GOP Field Shrinks To Four As Jeb Fades
It's been a month since I last took a look at the Republican presidential horserace, and there have been a number of dramatic developments in the meantime. So it's time once again to cast an eye over the Republican field.
Before I begin, a few technical notes are in order. First, data comes from the Real Clear Politics Republican poll-tracking page. The last column I wrote used the data from November 8th, on the RCP graph (every time I say "since last time" below, this is what I'll be referring to). And my own categories, as before, are divided into four levels: those with no chance of winning the nomination, those with a slim or longshot chance, those with a decent shot at winning, and those with a great chance of becoming the nominee. These are fairly arbitrary divisions, but they're what the race has so far seemed to require.
In the past month, there has been notable movement from a number of candidates, two of whom actually dropped into a lower category. Three candidates headed upwards in the polls, and all the rest stayed the same. Without further ado, let's take a look at the categories, from worst chance to best chance.
No Chance
There was a change in this list, but only because Bobby Jindal threw in the towel and doesn't have to be listed anymore. Other than that notable development, there are four Republican candidates who struggle to even get a single percent in any individual poll. They are: George Pataki, Lindsey Graham, Rick Santorum, and Jim Gilmore. Not a whole lot needs be said about any of them, since none of them will become the nominee.
Slim Chance
Last month, the big story was that Carly Fiorina had dropped down into this longshot category. This month, the big story (one that few others are even admitting yet) is that Jeb Bush has also now dropped down to longshot status.
This is a stunning development, because it comes after Jeb's super PAC just spent almost $30 million on ads. For this expenditure, Bush has sunk from 7.0 percent all the way down to 4.0 percent. He's below five points, and falling. Bush's last two national polls both had him at three percent. After spending more than every other Republican candidate combined.
What this means is that even though Bush still has an estimated $60 million or more to spend, it's not going to do him any good. When the voters just aren't buying what you're selling, it doesn't matter how many times they hear the pitch, in other words. Jeb, like Hillary Clinton in 2008, had one simple plan to win the nomination: be inevitable. Unlike Clinton, however, all Bush's money and all his inevitability might not win him even a single primary. After spending a fortune, he's fallen under five percent in the polling. That's a pretty dismal return-on-investment, folks! Because there's no easy answer for Bush ("throw more money at the problem" has definitely not worked yet), he can't even be considered a contender for the prize any more. Bush is now merely "at the forefront of the absolute longshots." That's it. How the mighty have fallen.
There are really three mini-tiers in this category, and Jeb can indeed claim to be the only one in the clear lead. All of these candidates, however, all only separated by a margin of 2.2 points, so these really are micro-divisions. Forming the middle of this pack are Carly Fiorina (3.0 percent) and Chris Christie (2.8 percent). Carly finally bottomed out of her own spectacular fall in the polling, and now gets a pretty steady three percent, down 8.8 points from her high point. Christie, on the other hand, has been polling in the two-to-three-percent range for months. He drifts up a point, then down a point, and recently is on an upswing which places him with Carly in the middle.
The lower micro-tier has John Kasich and Mike Huckabee tied at 2.0 percent, and Rand Paul who fell to a new low of 1.8 percent. All three of these guys are drifting downward, and all three are bordering on falling into the "no chance whatsoever" category entirely.
Decent Chance
Other than the news of Jeb stumbling so badly, most of the real action took place in this category. None of these candidates are frontrunners, but they're all in a strong position to leap into frontrunner status by becoming "the best alternative" to the current frontrunner. Each of these candidates saw significant movement in their polling last month, but this news was only good for two of them.
Ben Carson is in the midst of a campaign collapse. There's just no polite way to put it. His numbers are headed down, and they're headed down in a big way. Last month, Carson was giving Donald Trump a real run for his money, and Carson had even led in the polling briefly (a feat no other candidate has come close to achieving). This month, he's dropping like a stone. Currently, he's at 15.8 percent, down from 24.4 last time around. That's a falloff of 8.6 points in a very short time. Nobody quite knows why Carson fell when he did -- his numbers got worse even before the Paris terrorist attacks refocused the race on foreign policy. He said a few outlandish things, but then he's been doing that for the entire race, while his polling went up, not down. But for whatever reason, Carson seems to be fading fast. He won't disappear altogether, as I think he's got a certain level of core support that won't abandon him for a while, but as an actual contender for the nomination I think he's headed towards being the best longshot (the position Bush now occupies). He could surprise everyone and recover, but that's pretty rare for any candidate who has been near or at the top and fallen so far. The only silver lining for Carson right now is that he's still leading the other second-tier candidates -- but that will likely last only until the next few polls come out.
Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have certainly benefited from Carson's collapse. While Carson was falling, Cruz and Rubio were rising on an almost-identical climb to each other. So far, it's been a slowish climb, but a significant one nonetheless. Cruz went from 9.6 percent last month to 14.8 percent now -- a jump of 5.2 points. Rubio rose as well (but not by as much), from 11.8 percent to 14.3 percent. The two seem to be in a neck-and-neck race for second place (or will be, after Carson falls a bit further). Rubio has, so far, led this race by a nose, but in the past few days Cruz pulled ahead for the first time since they both began climbing. Interestingly, Cruz has jumped considerably in Iowa, while Rubio has stayed fairly stable. This could become an important dynamic the closer we get to the first caucuses, because a Cruz victory there might shift the public's perception in a big way.
Great Chance
For now, the Republican race has to be seen as a four-way contest. Carson still has better numbers than anyone but the frontrunner, and Cruz and Rubio are climbing steadily. But, of course, one name continues to stand out. Donald Trump has also benefited from Carson's fall, and his poll numbers rose from 24.8 percent last time around to a whopping 29.5 percent. That is roughly twice the support of any of the other main contenders.
Last month, Trump was in a real race for first place with Ben Carson. This time, he alone leads the pack -- way out front and pulling away. Carson's collapse means there is nobody even close to Trump in the polling, and all the terrorism and foreign policy focus seems to have actually helped Trump's numbers (as, ever modest, he himself pointed out recently).
Donald Trump is not exactly inevitable as the Republican nominee, but he sure is looking like the best bet, at this point. People have been predicting his collapse since the day he got into the race, and it has just not happened yet. Only one candidate (Carson) has even briefly challenged him in the polling. Nobody else has come close. Everyone else has struggled to even reach double digits.
I've been saying it all week: we are officially through the looking glass. Donald Trump is the sole frontrunner of the Republican nomination race. He shows no signs whatsoever of fading. He insults audiences to their faces, and his numbers go up. In fact, while I was writing this article (I've since been informed), Trump said something completely outrageous today -- but I bet it won't hurt him in the polls, no matter how crazy. Choose your metaphor: bulletproof, Teflon, water off a duck's back. Unless the race gets more competitive as Republican voters start flocking to Carson, Rubio, or Cruz (and, crucially, also start ignoring the other two), Trump may be untouchable. For now, at least, he is the only person worthy of the label of "frontrunner."
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Carson is fading because he doesn't channel the right wing id like Cruz, who is the only experienced officeholder left even challenging Trump. And Trump is doing so well because he casts aside all that politically correct stuff about human rights and empirical fact and rational thought to stimulate the conservative hindbrain like no one else on the stage. The right tried a compassionate conservatism, but it didn't work out; Sarah Palin electrified them with her John Bircher conspiracy nuttery, giving us a preview of the Tea Party era; now, we're seeing the new, non-compassionate conservatism. The movement has transformed into a nakedly-nativist, Alex Jones-'informed' lunatic asylum, and Carson is too much of a doctor to let a ward run itself like that.
OK, an update:
I have now added together all the donations I missed in the past week (discussed in today's Program Notes, in case you missed it), and updated the Pledge Drive graphic.
Woo hoo! We're over a third of the way there!
The response so far has been great, with more new donors than in the past few years. I thank everyone for donating (and will send out thank-you emails later tonight), and encourage everyone else to give if you can. We really want to keep the site ad-free next year....
In any case, sorry for the delay, it won't happen again.
-CW
Oh, forgot to say: you may have to refresh your browser (reload the page) to see the new graphic.
