ChrisWeigant.com

Republican Wimpiness On Display

[ Posted Monday, November 2nd, 2015 – 17:09 UTC ]

The Republican presidential candidates don't seem to realize it, but they're in the process of seriously undermining their own "tough guy" brand. Republicans have always seen themselves as "the Daddy party" (as opposed to Democrats' "Mommy party," of course), which has always meant no-nonsense toughness in the face of any opposition to their agenda. But how can American voters square this with the collective hissy fit the GOP candidates are now throwing over debate moderators? To put it the most obvious way, why should any voter believe that any of these folks will be able to get tough with (for example) Vladimir Putin, when they can't even handle snarky questions from journalists? Republicans seem to have now embraced what was (ironically) a major political problem for Jeb Bush's father -- the wimp factor.

Republican wimpiness is on full display right now. The GOP presidential candidates' campaigns all had a confab this weekend to come up with a list of demands to fix the debate process. Reportedly, Donald Trump isn't going to get on board (he's going to cut his own deal with the networks, or something), but most of the other campaigns are signing a letter addressed to future Republican debate hosts. This letter is actually pretty wimpy, if reports are to be believed (it was a private meeting, so no public documents were released or anything). The candidates want opening and closing statements. They want pre-approval of any text that appears on screen next to them. It's pretty small-ball stuff, really. Some radical ideas were considered, but reportedly couldn't get consensus among all the campaigns.

Added to all this wimpiness is the utter collapse of the Republican National Committee's control over the debate process. It wasn't supposed to be this way. After the 2012 election cycle, the RNC was going to get tough and lay down the debate law for all Republican candidates. There were too many debates last time around, so there would be fewer this time. There were too many liberals asking questions, so the debate host networks would be hand-picked by the RNC. They were supposed to have rigged the process so that only conservative moderators would be allowed to appear. Obviously, something went horribly wrong with this plan. The purity tests for the moderators seem to have been seriously flawed, or something. Whatever went wrong, Reince Priebus and the RNC look pretty downright wimpy now, and unable to even stand up to their own presidential contenders.

The mere fact that Republicans are even making the attempt to exercise control over what questions they get is pretty wimpy, when you think about it. After all, a part of the job of being president is occasionally holding press conferences. So what are any of these guys going to do if they become president? Demand pre-approval of any question asked? Is that really what Americans want from their leader? Some sort of veto power over the press? It's mind-boggling when you really think about the implications of Republican candidates trying to tyrannically exert control over the free press, in fact. If any of them are elected president, they are going to -- like it or not -- have to take questions from journalists, some of them openly hostile to their agenda. But they're wimping out on doing so during their primary campaign.

The whole fracas actually boosts the chances of a Democrat becoming president. If Republicans demand (and get) tame debates from hand-picked questioners during the primaries, what is going to happen when we get to the general election and one of them has to stand next to Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton? To say they'd be unprepared is an understatement, if all they've participated in are echo-chamber "debates" up to that point.

Republican complaints about the media are nothing new, of course. They've been whining about the media for decades, in fact. But the CNBC debate seems to have been some sort of final straw, and now the candidates are determined to somehow stack the deck in their favor. However, their biggest complaint wasn't actually about the substance of the questions but rather the disrespectful tone of the questioners. Ted Cruz made lots of headlines for berating the moderators, but the question he was asked which set him off was actually a softball question -- or it could have been, if Cruz had just answered it. Cruz was asked (admittedly, in a snarky way) about his opposition to the budget deal that John Boehner had just worked out with the other congressional leaders and the White House. This should have been a moment for Ted Cruz to shine, since his entire political persona has been built on strenuous opposition to such bills in the Senate. It's not a stretch to say that the fame he has achieved by his filibusters and obstructionism is the main reason why he's even a viable presidential candidate in the first place. And yet he chose to completely ignore the question and just rip into the moderators.

