Tuesday, February 16, 2016

GOP Establishment Besides itself Over Trump Debate

They all were so sure that Trump had finally stepped on it by going after Jeb's brother the way he did.

Even Morning Joe, who's become quite a Trump fan recently thought he was way off base in being so critical of W's  Iraq War and even suggesting he was to blame for 9/11.

Rubio jumped to W's defense: 9/11 is the fault of Bill Clinton alone-the Democrat. It can't be in any way W's fault though he had been President for nine months by 9/11. Somehow those nine months don't count.

According to Rubio, on the one hand, Presidents aren't allowed to fill Supreme Court vacancies in their last year in office. But on the other hand they can't be blamed for anything that happens in foreign policy in their first year in office. Maybe we should allow Presidents' only two years then as the first and last are meaningless.

Yet, lo and behold, we have some post debate SC polls and they don't seem to have hurt Trump at all.

In both post debate polls he's still up there and in neither is Jeb doing very well-in a new PPP poll he's now down to 7 percent for a last place tie with Ben Carson.

Gong after Trump like he did may have been a big mistake. He might have been better off staying in his own Establishment lane and going after Rubio who according to PPP is now in a second place tie with Ted Cruz at 18 percent a piece.

He needs badly to finish ahead of Rubio in SC. If Rubio can finish as strong as he is in this poll this may help him recover some of his lost mojo in NH after that robotic debate.

Indeed, no one attacked him in the last debate-but Cruz. Bad mistake, I think. Jeb isn't going to finish ahead of Trump in SC. He should go after Rubio.

As for his brother, I can see the argument for using him in SC as W does have a very high rating among SC Republicans, but even so it's a risky strategy that Trump is exploiting to the quick.

"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."


  1. Mike now W is bashing Trump. I hope Coulter tears into W in Donald's defense. She should go into full screech owl mode... I'm thinking words like moron, incompetent, cynical, unthinking would be a good place for her to start.

  2. Yes, I saw that. But Trump ominously wondered why this is the first public comment W has made in 8 years.

    He then even more ominously suggested W would have been better off staying behind closed doors.

    1. Mike, Google Mark Levin Trump 9/11, George Bush. He's mad at the RNC for stacking the debate audience, but oddly he's furious at Trump for criticizing w on Iraq. But of course he is! Trump effectively pooped on Jesus. (Even though Levin is a Jew). That's why I've never appreciated Trump more than now. He's destroying the central lie of the modern GOP. That's why I want Bush to stay in this thing. More than Cruz. I want Trump to keep a steady stream of diarrhea pouring down on the GOP jesus.

    2. I'm not saying w is their jesus. I'm saying the central wmd and Iraq war justification lie is. And Levin actually explains why: because if Trump is right it means w and his admin and everybody who defended them are the worst kind of evil. Exactly! It's like saying jesus was a two bit pos conman.

  3. The main thing for me is Anyone But Rubio.

    Though, after seeing his robot performance she could have some fun against him too.

    1. Sure I understand. But Levin correctly senses an existential threat to himself. If Trump is right it means he and the rest of the rw media machine are obviously pos conmen, and the mob might turn on them. There couldn't be a better outcome as far as I'm concerned. The radical journalists in the French Revolution did all mostly end get put to death or assassinated.

    2. Quoting Levin: "If George Bush went to war in Iraq and was lying about weapons of mass destruction there could not be a worse thing a president of the United States could do, or human being for that matter. And there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

      I love the way he concludes with an obvious falsehood. Even the bush admin didn't find wmd. They admit it! But for Levin to admit it is cognitive dissonance... At least for his audience.

    3. You're right: Bush should focus on attacking Rubio. Go Jeb! Go Trump! Lol.

    4. ...Levin concludes with a falsehood, but he's spot on with the rest.

  4. Mike, it looks like Limbaugh is playing it safe as usual. Tearing into the establishment for stacking the audience, but staying out of the Cruz Trump fight. He's not going to either Levin or Coulter's position. He's sticking with what they have in common. Is that your impression? What a viper pit. I hope it gets really uncomfortable in there. That it stops being fun.

