Obnoxious Bully from Jersey Endorses Obnoxious Bully from Queens

Suicide bombers usually only get one chance to take out a target, but Chris Christie wants another shot at Rubio:

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey endorsed Donald J. Trump on Friday, a major turn in a wild race and one that gives the New York businessman a major boost as he heads into the pivotal Super Tuesday contests.

Mr. Christie was a candidate himself until he came in sixth place in New Hampshire’s primary. Seeing his political career facing an abrupt conclusion at the end of a second term as governor following his faded presidential campaign, he was said to be deeply angry with Senator Marco Rubio, according to three people with direct knowledge of his thinking. He blames Mr. Rubio’s “super PAC” for halting his momentum in New Hampshire in December with a string of slash-and-burn ads.

The endorsement came a day after Mr. Rubio, in a withering debate performance, turned his guns on Mr. Trump for the first time, and followed up this morning, calling Mr. Trump a “con artist.”

After the endorsement announcement, Trump and Christie made fun of Rubio for troweling on make-up like a common trollop. Meanwhile, Rubio said maybe Trump pissed himself at the debate.

Yes, this is real. And there’s a significant chance that one of these idiots will get the nuclear codes.

198 replies
  1. 1
    PsiFighter37 says:

    I am watching it live on CNBC. Trump just said Romney walks like a penguin.

    This is real(?!)

  2. 2
    Doug R says:

    Does anyone know where I can get that babbling toddlers sound clip John Melendez was using on the Stephanie Miller show this morning?

  3. 3
    dr. bloor says:

    Bridge and tunnel, babies, bridge and tunnel.

    In a related announcement, Trump and Christie said they planned to celebrate the endorsement this weekend by vomiting out the windows of their cabs after drinking their way through downtown Manhattan.

  4. 4
    Sherparick says:

    Apparently, Christie, who has defended American Muslims, has decided that a guy likely to bring internment camps is not a problem for him.

    Why? Well, between the embrace of Obama and stuff like this, Christie became toxic to the “Real Murricans” who make up the base of the GOP. http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/chr.....ing-islam/

    Now, after going the full Trump, he will find the environment more inviting in 2020 or find himself on the ticket as Trump’s VP.

  5. 5
    Bill says:

    Governor Krispy Kreme has his eye on Ms. Lynch’s job.

  6. 6
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    Meanwhile, Rubio said maybe Trump pissed himself at the debate.

    Is there a context where that seems like more than just a desperate attempt to be funny? Kind of a middle school version of “the jerk store called, they’re running out of you!”

  7. 7
    JPL says:

    Trump is openly racist. The time to stop him was when he questioned the Presidents birth place and religion. The repubs thought he was pretty terrific then, why not now.

  8. 8
    Cacti says:

    Jersey whale is begging for the Veep spot.

    It would be great fun watching a Trump/Christie ticket lose NY and NJ.

  9. 9
    Mnemosyne says:

    I persist in my belief that the rest of the country doesn’t like East Coasters nearly as much as East Coasters assume they do. Trump himself is a bit sui generis since he’s a TV star and known quantity, but there’s a reason Giuliani and Christie never made a go of it outside the tri-state area. It’s also why I’m not worried about Bloomberg.

  10. 10
    PsiFighter37 says:

    Trump now saying he will make it easier to sue for libel. Someone tell him what happened to John Adams when he tried that…

  11. 11
    JCT says:

    It’s like very (bad) performance art. Although I like the idea of Christie as the designated Rubio destroyer.

    I’ll bet Trump promised him Attorney General for this.

  12. 12
    Sherparick says:

    Any question that human beings are just another species of primates should be eliminated. That we share a common ancestor with Gorillas, Chimps, Bonobos, Orangutans, and or slightly more distant ancestors the Baboon and Rhesus monkey is unquestionable, including the poop throwing.

  13. 13
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    reposting from below. I typed this specifically with the idea that Christie might want to be Trump’s Veep, but I think it holds for Christie more generally.

    I think Christie is operating under at least two, maybe three, delusions:
    1) Christie is a strong national candidate
    2) Christie is done with the Bridge etc stuff– as Twitter Nixon says, Waldstein and Kelly hate him as much as anybody at this point, and it sounds like that Port Authority could, not will, blow up big
    3) being Trump’s Veep or even Veep candidate is a big boost to Christie’s future ambition

    I guess it’s possible that I’m not being cynical enough, and Christie knows he’s done politically and sees a lucrative future in being a Vice President/glorified casino greeter in the Trump empire

  14. 14
    Anoniminous says:

    All the current polling is telling us Trump will be the GOP nominee. If Hillary can’t beat this racist fvcktard by 10 points then the entire Democratic Party should pack it in.

  15. 15
    NR says:

    Nikki Haley just said she’d support Trump if he wins the nomination. The establishment is coming around even faster than I thought they would.

  16. 16
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    reposting from below. I typed this specifically with the idea that Christie might want to be Trump’s Veep, but I think it holds for Christie more generally.

    I think Christie is operating under at least two, maybe three, delusions:
    1) Christie is a strong national candidate
    2) Christie is done with the Bridge etc stuff– as Twitter Nixon says, Waldstein and Kelly hate him as much as anybody at this point, and it sounds like that Port Authority could, not will, blow up big
    3) being Trump’s Veep or even Veep candidate is a big boost to Christie’s future ambition

    I guess it’s possible that I’m not being cynical enough, and Christie knows he’s done politically and sees a lucrative future in being a Vice President/glorified case-ino greeter in the Trump empire

  17. 17
    Calouste says:

    @PsiFighter37: Well, it seems Trump has found a way to get FOX and ClearChannel to support Clinders in the general. They would be sued out of business in a New York minute if it was easy to sue for libel.

  18. 18
    dedc79 says:

    The GOP has an incredibly deep bench. . . of megalomaniacs

  19. 19
    NonyNony says:

    @Mnemosyne: Right now Trump is winning the GOP primaries with about 33% of the vote. In Nevada he won big with 45% (but the usual caveats apply because it was a caucus).

    I guess what I’m saying is that I think you’re right – I think even Republicans like loudmouth angry New Yorkers less than people think. Trump is damn lucky that the GOP has no leadership right now and their ideology is basically one that thinks collection active problems are not really problems (e.g. I Got Mine, Fuck You) or else he would already have been eliminated from this race.

  20. 20
    Rand Careaga says:

    It’s an interesting gamble on Christie’s part: if Trump goes the distance, the payoff could be YOOOOGE (Pierce is thinking AG in a Trump administration, a post to which Christie would be eminently suited by the standards of such distinguished former attorneys general as John Mitchell, Ed Meese and Alberto Gonzales). If Trump’s not the nominee, and if, say, Cruz or Rubio go down in November, Christie will not be the first person at whom rifles are aimed in the circular firing squad. If Trump is the nominee and gets waxed in November, the governor will be radioactive as far as the GOP establishment is concerned. But whatever else his many failings may include, Christie is not conspicuously stupid, so I’m thinking that his decision might well be informed by the calculation that, win or lose, the GOP establishment isn’t going to be a very significant player going forward.

  21. 21
    Kirbster says:

    I used to enjoy reading Christopher Buckley’s novels of political farce. I do not, however, enjoy living in one.

  22. 22
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Cacti: I was thinking the same. People from outside the metro area really underestimate how unpopular those two bozos are.

  23. 23
    Amir Khalid says:

    I was just wondering: has Chris Christie lived down that time four years ago, when he sold out to Obama for Bruce Springsteen’s autograph?

  24. 24
    NonyNony says:

    @Anoniminous:

    If Hillary can’t beat this racist fvcktard by 10 points then the entire Democratic Party should pack it in.

    Don’t get your hopes up that high. In 2008 Obama was only able to beat McCain with a margin of 7% of the popular vote. And that was after a historically disastrous Republican presidency, a campaign that seemed to have been crafted by drunken rodeo clowns, and the selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate.

    The floor of the GOP’s voting base is about 46% in any election (Romney got 47%). If Trump is the nominee, I wouldn’t expect him to do any worse than 46% – if he managed to perform worse than McCain 2008 that would be amazingly good news for Democrats.

  25. 25
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NonyNony:

    Like I said, Trump is a TV star and has been famous for almost 30 years, so he’s not tagged with the “New York blowhard” tag the way Christie, Giuliani, and Bloomberg are. That kind of machismo doesn’t always play well in other parts of the country.