Republican candidates say they want substance, but when they get substantive questions (about the budget and the debt ceiling), they ignore them and refuse to answer. They say they want more interaction between the candidates on stage, but the second debate was pretty much designed to do just that (CNN almost exclusively set up candidate-versus-candidate questions, and then showed both in a split screen, hoping for some juicy interaction). This format was loudly attacked after the second debate, however, so it's kind of hard to figure out what the Republicans really want at this point. Wimpy demands to pre-approve on-screen text aside, what exactly would they change? At this point, it's anyone's guess, because no matter how the next debates are structured, there are bound to be lots of complaints, media-bashing, and other assorted whining after they happen. Actually, make that "while they happen," since the biggest "winners" from the last debate were the candidates who bashed the media the hardest during the debate.

Republican presidential candidates apparently all want nothing more than: "Could you please give me your campaign's talking points on subject X?" Or perhaps: "What are the lines you use on the campaign trail which get the biggest applause?" They do not want any of their "facts" challenged, obviously, and they do not want anyone to bring up embarrassing quotes or events from their past. These are all deemed "gotcha" questions, and will be banished from the debate setting. Otherwise there will be a chorus of: "WAAAAH! He was MEAN to me!" in the post-debate spin room. This is the Daddy party? Really? These are the guys that are going to go toe-to-toe with Russia and China and make them back down through sheer strength of personality? Are you kidding me?

Hillary Clinton recently sat down and answered extremely hostile questions for 11 straight hours. She did so with aplomb and certainty, and received praise for her poise from just about every neutral observer. Compare that to Republicans who spent a total of maybe 10 or 15 minutes each answering questions from the station that created the Tea Party, and who now want to write the rules in advance so that they don't have to listen to any more disrespectful questions. That is a clear contrast in strength and wimpiness, folks.

If Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee, from what we've seen so far she's going to eat these guys alive when the general election debates happen. That is, unless the Republican candidate wimps out from even participating, since he or she won't be able to set those rules in advance.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

50 Comments on “Republican Wimpiness On Display”

  1. [1] 
    Paula wrote:

    Exactly.

  2. [2] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    That bimbo Megan Kelly touched off all this ridiculous and off-base gotcha stuff and now The Media is like one huge out-of-control liberal fat pig with blood coming out of her wherever. It's as if these talking heads believe that performance artists should have to explain their art! Why don't they hold Joaquin Phoenix and Randy Quaid to the same standard? Thanks a lot Megan.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Heh.

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Excellent commentary, CW..

    Of course, it's all wrong.. :D

    Let's take stock..

    The Republican candidates don't like the debate process.. So they are banding together and actually DOING something about it..

    The Democrat candidates don't like the debate process.. They meekly say "Yes ma'am" and toddle about their way...

    Hmmmmmmmm

    Seems like all the "wimpyness" is on the Democrat Party side of the equation...

    Your same accusation of the GOP candidate being "unprepared" certainly applies to the Democrat candidate as well for the exact same reasons you state...

    And if Hillary IS the nominee, she has so much baggage and so many skeletons, *I* could wipe the floor with her in a debate....

    Michale

  5. [5] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "And if Hillary IS the nominee, she has so much baggage and so many skeletons, *I* could wipe the floor with her in a debate...."

    Too bad YOU aren't one of the candidates RUNNING Michale. :-D Unlike ALL of the current Republican candidates, with the possible exception of Trump, one thing you are NOT is a Wimp.

    Also, going against the RNC's post Romney loss autopsy report, apparently Republicans have decide to piss off Latinos even further, by dropping Telemundo from holding a debate. So much for Republican outreach I guess huh?

    And in YET OTHER political news :-D Larry Lessig became the latest Democrat to drop out of the race. So now there are THREE. Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley.

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Too bad YOU aren't one of the candidates RUNNING Michale. :-D Unlike ALL of the current Republican candidates, with the possible exception of Trump, one thing you are NOT is a Wimp.

    Why, thank you! :D

    Also, going against the RNC's post Romney loss autopsy report, apparently Republicans have decide to piss off Latinos even further, by dropping Telemundo from holding a debate. So much for Republican outreach I guess huh?

    The problem is, that "outreach" you speak of is complete and utter amnesty and instant citizenship for all illegal criminals..

    That simply will not happen and no amount of half measures or baby-steps will mollify the Left Wing Hispanic community.

    So, why bother??

    And in YET OTHER political news :-D Larry Lessig became the latest Democrat to drop out of the race. So now there are THREE. Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley.

