Trump mocks Fiorina’s physical appearance: 'Look at that face!'

[olde north church]

You are fundamentally misreading the dislike Trump generates.

For I cannot stand social conservatives.

Here I'm going to say it:

I think some of the anti-Trump people are paid by other campaigns to denigrate Trump.  They post negative stories.  I don't see that behind Trump supporters.  I see the same empty arguments from Trump-haters.  Which candidate besides Trump has released an actual position paper?  Which candidate, who while dropping out because his ideas weren't setting the world afire blames another candidate.  We are seeing "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
I hope those of you who are getting paid to post anti-Trump screeds are making a ton.  You have sold your souls.  But I'm sure that's not much of problem for you either.

[alicewonders]

If you don't want to follow society's rules, you shouldn't cast stones at people who don't follow society's rules.

That's hypocrisy.

Sometimes, when you don't want to follow society's rules - you tear down society's damn walls and run over them and destroy what's behind them.  It has happened before.

[musiclady]

Here I'm going to say it:

I think some of the anti-Trump people are paid by other campaigns to denigrate Trump.  They post negative stories.  I don't see that behind Trump supporters.  I see the same empty arguments from Trump-haters.  Which candidate besides Trump has released an actual position paper?  Which candidate, who while dropping out because his ideas weren't setting the world afire blames another candidate.  We are seeing "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
I hope those of you who are getting paid to post anti-Trump screeds are making a ton.  You have sold your souls.  But I'm sure that's not much of problem for you either.

Unbelievable.

Now anyone who criticizes Trump is PAID to do it?

Do you not have any respect for independent thought??

There are at least four or five other candidates who deserve serious attention.  This field is stronger than any I remember in all my decades of attention to politics.  But those of us who haven't settled on one (or in your view haven't settled on Trump??) are being accused of being paid to oppose him??

That is some creative thinking there, onc.......   

(And that's the nicest way I can phrase your accusation).

[alicewonders]

Unbelievable.

Now anyone who criticizes Trump is PAID to do it?

Do you not have any respect for independent thought??

There are at least four or five other candidates who deserve serious attention.  This field is stronger than any I remember in all my decades of attention to politics.  But those of us who haven't settled on one (or in your view haven't settled on Trump??) are being accused of being paid to oppose him??

That is some creative thinking there, onc.......   

(And that's the nicest way I can phrase your accusation).

I think some of the anti-Trump people are paid by other campaigns to denigrate Trump.

Whoa!  ONC said "some" - not "all"!

[musiclady]

Whoa!  ONC said "some" - not "all"!

Whoa!  Who, on this forum, of the myriads of us who don't want Trump to be our nominee, might be being paid to bash him?

The accusation was flung out into the air, and needs to be reined back in.

It's, IMO, completely irresponsible to throw that out there on a forum where many, many reasonable people think that Trump would be a bad candidate.  And making such an accusation stifles rational discussion.

[musiclady]

The well considered rationale I have that Trump would not represent conservatism well are....

1.  He is NOT a conservative
2.  He has no core principles.
3.  He lashes out like a child.
4.  He is an uncontrolled egotist, seeming to lack character.

I am not a "Trump hater."  I don't think he has the integrity to be President and to represent the American people as a Conservative leader.

(And I am not being paid to think that......)

[olde north church]

The well considered rationale I have that Trump would not represent conservatism well are....

1.  He is NOT a conservative
2.  He has no core principles.
3.  He lashes out like a child.
4.  He is an uncontrolled egotist, seeming to lack character.

I am not a "Trump hater."  I don't think he has the integrity to be President and to represent the American people as a Conservative leader.

(And I am not being paid to think that......)

I'll combine my answer to your melodrama:

1.  You are NOT one of those I was directing my comment at.

2.  There isn't a conservative or a Conservative among the 17, oops, 16 candidates on the GOP side.

3.  Trump may be impolitic but those who support him, enjoy his pulling down the columns of the temple.

4.  Did I mention there's not a single conservative or Conservative among the 16 candidates?

5.  I have an idea who I would vote for but I don't believe he'll be around.

6.  I'm pretty impressed with Jeb's not running away like a little girl, like Perry did.

7.  We are only seeing Trump's support among Republicans.  Wonder what the support would be among Democrats, Independents and Republicans combined?

Anything else?

[musiclady]

I'll combine my answer to your melodrama:

1.  You are NOT one of those I was directing my comment at.

2.  There isn't a conservative or a Conservative among the 17, oops, 16 candidates on the GOP side.

3.  Trump may be impolitic but those who support him, enjoy his pulling down the columns of the temple.

4.  Did I mention there's not a single conservative or Conservative among the 16 candidates?

5.  I have an idea who I would vote for but I don't believe he'll be around.

6.  I'm pretty impressed with Jeb's not running away like a little girl, like Perry did.

7.  We are only seeing Trump's support among Republicans.  Wonder what the support would be among Democrats, Independents and Republicans combined?