  26. 26
    Anoniminous says:

    @NonyNony:

    Polling out of Florida has Trump running 44/45% support. HuffPo Poll of Polls has him at 38% nationally, well enough ahead of Cruz and RUb2io to win. For me, the only remaining question about Trump is if he can break into the 50s nationally.

  27. 27
    Poopyman says:

    @Calouste: This morning it was Bernillary, this afternoon it’s Clinders. Sigh.

    While I still can, I’d like to thank you all for not using Hernie Sinton.

  28. 28
    Enhanced Voting Techinques says:

    After the endorsement announcement, Trump and Christie made fun of Rubio for troweling on make-up like a common trollop. Meanwhile, Rubio said maybe Trump pissed himself at the debate.

    I am thinking this would over the line for Andrew Jackson verses Adams, much less a modern party primary.

  29. 29
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Anoniminous: I would bet the popular vote spread might not be so big (more than 5%, less than ten), but more the electoral victory that will be big, maybe bigger than ’08– Obama narrowly lost IA and MO, IIRC, and maybe Trump would scare AZ blue. And if either of the doomsday scenarios I’m seeing speculated about come to pass– a Chinese crash spreading to the US or a big terror attack– all bets are off.

  30. 30
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I have never understood why all the poor losers in flyover land/the pumpkin patch dislike the city that fancies itself The Center Of The Universe.

  31. 31

    Maybe Christie is just burning the house down behind him now that he’s done.

  32. 32

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Obama won Iowa in both 08 and 12.

  33. 33
    Calouste says:

    @NR: That’s showing that “uniting the party against Trump” is just a pipe dream. Trump is likely to pick up a measurable chuck of the voters from each candidate that drops out. And considering how close he already is to a majority, that’s all he needs.

    And it shows the complete lack of self-awareness of Haley that she thinks she won’t be rounded up when Trump is going to get rid of those 12 million “illegals”. Illegals are hard to find by definition almost, and it’s just way easier to round up a bunch of brown skinned folk that you just come across if you need to make the numbers. There’s always the shredder to get rid of any papers they might carry that would prove their status.

  34. 34
    rikyrah says:

    OUR ELDERS CONTINUE to be punished by Jim Crow.

     63,756 Reasons Racism Is Still Alive in South Carolina
    That’s the number of minority registered voters who could be blocked from the polls by the state’s new voter ID law.
    By Ari Berman

    ……………………..
    Larrie Butler, a 90-year-old African-American man, was born in Calhoun County, South Carolina, at a time when the South was segregated during Jim Crow. He moved to Maryland after serving in the military and attending college, but returned to South Carolina in 2010. He got a voter-registration card and voted in the state in 2010.

    In 2011, South Carolina passed a strict new voter-ID law requiring a government-issued photo ID to cast a ballot. When Butler went to the DMV to switch his driver’s license from Maryland to South Carolina, he was told he needed a birth certificate to confirm his identity. But Butler was born at home, when there were few black hospitals, and never received a born certificate. When he went to the state Vital Records office to get a birth certificate, they said he needed to produce his Maryland driving records and high-school records from South Carolina. After he returned with that information, he was told he needed his elementary-school records, which Butler couldn’t produce because the school was closed. So instead he found his census record, which was not accepted because his first name in the census, Larry, did not exactly match the name he’d used for his entire life, Larrie. He was told to go to court and legally change his name at 85 years old, in order to obtain the birth certificate required to get a driver’s license in South Carolina and also be able to vote.

    “It made me feel terrible,” Butler said.

  35. 35
    PaulW says:

    For those of us here, this is all horrifying and unsettling news.

    what terrifies me is that there’s so many people who view this as GOOD news…

    We are facing a political scenario where Trump is getting political cover within the GOP itself to where they’ll be stuck with him as their official banner carrier into the November election. And while it may be pretty to think that Trump will fall apart and lose this November general election in a big way (and drag the rest of the corrupted Republican party with him), we can’t take that for granted. He’s gotten this far conning the sh-t out of the GOP voting base (how the hell else can an oft-married perv like him win over evangelicals?), and he’s crafty enough a con artist to know how to shill to anyone.

    If I am panicking, it is because we are facing a 50-50 chance of a bankrupting fraud becoming President of the United States. I am living in a state where my fellow residents voted in a goddamn Medicare Fraud – TWICE – and even as our schools collapse and our beaches die thanks to toxic waters there’s still no sign of my fellow residents waking up from the goddamn fantasies the state GOP keeps spinning to keep themselves in power.

  36. 36
    Amir Khalid says:

    @NR:
    It’s a rational calculation: once nominated, the Donald will be the big man in the Republican party — at least for the few months between the party convention and election day. And he could conceivably remain the big man for four or eight years. One might as well get ready to kiss up to him for the duration.

  37. 37
    LAO says:

    As a New Yorker — I found this shocking. I can’t explain why — I have been paying attention.

  38. 38
    Hal says:

    Well now Trump has his vp.

    Also, when is Christie’s bypass surgery going to kick in? Speaking as another fat person, I use to think he was going to make some amazing personal transformation and run away with the election. Oh well. He should have softened his tone and become a Democrat.

  39. 39
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Rand Careaga:

    It’s an interesting gamble on Christie’s part: if Trump goes the distance, the payoff could be YOOOOGE (Pierce is thinking AG in a Trump administration, a post to which Christie would be eminently suited by the standards of such distinguished former attorneys general as John Mitchell, Ed Meese and Alberto Gonzales). If Trump’s not the nominee, and if, say, Cruz or Rubio go down in November, Christie will not be the first person at whom rifles are aimed in the circular firing squad. If Trump is the nominee and gets waxed in November, the governor will be radioactive as far as the GOP establishment is concerned. But whatever else his many failings may include, Christie is not conspicuously stupid, so I’m thinking that his decision might well be informed by the calculation that, win or lose, the GOP establishment isn’t going to be a very significant player going forward.

    First, I respect your right to choose and even though I disagree with your decision, I accept your choice not to use the Oxford comma.

    Second, I think your analysis is spot on. Christie is a smart guy and he has game-theoried this out, and it’s a sign that the GOP establishment is no longer something to be feared, if even respected. If Jeb… and his vast fortune couldn’t even make it to Super Tuesday, then those guys are old news.

  40. 40
    LAO says:

    @Iowa Old Lady: I think you are right. Nothing else makes sense. He can’t possibly believe that aligning himself with Trump is his best course of action.

  41. 41
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Enhanced Voting Techinques:

    Think again. Thomas Jefferson’s surrogates called John Adams a hermaphrodite, and Adams’s surrogates retaliated by claiming Jefferson was mixed-race, and later that he had died.

    Today’s politicians are pikers in comparison, but they have a much bigger megaphone.

  42. 42
    aimai says:

    @Rand Careaga: If Trump is not the nominee then what does Christie care, really? Trump and New York/New Jersey people are more important to him than Rubio etc… even if they do become the nominee. They aren’t going to win and I think the Republicans know it. Trump might win. But not Rubio or Cruz. So there’s nothing lost.

  43. 43
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    Nikki Haley just said she’d support Trump if he wins the nomination. The establishment is coming around even faster than I thought they would.

    What else can they do? Their voters have spoken. I don’t think he’ll be that hard to completely capture. He doesn’t believe in anything other than his own wonderfulness.

  44. 44
    Anoniminous says:

    @NonyNony: @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Your hyperbole detection meters need to be adjusted.

  45. 45
    Grumpy Code Monkey says:

    @Bill:

    Governor Krispy Kreme has his eye on Ms. Lynch’s job.

    When RoonieRoo floated that same theory earlier today, I replied that I wasn’t sure the universe could survive the irony of Christie as AG.

    But if Trump actually does win? Not the strangest thing that could happen.

  46. 46
    aimai says:

    @rikyrah: Jesus Christ.

  47. 47
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    I was getting into a bit of a Hamilton vs Adams fight with Anne Laurie in another thread, and I realized I was running into Boston vs NYC partisanship as well. (Adams is AL’s hometown boy, and Hamilton is her rejected birth city’s guy.) Since I’ve never been to either city, I really don’t care, TBH.

  48. 48
    NR says:

    @Calouste: Yeah, I know. Trump is almost certain to be the nominee.

    But in liberal circles, there seems to be the popular idea that Republicans (establishment or otherwise) won’t support Trump if he’s the nominee. That idea is a fantasy. The establishment is already getting on board. Trump will have the entire Republican party behind him for the general election, regardless of what they’re saying now.

