Donald Trump just tripped up on the air over foreign policy. Again and again.

[bkepley]

By Sean Sullivan and David Weigel
WP

Donald Trump, leading in the polls and riding a wave of momentum in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, just hit a speed bump named Hugh Hewitt.

The conservative radio host peppered Trump with a host of foreign policy questions in a Thursday interview that produced some uncomfortable moments for the real estate mogul, who appeared upset at the line of questioning.

At one point, Hewitt asked Trump if he was familiar with "General  Soleimani" and the "Quds Forces." (He referred to Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, commander of the elite Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guard Corps.) Trump said he was but then appeared to mistake the Quds for the Kurds, a Middle Eastern ethnic group.

"The Kurds, by the way, have been horribly mistreated by us," said Trump.

Hewitt corrected him: "No, not the Kurds, the Quds Forces, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds Forces."

After that, Trump said he thought Hewitt said "Kurds."

"No, Quds," responded Hewitt.

Later on, Hewitt insisted he didn't believe "in gotcha questions." Trump disagreed.

"Well, that is a gotcha question, though," he said. "I mean, you know, when you’re asking me about who’s running this, this this, that’s not, that is not, I will be so good at the military, your head will spin."

Asked what he would do as president if China were "to either accidentally or intentionally sink a Filipino or Japanese ship," Trump refused to say.

"I wouldn’t want to tell you, because frankly, they have to, you know, somebody wrote a very good story about me recently, and they said there’s a certain unpredictable, and it was actually another businessman, said there’s a certain unpredictability about Trump that’s great, and it’s what made him a lot of money and a lot of success," said Trump. "You don’t want to put, and you don’t want to let people know what you’re going to do with respect to certain things that happen."

Hewitt told Trump that when it comes to terrorism, "I’m looking for the next commander in chief, to know who Hassan Nasrallah is, and Zawahiri, and al-Julani, and al-Baghdadi. Do you know the players without a scorecard, yet, Donald Trump?"

Trump said he did not.

"No, you know, I’ll tell you honestly, I think by the time we get to office, they’ll all be changed," he said. "They’ll be all gone. I knew you were going to ask me things like this, and there’s no reason, because number one, I’ll find, I will hopefully find General Douglas MacArthur in the pack. I will find whoever it is that I’ll find, and we’ll, but they’re all changing, Hugh."

For the record, Hasan Nasrallah is the secretary general of Hezbollah; Ayman al-Zawahiri is the new leader of al-Qaeda after the death of Osama bin Laden; Abu Mohammad al-Julani is the leader of Jabhat al-Nusra, or al-Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate fighting in Syria; and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is the leader of the Islamic State, which controls parts of Syria and Iraq.

Ordinarily, an interview like this would put a candidate at serious risk of falling in the polls. But nothing about Trump's candidacy has been ordinary, so it remains to be seen whether it will hurt him or not.

more here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/03/donald-trump-just-tripped-up-on-the-air-over-foreign-policy-again-and-again/?tid=pm_politics_pop_b

[NavyCanDo]

All the "outsiders" better prepare themselves good for questions like this at the CNN debate. Can you name the president of Kazakhstan? is the type of questions CNN likes to throw out.

[bkepley]

All the "outsiders" better prepare themselves good for questions like this at the CNN debate. Can you name the president of Kazakhstan? is the type of questions CNN likes to throw out.

All the other candidates.  I'm pretty sure Trump won't bother.

[andy58-in-nh]

All the other candidates.  I'm pretty sure Trump won't bother.

I suspect you're right. And the reason has to do with character.
 
There are some people - we've all known one - whose reach exceeds their grasp, largely because their ambition exceeds their comprehension by such an extent that they become ever impatient to act before they have learned enough. 
 
Sometimes, they succeed by sheer force of will and by having correctly guessed as to what, and who, and how. But many other times they fail, leaving behind a trail of wreckage for others to clean up while they move on to new ambitions, even while blaming the others and learning no lasting lessons in the process.   
 
At least one of them is currently running for President and imperiously names things after himself as though honor might be purchased rather than earned.