-CW
Poor, Jim Gilmore, he is so far out, you don't even bother to get his name right.
santoroski -
Whoops, ya got me! Mea culpa. It's now been fixed, and the editor responsible is getting coal in his stocking this year.
:-)
-CW
If I were a jihadi in India and I wanted to sneak into the USA to do some terroristy stuff, I would tell President Trump's goons that I was a Scientologist. I would hide my dirty ebola bomb inside of an E-Meter.
Donald Trump is the sole frontrunner of the Republican nomination race.
Remember way back when Trump started his campaign and he was resoundingly ridiculed...
Remember what I said??
"Ya'all ridicule Trump at yer own risk.. Trump didn't get to be richer than god by being a clown.."
And lo and behold, here we are... :D
Michale
197
If I were a jihadi in India and I wanted to sneak into the USA to do some terroristy stuff, I would tell President Trump's goons that I was a Scientologist. I would hide my dirty ebola bomb inside of an E-Meter.
Why wait for a Trump presidency??
Just tell Obama you are a gay muslim fanatic and you'll be invited in, given a cushy government job where no rules or laws apply to you...
:^/
Michale
199
JFC-
"If I were a jihadi in India and I wanted to sneak into the USA to do some terroristy stuff"....
Cue harp music and a ripple effect and you have the classic segue into an ISIS music/dance internet video.
Note to CW: ball has been been placed on the T, lets see what the li'l' guy's got!
I'm surprised Trump has proposed (yet) that all Muslims in the US wear a yellow crescent and/or traditional garb in public. Can't be too careful. Make 'em live in special neighborhoods, with a wall, and a gate for checking in and out.
The horse race polls and prediction markets are starting to converge now that the Republican pack of nominees is being culled. The top 3 is the same, but the markets order it:
Rubio, Trump, Cruz. Carson faded to an extreme long shot weeks ago, and never exceeded much over a 6% chance of winning the nomination.
Some of the shine is off the Rubio brand at the markets where there has been a steady decline for several weeks, down to about 35% (from a fleeting high over 45%). Over the same interval, Cruz has been climbing to an all time high of 17% chance of nomination.
Trump odds have been highly volatile over the last two weeks, his graph looks like an un-mowed lawn, his percentages have fluctuated over as much as 5% in a matter of days. He burbles around 22-23%. I think this reflects Trump's big hurdle, his high negatives. Cruz and Rubio loyalties are more interchangeable.
Bush is still number 4 at the marketplace, and he's actually had a very modest recovery over the past few weeks - to just over a 10% long shot. Oh for early days, when he was peaking just under 45%.
As I said one or two articles back, Republican adults are in a panic because they fear that even if Trump is forced out, the surviving nominee will have tacked so far right that he can't win enough swing states. Voters think popular votes, professionals think electoral votes in swing states, and Trump talks without ever bothering to think.
I think the only real issue now is the depth and veracity of Rubio's credit card shenanigans. If it turns out there is enough to taint him, the field is open for Cruz.
This, for me, is the most worrying possibility. Cruz makes Trump look sane.
What of Rubio's affair??
That go anywhere??
Hard to believe a man with Rubio's wife would stray..
On the other hand....
http://media.philippines-addicts.com/images/forum/uploads/monthly_12_2013/post-15082-0-18951200-1386370947.jpg
:D
Michale
205
"Ya'all ridicule Trump at yer own risk.. Trump didn't get to be richer than god by being a clown.."
He got rich by inheriting a LOT of property and a thriving business in NYC. He is not a self-made man.
He got rich by inheriting a LOT of property and a thriving business in NYC. He is not a self-made man.
Yea, he inherited a LOT...
But he didn't inherent his entire wealth..
And if he was the clown ya'all CLAIMED he was, he would have lost it all in short order..
I know giving credit where credit is due is anathema to the Political Ideologue's psyche....
But a reasonable and logical person can hate someone and STILL acknowledge and respect their capabilities...
Michale
206
I know giving credit where credit is due is anathema to the Political Ideologue's psyche....
But a reasonable and logical person can hate someone and STILL acknowledge and respect their capabilities...
Am I wrong??