  49. 49
    Matt McIrvin says:

    I think it’ll be narrower than 2008 or 2012, because Trump may be generally loathed, but Hillary Clinton is generally disliked as well (Sanders’ situation is better, but there’s a lot of “don’t know/unsure”, and obvious potential to red-bait him). With Clinton v. Trump, we’re counting on a relative hate level difference of maybe 5%.

    We don’t have a candidate like 2008 Barack Obama, whose personal approval was initially high even from people who didn’t agree with him or would vote for him.

  50. 50
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @PaulW:

    He’s gotten this far conning the sh-t out of the GOP voting base (how the hell else can an oft-married perv like him win over evangelicals?)

    He didn’t con the evangelicals–they just finally admitted openly that they don’t give a shit about Jesus or the actual tenets of Christianity; they just care about hating brown people, women, and poors.

  51. 51
    NonyNony says:

    @Calouste:

    That’s showing that “uniting the party against Trump” is just a pipe dream.

    Nah – what it’s showing is the inherent weakness that the establishment-types have these days. Haley can’t really say anything otherwise – she’s a supposed leader in her party. If the party voters choose Trump her choices are basically to refuse to support him – and leave the party and her entire life behind – or stay in the party and support him. She can’t really do anything else and she knows it.

    That’s the thing – they’re all basically trapped by their ambitions and their previous choices. They can’t refuse to support him if he’s the nominee – it would mark the end of their careers, not his.

  52. 52
    Brachiator says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I persist in my belief that the rest of the country doesn’t like East Coasters nearly as much as East Coasters assume they do.

    FDR and Teddy Roosevelt were East Coasters. Now it’s true that former NYC mayors have crashed and burned when they tried for the presidency, and this would include Bloomberg.

    In any case, let’s see how things look after super Tuesday.

  53. 53
    bemused says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    They hate things they are too scared to experience. The farthest a large percentage of Iron Rangers have traveled to is Vegas or Disneyworld.

  54. 54
    Kay says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    He didn’t con the evangelicals–they just finally admitted openly that they don’t give a shit about Jesus or the actual tenets of Christianity;

    True, and now we’ll watch as “conservatives” jettison all of conservatism to back a strong man who they perceive as a “winner”.

    It’s shocking to me, how each faction are being exposed as frauds, one by one.

  55. 55
    PaulW says:

    @srv:

    He’s the right Attorney General to put Hillary behind bars. If she doesn’t win, she’s going to have to flee the country. Maybe she can get an H1-B somewhere.

    The investigations into Christie aren’t over: there’s still ongoing questions into Sandy relief funds he may have mishandled. Christie may be the one behind bars, not Hillary.

  56. 56
    sigaba says:

    @Doug R: If you can find me a YouTube of the show I can probably find the sound, it’s probably either in my library or the one at the studio.

  57. 57
    Thoroughly Pizzled says:

    If we get Hillary/Bernie vs. Trump/Christie, and somehow a Yankees-Mets World Series, I fear New York will turn into a black hole and swallow the planet.

  58. 58
    Germy says:

    “The fact of the matter is, no one’s gonna get inside this guy’s head… there is no better fighter than Donald Trump,” says Christie. “He’s going to fight for the American people. And you didn’t hear Senator Rubio talking about that this morning… I can guarantee you that the one person Hillary and Bill Clinton do not want to see on that stage in September is Donald Trump. They know how to run the usual political playbook around junior senators, and run them around the block. The best person to beat Hillary Clinton in November, on that stage last night, is undoubtedly Donald Trump. I’m happy to be on the Trump team and I look forward to working with him.”

  59. 59
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Mnemosyne: Everyone’s an East Coaster this time around, though (except Ted Cruz, and he doesn’t count since he has no hope). Hillary wasn’t one initially, but she is now.

  60. 60
    NR says:

    @Matt McIrvin: Trump will probably drive higher Hispanic turnout and swing them further toward the Dems. But I think our share of the white vote is going to decline even further. Trump might crack 70% with non college-educated whites. That could lead to a very strange electoral scenario where we hold Florida but are at risk of losing traditionally blue states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

  61. 61
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Germy: “What’s your position on shooting Muslims with pig-blood bullets, Governor Christie?”

  62. 62
    bemused says:

    The Trump-Christie smooch fest was nauseating.

  63. 63
    LAO says:

    @Thoroughly Pizzled: Yanks not good enough this year. My Mets though . . .

  64. 64
    bemused says:

    @Doug R:

    I think I’ve seen that recently. It sounded like the youtube of the twin toddler boys talking to each other in their own language.

  65. 65
    Cacti says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Think again. Thomas Jefferson’s surrogates called John Adams a hermaphrodite, and Adams’s surrogates retaliated by claiming Jefferson was mixed-race, and later that he had died.

    Today’s politicians are pikers in comparison, but they have a much bigger megaphone.

    Most Americans know about the Hamilton/Burr duel.

    What they don’t know is the reason for it:

    Hamilton circulating rumors that Burr was having an incestuous relationship with his adult daughter Theodosia.

  66. 66
    Bill says:

    @PaulW:

    We are facing a political scenario where Trump is getting political cover within the GOP itself to where they’ll be stuck with him as their official banner carrier into the November election. And while it may be pretty to think that Trump will fall apart and lose this November general election in a big way (and drag the rest of the corrupted Republican party with him), we can’t take that for granted.

    Nobody is taking it for granted, but fact is Polls indicate he is the best opponent for Hillary to trounce.

    Also, despite being a sexist/racist asshole (like every damn Republican candidate), and utterly unqualified for the job, he is also the most moderate of the horrible choices running on the Republican side.

    If I am panicking, it is because we are facing a 50-50 chance of a bankrupting fraud becoming President of the United States.

    The odds are waaaaaay lower than 50-50.

  67. 67
    aimai says:

    @Matt McIrvin: In what sense is it true that HRC is “generally disliked?” I just read a very interesting piece over at Kos arguing that HRC is incredibly popular when she is in a specific job, or between jobs. But that during the run up to her getting a specific job (Senate, Presidency, Secretary of State) she is (sometimes) disliked or attacked as “too” something. But that this is generally true of women running for office. They pointed out that it was true of Liz Warren as well–that before she started running for the Senate, and after she got in, people adored her but during the actual running for the Senate (and I can attest to that because I’m in MA and was door knocking for her) people were highly critical of all the aspects of her personality which they subsequently have come to adore.

    I don’t agree that HRC is universally or even largely unpopular. She has been widely admired and liked for years–while also being an object of extreme hatred by Republicans. But that isn’t a global thing, its situational.

  68. 68
    Germy says:

    @Matt McIrvin: saw this comment on LGM:

    humanoid.panda says:
    February 26, 2016 at 1:28 pm
    Why have one unelecteable rage-monkey with a thick oppo-file on your ticket when you can have 2? Trump-Christie 2016!

  69. 69
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Steve in the ATL: I know, right? Nobody forced those losers to live in loserville.

  70. 70
    NR says:

    @aimai:

    In what sense is it true that HRC is “generally disliked?”

    In this one.

  71. 71
    bemused says:

    I just heard a Dem Congressman say on msnbc that New Jersey just lost hundreds of millions of dollars in relief for residents still not in their homes because the application was not filled out properly and now Christie is flying off to Texas again.

  72. 72
    sparrow says:

    @Matt McIrvin: Actually, I think Sanders holds the parallel with Obama in this respect pretty well. I fairly often see republicans commenting on Sanders that they don’t totally agree with him on methods, but they like the problems he identifies, and they see him as honest. He does not have the horrible, horrible unfavorables that Hillary has.

  73. 73
    Paul in KY says:

    @Mnemosyne: Agree with your thinking here.

  74. 74
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I was getting into a bit of a Hamilton vs Adams fight with Anne Laurie in another thread, and I realized I was running into Boston vs NYC partisanship as well. (Adams is AL’s hometown boy, and Hamilton is her rejected birth city’s guy.) Since I’ve never been to either city, I really don’t care, TBH.

    Boston and NYC both have many wonderful qualities, and both have sports teams deserving all the hatred they receive. The tie breaker for me is accents–the Boston one grates on me like no other accent outside of SE Asia.

  75. 75
    Marc says:

    Clinton has extremely high unfavorable ratings. That doesn’t make her universally unpopular, but it does make her unpopular. And with high name recognition, that is a number that’s difficult to change.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/161.....-news.aspx

    Has a good long-term summary. For reference, Mitt Romney in 2012 around election time had a unfavorable rating of 47 percent, and Obama tends to be in the mid-40s. So, yes, her numbers are unusually high.