[DCPatriot]

I suspect you're right. And the reason has to do with character.
 
There are some people - we've all known one - whose reach exceeds their grasp, largely because their ambition exceeds their comprehension by such an extent that they become ever impatient to act before they have learned enough. 
 
Sometimes, they succeed by sheer force of will and by having correctly guessed as to what, and who, and how. But many other times they fail, leaving behind a trail of wreckage for others to clean up while they move on to new ambitions, even while blaming the others and learning no lasting lessons in the process.   
 
At least one of them is currently running for President and imperiously names things after himself as though honor might be purchased rather than earned.

Et tu, Andy!     

[NavyCanDo]

All the other candidates.  I'm pretty sure Trump won't bother.

Yea, Trump's reply would be, "Why the hell should I care who the president of Kazakhstan is or who the Quds are, or the name of their leader?  I'll hire good people to find that out for me?   And trumpeters will rise from their seats and shout Hallelujah.

[bkepley]

Yea, Trump's reply would be, "Why the hell should I care who the president of Kazakhstan is or who the Quds are, or the name of their leader?  I'll hire good people to find that out for me?   And trumpeters will rise from their seats and shout Hallelujah.

  Maybe he'll hire a good person to hire other good people and he'll just take a long vacation.

[mystery-ak]

Not coming to the defense of Trump but i seem to remember a gotcha to W in 2000....and even the most polished politician can't remember all the names of every dictator, president, prime minister etc all over the world as some of these people seem to change on a very regular basis...so give me a break this was a converted effort to embarrass Trump as they did W in 2000

[bkepley]

DT: All right, I think it’s ridiculous. I’ll have, I’m a delegator. I find great people. I find absolutely great people, and I’ll find them in our armed services, and I find absolutely great people. And now on the bigger picture, like the fact that our Kurds are being treated so poorly, and would really is the one group that really would be out there fighting for us, I think, and fighting for themselves, maybe more importantly to them, I understand that. But when you start throwing around names of people and where they live and give me their address, I think it’s ridiculous, and I think it’s totally worthless.

[andy58-in-nh]

Et tu, Andy!     

Yes, and I'm not entirely happy about it, because The Donald really has done the nation a service.
 
He's done so specifically by calling attention to a very real problem: the alienation of the national political elites from the people. That's why so many people are so angry, and justifiably, I think, because our interests and those of our "leaders" are increasingly divergent.
 
Illegal immigration is a prime example, and the issue on which Mr. Trump has largely built his campaign.
 
The problem for me, is that beyond the interjection of new life into what was threatening to become a depressingly familiar campaign, Trump offers little of true substance himself. The fact that he's bold, he's brash and has no filter in the pathway between his brain and his mouth is truly refreshing, but superficially so.
 
We're all pretty much tired of the scripted, controlled, focus group-tested, doublespeak-uttering unprincipled bullshit artists who fill our airwaves and our legislatures.
 
So, one cheer for Trump in breaking through the clutter.
 
At the current time, we've got a President who lies all the time and talks endlessly about himself.
 
Do we really need a candidate who speaks more truthfully, but who talks endlessly about himself?
 
I'm not a Trump "hater".
 
I just think we can - and must - do better in seeking someone who possesses more in the way of comprehension, knowledge, values and virtues, but who also keeps the dishonest and dishonorable political pros at a distance.  I think we might have a couple or three.

[Bigun]

Yes, and I'm not entirely happy about it, because The Donald really has done the nation a service.
 
He's done so specifically by calling attention to a very real problem: the alienation of the national political elites from the people. That's why so many people are so angy, and justifiably, I think, because our interests and those of our "leaders" are increasingly divergent.
 
Illegal immigration is a prime example, and the issue on which Mr. Trump has largely built his campaign.
 
The problem for me, is that beyond the interjection of new life into what was threatening to become a depressingly familiar campaign, Trump offers little of true substance himself. The fact that he's bold, he's brash and has no filter in the pathway between his brain and his mouth is truly refreshing, but superficially so.
 