Michale
207
M-15,16
Trump is no dolt. He is pretty canny with regards to marketing. That said, it would have been hard not to increase your capital when you inherit a real estate empire during the up cycle of a real estate boom. Trump has had a least one corporate bankruptcy, probably more, when times weren't so good. It didn't kill him - he was too big to fail.
But he didn't inherent his entire wealth..
It's been calculated that if Trump had liquidated all his inherited assets, invested in an unmanaged index fund and spent his life on the golf course, he would be considerably more wealthy than he is today...
Trump is no dolt.
Is that the same thing as admitting that Trump is no clown??
Trump has had a least one corporate bankruptcy, probably more, when times weren't so good.
"I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
-Michael Jordan
I'm just sayin'
Michale
208
It's been calculated that if Trump had liquidated all his inherited assets, invested in an unmanaged index fund and spent his life on the golf course, he would be considerably more wealthy than he is today...
Who calculated and for what purpose??
Michale
209
Who calculated and for what purpose??
Just about every financial rag has done a version of it. I think they do it to bring in readers and counter people like you who prop him up as some sort of business genus. Most of these rags are in New York where Trump hate has a long and storied history.
Most of these rags are in New York where Trump hate has a long and storied history.
Ergo, the claims (since they are based on hate) SHOULD be taken with a huge grain of salt...
OK.. Got it...
Michale
212
Ergo, the claims (since they are based on hate) SHOULD be taken with a huge grain of salt...
And yet still classified as "low sodium" compared to the amount of salt required anytime Trump opens his mouth...
But hey, he might be Darth Trump after all...
And yet still classified as "low sodium" compared to the amount of salt required anytime Trump opens his mouth...
That's an opinion and I respect that..
But it's the opinion of someone who is a Hillary Clinton supporter so ... really..... :^D
Michale
213
""I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
-Michael Jordan
I'm just sayin'"
And I'm just sayin' that Michael Jordan had a freakishly great talent for basketball, plus a winning personality, while Trump has a freakish talent for promotion, including an ability to take both sides of virtually any issue at some point in his career. Trump is no business genius, but he talks a great game.
Trump is no business genius,
If that were true, he would be broke and destitute right now...
You can make all the partisan-based insults you want, but the FACTS and REALITY proves that Trump IS, indeed, a business genius...
Ya'all have been saying things like that against Trump since he announced his campaign..
And yet, here he is...
So, what am I to believe??
The political partisan bias or my own eyes?? :D
Michale
214
The House took the first steps to rein in the visa waiver program Tuesday, rallying for a bipartisan vote to demand high-risk travelers face stricter scrutiny as Congress and the White House look for ways to keep potentially thousands of foreign fighters from reaching the U.S.
Under the terms of the bill, which still needs Senate approval, visitors who normally wouldn’t need a visa but who have recently visited controversial countries such as Syria and Iraq would be forced to face new levels of scrutiny before being admitted into the U.S.
19 Democrats voted against this legislation....
For shame, Democrats... For shame...
Michale
215
Great quote about Trump from Nate Silver (talking about what works in the pre-primary state of the nomination process):
"What about being a jerk? If you can make yourself the center of attention — and no candidate in modern memory has been more skilled at that than Trump — you can potentially turn the polls into a referendum on your candidacy. It’s possible that many GOP voters are thinking about the race in just that way now. First, they ask themselves whether they would vote for Trump; if not, they then choose among the 16 other candidates. The neat thing about this is that you can overwhelmingly lose the majority in the referendum — 75 percent of Republicans are not voting for Trump — and yet still hold the plurality so long as the “no” vote is divided among a sufficient number of alternatives."
fivethirtyeight -dot- com/datalab/donald-trump-is-winning-the-polls-and-losing-the-nomination/
No one will win the election without the Independents..
And the Independents HATE Hillary with a passion...
Advantage: TRUMP
Michale
216
Woot! Fund drive!
The Donald pissed a lot of people off people in NY before he decided to become a national arsehole. Thus in NY they have been ridiculing his "I'm a great deal maker" nonsense for a while. Here are a couple of articles that evaluate his wealth if he had invested in a broad portfolio of S&P 500 stocks vs. his 'amazing deals':
http://www.vox -dot- com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund
fortune -dot- com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/
Neil,
Trump has pissed a lot of people off, period..