  76. 76
    Calouste says:

    @Grumpy Code Monkey: Someone on TPM posited the theory that Christie is going for Scalia’s seat. Looks like an easy way to stay out of jail: lifetime appointment, no way he is going to get impeached and convicted as long as there are at least 34 GOPers in the Senate, and he can fight the case all the way up to the Supreme Court and then not recuse himself.

  77. 77
    Betty Cracker says:

    @aimai: That’s an interesting theory — maybe it’s taboo for women to compete on some level. Once they have the job (or are done with it), they don’t present such an affront.

  78. 78
    LAO says:

    You know, I will never again tolerate a republican claiming Obama insulted/insults the dignity of the presidency. My god — all of these guys are clowns.

  79. 79
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @aimai: In what sense is it true that HRC is “generally disliked?”

    In the sense of national approval-disapproval polls, which are running about 53-41 against her:

    http://elections.huffingtonpos.....ble-rating

    For Trump it’s 57-36 against, so that’s the margin we’re looking at. And Hillary Clinton was running massively net positive until she became thought of as a serious presidential contender again, so a lot of pure partisan feelings probably go into that.

    The one pollster HuffPo uses on this that I’m really suspicious of is Morning Consult, but they seem to overrate both Trump AND Clinton, so it balances out.

  80. 80
    Paul in KY says:

    @Poopyman: ‘Hernie Sinton’ sounds like an outlawed wrestling move.

  81. 81
    sparrow says:

    @NR: Thank you. I don’t mean to impune aimai specifically, but some Hillary supporters seem to be too much inside the democratic party bubble, and don’t spend much time looking out. It bears repeating…

    According to national polls, nearly 53 percent of Americans have an unfavorable impression of Clinton, which would make her the most disliked presidential nominee in modern history. Even if incumbents are included, the only candidate with worse numbers was Jimmy Carter in 1980.

    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/karp-bernie-sanders-electability-clinton-republicans-trump-election/

  82. 82
    Paul in KY says:

    @Calouste: They wouldn’t come for her, her name is ‘Nikki’!!

    Edit: Just thought of it, but if her parents had named her ‘Nikkki’, she’d have no trouble at all with the deport crowd.

  83. 83
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    I try to avoid violent rhetoric in this still newish year, but could somebody punch Chuck Todd in the nuts with a pair brass knuckles?

    Chuck ToddVerified account
    ‏@ chucktodd
    This Christie endorsement could be as important to Trump both on timing and symbolism (estab cred) as Teddy’s endorsement was of Obama in 08

    Leaving everything else aside, Chris Christie just flamed out in the primaries after two primaries, he’s at about 30% approval in his home state. So he’s a towering figure just like Ted Kennedy.

  84. 84
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    Maybe that’s why everyone has such high negatives, then. ;-)

    Obviously, I’m not saying that none of the candidates on either side can win. I’m just saying that the MSM has an East Coast bias and their love for certain candidates often isn’t shared by the rest of the country.

  85. 85
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @sparrow:

    I fairly often see republicans commenting on Sanders that they don’t totally agree with him on methods, but they like the problems he identifies, and they see him as honest. He does not have the horrible, horrible unfavorables that Hillary has.

    Hillary has high unfavorables because Fox News et al have been attacking her non-stop for 25 years. No one has attacked Bernie because no one has cared enough about him to do so. If he is the Dem nominee, the entire rightwing noise machine is going to after him with guns blazing and there will be a swift and dramatic change in his ratings.

  86. 86
    NR says:

    @sparrow: Trump’s numbers are a bit worse. But the problem there is that a significant chunk of Trump’s unfavorable ratings come from Republicans. Those will all flip to “Favorable” once he’s the nominee. And even if they don’t, they will all still vote for him.

    Republicans fall in line. It’s what they do.

  87. 87
    lgerard says:

    After seeing Trump’s Rubio impersonation this after noon the Daily Show, John Oliver, et al might as well take a few months off.

    The 3 GOP Stooges provide their own snarky comedy.

  88. 88
    NR says:

    @Steve in the ATL: You are giving a lot of credit to a group of people who couldn’t even take down Donald Trump.

  89. 89
    Paul in KY says:

    @NR: I have had a standard Republican here at work (Catholic, very anti-abortion, not as right wing as the 27% crowd) tell me there’s no way he will vote for Trump & would vote for Hillary in that situation.

    He might be trying to butter me up for something, though.

  90. 90
    msdc says:

    @sparrow:

    He does not have the horrible, horrible unfavorables that Hillary has.

    Yet.

  91. 91
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Interestingly, though, Clinton went massively net favorable once she was no longer a presidential candidate, and became Secretary of State. It was only once she was out of the State job and people started talking about the 2016 election cycle that she started dropping into negative territory again (and people started retrospectively knocking her tenure as Secretary of State).

  92. 92
    D58826 says:

    He blames Mr. Rubio’s “super PAC” for halting his momentum in New Hampshire in December with a string of slash-and-burn ads.

    As I said in an earlier thread ‘revenge is a dish best served cold’. And thew timing just stomped all over Marco’s big momentum day. :-)

  93. 93
    Elie says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    And she is the first serious woman candidate since the Fox and right wing noise machine has begun so strong. She is tagged with all the deficiencies of her husband’s administration and somehow takes the heat for his infidelities also. Not that surprisingly, a lot of women just hate her. When asked why, some of my hater women friends just sputter …”because”… well her judgement”. What judgement, I ask and they can never nail it down.

    Because that’s why. Because.

    Also see the usual gaggle of Hillary haters showing up. I won’t stay around too long — they have nothing to say that I want to read or react to.

  94. 94
    Calouste says:

    @Marc: Not as high as Donald Trump, who has 63% unfavorable, for a net negative of 32%. Clinton has a net negative of 12, the same as Cruz btw.

    Sanders now has a slight net positive, but he has 23% undecided/don’t know, and I think most of those will go against him after the Republicans start their attacks.

  95. 95
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @NR: Democrats fall in line, too. Maybe not to the same degree. But some of Clinton’s negatives are surely coming from Sanders supporters who will rethink them once the primary fight is over.

  96. 96
    Mnemosyne says:

    @sparrow:

    As a couple of other people have pointed out in this thread, that article is incorrect. There is another candidate who is even more disliked than Hillary in every poll: Donald Trump.

    So unless the argument is that the more disliked candidate will somehow win over the less disliked one, I’m not seeing it.

  97. 97
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    John HarwoodVerified account
    ‏@ JohnJHarwood
    distraught ex-GWB aide: “I’ll blackball anyone who works for Christie. No one who stands with Trump gets a dime, or a job, ever.”

    distraught! I’m wondering which “aide” was high up enough to talk about black balling, hiring, and cutting off funding. Rove would be too good to be true, but this wasn’t Ari Fletcher or Karen Hughes.

  98. 98
    Marc says:

    @msdc: Which makes it possible for him to do better. That’s quite different from having an unfavorable impression and high recognition.

  99. 99
    NR says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Oh, and by the way, last night at the debate the Republicans all agreed that the Clinton Foundation was going to be Hillary’s biggest weakness, and they’ve barely even started on it so far. If you think we’ve already seen the worst that Hillary’s numbers can get, think again.

  100. 100
    Calouste says:

    @sparrow:

    It bears repeating…
    According to national polls, nearly 53 percent of Americans have an unfavorable impression of Clinton, which would make her the most disliked presidential nominee in modern history,

    except for Donald Trump.

  101. 101
    Kay says:

    @Marc:

    I think it’s an issue. It also doesn’t matter a bit why. If it’s unfair, well, that’s not an election argument. Unfair doesn’t matter with “unfavorable”- there’s no fairness analysis involved with voting or not voting for someone :)

    John Kerry and Al Gore were treated unfairly too. Fat lot of good recognizing that did anyone.

  102. 102
    Miss Bianca says:

    @aimai: @Matt McIrvin:

    Good insights. I think it might well be true. Remember that meme of Sec. Clinton looking all bad-ass in her shades, Texting While Demolishingly Competent as SOS? *Then*, all the Kool Kidz thought she was awesome. Now, she’s the B**ch Queen, sooo Unlikeable, oh my goodness!

    I’m getting so sick of this crap.

  103. 103
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Elie: I won’t stay around too long — they have nothing to say that I want to read or react to.

    All that is necessary for the triumph of the Emos is for the phlegmatic and skeptical to post nothing!

  104. 104
    Chyron HR says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    For Trump it’s 57-36 against, so that’s the margin we’re looking at.

