Wednesday, August 10, 2016

GOP Presidential Canmdidate Goes Beyond Overboard... (2 Update 8/11/16)

Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth


Yesterday Donald Trump pushed the limits of anti political correctness beyond the boundaries any rational thinking person can accept. His judgement, often in question since he announced his candidacy last June, is increasingly becoming more bizarre and skirting the boundary between just a bit crazy and pure insanity.

We are of course talking about his remarks at a campaign rally in North Carolina when he said the following:


"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks, All the Second Amendment people — maybe there is."


What troubles me is the feverish frenzy the liberal left has worked themselves into over what is admittedly a very stupid statement, However, there is no credible reason to think Trump was suggesting or encouraging 2'nd amendment rights advocates to assassinate Hillary Rodham Clinton. Trump is many things that many people disapprove of, but, inciting or engaging in actual violence is not among them.

The following, my comments on two liberal weblogs, really sum up what is a more reasonable view and understanding of Trump's admittedly very foolish and unthought-out remarks.

Dumb statement by Trump. Extremely stupid in his wording. However his explanation is certainly plausible.

The "if Clinton gets to pick her judges" is hypothetical, possible only if and when she is elected. Trump was, as he said, speaking to 2'nd amendment rights advocates to encourage them to vote for him as he would select pro firearm conservative judges.

I very highly doubt Trump was suggesting assassination of Clinton. Trump has demonstrated time and time again his tendency to shoot from the hip and think later. A quality we can ill afford in the President of the United States.

Trump may be wealthy but when it comes to politics and government he ain't to bright.



Do we really believe Trump was suggesting the assassination of Clinton. Methinks not.

Trump's statement "if Clinton gets to elect her judges" is hypothetical at this point and can only happen if she is elected. It is not only plausible but very likely Trump was talking to 2'nd amendment rights advocates. He needs their votes and he was sending the message he would appoint conservative pro 2'nd amendment rights judges.

It was a stupid shoot from the hip statement, something Trump is prone to do. A quality we can ill afford in the President of the United States.

Stupid, yes. Presidential, absolutely not. Will it affect the avid Trumpian's viewpoint, nope. But did Trump mean to imply nefarious intent, highly unlikely and very improbable.

He likely pushed more undecided but Clinton leaning folks into HRC's fold.

A VERY STRANGE YEAR INDEED.

Trump has, without a doubt thrown his judgement into further question-- the resounding response should be to deny him the presidency by a landslide margin. But the liberal left's over heated hyperbole is a bit too much as well. Trump was not advocating assassination.

Just to make it very clear... This weblog does not support Donald Trump, is working for his defeat, and is encouraging folks to vote for HRC.

More HERE.


Update 8/11/16

Yesterday in a response to a comment by Flying Junior I said...

Rational Nation USA Thu Aug 11, 05:17:00 AM EDT

Frankly IMO the GOP nationally (and by state) should denounce his rhetoric and withhold financial support from the campaign. And, Faux "News" should cut off his near 24/7 freebeess. But, neither the GOP or Faux "News" is governed but common sense any longer.

Oh, I forgot to mention the NRA, Trump's biggest fan club should make a statement against Trump's rhetoric. They won't however.

Trump has bad judgement, is unfit, unqualified, and therefore does not, IMO, deserve to win the presidency. But he was NOT suggesting assassination.


This just out...

POLITICO - More than 70 Republicans have signed an open letter to Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus urging him to stop spending any money to help Donald Trump win in November and shift those contributions to Senate and House races.

The letter comes as a number of Republican senators and high-profile GOP national security officials have come forward saying they cannot vote for Trump.

“We believe that Donald Trump’s divisiveness, recklessness, incompetence, and record-breaking unpopularity risk turning this election into a Democratic landslide, and only the immediate shift of all available RNC resources to vulnerable Senate and House races will prevent the GOP from drowning with a Trump-emblazoned anchor around its neck,” states a draft of the letter obtained by POLITICO. “This should not be a difficult decision, as Donald Trump’s chances of being elected president are evaporating by the day.”