    1. I think it's already a viper pit though for me that makes it all the more fun.

      Yes, that is Rush-he usually plays it safe. The poll numbers seem to suggest that no one was fooled and the stacked deck didn't play well as Jeb's numbers are sinking and Trump's remain strong

    2. That's what makes Levin's rant about stacking the deck a little curious. His boy Cruz also defends W on Iraq (though perhaps not during the debate?). I think Mark just wants to throw a few rocks with the cool kids.

  5. At the same time, it would be fun to see Jeb get crushed in SC, especially now that W is personally investing himself in it. I can see why W is motivated more than before: in a sense he's defending his legacy and honor as a human being (taking Levin's words). If SC says "F-you asshole: we changed our mind about you. You're a disgrace" in response to his efforts, that will be satisfying. Still, like you, I'd like to see Rubio do even worse.

  6. It would and it wouldn't. If him getting crushed leads to Rubio gaining strength and ending up with the nomination then not for me it wouldn't be.

    I do feel like Rubio is lucky here in getting a pass. This Politico piece seems to back this idea up.

    1. How about this: Iraq, WMD and "Sadam did 9/11" defenders ALL get crushed. I'd like to see W become as toxic to the right as Nixon. He deserves it more than Nixon in my view: much more!

      If the GOP goes isolationist, the neocons won't stand for that. They'll go Democratic before they support isolationism. I truly believe they view political parties as simply a means to accomplish their foreign policy goals. NOT that I'd be thrilled with then influencing the Dems, but if that's the best deal they can get, so be it. They can join on our terms.

      Rubin is always a good gauge of the neocon view:

      "Let’s start with the incontrovertible: Donald Trump has no clue what he is saying, in large part because he has contempt for the truth. There is no — zero, zilch — evidence President George W. Bush “lied” about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Not even Hillary Clinton — who thought the same thing — would go so far. Every major Western intelligence agency believed there were WMDs in Iraq as did then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, current Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Bob Woodward."

      "Do South Carolina voters look at this guy and actually think, “Yeah, that’s the guy to be commander in chief and to make Supreme Court nominations!”? If so the GOP is in deep, deep trouble."

      "First, remember the right-wing talk show hosts and blogs that were pushing this guy. Stop treating them — and their anti-immigration hysteria — as serious political analysis."

      "Finally, Trump opponents, Republican officials and leaders of conservative organizations need to stop saying they will support Trump if he is the nominee. He’s not remotely capable — intellectually, ethically or temperamentally — for office. They can figure out later what to do about it if he does get the nomination. Preventing him from getting the nomination, however, requires a consensus that party solidarity should never require supporting someone so manifestly unfit for the country’s highest office, especially in times like these."

      She even said it in one of those pieces: Even HRC isn't THAT bad! (and she loathes HRC). I swear she'll be a supporter before Nov! Lol

    2. I hope SC proves to Jen that the "GOP is in deep, deep trouble."

    3. HRC vs Trump in the general: the neocon nightmare. Good. Maybe they'll all move to some other hapless country they can con into stupid wars.

  7. More neocon BS on WMDs:

    Their whole edifice of lies is in danger.

    Let's look at what really happened:
    They were hell bent on their war with Iraq. Why? I could guess, but I'll refrain.
    They would stop at nothing to get it, so they misrepresented facts and brushed all concerns under the rug, and viciously going after anybody saying the emperor had no clothes.
    They got what they wanted by spinning a BS tale of Sadam's involvement in 9/11 and another (totally unrelated tale) of WMDs, using any pretense they could.

    What I find most galling is not that they ineptly miscalculated the risks on what could go wrong, but that they lied to get what they wanted, and worse they never even thought carefully about what possibly could have gone RIGHT! It's almost like they believed Disney movies and comic book happy endings. Their thinking was so unrealistic ... bringing democracy to a new pro-Israel Iraq. "Cakewalk." It wasn't just that the lying was evil, it was that what they wanted was based on moronic feel-good movie endings. The markings of a TRUE conspiracy theory... with realistic moron conspirators, who bungle the job and leave their obvious fingerprints all over. A slow motion train wreck, with many many missed opportunities to avoid it.