    Yeah but Hillary’s relatively lower negatives are actually more negative because that filthy scheming bitchwhore is stealing the nomination from our Lord and Savior Bernie reasons.

  105. 105
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Mnemosyne: A lot of the assessments of Clinton’s chances of winning the general election have been implicitly assuming that the Republican candidate will be Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio.

    (Clinton usually murdered Jeb in head-to-head polls, but Rubio usually gives her a real fight, maybe because opinions about him are less well-formulated.)

  106. 106
    Marc says:

    @Mnemosyne: Rubios negatives are in the mid 30s, twenty points lower than hers. That’s a real problem. Trump is the only one with higher ones, but his are more malleable than hers (because approval rating always decline in a contentious primary and bounce back up; and the GOP primary has been way nastier than the Dem one!)

  107. 107
    NonyNony says:

    @aimai:

    They pointed out that it was true of Liz Warren as well–that before she started running for the Senate, and after she got in, people adored her but during the actual running for the Senate (and I can attest to that because I’m in MA and was door knocking for her) people were highly critical of all the aspects of her personality which they subsequently have come to adore.

    Yes – THIS^

    I think a lot of the “Hillary is universally hated – look at her high negatives” crowd do not get exactly how little data we have about a woman running for high office. IIRC Warren isn’t the only one this effect appears with – a lot of women see this happen when they’re running for office. yet they win anyway.

    There’s a whole lot of “boy that sure is an uppity woman” that comes from both genders when women run for office. Even from voters who should be her allies. It sucks, but it’s there. And I strongly suspect – given how low her negatives were until right before she began running for office – that’s exactly what this is all about.

    (Again – I’m inclined to vote for Sanders myself this election as I typically vote for the most leftward leaning candidate in any primary. But this effect is real guys, and women have to put up with a lot of this bullshit in ways that men don’t. Clinton has been having the GOP pile on her for 25 years – those negatives are at her ceiling for negatives – she’s not going to go any lower. And she likely bounces back up if she’s the Dem nominee because right now she’s being dragged down by Dems trying to boost Sanders who will actually come around if she wins the nomination.)

  108. 108
    Kay says:

    Email from one of my sisters:

    Trump/Christie admin — with slimeball grifter fraud Giuliani — would loot this country more than GWB.

    True. Every word.

  109. 109
    scav says:

    Shit flinging narcissist monkey olympiad must have rolled into town, this time with more audience participation. They’ve really been in training. I can’t decide if Cruz will break out the hockey sticks when a convention breaks out, but am counting on the yoooge mouthpiece for the WWE showboating. What other events are in store? Palin in cat-suited mud-wrestling?

  110. 110
    Cacti says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I’m just saying that the MSM has an East Coast bias and their love for certain candidates often isn’t shared by the rest of the country.

    The eastern press assumes that because that part of the country is the center of their universe, it’s the center of everyone else’s too.

  111. 111
    Paul in KY says:

    @Elie: Because she has Bill and I don’t is probably the reason.

  112. 112
    Applejinx says:

    Nice McCain reference! :)

  113. 113
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    I do think that Bernie might do slightly better against Trump than Hillary would, because then you have the two anti-establishment candidates going head to head. Hillary would do slightly better than Bernie against an establishment candidate.

    But I still think that either one of them will slaughter the Republican candidate once the R steps outside of his bubble.

  114. 114
    Cacti says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    Democrats fall in line, too. Maybe not to the same degree. But some of Clinton’s negatives are surely coming from Sanders supporters who will rethink them once the primary fight is over.

    This.

    Clinton is the evil ice queen for running against Grandpa Goodness.

  115. 115
    NR says:

    @Calouste: Like I said, a big chunk of Trump’s unfavorable numbers come from Republicans. And they will all support him once he becomes the nominee.

  116. 116
    SenyorDave says:

    I don’t wish him specific ill, but if this disgusting POS was choking on a krispy kreme I would just think of this and probably walk by:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNRWiFUf2_8

    Or maybe this one:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtEFEdrrXc4

  117. 117
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Marc:

    Rubios negatives are in the mid 30s, twenty points lower than hers. That’s a real problem.

    No, that will not be a problem. No one has gone after Rubio yet either because he is still a nobody. If he is the R nominee, there will be a mierda storm about drugs and prison and rent boys and late night public park rendezvouses, and that’s without even getting into his lack of intelligence and lack of political accomplishments. And while Republicans fall in line when they’re told to, there will still be many who can’t bring themselves to vote for a Mexican.

  118. 118
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Marc:

    I honestly don’t see any way that Trump’s favorables go up. What, he’s suddenly going to start acting statesmanlike after he wins the primary?

    Trump is an asshole. Everyone knows he’s an asshole. The best he’s going to get from Republicans is going to be, I hate the guy, but he’s better than a Democrat. And independents hate him even more than they hate Hillary.

  119. 119
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne: Do you really want to bet against a Republican in a race to the bottom?

  120. 120
    Jeffro says:

    @Iowa Old Lady:

    Maybe Christie is just burning the house down behind him now that he’s done.

    Christie could have been the Establishment’s guy in 2012; clearly, he got burned by waiting. I’ll give him credit, he’s the fastest of that group to see which way the wind’s blowing in 2016.

    On another note, I think Clinton’s going to kill Trump with kindness…pull him in close for the mother of all “Christie hugs”. Her interview on Morning Ho yesterday is a thing of beauty

    #eleventydimensionalchess

  121. 121
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    Sabrina Siddiqui ‏@ SabrinaSiddiqui 53m53 minutes ago Washington, DC
    “No matter how cynical one becomes about politics, it seems never to be enough.” — @ JRubinBlogger on Christie

    Wasn’t Chris Christie one of J-Rube’s special Valentine’s before now?

  122. 122
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Mnemosyne: I don’t know–is it better to meet Trump more on his own turf, or do you counter-program?

    Bernie probably takes a bite out of Trump’s working-class-white and angry-young-screw-the-world support, and increases white youth turnout, but is that bigger than Hillary’s strength among minorities? Do well-off educated professionals ditch scary radical Sanders for some numbnuts like Mike Bloomberg? There are a lot of unknowns here.

  123. 123
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Cacti:

    Rubios negatives are in the mid 30s, twenty points lower than hers. That’s a real problem.

    Back on 9/11/2001, my company had a couple of employees on one of the kamikazee planes. Our US HQ was in NYC, and they had a well-justified freakout over the whole event, even beyond the loss of two of our own. We spent the next few days talking to people in our offices across the US to make sure they were ok and see if they needed grief counselors or anything.

    The universal reaction outside of the NYC/Boston corridor? “No, we’re fine. It didn’t really impact us out here. Say, when are we getting new printers?”

  124. 124
    Marc says:

    Trumps’ negatives will drop when he is the nominee and has the full support of the party and the propaganda network. It’s guaranteed. Clinton will also improve, but (contrary to the online environment), Democrats tend to have pretty favorable views of both Clinton and Sanders; she does poorly with Republicans and independents.

    I do agree that Trump vs. Clinton will be more favorable for her than Rubio vs. Clinton in terms of perceptions.

  125. 125
    JMG says:

    The best way to have a low unfavorable rating in American politics is to be unknown to most of the public (which isn’t hard, considering how little knowledge of and attention to politics there is within said public. Rubio is relatively little known, so lower unfavorables. Sanders even less known, so lower than that. EVERYBODY knows who Trump and Clinton are.

  126. 126
    Brachiator says:

    Rubio said maybe Trump pissed himself at the debate.

    It may be too little, too late, but Baby Rubio finally let loose and slapped Trump around the way that Bogart slapped Elisha Cook, Jr in The Maltese Falcon.

    Underneath his robotic facade, Rubio is a nasty little street fighter. If he were a Democrat, and Trump was a more well liked Republican, like a Mitt Romney, the conservative pundits would be calling Rubio a Cuban thug assaulting an upstanding white man.

    I have consistently said that the one clear way to stagger Trump is to mock him, and Rubio is not only able to do so, he is able to get down into the mud with Trump and fight it out hard and tough.

    This is also a hint of the macho swagger that Rubio would bring to a fight against Hillary or Sanders. It would not be nice, it would not be pretty, but politics is not a church social.

    Rubio is the first person I’ve seen, including professional comedians, who has quickly taken Trump’s measure and rattled him. The only other person to do so with such precision has been Obama.

    But again, it may not be enough. And clearly, the GOP grandees have put out the word that Trump is to be taken down with everything the Republicans’ have got. And Baby Rubio is happy to be the man to give it a shot.