Anything else?

Yeah.  Trump said that Clinton was the best President.  That sure is pulling down the columns of the temple, ain't it?

And there are multiple choices among the remaining candidates who are MORE conservative than Trump....... who isn't conservative at ALL.

Trump has less than a third of Republican primary voters behind him.  I'm not good at math, but that's certainly not going to get him into the WH.  "Independents" are mamby-pambies who hate conflict.  They won't vote for Trump.  And the majority of the Democrat party is now socialist.  They won't vote for Trump either.

That leaves a tiny percentage of the overall population voting for him.  And Hillary or Biden in the WH.

[truth_seeker]

He Fights!

Don't you think Trump could get five more points, if he routinely turned his baseball cap backwards?

Just keepin' it real, dude.

[Godzilla]

Sometimes, when you don't want to follow society's rules - you tear down society's damn walls and run over them and destroy what's behind them.  It has happened before.

That's called anarchy, like Somalia.  That's not a conservative trait.

[bkepley]

Here I'm going to say it:

I think some of the anti-Trump people are paid by other campaigns to denigrate Trump.  They post negative stories.  I don't see that behind Trump supporters.  I see the same empty arguments from Trump-haters.  Which candidate besides Trump has released an actual position paper?  Which candidate, who while dropping out because his ideas weren't setting the world afire blames another candidate.  We are seeing "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
I hope those of you who are getting paid to post anti-Trump screeds are making a ton.  You have sold your souls.  But I'm sure that's not much of problem for you either.

Trump could put a stop to a lot of it by just acting like a man insead of a child but he can't do it.

[truth_seeker]

There are at least four or five other candidates who deserve serious attention.  This field is stronger than any I remember in all my decades of attention to politics.

Yesterday I was thinking about the situation, whereby on one hand we do have an impressive lineup, but on the other hand they are not gaining support.

The whole game has changed. Trump knows that in an age of near instantaneous communication, 24/7 news, etc. that the "outrageous" wins over the safe, secure, predictable, old style of doing campaigns.

Consider it the natural evolution to the next stage AFTER Drudge and Rush and Levin and Beck.

For over a decade "conservatives" have turned to those media sources for their information, and actually their adult entertainment. They were however content with letting the news people be the entertainers, and the politicians be politicians.

But like addicts and alcoholics, they need MORE. They now require the candidates themselves to be the outrageous entertainers. Candidates who can't change are falling by the wayside.

The audience craves more, and more of what Trump doles out. Trump is handing out free samples of a new politics. "Don't ask me about policies; doesn't this stuff make you feel GOOD?"

Trump says in effect, "aren't you tired of people that act entirely predictably? Check me out. I won't just ride on the helicopter. I already own the helicopter."

[musiclady]

Yesterday I was thinking about the situation, whereby on one hand we do have an impressive lineup, but on the other hand they are not gaining support.

The whole game has changed. Trump knows that in an age of near instantaneous communication, 24/7 news, etc. that the "outrageous" wins over the safe, secure, predictable, old style of doing campaigns.

Consider it the natural evolution to the next stage AFTER Drudge and Rush and Levin and Beck.

For over a decade "conservatives" have turned to those media sources for their information, and actually their adult entertainment. They were however content with letting the news people be the entertainers, and the politicians be politicians.

But like addicts and alcoholics, they need MORE. They now require the candidates themselves to be the outrageous entertainers. Candidates who can't change are falling by the wayside.

The audience craves more, and more of what Trump doles out. Trump is handing out free samples of a new politics. "Don't ask me about policies; doesn't this stuff make you feel GOOD?"

Trump says in effect, "aren't you tired of people that act entirely predictably? Check me out. I won't just ride on the helicopter. I already own the helicopter."

You make a good point here, t_s.  Perhaps the best description of Trump is 'outrageous,' and the best definition of many who support him is 'angry.'

I have listened to Rush for two decades, and to Beck off and on and to Levin very rarely, but I have never been persuaded by their bombastic rhetoric.  I think many of us who listen truly are independent thinkers who can discern when the radio guys go too far.  We listen for facts and ideas, but are not blind followers.

I am not going to go so far as to accuse all Trump followers of being blinded, but their primary defense of him, I think, arises from anger and not rational thought.  The problem is that responses made out of anger never end up with good decisions' being made. 