    Whose Larry Lessig???

    :D

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The problem is, that "outreach" you speak of is complete and utter amnesty and instant citizenship for all illegal criminals..

    you think only illegals watch telemundo? if so, you'd best start the deportation hearings on yours truly.

    JL

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    I was referring to the "outreach" part of JM's comment...

    As far as dropping Telemundo, as a network, they have proven that they can't be trusted to honor contracts.. In other words, their word is not worth a peso...

    So, I see no problem with dropping them from the debates...

    Your Joe and Jane Sixpack would not either..

    The only people who DO care are those who wouldn't vote for a GOP candidate anyways..

    So, I fail to understand the problem...

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why didn't I see these kinds of comments from ya'all when the Democrat Party dropped Fox News from it's debate schedule??

    hmmmmmmmm??? :D

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why didn't I see these kinds of comments from ya'all when the Democrat Party dropped Fox News from it's debate schedule??

    hmmmmmmmm??? :D

    To be fair, these kinds of comments were all over the Right Wingery at the time.....

    So I guess ya'all are in ... er.... "good" company... :D

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hillary Clinton recently sat down and answered extremely hostile questions for 11 straight hours. She did so with aplomb and certainty, and received praise for her poise from just about every neutral observer.

    Oh Moose Poop!!! The ONLY people who praised Hillary are the Left Wingers who are all about Hillary to begin with..

    NEUTRAL observers commented on how many lies she told, how she gave one story to Libyans and her daughter and how she gave c COMPLETELY DIFFERENT story to the American people..

    Ya'all can put all the lipstick you want on this pig, but it will still be a pig.

    Hillary is a liar.. She is dishonest.. She is untrustworthy..

    So says over 60% of the American people....

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Buy air time, hire you own moderators who ask approved questions, edit the video and air the mass commercial. Watch your audience snooze. The GOP knows this. They want a cage match, "us against the media". Cage match debate made Trump in the initial horse race polls. Cruz got the biggest applause lines last week fighting in the cage. Is crocodile bitching a real term? Should be.

    Sad news to report. The Donald Trumpkin Jack O' Lantern gracing my front gate was savagely mauled by rogue squirrels last night. A short life, his candle burned out long before the legend ever did.

    Sci Fi update. Ex Machina. Instant rise to my top ten best sci-fi movie of all time. Low budget, beautifully executed, incredibly creepy.

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sci Fi update. Ex Machina. Instant rise to my top ten best sci-fi movie of all time. Low budget, beautifully executed, incredibly creepy.

    Yea, that was a really good movie.. The wife and I loved it..

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    You watch PREDESTINATION? I love Time Travel movies that gives one nose-bleeds.. :D

    Michale

  15. [15] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M-13

    No, but Predestination just became available on Amazon Prime this month, so I'll give it a view - the reviews were pretty good.

    I deliberately held off watching Ex Mach until Halloween...tradition being a bunch of my reprobate friends get together and watch a really good sci fi/scary movie after the trick or treaters go home....aka "Bobbing for Beers Film Festival."

    Ex Mach was recognized at this years Festival for "best butt ever" on a robotic character.

  16. [16] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I was referring to the "outreach" part of JM's comment...

    JM was referring to republican outreach to latinos, most of whom are legal. by census figures there are 54 million latinos in the US, about 17% of the population. the illegals are estimated at ten million, many of whom aren't even counted on the census figures. that leaves a whole lot of citizens who are already legal potential voters and another fairly large chunk of soon to be naturalized potential voters. if you want to beef over telemundo's contractual obligations, go right ahead. i'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to dispute your assertion. however, the republicans giving up a platform to share conservative ideas with many new, perfectly legal voters just doesn't seem like such a good idea.

    JL

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    <I.JM was referring to republican outreach to latinos, most of whom are legal.

    The majority of those legal latinos are as against illegal immigrants as the GOP is...

    THEY paid their dues and did things the legal way...

    however, the republicans giving up a platform to share conservative ideas with many new, perfectly legal voters just doesn't seem like such a good idea.

    It is if the viewers of the particular network won't vote GOP anyways..

    If I recall correctly, THAT was the exact reasoning that the Left Wing used during the 2008 Elections when Democrats wouldn't go on Fox News..