SKIP

The letter ticks off a series of Trump actions that they believe have "alienated millions of voters of all parties,” including, attacking Gold Star families, positive comments about violent foreign leaders and encouraging Russia to find Clinton’s lost emails.
“Those recent outrages have built on his campaign of anger and exclusion, during which he has mocked and offended millions of voters, including the disabled, women, Muslims, immigrants, and minorities,” the letter states. “He also has shown dangerous authoritarian tendencies, including threats to ban an entire religion from entering the country, order the military to break the law by torturing prisoners, kill the families of suspected terrorists, track law-abiding Muslim citizens in databases, and use executive orders to implement other illegal and unconstitutional measures.”

It is good to see the RNC beginning to recognize and accept the disaster that Donald J. Trump is for their party specifically and the nation in general. Maybe there really is a chance, as slim as it may be, that the republican party will rebuild the party and pursue an actual sensible fiscally agenda and embrace a much more inclusive agenda and path for the future.

It is looking like Trump will be the star in America's Greatest Political Loser of All Time.

Read full story BELOW THE FOLD.

Via: Memeorandum


2'nd Update 8/11/16

The Washington Post - Some of the country’s wealthiest Republican donors are targeting Senate and House races around the country, hoping a financial firewall will protect the party’s congressional majorities on Nov. 8. Their investments — fuel for a record haul by super PACs this year — reflect a fear prevalent throughout the party: that Trump’s contentious candidacy threatens to trigger an electoral rout up and down the ballot.

Those worries spilled into public view Thursday, when a letter signed by more than 75 longtime GOP officials and party veterans asking the Republican National Committee to shift its resources to vulnerable Senate and House candidates was made public.

As the focus and funds are diverted to down ticket candidates the Trump campaign will need more free airtime from its biggest media support, Faux "News".

Read the full story BELOW THE FOLD.

Via: Memeorandum

15 comments:

  1. Whether he meant it to incite violence or not, it doesn't matter. The fact that he said it, and that 2nd amendment wing nuts will interpret it as an inducement to violence, is what matters. A presidential candidate should be smart enough to know that, and since he does not, he deserves all the crap he is getting for saying such a ridiculous thing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Trump is many things that many people disapprove of, but, inciting or engaging in actual violence is not among them."

    But Trump has said things that can be construed as inciting violence.

    And there's this:

    At a campaign rally in Kansas City on Saturday, the day after the unrest in Chicago, Trump addressed an earlier event in Dayton, Ohio, when a protester tried to storm the stage.

    The candidate said he would have fought the person had he reached the lectern and mimed punching him a few times.

    "I'll beat the crap out of you," he then mouthed.

    "Part of the problem ... is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore."

    At a press conference in Florida earlier on Friday, Trump was asked about his rhetoric in the wake of an incident in which a supporter at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, sucker-punched a black man in the face.

    While he wasn't asked about that specific altercation, Trump said of violent behavior in general at his events: "The audience hit back and that's what we need a little bit more of."

    He also praised people using physical force at his rallies as "appropriate."

    On NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday, Trump said he would have his team look into paying the legal fees of 78-year-old John McGraw, who was charged with assault and disorderly conduct after attacking the protester.
    "In the good old days this doesn't happen because they used to treat them very, very rough."


    SOURCE

    ReplyDelete
  3. The only moral justification for an act of violence is in Self Defence .

    I am perfectly aware of Mr. Trump's proclivities to shoot from the hip first and think later. He is without question Unfit to be president. Everyone should criticize Trump's lack of good judgment that show him to be unfit AND unqualified to hold the office of the presidency of the most militarily and eeconomically powerful nation in the world.

    But intentionally interpreting his remarks as a dog whistle to assassinate HRC is ludicrous IMO. As well as it likely is to millions of other people
    no doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  4. RN: ...interpreting his remarks as a dog whistle to assassinate HRC is ludicrous IMO...

    Yet, that is exactly what he did. His explanation later was 100 percent implausible.