And yet, his numbers continue to rise..
:D
Michale
217
Woot! Fund drive!
I am counting on you, David!! :D
Michale
218
David may be the last one you CAN count on ... :(
David may be the last one you CAN count on ... :(
Why??
Just because I don't toe the Party line??
What's changed between now and the last 10 years???
I mean, besides the fact that Obama is the biggest frak-up we have seen since Jimmy Carter and there is really nothing left that ya'all can point to that is GOOD about Obama?
Besides all that, I mean...
Well, I am sorry that Obama didn't live up to your expectations..
But that's no reason to kill the messenger... :D
Michale
262
Just because I don't toe the Party line?? What's changed between now and the last 10 years???
I don't toe the Party line, so that can't be the reason.
What's changed is that I have finally tired of your MO in commenting, generally speaking. I have no energy left for reading it much less responding to most of it.
It's ironic because you would find quite a lot of criticism of the current administration and even some praise for the last one - from me alone if from no one else - if every single one of your comments weren't so steeped in cynicism and disdain for the American body politic.
I don't know how else to explain my frustration with commenting here, these days. And, since this is really the only place left for me, it is also very saddening. :(
It's ironic because you would find quite a lot of criticism of the current administration and even some praise for the last one
If there was then I wouldn't be here... Or, at least I wouldn't be here as much..
But we both know that there isn't.. On either score..
Things are now diametrically opposite as they were in the beginning of Weigantia..
Back then it was ya'all who were castigating and attacking the Administration on a daily, sometimes hourly basis and it was me who was saying "Oh com'on, things aren't THAT bad..."
Basically, ya'all are playing defense right now... And judging from your comments, you don't like playing defense..
And I am truly sorry about that...
Michale
265
@Michale [#37]
If there was then I wouldn't be here... Or, at least I wouldn't be here as much..
Is it 265 posts in less than 3 or 4 weeks? That 'bout right? Ever imagine what you'd say if you limited your posting to, say, twice daily? The practice brings a kind of editing mentality to it: "no, that's not worth this post; no, not that either...". I know, I've tried it and it helps.
With 265 posts in, say, 26 days, I think you've probably crossed the line from merely critiquing as part of a broader conversation that intends to engage with your fellow conversants into simply haranguing them. I'm not convinced that's helping you get your point across.
There is value in playing devil's advocate and there is value in calling out hypocrisy. Occasionally, you've caused me to have to think over a point more. I'm just not sure 10-20 posts a day of frequent judgement of other commenters and your broad brush "ya'all"s and "Left Wingery" is really helping us see your point.
If nothing else, it's insulting to refer to us -- to me, to @Elizabeth Miller, to @akadjian, to each and every of us individuals -- as just party drones, all while simultaneously proclaiming your somehow unique high-minded independent objectivity. Michale: 10 to 20 posts a day of "if you all were just as independent and free thinking as I am, America would be great again" is not gettin' 'er done, my friend.
Or is it not your objective to change hearts and minds? If not, then what?
My advice -- and it's heartfelt, because challenging groupthink is valuable and its what I thought you intended to do -- is, for a week, try writing but a single post per day on CW. What would you choose to say if you had to say it in one post? How would you say it so that it really counted?
@Elizabeth Miller
For what its worth, your comments in particular are a reason I contributed to CW's site this year. It'd be a true shame if your voice was not longer heard here.
rdnewman,
For some reason, I keep wanting to call you Randy! And, then, all I can think of is that song he wrote about New Orleans ... and then I start to cry ... well, almost. :)
Anyway, it's Richard, right?
Thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate them. I'm going to keep commenting here as long as there are people like you and David and Bashi and even Paula and Mopshell and others who balance things out against our resident leader of the comments section.