    No??

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    If I recall correctly, THAT was the exact reasoning that the Left Wing used during the 2008 Elections when Democrats wouldn't go on Fox News..

    no, the 2007 cancellation of the fox democratic debate was a response to comments by roger ailes, chairman of fox news, who joked about obama's name by asking why bush and the afghani authorities hadn't caught him yet. there certainly was anti-fox sentiment on the left prior to that, but until ailes' comment the debate was due to go on as scheduled.

    JL

  19. [19] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    It is if the viewers of the particular network won't vote GOP anyways..

    not necessarily the case. it's true that about 60% of hispanics are democrats, but 20% are republicans. that may be a significant disadvantage, but there's plenty of room for movement. plus, hispanics although economically liberal, tend to be socially conservative. there's definitely a receptive audience on some issues.

    JL

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    no, the 2007 cancellation of the fox democratic debate was a response to comments by roger ailes, chairman of fox news, who joked about obama's name by asking why bush and the afghani authorities hadn't caught him yet.

    So, Democrats gave up outreach to all those Americans (Fox IS the #1 channel for news) because of a lame joke?? :D

    Seems pretty silly to me..

    But, regardless, the Left's animosity towards Fox is well-known.. And it's similar to the Rights animosity towards NBC in the here and now..

    but 20% are republicans.

    And that 20% is with the GOP on illegal immigrants and doesn't watch Telemudo...

    Telemudo is the hispanic version of MSNBC...

    No big loss to the GOP....

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    altohone wrote:

    John M

    Actually, trollery is most certainly the wimpy way to "win" a debate.

    Of course, some people think that Lance Armstrong and Barry Bonds deserved their praise.

    I'm not one of those people.

    A

  22. [22] 
    altohone wrote:

    Micha

    "The ONLY people who praised Hillary are the Left Wingers who are all about Hillary to begin with.."

    There you go lying again.

    The Left supports Bernie... (and the far left none of the above).
    And Bernie supporters weren't praising the Hill.
    Not even debatable.

    You're stuck in a rut with that shtick.

    A

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    A small percentage of The Left supports Bernie...

    There....

    Fixed it for you... :D

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, trollery is most certainly the wimpy way to "win" a debate.

    The problem is, you define "trollery" as "everything and anything you disagree with"...

    Ergo, it's not very relevant.. :D

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Megyn Kelly is unimpressed with the Family Dinner Menu of Debate Show Demands that some of the GOP contestants had their expensive elite lawyer draw up for them. She must be a stealth lib.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VLyO8FP5Ys&feature=youtu.be

  26. [26] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I do hope that The Donald negotiates a comfortable ambient temperature in Iraq before he sends our heroes over there to crush the ISIS.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Megyn Kelly is unimpressed with the Family Dinner Menu of Debate Show Demands that some of the GOP contestants had their expensive elite lawyer draw up for them. She must be a stealth lib.

    Must be, considering all the demands that Diva Hillary always makes when she speaks..

    On the stage: lemon wedges, room temperature water, a carafe of warm/hot water, coffee cup and saucer

    A computer, mouse, printer and scanner

    Spread of hummus

    Chairs with two long, rectangular pillows and two cushions to be kept backstage in case the former secretary of state “needed additional back support”

    A teleprompter and “2-3 downstage scrolling monitors”

    A special podium (her team rejected the podium that had been set up for her use)

    Coffee

    Tea

    Room-temperature sparkling and still water

    Diet ginger ale

    Crudité

    Sliced fruit

    Approval for any promotional materials

    Recording is permitted “for archival purposes” and only a two-minute highlight video can be uploaded to YouTube

    “Prestaged” group photos so that Clinton doesn’t have to wait “for these folks to get their act together.” The former secretary of state “doesn’t like to stand around waiting for people.”

    I mean, seriously...

    If ya'all want to complain about "Diva", you need look no further than your soon-to-be coronated queen "bimbo"..

    After all, she is the best that Democrats have to offer... :D

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Look over there!

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Look over there!

    Exactly..

    That's what ya'all are saying when you point to the GOP side of things..

    "Look!! Over there!!"