Trump, however,  is wily enough to tap into that anger, and it may carry him to a point, but I truly don't think he's going to end up being our nominee.  I believe as the field winnows down, Trump will not gain from those who drop out.  Other more qualified candidates will.

[olde north church]

You make a good point here, t_s.  Perhaps the best description of Trump is 'outrageous,' and the best definition of many who support him is 'angry.'

I have listened to Rush for two decades, and to Beck off and on and to Levin very rarely, but I have never been persuaded by their bombastic rhetoric.  I think many of us who listen truly are independent thinkers who can discern when the radio guys go too far.  We listen for facts and ideas, but are not blind followers.

I am not going to go so far as to accuse all Trump followers of being blinded, but their primary defense of him, I think, arises from anger and not rational thought.  The problem is that responses made out of anger never end up with good decisions' being made. 

Trump, however,  is wily enough to tap into that anger, and it may carry him to a point, but I truly don't think he's going to end up being our nominee.  I believe as the field winnows down, Trump will not gain from those who drop out.  Other more qualified candidates will.

Of course it's "anger".  Let's used the Left's vernacular.  Remember, that's what happened in 1994 when the Republicans took Congress.  "The voters had a 'temper tantrum'"  Remember that?  It is a word used to diminish the thought process of those who are engaged.
Perhaps a different phrase might be more correct.  Recognition might be accurate.  Recognition all around.  Recognition among the voters they have been played for fools.  Recognition from the political class that the gravy train is coming to an end.  Recognition from the political commentators and PAC owners they may actually have to work for a dollar.

[NavyCanDo]

4.  Did I mention there's not a single conservative or Conservative among the 16 candidates?

What the hell is your definition of a "conservative"?  Is there such a thing as the perfect conservative?  And if there was, would he or she have a snowballs chance in hell of capturing the vital swing voters?   The answer is NO.     The way I look at it, if you throw out a few of the names , we are left with probably the most conservative field running than I seen in my lifetime of voting. But not so conservative as to throw the election away on principle.   

[bkepley]

What the hell is your definition of a "conservative"?  Is there such a thing as the perfect conservative?  And if there was, would he or she have a snowballs chance in hell of capturing the vital swing voters?   The answer is NO.     The way I look at it, if you throw out a few of the names , we are left with probably the most conservative field running than I seen in my lifetime of voting. But not so conservative as to throw the election away on principle.   

Yep and what some today call conservative is not the free-market conservatism I was raised on. It's more closely aligned with Bernie Sanders socialism as even the left has noticed.

[musiclady]

Of course it's "anger".  Let's used the Left's vernacular.  Remember, that's what happened in 1994 when the Republicans took Congress.  "The voters had a 'temper tantrum'"  Remember that?  It is a word used to diminish the thought process of those who are engaged.
Perhaps a different phrase might be more correct.  Recognition might be accurate.  Recognition all around.  Recognition among the voters they have been played for fools.  Recognition from the political class that the gravy train is coming to an end.  Recognition from the political commentators and PAC owners they may actually have to work for a dollar.

Except that Peter Jennings' insult that GOP voters were having a 'temper tantrum' was untrue.

I believe Trump support is based not on his qualifications, nor his conservative principles (which he doesn't have), but on anger at the Republican party.  And I will repeat that anger never results in wise decisions.

We can get the course correction we need with one of the more qualified candidates running.

With Trump we just get a different kind of dictatorship.

No good.

[musiclady]

What the hell is your definition of a "conservative"?  Is there such a thing as the perfect conservative?  And if there was, would he or she have a snowballs chance in hell of capturing the vital swing voters?   The answer is NO.     The way I look at it, if you throw out a few of the names , we are left with probably the most conservative field running than I seen in my lifetime of voting. But not so conservative as to throw the election away on principle.   

Correct.

[truth_seeker]

When the argument is made that Trump is responding to voter "anger" it implies the voters are mature, intelligent beings.

My contention is the voters are increasingly juvenile, attention seeking emotive beings, craving entertainment.

Trump has picked up on it. He is like the rude Facebook 'friend of friend,' that gets kicks from outrageous postings, that get likes and shares.

Trump doesn't call on voters to listen to a convincing principled discussion of policy; he calls upon them to check out their iPhones for his next outrageous insult, and they eat it up.

Perry's exit is in effect an admission of "I can't keep up with this chit."

[Scottftlc]

Except that Peter Jennings' insult that GOP voters were having a 'temper tantrum' was untrue.

I believe Trump support is based not on his qualifications, nor his conservative principles (which he doesn't have), but on anger at the Republican party.  And I will repeat that anger never results in wise decisions.