    Trump: "Obama is the founder of ISIS. I would say the co-founder is Crooked Hillary Clinton". These comments coming shortly after Trump called for the death of Hillary Clinton, should she be elected. Our government has targeted ISIS leaders for assassination (and actually killed a number of them). He's doubling down.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your opinion, not mine. It ludicrously fits your agenda, not mine. I'm not backing away from my posistion on this.

    Nor will you. You work your angles to defeat Trump. I'll work my truth to defeat Trump. In the end We Both Win . Its called finding the common ground to defeat the mutual enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, Les, Trump does say some pretty incendiary stuff. In that same speech he said Hillary Clinton would abolish the 2nd Amendment. There are screwballs out there that really eat this stuff up, ya' know.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nobody thought that Sarah Palin was actually advocating the assassination of sitting congress critters in 2011 with her oh-so-cute crosshairs graphic across a map of the United States. She was just targeting ten congressional seats that had unfortunately fell to democrats in 2010. So she used a targeting device that is only used for two things, guns or surveying telescopes. It made a point. Good on her.

    So Jared Loughner shot a bullet dead through the head of his congress critter, Gabby Giffords, right when she was doing a meet the public event. No connection? You tell me.

    The difference? For all her foibles, Sarah Palin is a sane and decent American. OTOH, Trump has a pattern over the last year of inciting violence through ridiculous hyperbole. You all remember it. Offering to pay for legal defense for those arrested for assault. List them for me. I don't need convincing. He's a menace. It's time he get a stern warning from the authorities.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm willing to bet that when the appropriate authorities spoke to the Trump campaign (likely Trump himself) he did receive an appropriate warning Flying Junior. As it should be because he just skirted the line.

    Frankly IMO the GOP nationally (and by state) should denounce his rhetoric and withhold financial support from the campaign. And, Faux "News" should cut off his near 24/7 freebeess. But, neither the GOP or Faux "News" is governed but common sense any longer.

    Oh, I forgot to mention the NRA, Trump's biggest fan club should make a statement against Trump's rhetoric. They won't however.

    Trump has bad judgement, is unfit, unqualified, and therefore does not, IMO, deserve to win the presidency. But he was NOT suggesting assassination.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm willing to bet that when the appropriate authorities spoke to the Trump campaign (likely Trump himself) he did receive an appropriate warning Flying Junior. As it should be because he just skirted the line.

    Frankly IMO the GOP nationally (and by state) should denounce his rhetoric and withhold financial support from the campaign. And, Faux "News" should cut off his near 24/7 freebeess. But, neither the GOP or Faux "News" is governed but common sense any longer.

    Oh, I forgot to mention the NRA, Trump's biggest fan club should make a statement against Trump's rhetoric. They won't however.

    Trump has bad judgement, is unfit, unqualified, and therefore does not, IMO, deserve to win the presidency. But he was NOT suggesting assassination.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Trump WAS suggesting assassination. He said it because he knew it would appeal to his racist base (not because he wants HRC assassinated if elected). And he knew he could just deny that's what he meant latter. Worked with RN (who is vigorously denying the obvious).

    ReplyDelete
  11. RN, Does Trump want Clinton assassinated if she becomes president? Like you, I believe the answer is no. BUT can what he said be interpreted as saying that she should be assassinated, the answer is definitely yes. He has millions of followers. Some are undoubtedly unstable. As Lawrence O'Donnell said last night, "It only takes one!" History has proved that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You repeat the democrat playbook well. My question is was your post considered plagiarism.
    Don't need to worry RN because four years from now when nothing changes and the corruption is rampant we can scratch our heads and say we need a change.

    He was appealing to his supporters who will vote form him and that is people who support the 2nd amendment. This is much the same as -H- supporters who support taxing the rich and corporations to give away more free stuff and buy votes.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm my rational, unemotional view... NO Jerry.

    ReplyDelete
  14. @ skudrunner and with respect to his comment... GIBBERISH. As usual.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.