    Trying to distract everyone from the exact same thing going on over on the Left Wingery side of things... :D

    You got it exactly... :D

    But, don't worry.. :D

    I'll always be around to point out that there is no difference between the Right Wingery and the Left Wingery...

    "Your good and your evil use the same methods to achieve the same goals.."
    -Yarnek, STAR TREK, The Savage Curtain

    Michale

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    Look over there!

    Yer just being pissy because ya'all have such a piss-poor candidate representing you for POTUS..

    Don't get bitchy with me..

    YA'ALL picked her!! :D

    I mean, ya'all could have had a Biden.. Someone with MORE than a shred of decency, honor and integrity..

    But, instead, ya'all went with Hillary... A candidate who has NONE of those qualities.. A candidate who is the ANTI- of those qualities..

    "Oh Johnny, Johnny, did you back the wrong horse..."
    -Dr Peter Venkmen, GHOSTBUSTERS II

    :D

    Michale

  31. [31] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Hillary is a diva, too!

    Marco should probably pass, but Carly the Zombie Gender Card Troll should jump on that talking point since she has decided not to sign the GOP Diva Eruption Letter. She's well positioned to tell the boys to get out of the kitchen if they can take 68 degree heat.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    but Carly the Zombie Gender Card Troll

    Once again, your love for Hillary blossoms thru..

    You complain about Carly playing the gender card, but you don't ever mention how Hillary is JUST a gender card...

    :D

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hillary is a diva, too!

    See!! You agree with me!!

    Winning!! :D

    heh

    Michale

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    Donald Trump could win over Hispanics who fear job competition from illegals
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/3/donald-trump-could-win-over-hispanics-who-fear-job/

    You were saying??

    You see, that's the entire problem with the Left's argument..

    They always try to make the issue about IMMIGRANTS..

    But the issue is not, nor has ever been about immigrants..

    It's ALWAYS been about ILLEGAL immigrants..

    Criminals..

    Even the LEGAL hispanics see that...

    That is why Trump is a lot more popular with minorities than ya'all give him credit for..

    Michale

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don’t care if he likes me or not as a Hispanic or Latino, as long he creates the jobs he promised. He is never going to take me out for a beer, so it doesn’t matter whether I like him or not either."
    -Carlo Maffatt LEGAL Mexican Immigrant

    You will find that most LEGAL immigrants feel the same way...

    Michale

  36. [36] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    You were saying??

    i was saying that it wasn't such a good idea to snub telemundo, because it removes the opportunity to reach spanish-speaking latinos (both legal immigrants and natural born citizens), who may be receptive to a conservative message. i'm not sure what you think i was saying, but your latest comment disproves your earlier one, that "the viewers of [telemundo] won't vote GOP anyways..."

    i understand the analogy between dems snubbing the fox debate and pubs snubbing the telemundo debate, but as you've firmly established in your last comment, the two scenarios are not parallel.

    JL

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    i understand the analogy between dems snubbing the fox debate and pubs snubbing the telemundo debate, but as you've firmly established in your last comment, the two scenarios are not parallel.

    In other words...

    "That's different"

    Amazing how it always is, eh? :D

    i'm not sure what you think i was saying, but your latest comment disproves your earlier one, that "the viewers of [telemundo] won't vote GOP anyways..."

    Not at all..

    LEGAL immigrants assimilate.. They come to the melting pot to melt in...

    LEGAL immigrants don't watch Telemudo any more than LEGAL immigrants support La Raza....

    Michale

  38. [38] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    LEGAL immigrants don't watch Telemudo any more than LEGAL immigrants support La Raza....

    That's simply not the case. Telemundo and Univision provide programming that is relevant to spanish speakers of all types, from natural-born second gen citizens to legal immigrants to non-hispanics who love soccer (such as myself). latin culture is a vital part of american culture, just like german and italian food has become "american" food, just like black and jewish cultures have driven popular entertainment tastes, spanish language communication has become a normal part of american culture. the melting pot melts both ways, and telemundo is no more a liberal bastion than any other network.

    JL

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    and telemundo is no more a liberal bastion than any other network.

    And, has been well established "any other network" IS a liberal bastion..