We can get the course correction we need with one of the more qualified candidates running.

With Trump we just get a different kind of dictatorship.

No good.

With all due respect, and I mean that (unlike whenever you hear those words), you are very wrong here.

It is not anger at (just) the Republican Party. For my part, I think the only good concepts of government we have reside within the Republican Party.  The Republican Party it is only tainted in the part that plays with the elite of the governing class - there are voices within it that aren't a part of that - but I digress...

It is anger with America's ruling class of political elite, those who think that governing is a personally lucrative political game.  Trump is a reflection of anger at the Democrats as well as anger at the Republican elite that play along with them.  It is anger at Bush, Clinton, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Boehner, McConnell, etc., etc. it is a pox on all their houses and mostly on their system of governance.

And you cannot get the course correction with one of the other candidates running because none of them can get above the election game and change it. They will be trapped and captured by the media and pummeled and made irrelevant by the Democrats. It took one off statement (47 percent) to doom Romney against a weakling Democrat.  No one can be perfect enough to win inside the election game with all the built-in disadvantages that Republicans have.  The only way to win is to grab that game by the neck and strangle it - to be so bold and unafraid and noisy that you take the media out and define the election, you don't let it, or your enemy, define you.

The standard issue "serious" Republicans - regardless of any stand on ANY issue - gets crushed by the disadvantages and his or her own dignity and gentility (just like George W. Bush let himself get crushed by the Democrats).

Right now only Trump can do that - is showing us how it can be done. He's a megalomaniac...the only kind of person that can overcome the many social and cultural and political advantages enjoyed by the Democrats.  National elections like these are easy for Democrats, they are amazingly difficult for Republicans. It takes someone as bold and fearless as Trump to handle that successfully. ALL of the others lose without ever even having a ghost of a chance. Republicans HAVE to have a game changer or they are simply irrelevant.

[mystery-ak]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/carly-fiorina-arizona-gop-women-trump-213574


Fiorina's answer to Trump: 'Ladies, look at this face'

The former tech exec can fire up a crowd of Republican women - but can she close the sale?

By Hadas Gold

09/12/15, 12:05 AM EDT


SCOTTSDALE, Ariz — Carly Fiorina has Donald Trump to thank for an opening line that got a big crowd of Republican women roaring on Friday evening.

"Ladies, look at this face," Fiorina said to loud, knowing cheers from the audience of roughly 600 Republican women at the National Federation of Republican Women convention. "This is the face of a 61-year-old woman. I am proud of every year and every wrinkle."

The former Hewlett Packard executive, and the only woman running for the GOP nomination, came to the stage to a standing ovation and received a few more as she confidently wandered the stage, delivering a speech with the same vigor and precision that brought her great praise at the first Republican debate.

"And look at all of your faces — the faces of leadership," she continued. "The faces of leadership in our party, the party of women's suffrage. The face of leadership in your community, in your businesses, in your places of work and worship. Ladies, note to the Democrat party: We are not a special interest group; we are the majority of the nation."

Fiorina is on a hot streak. She's up in the polls and has made it to next Wednesday's primetime GOP debate, albeit with the help of CNN's last-minute change in rules.

Anticipation for Fiorina's appearance, which kicked off the convention, was high. Staff at her booth outside of the ballroom said they had quickly run out of Fiorina signs, buttons and literature and were swarmed after the speech.

But while she showed she was able to fire up an important and reliable base of support — Republican women — she didn't quite close the sale with many in the audience. That's been her problem for weeks: She's impressive in person, but not most GOP voters' first choice.

Fiorina gave a modified version of her stump speech, focusing on her experience as a businesswoman who climbed the corporate ladder all the way from the bottom rung, where along the way she was once called a "token bimbo" by a male superior and chose to attend a client meeting at a strip club.

Though Hillary Clinton was the only candidate she mentioned by name, the aura of Trump hung heavy in the air.

"Leadership is not about position," she said at one point. "It is not about how big your office is or how big your plane, or your helicopter, or your ego is. Leadership is about service."

Some of Fiorina's biggest cheers came when she said that one of her first calls as president would be to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or how she wouldn't replace the thousands of retiring federal government workers in order to decrease "the weight, the power the cost, the complexity, the ineptitude and the corruption of the government." Jokes about Clinton "wiping her server with a towel" or about how a "man's hormones" affect his judgment were also raucously received.

As Fiorina finished her speech, the song "Taking Care of Business" played, and dozens of women jammed the stage, including one dressed head to toe as the Statue of Liberty and another holding her 6-week-old baby. Multiple women filing out of the ballroom were heard exclaiming "she was so good," and "that was fantastic."