    ETA: In one of the clips I saw of the debate, Cruz and Rubio are smiling at each other as Rubio slaps Trump around that reminded me of Captain America and Bucky beating the shit out of Iron Man in the “Civil War” movie trailer. No wonder Trump is whining in his emails, while Rubio continues to go after him.

  127. 127
    superpredators4hillary says:

    If Hillary gets the nom, she’s gonna trounce Trump by shooting hard to the right. But, we’ll all know [wink, wink] that’s all just a pander. Lol, stupid goopers.

  128. 128
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    When we have the Obama machine behind the eventual Democratic nominee? In a heartbeat. And I think either one of our nominees can do it. If Hillary could sit in front of the Beghazi committee for 13 hours without breaking a sweat, she can squish Trump like a bug. And there’s no way Trump is going to be able to out-talk Bernie, because Bernie has the rhetoric *and* the facts.

    We have two strong candidates. I’m saving my strength to push the last one standing over the line in the general election rather than wasting my time on petty squabbling in the primary.

  129. 129
    piratedan says:

    @Matt McIrvin: well I do often wonder if the net unfavorables are simply because the folks out there in flyover country are tired of having her name linked with nothingburger scandals… lets face it, the NYT has a hard-on for her as if she not only broke up with them for their cuter younger sister, they also blame her for running over their dog. Is she perfect no, but I have to admit, after a full year of Benghazi and living through Vince Foster and Whitewater and the ongoing pop up book of where’s Bill Clinton’s dick, that name recognition isn’t always a positive thing. If there’s one thing that pollsters seem to absolutely despise, it’s context.

  130. 130
    goblue72 says:

    Yes, this is real. And there’s a significant chance that one of these idiots will get the nuclear codes.

    I thought all we had to do was fall in line behind the Clinton coronation and all would be well?

  131. 131
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne: Fair enough. I’ll just say that you’re a lot more optimistic than I am and leave it at that.

  132. 132
    Mnemosyne says:

    @JMG:

    This. Trump’s and Clinton’s favorables/unfavorables are baked in to a large extent, because they’ve both been in the public eye for so long.

  133. 133
    Mary G says:

    Truth is stranger than fiction…you couldn’t make this stuff up.

  134. 134
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    What, he’s suddenly going to start acting statesmanlike after he wins the primary?

    He’ll try. Jon Favreau (the speechwriter, not the movie guy) wrote a scary column recently in which he assembled a “Trump victory speech” that he imagined Trump giving on the day he gets enough delegates to clinch the nomination. He cut and pasted it almost entirely out of statements that Trump has actually made in the past, and while being inimitably Trump, it was an anodyne, sunny speech that made Trump look really appealing. He argued that this is what we’ll be dealing with when Trump pivots to the general election, a formidable threat.

    Maintaining that image may take more self-control than Donald Trump has, but I don’t know how much I’d bet on it.

  135. 135
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Brachiator:

    Rubio is the first person I’ve seen, including professional comedians, who has quickly taken Trump’s measure and rattled him. The only other person to do so with such precision has been Obama.

    ETA: In one of the clips I saw of the debate, Cruz and Rubio are smiling at each other as Rubio slaps Trump around that reminded me of Captain America and Bucky beating the shit out of Iron Man in the “Civil War” movie trailer. No wonder Trump is whining in his emails, while Rubio continues to go after him.

    I’m not sure what you are talking about here, but I’m having Baghdad Bob flashbacks. When exactly did Trump get rattled? When did Rubio slap him around? Rubio got a couple of digs in, but he never took control of the debate and Trump already trumped his presser from this morning.

  136. 136
    goblue72 says:

    @Marc: The trick is who pulls more of the Independents. Those swing voters in the swing states are the ones who decide national elections.

  137. 137
    Cacti says:

    @superpredators4hillary:

    If Hillary gets the nom, she’s gonna trounce Trump by shooting hard to the right. But, we’ll all know [wink, wink] that’s all just a pander. Lol, stupid goopers.

    Slow day at Kos?

  138. 138
    Jeffro says:

    @Paul in KY: NR’s comment reminded me of something I saw a little while back…along the lines of “for every high school grad that will now vote for Trump, the GOP loses a college educated voter to Clinton”

    Maybe this was it…
    http://thefederalist.com/2016/.....ite-house/

  139. 139
    jl says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    ” What, he’s suddenly going to start acting statesmanlike after he wins the primary? ”

    Yes, he will, at least Trump has said that he would. And he has explained why. Trump said, basically, that he has had to put on a circus act in order to distinguish himself in a crowded field of clowns. Once he has the nomination, he will start acting more statesmanlike. Whether this strategy will work is another matter. Trump has said he can change himself as he wants to very quickly. And Trump is assuming that a more statesmanlike demeanor will not dampen the enthusiasm of his low info bitter bigot supporters.

    Sorry I can’t find a link to the interviews right now, but that is what he said.

    What I liked from last night is that Trump is not as quick on his feet as I thought he would be in terms of giving clear summary substantive responses to bozos like Cruz and Rubio. One problem I have with Sanders is that he doesn’t seem particularly quick on his feet in debates and in responses the day after a big flap, but I think Sanders can do far better than Trump. And with HRC, no contest HRC is far far better, from what I saw of Trump last night.

    I think either Sanders or HRC could have knocked out some of the bush league creepy twerp debater tricks Cruz and Rubio pulled last night on Trump. Trump had to resort to insults.

    Trump imagines he is a world historical genius, and a shape-shifter who can remake himself into whatever really classy and terrific thing he wants to be at will. But he ain’t, and even if he were, he is developing a kind of behavior muscle memory for resorting to crude insults to shut down arguments in a primary that is composed of losers weirdos and idiots on the stage and off. Trump thinks he can pivot effortlessly into the very different world of the general election. I have had my doubts, and what I saw last night did not change them.

  140. 140
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Steve in the ATL: I thought the line about if he hadn’t inherited $200 million, he’d be selling watches on Canal St was a great line, till I heard the audio on the radio this a.m. And Pierce suggests the Rubiobot was set on high speed and threw out all his lines at once, which sounds like bad programming.

  141. 141
    Chyron HR says:

    @superpredators4hillary:

    Another infallible psycho-historical prediction from the people who spent the past 8 years swearing up and down that Obummer was going to abolish Social Security in his SOTU address. (Which one? All seven of them.)

  142. 142
    Brachiator says:

    @JMG:

    The best way to have a low unfavorable rating in American politics is to be unknown to most of the public (which isn’t hard, considering how little knowledge of and attention to politics there is within said public. Rubio is relatively little known, so lower unfavorables. Sanders even less known, so lower than that. EVERYBODY knows who Trump and Clinton are.

    That’s only part of it. The Clintons have been polarizing figures as long as they have been involved in politics. And their enemies have gone after them relentlessly for decades, which has also influenced public perception.

  143. 143
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @goblue72: Actually, it’s relative base turnout in the swing states.

  144. 144
    Cacti says:

    @jl:

    Trump imagines he is a world historical genius, and a shape-shifter who can remake himself into whatever really classy and terrific thing he wants to be. But he ain’t, and even if he were, he is developing a kind of behavior muscle memory for resorting to crude insults to shut down arguments in a primary that is composed of losers weirdos and idiots on the stage and off. Trump thinks he can pivot effortlessly into the very different world of the general election. I have had my doubts, and what I saw last night did not change them.

    I can see Trump losing his shit when Hillary responds to one of his stupidities with a contemptuous laugh.

    Of things that the Donald finds intolerable to the point of incoherent rage, I’d guess that getting laughed at by a woman is near the top of the list. Women to him are something that you acquire and discard. Not actual people who can treat you as a rival.

  145. 145
    Damn Frank says:

    The big difference between now and then dealing with HRC and the Fox Noise\Hate Machine…

    Is TIME.

    It’s been 6-7 years since FOX was after HRC and their demographic has gotten older and it dying off and not being replaced by younger people.

    So yes the right wing noise machine does work but it’s a lot more get off my lawn than it used to be…

  146. 146
    goblue72 says:

    @Calouste: What are they going to attack with that will stick? Because its not just the attack, its getting things to stick. Kerry got Swiftboated with lies, but part of the reason is stuck was because Kerry (a) did toss back his medals which to this day infuriates a certain segment of the RAH RAH TEAM AMERICA! crowd and (b) he is indeed a bit of a Boston Brahmin pompous windbag with a bouffant. I lived in Massachusetts when both he and Ted were Senators – and despite Kerry growing up a threadbare Brahmin to Ted’s family money, Ted still came off as a your buddy from the corner pub to Kerry’s Louisburg Square elitism.