    So yea.. I guess yer right... :D

    Telemundo gave up ANY semblance of neutrality when they lashed out at Trump for what was a perfectly reasonable, logical and PROVABLE assessment...

    Michale

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Telemundo gave up ANY semblance of neutrality when they lashed out at Trump for what was a perfectly reasonable, logical and PROVABLE assessment...

    ... of ILLEGAL immigrants...

    Michale

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    the melting pot melts both ways,

    "Immigration without assimilation is invasion"

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    just like german and italian food has become "american" food, just like black and jewish cultures have driven popular entertainment tastes, spanish language communication has become a normal part of american culture. the melting pot melts both ways,

    But that's the problem..

    Those that are illegals AREN'T melting..

    They are demanding that ALL the melting comes from the American side of the equation...

    The illegals are NOT assimilating.. They are FORCING Americans to assimilate to THEIR culture..

    In other words, they are no different than the Borg..

    Michale

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Keep in mind.. We are talking ILLEGAL immigrants... Criminals...

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    altohone wrote:

    No Micha

    As usual, you are just like all the wingnuts who think Wall Street coddling corporatist warmongers qualify as "Left" simply because they have a "D" after their name and because you are even further to the right.

    So, you didn't "fix" anything, just piled another lie on top of your previous lie.

    Funny how your efforts amount to a defense of the establishment status quo though... or are you unaware that is the role you are playing by lying about the true nature of such Dem politicians?

    And, again, no, you are wrong about trollery too.
    It is a well defined tactic which you engage in constantly.
    The content has nothing whatsoever to do with it... except, of course, that facts, logic and common sense do not support the content of the ideology you spew, leaving you no recourse except dishonest trollery.

    A wingnut troll such as yourself lives in a bubble of denial about their dishonesty though, so I don't expect you to admit it.

    In case you've forgotten, my comments aren't for your benefit though.

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    A wingnut troll such as yourself lives in a bubble of denial about their dishonesty though, so I don't expect you to admit it.

    "Thank you for your concession that you have absolutely NO logical or rational rebuttal and must, therefore, resort to childish name-calling and immature personal attacks.

    Your concession of my superiority is appreciated, albeit irrelevant."

    Have a nice day and, hay.... Thanx for playing. :D

    Michale

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here's a spokesperson for the Illegal Immigrant community..

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTDmJXxUsAAYmZm.png

    His parents must be SO proud... :^/

    Michale

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Some racist illegal immigrant advocacy group has just offered a $5,000 "bounty" if someone in the SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE audience stands and yells, "DONALD TRUMP IS A RACIST!!" during Donald Trump's hosting of SNL..

    Several commenters came up with an awesome idea that I think Trump should follow...

    At the opening, Trump says:

    " I want everyone in the audience to stand and say 'DONALD TRUMP IS A RACIST!!'

    Now, a racist organization has promised $5,000 to each and every one of you and my lawyers will contact this organization on your behalf and make sure they pay!!

    LIVE FROM NEW YORK, IT'S SATURDAY NIGHT!!"

    Wouldn't that be a hoot, eh?? :D

    Michale

  48. [48] 
    altohone wrote:

    Micha

    Perfect example of trollery.
    Changing the subject to avoid addressing the content.
    Are you blissfully unaware how often you prove my points?

    Of course, the whole claiming victory bit without engaging is simple projection, and a sad personal fault, but also not uncommon among trolls though not considered trollery in and of itself... not to mention bizarrely off topic to the portion of the comment you chose to quote.

    But, you are a wingnut troll, so the description is accurate. I understand your need to attempt to portray accurate descriptions about you as inaccurate, but that is just more wimpiness on display for all to see.

    Owning up to what you are, and the tactics you use would be the honest and ballsy move.

    You don't have to be LGB or T to come out of the closet.

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    But, you are a wingnut troll, so the description is accurate. I understand your need to attempt to portray accurate descriptions about you as inaccurate, but that is just more wimpiness on display for all to see.

    Once again, thank you for your concession.. :D

    You can't win, Biga... :D

    Every time you make an immature and childish personal attack to avoid the facts and reality, you put your impotence on display for all to see.. :D

    Michale

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    you put your impotence on display for all to see..

    But, take heart..

    I think they make a pill for that.. :D

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.