Speaking of Michale, his number of comments is rising fast as they do every year at this time, specifically between American thanksgiving and New Year's Day. This is because his pledge to the CW.com Holiday Fund Drive is based on the number of comments he makes. This is the only time of the year when I hope he keeps breaking his previous years record! I only ask that he try to tone it down a bit but, Michale is Michale and, when it comes right down to it, I guess I wouldn't really want him to change ... too much. :)
RD,
What she said... :D
Michale
275
@Elizabeth Miller [#39]
Ah, thank you for correcting me! And, yes, it's Richard. Only my wife gets to call me randy... ;) But Randy did write some good stuff, so not unappreciated.
@Michale
I owe you an apology then re number of comments! So, I'm sorry, Michale. On January 1, though, I'm happy to discuss New Year's resolutions if you like...
@Michale
<...realization slowly dawns...?
So what I heard then was that if I make a bunch of claims, challenges, and arguments you feel compelled to respond to, it'll cost you money?! And help CW?!
I know what I'm doing later today. We can discuss Politifact, gun control, how awesome our current President is....
Heh.
On January 1, though, I'm happy to discuss New Year's resolutions if you like...
Heh.
I owe you an apology then re number of comments! So, I'm sorry, Michale.
No apologies necessary...
The fact that I am also sporting a nasty flu (I *NEVER* get sick) is also lending to me being a little more snotty... (get it?? Flu?? Snotty?? :D) than usual... :D
On January 1, though, I'm happy to discuss New Year's resolutions if you like...
I'm up with that.. Or is it down with that??:D
Michale
276
So what I heard then was that if I make a bunch of claims, challenges, and arguments you feel compelled to respond to, it'll cost you money?! And help CW?!
"HE CAN BE TAUGHT!!!"
-Genie, ALADDIN
:D
Trek is always a good subject as well...
Speaking of which... I just recently had WHOAA!!! WAIT A MINUTE moment, completely out of the blue....
Why was Kahn Noonein Singh so different in STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS??
The event that caused the alternate time-line was LONG after Kahn and the Eugenics Wars...
So Kahn should have been completely the same as he was in the "real" time-line...
I mean, they casted some pale Brit in the role... They should have got a young Ricardo Montelban look-alike... Right???
Michale
277
Ah, thank you for correcting me! And, yes, it's Richard. Only my wife gets to call me randy... ;) But Randy did write some good stuff, so not unappreciated.
"I always wanted to be called 'Randy'. But no one calls me Randy except my wife and my basketball coach.. 'Hay Randy!! Go backdoor!!' "
"..... I'm guessing that was your basketball coach.."
-SPIN CITY
:D
Michale
279
We can discuss Politifact, gun control, how awesome our current President is....
Speaking of Gun Control..
It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
https://newrepublic.com/article/125498/its-time-ban-guns-yes-them
Remind me again how the Left Wingery is NOT about banning all guns???
:D
Michale
286
@Michale [#48]
Remind me again how the Left Wingery is NOT about banning all guns???
Wait, I'm confused. Am I part of the "Left Wingery"? I identify as Democrat, voted for Obama and would do so again (given other current options). I own a couple of weapons and would not support a ban on all firearms. All I saw was that someone named Phoebe Maltz Bovy wants to ban all guns. Never met her. To make an argument against gun bans, Michale, I promise that you do not need that big ol' "Left Wingery" brush. I'm tired of you getting paint all over me... :D
Why was Kahn Noonein Singh so different in STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS??
When I watched the movie: Exact. Same. Thought! I didn't see Abram's point in changing that character so much. Forget ST movie #2 WoK, even the TOS episode w/ Montelban didn't warrant some of those changes. I didn't mind that Khan was British instead of Latin (or Spanish?), just that the circumstances of TOS didn't seem to hold. Still, I like the new ST movies in general and just kind of shrugged it off as its another universe and they're gonna do what they're gonna do. Kinda of like reading DC (or even Marvel) comics...
***
Finally, Michale, did you watch Jessica Jones yet?If you're laid up with the flu (get well soon!), then you have a perfect opportunity. Who would she vote for in the primary? (I ask only to pretend to keep it on topic...)