"She was absolutely positive and powerful and had the message that we need for today — to be a leader who's going to be effective. I have not made up my mind yet but that may have just swayed me the little bit I was needing," said Teri Smith, a realtor from Lake Tahoe, Calif., as she surveyed the crowd around Fiorina.

Many other women, though, said that it was too early to fully commit to a candidate, though they supported Fiorina's contribution to the race.

"I believe she's extremely qualified," said Kathleen Anderson, a stay-at-home mom from Bountiful, Utah. "It bothers us to hear her spoken of as a vice presidential candidate."

Standing with Anderson, Lori Brinkerhoff, also from Utah, said she was disgusted by Trump and how he has treated Fiorina.

"He's a misogynist, clearly he's a misogynist. He sees women as sex objects, let's face it," she said.

"I haven't had any candidate that I've liked," said Michelle Scharf, a VP of government relations for a technology company. "But today I feel like I have someone I can say, 'They're on my radar.'"

[musiclady]

With all due respect, and I mean that (unlike whenever you hear those words), you are very wrong here.

It is not anger at (just) the Republican Party. For my part, I think the only good concepts of government we have reside within the Republican Party.  The Republican Party it is only tainted in the part that plays with the elite of the governing class - there are voices within it that aren't a part of that - but I digress...

It is anger with America's ruling class of political elite, those who think that governing is a personally lucrative political game.  Trump is a reflection of anger at the Democrats as well as anger at the Republican elite that play along with them.  It is anger at Bush, Clinton, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Boehner, McConnell, etc., etc. it is a pox on all their houses and mostly on their system of governance.

And you cannot get the course correction with one of the other candidates running because none of them can get above the election game and change it. They will be trapped and captured by the media and pummeled and made irrelevant by the Democrats. It took one off statement (47 percent) to doom Romney against a weakling Democrat.  No one can be perfect enough to win inside the election game with all the built-in disadvantages that Republicans have.  The only way to win is to grab that game by the neck and strangle it - to be so bold and unafraid and noisy that you take the media out and define the election, you don't let it, or your enemy, define you.

The standard issue "serious" Republicans - regardless of any stand on ANY issue - gets crushed by the disadvantages and his or her own dignity and gentility (just like George W. Bush let himself get crushed by the Democrats).

Right now only Trump can do that - is showing us how it can be done. He's a megalomaniac...the only kind of person that can overcome the many social and cultural and political advantages enjoyed by the Democrats.  National elections like these are easy for Democrats, they are amazingly difficult for Republicans. It takes someone as bold and fearless as Trump to handle that successfully. ALL of the others lose without ever even having a ghost of a chance. Republicans HAVE to have a game changer or they are simply irrelevant.

While I agree with some of the points you make here (perhaps most of them), I disagree with your conclusion.

For me, and for many others, character is critical, and if one is 'bold and fearless' without integrity, we lose in winning.

Perhaps for me the sad reality is that, if Trump is what is needed to get a Republican 'victory,' then we are so far down in the chasm we will never recover.

But that's not really a new thought for me.  I started to believe that in 2008 when Obama won, and it was confirmed in 2012, when in spite of his known corruption and ineptness, the American people reelected him.

I don't want a Pyrrhic victory.  I want America back.

And I fear it's far too late for that to happen.....

[flowers]

Did any of the candidates say a thing about 9/11 yesterday or the Benghazi anniversary? Any thing about how Iran gets nukes on the anniversary of 9/11? Or was Florina and Trump talking about faces along with MG and Krauthammer?

[Oceander]

The unmitigated truth of the matter?   You guys hate him because he's not a SOCON.

My attitude on that is...THANK GOD! 

As Mark Levin would say now...."There!  I said it!"

Again, somebody must have hijacked your account.  I am hardly a socon (I usually get castigated for saying socons should "chill out" on the social issues).  I dislike Trump because he's using people to pimp his own ego, he's not even principled enough to be a pragmatist, and he is most definitely a liberal when it comes to many core individual liberty issues, such as respecting private property (he's perfectly fine with government using eminent domain to take homes from their owners and give them to developers like himself).

[musiclady]

Again, somebody must have hijacked your account.  I am hardly a socon (I usually get castigated for saying socons should "chill out" on the social issues).  I dislike Trump because he's using people to pimp his own ego, he's not even principled enough to be a pragmatist, and he is most definitely a liberal when it comes to many core individual liberty issues, such as respecting private property (he's perfectly fine with government using eminent domain to take homes from their owners and give them to developers like himself).

It's quite remarkable when a dreaded "SoCon" like me and a non-SoCon like you are on the same page!