    If keep seeing that GOP would attack Sanders for being a “socialist”. To which Sanders would likely embrace it with a “Yes I am – so what?” Same with “tax and spend liberal” attacks – he’d meet it with a “Yes, exactly. I’m gonna tax the rich till they bleed and spend it on everybody else. So what?”

    The attacks that stick are the ones that hint a kernel of truth and the object of the attacks attempts to dodge it.

  147. 147
    Chyron HR says:

    @goblue72:

    If a candidate I don’t like wins an election, it’s a CORONATION! Boooo!

    Wow, it’s like I’m really listening to Rush Limbaugh.

  148. 148
    jl says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Rubio is a lazy twerpy nervous little grifter. I heard a clip of him this morning trying to capitalize on the debate last night. He’s already forgotten the advice someone gave him to speak more slowly and not nervously rush his punch lines.

    But what do you expect from a guy whose main campaign activity is to preen and grovel in front of money bag donors?

    I didn’t see any breakthrough for Rubio either. Both Rubio and Cruz had to gang up and tag team to land some blows on Trump last night, and in terms of what counts in the GOP primary (BS and image) neither did much lasting damage, IMHO. Not enough to change the primaries a few days off. Substantive developments in possible Trump scandals might change things, but that would be reality butting into the GOP primary and not really due to any of the stunts the two dinky creeps tried to pull last night.

  149. 149
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    I’m old enough to remember when Donald and Ivana were the glamorous power couple in all the tabloids, not Kim and Kanye. I am extremely skeptical that Trump can make the pivot at all, much less sustain it to Election Day against an experienced campaigner like either of the Democrats running.

  150. 150
    Cacti says:

    @goblue72:

    If keep seeing that GOP would attack Sanders for being a “socialist”. To which Sanders would likely embrace it with a “Yes I am – so what?” Same with “tax and spend liberal” attacks – he’d meet it with a “Yes, exactly. I’m gonna tax the rich till they bleed and spend it on everybody else. So what?”

    The attacks that stick are the ones that hint a kernel of truth and the object of the attacks attempts to dodge it.

    The above assumes that other age groups regard the term “socialist” with the same benign indifference as Millennials. They don’t.

    Apart from the socialist attack, he’ll also get hammered over his plans to raise taxes on all income groups, not just the rich. The last Dem candidate who made a similar promise was Walter Mondale.

  151. 151
    goblue72 says:

    @Matt McIrvin: Citation?

  152. 152
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @NonyNony: Warren had a hard fight for Senate, though, and it was against Scott Brown, a certifiable ignoramus and asshole who had gotten in via a special election against world’s worst campaigner Martha Coakley. In the end, Warren pulled away and won by several points’ margin, but it was tied up for much of the campaign. So I think that anti-woman effect that shows up in approval polls probably affects the actual vote too.

  153. 153
    goblue72 says:

    @Cacti: Its not 1984.

  154. 154
    Brachiator says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    And Pierce suggests the Rubiobot was set on high speed and threw out all his lines at once, which sounds like bad programming.

    Not so. Rubio’s response to Trump’s claim that Rubio always repeats himself was a devastating quick bit of improvisation.

    And Rubio may have been set to high speed, but all his jabs landed. And he paused while the audience laughed at Trump.

    Where Rubio was robotic was in his lame (but aimed at the audience) remarks that Clinton was a horrible Secretary of State, and Kerry a reinforcement of the bad decisions of an inherently flawed Obama. The dead horse that Rubio keeps beating is “young Obama, bad. Young Baby Rubio, good!”

  155. 155
    goblue72 says:

    @Chyron HR: Only if you are a moron.

  156. 156
    Cacti says:

    @goblue72:

    Its not 1984.

    And how does that change the fact that the majority of votes in 2016 will be from people old enough to remember the Cold War?

    Or that promised tax hikes on middle class voters will still go over like a lead balloon?

  157. 157
    jl says:

    @Cacti: I think either Sanders or HRC could have shut down the Cruz and Rubio stunts last night in their sleep, and have made both of them look like fools. Trump simply could not respond when challenged in way that accomplished those two goals.

    Both Rubio and Cruz, like Jeb, are clumsy and things only go well when their prepared debate gimmicks go 100 percent according to plan. If not, they end up leaning into punches, as we have seen repeatedly.

    Even a relatively slow and ponderous Sanders can ad lib effectively against HRC. And both are far better at follow up in days following when an opponent slips up. Trumps clumsiness last night encouraged me a little. Still having any of those GOP dingbats on election day away from the Presidency is scary.

  158. 158
    Chyron HR says:

    @goblue72:

    Isn’t it funny how the word “coronation” is invariably used by someone who falls into one of the following groups:

    1) People who think Clinton should have dropped out of the race after losing New Hampshire.
    2) People who think Clinton should have dropped out as soon as Sanders announced his candidacy.

    But no, clearly it’s the Clintonites who are acting like they’re “entitled” to a “coronation”, not the folks who’re incensed that the Berning Man is being forced to participate in a primary election like some sort of common politician.

  159. 159
    Brachiator says:

    @jl:

    Trump thinks he can pivot effortlessly into the very different world of the general election. I have had my doubts, and what I saw last night did not change them.

    I agree with many of your insights, especially that Trump was not as light on his feet as he has been in the past in this last debate.

    But I think that pundits and bloggers keep mistaking Trump for a regular politician. I don’t know that Trump thinks he can pivot into “the different world of the general election.” For one thing, I don’t think that Trump thinks that far ahead. More importantly, he has never been in an election, period. Even if his advisors are old political hands (and I haven’t seen much background about them), this is all new to Trump. And he is still a reactive personality. He calms down and is nicer and more statesmanlike after a win, and peevish after a loss or setback. I don’t know that he can really adapt to a changing audience as the campaign goes on.

  160. 160
    gogol's wife says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Rubio sounds really presidential in the quotations at that link.

    President of the kindergarten milk club.

  161. 161
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    @NR:

    If you think we’ve already seen the worst that Hillary’s numbers can get, think again.

    Your fucking concern is fucking noted once a-fucking-gain.

  162. 162
    NR says:

    @jl: I think Trump is a bigger threat than most people here do, but he’s definitely not invincible. No politician is. I think he can be baited into a trap.

  163. 163
    jl says:

    @Brachiator: Sorry I can’t find the links to the interviews right now (and come to think of it, I heard one of them on radio in the car, so not sure there is a link). But Trump has explicitly said that he does look that far ahead, and he has thought about how he has to present himself at different stages of his campaign from when he was planning his campaign.

    As I typed in previous comment, whether he actually can do what he thinks he can (‘very easily’ in his words) do is another question. I was happy to see from last night that I saw nothing to put a dent in my doubts about that. And also i have questions about how a more sober, statesmanlike and (possibly) more informed Trump will fly with his yahoo support. Edit: they seem to be the kind of people who have to be really charged and emotionally geared up to do anything, which may be a problem with turnout. Especially if Trump decides it wise to soften some of his hot button, and stupid and offensive to most people, plans like his huge classy wall and total Muslim ban.

  164. 164
    Tom Q says:

    So, Donald Trump’s negatives are going to ease up once the primaries are past — in spite of the fact that most everyone has known who Donald Trump is since before Julia Roberts was famous.

    But Hillary’s current negatives are absolutely locked in, despite the fact that they weren’t at this level TWO YEARS AGO.

    And even if you assume BOTH are locked in, that leaves Hillary with about a six-point edge…which is close to Obama/McCain territory.

    I’m in line with what’s been said above: Hillary’s numbers are artificially poor right now because much of the Sanders bloc has taken a deep dive into “she’s an evil corporatist bitch” territory. There’ll be months for reconciliation, months during which Hillary will get a lot of exposure that shows up this false stereotype, and those numbers will improve as Democrats line up to vote for her.

  165. 165
    nutella says:

    Trump and Christie made fun of Rubio for troweling on make-up like a common trollop.

    I don’t think Trump should be mentioning bad makeup jobs. Every picture of him recently shows the contrast between the naturally white skin around his eyes and the bad spray-tan on the rest of his face.

  166. 166
    jl says:

    @Tom Q: Substance will be far more important in the general election than in the GOP primary. Both HRC and Sanders have it, and I think we have yet to see any evidence of that from Trump. Some of his stupid and laughable proposals make him the least likely to to offer any substance to the typical general election voter, the question is, how much of his act so far has been an intentional and carefully planned con to get the GOP nomination. I have no clue about that.