Wait, I'm confused. Am I part of the "Left Wingery"? I identify as Democrat, voted for Obama and would do so again (given other current options). I own a couple of weapons and would not support a ban on all firearms. All I saw was that someone named Phoebe Maltz Bovy wants to ban all guns. Never met her. To make an argument against gun bans, Michale, I promise that you do not need that big ol' "Left Wingery" brush. I'm tired of you getting paint all over me... :D
Well, then speak out against the Phoebes Maltzes Bovys of the Left..
Silence Gives Assent :D
Michale
288
@Michale [#48]
Speaking of, you and I had a conversation awhile back re gun control and I actually thought we were close to being in the same county on the subject. The idea was what if there were no restriction on gun ownership except that gun owners had to be trained and licensed (and I'm not talking the ridiculous 4-hour little dog and pony show, but a real training like one might get in handling a firearm over multiple weeks and hundreds of rounds with emergency response training. Nothing too onerous, but better than just learning how to load it on a Saturday morning before brunch.
I'm up for that. Especially if such licensing involves regular renewal requiring X hours or Y rounds per year. Kinda like a pilot's license or what have you.
I don't know how much it might prevent mass shootings, but I got to believe that it's more likely that licensed citizens with such training is more likely to constitute a real citizens' militia that could meaningfully respond in such a situation. And it would make gun ownership less casual.
Where'd you end up on that idea?
@Michale #[50]
Okay, I disagree with Ms. Bovys.
Now what?
When I watched the movie: Exact. Same. Thought! I didn't see Abram's point in changing that character so much. Forget ST movie #2 WoK, even the TOS episode w/ Montelban didn't warrant some of those changes. I didn't mind that Khan was British instead of Latin (or Spanish?), just that the circumstances of TOS didn't seem to hold. Still, I like the new ST movies in general and just kind of shrugged it off as its another universe and they're gonna do what they're gonna do. Kinda of like reading DC (or even Marvel) comics...
Good.. So it's not just me...
In and of themselves, the STAR TREK 90210 movies aren't bad. Great effects, action packed, really good...
And I can even understand them wanting to re-invent Trek for a new generation..
My only beef has always been, why did they have to kill 6 billion Vulcans to do it??
Why did they have to totally decimate established Trek lore??
I didn't mind that Khan was British instead of Latin (or Spanish?),
Middle Eastern... Kahn's domain stretched across Asia
to the Middle East..
Which explains why Kahn HAD to be a pale Brit...
Can't be demonizing the Middle Eastern man, now can we!? :^(
Michale
289
Okay, I disagree with Ms. Bovys.
Now what?
Thank you...
Now, anytime someone talks about gun control and mentions the UK or Australia, your mission (should you choose to accept it) is to calmly and rationally explain to them that, here in this country, we have a 2nd Amendment that says it is a constitutional right to own guns.. That means handguns and long guns...
Then sit back and watch how your calm and rational argument turns them beet red with apoplectic hysteria... :D
It's fun.. :D
Michale
290
Finally, Michale, did you watch Jessica Jones yet?If you're laid up with the flu (get well soon!), then you have a perfect opportunity. Who would she vote for in the primary? (I ask only to pretend to keep it on topic...)
Who says I am laid up?? I still gots to work. I have a high maintenance family.. :D
But, unless Jessica Jones is downloadable, I doubt I can watch her...
:D
Michale
291
@Michale [#54]
Now, anytime someone talks about gun control and mentions the UK or Australia, your mission (should you choose to accept it) is to calmly and rationally explain to them that, here in this country, we have a 2nd Amendment that says it is a constitutional right to own guns.. That means handguns and long guns...
Okay, no problem. I can do that. Have done it.
Doesn't mean we can't have regulations about their use, possession, and ownership. We have a first amendment too, but I can't yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater.
RD,
I can't speak to training and classes because, obviously, I had years...
But here in FL, I believe 2 8-hour courses are required (might be 1 now) plus a 4 hour range-time course.. That's what my daughter went thru when she got her CCW..
I don't mind training courses.. Hell, the NRA is BIG on training courses and gun safety courses....
Do they get any credit for that from the Hysterical Left?? Of course not..
The problem is that the vast majority of the Left Wing is NOT about training courses to make better and safer gun owners..
The vast majority of the Left Wing want to make gun ownership as onerous as possible so LESS people will own guns..