We're all pretty much tired of the scripted, controlled, focus group-tested, doublespeak-uttering unprincipled bullshit artists who fill our airwaves and our legislatures.
 
So, one cheer for Trump in breaking through the clutter.
 
At the current time, we've got a President who lies all the time and talks endlessly about himself.
 
Do we really need a candidate who speaks more truthfully, but who talks endlessly about himself?
 
I'm not a Trump "hater".
 
I just think we can - and must - do better in seeking someone who possesses more in the way of comprehension, knowledge, values and virtues, but who also keeps the dishonest and dishonorable political pros at a distance.  I think we might have a couple or three.

Well said Andy! Right there with you across the board! 

[GourmetDan]

He's done so specifically by calling attention to a very real problem: the alienation of the national political elites from the people. That's why so many people are so angy, and justifiably, I think, because our interests and those of our "leaders" are increasingly divergent.

Just another example of how those who control the msm drive opinion and debate in this country.

If they say it's important, it's 'important'... if they're silent on any issue, it didn't happen...

[truth_seeker]

Trump is going to be "great on Kazakhstan and the Quds, too."

Just don't ask him the wrong way, or he'll react like an angry middle-school playground bully.

Advice: He signed the pledge, meaning he is serious and intends to stay in to the finish. Therefore he should start taking some much deserved breaks, and study on issues.

That way he won't make costly unforced errors, like this. He needs undecided voters to see him as a sound rational choice, not just a brash mouthpiece for frustration.

[Godzilla]

Trump is going to be "great on Kazakhstan and the Quds, too."

Just don't ask him the wrong way, or he'll react like an angry middle-school playground bully.

Advice: He signed the pledge, meaning he is serious and intends to stay in to the finish. Therefore he should start taking some much deserved breaks, and study on issues.

That way he won't make costly unforced errors, like this. He needs undecided voters to see him as a sound rational choice, not just a brash mouthpiece for frustration.

This is something politicians do to brush up on the issues... but it makes no sense to me.  These groups, these issues... are all in the news, in periodicals, and in journals on foreign affairs.

Simply pick up a tablet and read a few articles while using the restroom each day.  Within a week, you'd be able to handle these sorts of 'gotcha' questions.

[flowers]

Yes, and I'm not entirely happy about it, because The Donald really has done the nation a service.
 
He's done so specifically by calling attention to a very real problem: the alienation of the national political elites from the people. That's why so many people are so angry, and justifiably, I think, because our interests and those of our "leaders" are increasingly divergent.
 
Illegal immigration is a prime example, and the issue on which Mr. Trump has largely built his campaign.
 
The problem for me, is that beyond the interjection of new life into what was threatening to become a depressingly familiar campaign, Trump offers little of true substance himself. The fact that he's bold, he's brash and has no filter in the pathway between his brain and his mouth is truly refreshing, but superficially so.
 
We're all pretty much tired of the scripted, controlled, focus group-tested, doublespeak-uttering unprincipled bullshit artists who fill our airwaves and our legislatures.
 
So, one cheer for Trump in breaking through the clutter.
 
At the current time, we've got a President who lies all the time and talks endlessly about himself.
 
Do we really need a candidate who speaks more truthfully, but who talks endlessly about himself?
 
I'm not a Trump "hater".
 
I just think we can - and must - do better in seeking someone who possesses more in the way of comprehension, knowledge, values and virtues, but who also keeps the dishonest and dishonorable political pros at a distance.  I think we might have a couple or three.

[Fishrrman]

NavyCanDo wrote above:
[[ Yea, Trump's reply would be, "Why the hell should I care who the president of Kazakhstan is or who the Quds are, or the name of their leader? ]]

Frankly, I think that's an appropriate response.

I would go further and add to it:
"They're all muslims. And islam in general is quite clear about how it regards non-islamics and its intent to conquer the entire world. That's what matters more than the name of any present-day ruler, because ALL of them follow only ONE "leader", and he's been dead for 1400 years, but his principles of worldwide jihad live on."