  167. 167
    Brachiator says:

    @jl:

    But Trump has explicitly said that he does look that far ahead, and he has thought about how he has to present himself at different stages of his campaign from when he was planning his campaign.

    OK. I hadn’t heard this, but I will accept that Trump says that he looks far ahead. If he continues to do well, I will look for signs to confirm this. If he actually can be judicious, he might actually be dangerous. I could say I have my doubts, but Trump has consistently been surprising those who take him for granted.

    And also i have questions about how a more sober, statesmanlike and (possibly) more informed Trump will fly with his yahoo support. Edit: they seem to be the kind of people who have to be really charged and emotionally geared up to do anything, which may be a problem with turnout. Especially if Trump decides it wise to soften some of his hot button, and stupid and offensive to most people, plans like his huge classy wall and total Muslim ban.

    Trump can soften his message, but he cannot repudiate it. And it is too early to talk about turnout. If Trump continues to do well in primaries, this could help insure that his people turn out for the general election.

  168. 168

    @Tom Q: It’s comforting to me that after D debates both Clinton and Sanders experience a rise in approval numbers. People seeing them realize they’re better than the viewer anticipated.

  169. 169
    WaterGirl says:

    @sparrow: I keep repeating this, but I want to see the polls where they not only ask if you like/dislike Hillary, but where they follow up with a question “will you vote for Hillary if she is the democratic nominee?”.

    Because if you ask me how I feel about Hillary Clinton as president, I will end up on the very negative end of that spectrum. Ask me if I will vote for her in the general election if she is the nominee – and the answer would be hell yes, I will.

    By the way, there is not a single person (not on the internet) that I have discussed politics with who likes Hillary Clinton. I believe she is quite unpopular and is quite polarizing (when she is not safely ensconced as Secretary of State,). I think it can be hard for people who are fiercely for Hillary to see this.

  170. 170
    PurpleGirl says:

    @rikyrah: That is disgusting. Truly, truly disgusting. When will this shit stop.

  171. 171
    jl says:

    @Brachiator: I agree with you on those scores. How much of what he have seen of Trump so far is a conscious and planned out con game, with the GOP and its primary voter base, being the marks? I don’t think we know yet.

    So, I was heartened last night be what I thought I saw of the limits of Trump’s abilities in what passes for substantive back and forth argument in the GOP. Yeah, I admit, a lot of extrapolation there, but have to go on what info we have.

  172. 172
    Davebo says:

    I’d say Christie traded the endorsement for a gig as Sec. of Transportation in the Trump administration!

    It’s a perfect fit.

  173. 173
    Davebo says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    (how the hell else can an oft-married perv like him win over evangelicals?)

    Hey, they did come around on McCain so it’s obvious that evangelicals aren’t really all that interested in a pious test.

  174. 174
    Brachiator says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Rubio got a couple of digs in, but he never took control of the debate and Trump already trumped his presser from this morning.

    I disagree. And Trump’s post debate reaction, calling Rubio a choker, was weak and unconvincing.

    I didn’t say he was knocked out, but he was definitely rattled. And when the audience laughed at him, that was harder for him to handle than getting booed.

  175. 175
    Brachiator says:

    @WaterGirl:

    I keep repeating this, but I want to see the polls where they not only ask if you like/dislike Hillary, but where they follow up with a question “will you vote for Hillary if she is the democratic nominee?”.

    The upcoming primaries may also give some sign of this. Polls can be misleading for a lot of reasons. And of course, much may depend on who her opponent might be (assuming of course that she wins the Democratic Party nomination).

    By the way, there is not a single person (not on the internet) that I have discussed politics with who likes Hillary Clinton. I believe she is quite unpopular and is quite polarizing (when she is not safely ensconced as Secretary of State,). I think it can be hard for people who are fiercely for Hillary to see this.

    Good point. HRC seems to inspire intense reactions, in those who dislike her and in those who are her fiercest partisans.

  176. 176
    msdc says:

    @Marc:

    Which makes it possible for him to do better.

    In a universe where the GOP never runs attack ads against him, sure.

    There’s a reason Karl Rove was running ads against Hillary in Iowa and Nevada. It’s not because he likes Bernie’s single-payer health care plan (except possibly in the sense that the fox likes a nice, plump chicken).

  177. 177
    NR says:

    @msdc: Not this shit again.

    You know that the Republicans will run attack ads against Hillary too, right? You know that they’ve barely even mentioned the Clinton Foundation thus far, right?

    It’s pretty unbelievable, the level of magical thinking among Hillary supporters that says that just because she has been damaged by attacks, she cannot be further damaged by more attacks.

  178. 178
    msdc says:

    @NR: Almost as unbelievable as the magical thinking that says Bernie Sanders has room to gain popularity because he’s never been on the receiving end of an attack ad!!!!1!

    PS. Please tell us again about how you used a magical toy at 538 to construct your doomsday scenario for Clinton, only Clinton still wins under that scenario, so Trump contests the vote and wins that doomsday scenario instead, all because we didn’t have the wisdom to vote for a 74-year-old socialist.

    What was that about magical thinking?

  179. 179
    NR says:

    @msdc: I never said that Bernie wouldn’t have his own problems in the general.

    But it’s just insanely stupid to say that we should be afraid, oh so very afraid! to nominate Bernie because the Republicans will drive up his negatives when Hillary’s are already sky-high and have the potential to climb even higher.

  180. 180
    msdc says:

    I never said that Bernie wouldn’t have his own problems in the general.

    My initial point was directed at someone who suggested just that.

    My response to you was about confusing electoral analysis with fan fiction.

  181. 181
    NR says:

    @msdc: Also, reading comprehension fail on your part. I said that Trump would contest the state, not “contest the vote.”

  182. 182
    NR says:

    @msdc: And how is your analysis of Bernie’s fortunes in the general election not “fan fiction?”

  183. 183
    Origuy says:

    @Cacti:

    The above assumes that other age groups regard the term “socialist” with the same benign indifference as Millennials. They don’t.

    Ah, but Millennials are the only ones that matter. We olds should just climb on a ice berg and die; the sooner the better, to reduce the surplus population.

  184. 184
    msdc says:

    @NR: Ooh, zing! That totally changes the meaning of your made-up story about how your own fantasy football numbers were probably wrong.

  185. 185
    NR says:

    @msdc: Yes, I’m sure that your fantasy numbers are better than my fantasy numbers. Carry on.

  186. 186
    msdc says:

    @NR: Yeah, I don’t go around citing online toys where I determine the results as evidence.

  187. 187
    NR says:

    @msdc: No, you just cite your own magical knowledge of Bernie’s general election fortunes. Newsflash, that’s not evidence either.

  188. 188
    Aleta says:

    New member of the Bully Club: Le Paige has endorsed Trump.

  189. 189
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @msdc:

    My response to you was about confusing electoral analysis with fan fiction.

    Oh no you di’int!

  190. 190
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @Aleta: With this goes the coveted endorsements of Shifty, Smoothie, and D-Money…

  191. 191
    Aleta says:

    @Davis X. Machina: ha, he should be so lucky …. (very funny!)

  192. 192
    Mike J says:

    @Origuy:

    We olds should just climb on a ice berg and die; the sooner the better, to reduce the surplus population.

    SO you’re saying they have the same health care plan as the Republicans?

  193. 193
  194. 194
    Felonius Monk says:

    @Davis X. Machina: But he will get the votes of Larry, Darryl, and Darryl.

  195. 195
    Joel says:

    @Steve in the ATL: You haven’t heard a Pittsburgh accent.

  196. 196
    Joel says:

    @Matt McIrvin: Obama, for what it’s worth, enjoyed between +20 and +40 favorability ratings before he became president in earnest.

    I’m doubtful as to the actual importance of favorability as an electoral predictor. Remember that republicans were bleating all about it during the 2012 elections (when it looked bad for Obama).

  197. 197
    Joel says:

    @Calouste: Harry Truman circa 1948 had favorability ratings below 40 percent. Jimmy Carter in 1980 is another example.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/116.....rends.aspx

  198. 198
    J R in WV says:

    @srv:

    You are so fucking stupid – no other country has an immigration form called a H-1B. It’s a form used by the American State Department. Other countries have other forms.

    Stupid!! I used to cut some slack and suppose it could be ignorance – but this shows it’s just stupidity.

Comments are closed.