You get it about guns..
Bashi gets it about guns..
But, in THAT regard, you both are VERY atypical of the Left...
The vast majority of the Left are like Paula and Mopshell...
Ban guns and demonize gun owners...
Michale
293
RD,
Doesn't mean we can't have regulations about their use, possession, and ownership.
We *DO* have regulations on their use, possession and ownership..
Right??
So this brings us back to the age old question..
Give me a law that is in keeping with the 2nd Amendment and will prevent or help prevent mass shootings or terrorist attacks and has an even SLIGHT possibility of being put into play..
Bashi had some good ideas.. A "militia" of sorts..
That would never get off the ground because the Left would never allow it..
Neil's idea of insurance and registration does NOTHING to PREVENT gun violence.. Just discourages gun ownership and makes it easy to track guns AFTER gun violence has been committed...
I forgot to ask Neil how he felt about FAST AND FURIOUS, but that's another discussion..
Guns and gun ownership is already regulated.. Probably a lot more than our founding fathers would have liked..
And yet, it STILL does no good..
So, maybe... JUST MAYBE... It's time to look at something else...
Michale
294
@Michale [#57]
But, in THAT regard, you both are VERY atypical of the Left...
So like Bernie Sanders?
Or this guy: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/confessions-of-a-liberal-gun-lover-20140714.
@Michale [#57]
But, in THAT regard, you both are VERY atypical of the Left...
Or maybe these people: https://www.facebook.com/LiberalGunClub
I admit gun-friendly liberals aren't the majority of liberals, but we're not that hard to find.
When I watched the movie: Exact. Same. Thought! I didn't see Abram's point in changing that character so much. Forget ST movie #2 WoK, even the TOS episode w/ Montelban didn't warrant some of those changes.
Now, ask me about my theory that STAR TREK:ENTERPRISE takes place completely in the MIRROR UNIVERSE... :D
Michale
297
I admit gun-friendly liberals aren't the majority of liberals, but we're not that hard to find.
They ARE hard to find because they never speak up when the Phoebes Maltzes Bovys on the Left spew their hysteria...
I have been here in Weigantia for going on a decade now..
And it's ONLY been in the last month or so that ANYONE has spoken up in favor of responsible gun ownership....
I can't speak to other venues because, as I mentioned.. I don't get out much.. :D
Michale
298
@Michale [#61]
Only made it through the first two seasons so far. Actually not quite done with season 2. I'm told it improves after season 2. That theme song is terrible for a Star Trek show, but I don't think the episodes are all that bad.
@Michale [#62]
Or perhaps the news outlets don't choose to cover the liberals who do disagree with Ms. Bovys. Doesn't feed the narrative of Red vs. Blue. Don't know, just might be a reason you don't hear much about it.
Only made it through the first two seasons so far. Actually not quite done with season 2. I'm told it improves after season 2. That theme song is terrible for a Star Trek show, but I don't think the episodes are all that bad.
Ahhh Season 2 Episode 23 is the one you want to make note of... But you will have to have the SHATNER-VERSE books under yer belt as well... Especially AVENGER
As far as the series itself.. As much as I love Scott Bakula, he just doesn't do a Starship Captain very well...
Of course, he doesn't do a New Orleans NCIS agent very well either.. :)
Bakula will always be Sam Beckett to me.. :D
Michale
299
Or perhaps the news outlets don't choose to cover the liberals who do disagree with Ms. Bovys. Doesn't feed the narrative of Red vs. Blue. Don't know, just might be a reason you don't hear much about it.
One doesn't need the media to get on blogs and such and shout down the hystericals...
All it takes is the will to buck Party ideology and do what's right for the country..
Michale
300
And, before I sign off for the night (my lovely wife is home and my nights (and heart) belong to her.. :D) here's something to wet yer wit.. :D
http://www.startrekcontinues.com/episodes.html
Michale
301
@Michale [#67]
As long as I got you past 300...
"You wouldn't hit a guy with glasses, would you?? {whaaam}.. You hit a guy WITH glasses.. he he Well played.."
-King Candy, WRECK IT RAPLH
:D
Michale
306