing the Republican Party. And frankly, I'm not sure how they extricate themselves from this mess. I'm not sure they can.

 

Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a Democrat, a lifelong democrat to my recollection. Regardless, the GOP hasn't become more extreme to the right since '92, it's become Democrat Party Light. There are so many RINO's in the GOP that the republican citizens end up voting these RINO's in only to be stabbed in the back. This has resulted in the nomination of Donald J. Trump. People don't trust the politicians, they don't trust the government, present company and all democrats excluded.

 

Whadyaknow, they were prescient.

 

And of course you believed them as you read it 2 hours before it was announced........or for that matter the debate had finished

 

They're doing better at predicting than the AGW alarmists.

 

Silly...........

 

So is this thread.

 

Stupid because it's embarrassing you mean............

 

Yes, you should be embarrassed starting this thread.

 

Adolescent.........

 

Glad you agree, the thread is very adolescent.

 

What difference does it make if Moynihan was Democrat? Unfortunately, this is part of the problem. America's so called "conservatives" who are anything but conservative, are taught by the Republican entertainers they follow to slap a Democrat or "liberal" label on anything and everything but Republican Party dogma and then ignore it. Labels allow Republicans or so called "conservatives" to summarily and without merit dismiss many and all inconvenient facts and reason.

Contrary to your assertion, the Republican Party has become demonstrably more extreme since the early 90's and that's obvious to outside observers and many Republicans as well. Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan's son and a steadfast life long conservative has said his father and mother would not support this Republican Party.

"My father would not support this kind of campaign, if this is what the Republican Party wants leave us Reagans out. Nancy would vote for HRC," he tweeted. - Michael Reagan, eldest son of Ronald Reagan

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/06/politics/michael-reagan-donald-trump-election-2016-don-lemon/

Republicans claim Obama is some sort of liberal, imperial extremist and cite Obamacare as an example. Obamacare was Romneycare and before that it was the official Republican policy and had been since 1994 when it was created inside a Republican think tank. It was endorsed by and promulgated by Republican leaders right up until Democrats decided to back it in 2009. Now Republicans view it as a takeover of American healthcare, even though it is anything but. What were reasonable ideas to Republicans are now anathemas with Republicans because the Republican Party has become more and more extreme with each election failure and resulting ideological purge.

The problems face isn't the lack of ideological purity, It's exactly the opposite. The Republican Party has become too ideologically pure and Republican ideology has become divorced from reality. Republican ideology is so divorced from reality, it can never deliver the promised goods. That's apparent to everyone but the Republican base, i.e lesser educated white males.

PS: I was a Republican in the 70's. 80's, and early 90's before the Republican Party went off the rails and headed down the path towards extremism. It's also important to note the rise of Republican extremism coincides nicely with the rise of the Republican entertainment industry.

 

This is the exact opposite of the truth. The GOP establishment has moved so far left the party is unrecognizable.

It's the Democratic Party that has moved so far to the left that it has become too extreme.

I don't think Michael Reagan can say that his father and step-mother would be for gay marriage,
open borders, $20 Trillion in debt, the Iran Deal, stripping the military to the bare bones.

Once again, the reason Donald Trump is the nominee is not because he's a conservative to the
extreme. Trump is quite liberal on some issues. The reason is because the GOP has betrayed
the base over and over. This is an anti-establishment movement. Whoever doesn't see this is
betrayed by their own loyalties to their parties, their idiologies, the politicians and government.

 

Unfortunately, it's the exact truth, and I gave you examples. And whether you want to recognize it or not, and clearly you don't, both parties have moved to the right with rise of Republican entertainment.

Well, then you should be able to prove it, but you cannot. Because is simply isn't true.

Well, then prove it. But yet again, you can't. Because it simply just isn't true.

So you don't think Reagan's children knew their father? I'd like to see some evidence on that one too. The fact is all of Reagan's children believe the same thing. Michael Reagan has been and remains a very devote Republican.

Let me remind you, Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to illegal immigrants. "I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally," Ronald Reagan said in 1984. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672

Democrats basically want to do what Reagan did in 1984.

Additionally, Reagan is largely responsible for the 19.7 trillion dollar debt. About 6 trillion dollars of the reported national debt is directly attributable to the Social Security Trust Funds. For that last 30 plus years every time some received a pay check they have contributed to the national debt, because a portion of that paycheck was transferred from the Social Security Trust funds into the Treasury general fund and used to pay for tax cuts to America's richest families and in so doing reported as debt. So Reagan is directly responsible for a huge portion of the reported national debt.

Six trillion dollars of the reported national debt is nothing more than excess payroll taxes collected over the course of the last 30 plus years, and those payroll tax excesses are directly attributable to Ronald Reagan. One more point, the US Federal Reserve hold about 3 trillion dollars of US Treasury debt. So when you look at the real US debt it's about 11 trillion dollars, not 20 trillion dollars. Money you owe to yourself isn't debt.

Additionally, saying we have open borders makes for good demagoguery in Republican circles. But we don't have open borders. We spend billions every year on border enforcement and this president, President Obama, has deported more illegal aliens than any American president before him.

The fact is Ronald Reagan's children attest to the fact that their parents would be horrified and appalled at what the Republican Party has become.

Trump is very "conservative" by today's standards. But there is nothing conservative about what passes for conservationism today. Trump is the Republican nominee because he is the ultimate Republican entertainer. I listen to right wing radio every day. Trump is the perfect incarnation of a Republican entertainer. That's why he is where he is today. That's why his message has been successful in right wing circles. Trump has a very careless disregard for the truth.