home

The Unwatchable RNC

I made it through the last 10 minutes of Eric Trump's speech. I actually thought he did a credible job (I only cringed once, when he followed up a reference to undocumented residents as being illegal.) While waiting for the next speaker, I learned from the CBS crew that Ted Cruz didn't endorse Trump when he spoke and got booed, and that the convention's video monitor system failed so there is no watching the speakers on a big screen if you are in the convention hall tonight.

Earlier I read the Trump campaign released a statement from a campaign worker who admitted being responsible for Melania's copycat speech. She said she offered to resign but Trump said no -- people make mistakes.

Apparently, Marco Rubio addressed the convention by video and didn't endorse Trump. [More..]

On the car radio earlier on MSNBC, the hosts were counting the number of times speakers mentioned Trump as opposed to Hillary, and there were many more references to Hillary. What that means (according to MNSBC): Republicans are not supporting Trump but running an anti-Hillary campaign.

CNN was impossible to listen to on the car radio -- they were unable to mute out enough of the background noise to be able to hear what Wolf and others were saying. I got tired of trying so hard to listen and changed the channel to MSNBC, which didn't have that problem.

The point at which the whole fiasco became unwatchable tonight: When Newt Gingrich took the stage and started telling his lies about Hillary. He is just a despicable human being in my view, and has been since I first heard of him in 1994. What a bullet we dodged that he (and Giuliani) weren't chosen as VP candidate.

I might have watched Mike Pence but Newt left such a bad taste I had to shut it down.

Watching instead: El Principe on Unimas and waiting for James Corden and Michelle Obama's Carpool Karaoke.

One more day of this pathetic Republican circus. Things (not) to look forward to: Ivanka Trump will speak, and will wear her own design, in her attempt to sway women, particularly millenials, to support her father. The average price of the dresses in her line is $145.00.

Yet, more important for her Thursday speech is Ms. Trump’s appeal to professional women, particularly millennials. She is expected to talk about how she learned to be entrepreneurial from her father, which led her to start and run her brand of “accessible” fashion.” On stage, Ms. Trump plans to wear her line, in which dresses average $145 each and shoes $135 each.

Ivanka's shoe company was sued last month in federal court by Italian shoe company Aquazzura Italia, which claims her shoe is a copycat.

Aquazzura Italia has sued Ivanka Trump and Mark Fisher Holdings, accusing them of trade dress infringement and unfair competition for selling what they claim is a copycat version of a popular pair of shoes made by the Florence-based shoe brand.

The suit, filed Tuesday in U.S. district court in Manhattan, names Trump’s New York-based company IT Collection LLC, and Marc Fisher Holdings, based in Greenwich, Connecticut, accusing them of knocking off Aquazzura’s strappy stiletto “Wild Thing” shoes, which retail for $785 and are sold at department stores such as Barney’s and Saks Fifth Avenue, and at the Aquazzura boutique in Manhattan.

In April, 20,000 Ivanka Trump scarves which were manufactured in China were the subject of a recall because they were deemed to be too flammable and posed a burn risk. Here's more on her shoes manufactured in China.

Of all the things not to base your vote on, I'd say the obviously partisan support of the candidate's children (who certainly stand to benefit from the added fame if Pop gets elected) is at the top.

< Tuesday Night Open Thread: RNC Alternative TV Watching | Michelle Obama Rocks it Out With James Corden >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Worst convention (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:13:31 PM EST
    ever. It has absolutely no redeeming qualities to it.

    I gotta ask (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:34:01 AM EST
    GA, outside of Trump withdrawing and endorsing Hillary, what could the Reopubs have done to satisfy you?

    Parent
    Hey Jim (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:49:43 AM EST
    it's not about me. It's about the rest of the country and it's been nothing short of a disaster to everyone outside of the hardcore GOP. It's been a fest of hatred, misogyny and every other disgusting thing you can think of. It's 1992 with the two crazy Pats morphing into almost every speaker at the convention. It's the Salem Witch Trials. Even I never envisioned a GOP convention this stinky, this disgusting and this bereft of ideas.

    Parent
    Per CNN (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 06:05:15 PM EST
    75% of the viewers approved....

    And it looks like record numbers viewed it.

    Parent

    Viewing CNN invalidates (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 06:07:35 PM EST
    Any political opinion they might have.

    Parent
    Whenever Jim starts making claims ... (none / 0) (#73)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 07:08:57 PM EST
    And it looks like record numbers viewed it.

    ... prefaced by "looks like", you can be guaranteed he has no idea if what he's about to say is true.  As usual, it's not.

    Parent

    Typical stuff from you (none / 0) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 10:18:40 AM EST
    I quote CNN and you go into defense mode, running around looking for a way to counter.

    What a dog's life you must live.

    As many have observed...TV viewing is down as compared to years past...but using the computer and social media has exploded as a means of receiving and sending information.

    So who knows how many watched?

    Which is the excuse you will use if the Demo's convention is poorly watched via TV,

    Parent

    You "QUOTED"?!? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 10:22:47 AM EST
    No link - no quote - just an observation from Jim that - as usual - is completely false.  So now you backpedal with "who knows how many watched", as opposed to your original claim - "record numbers".  Then you try to change the subject when you get called on it.

    Typical Jim.  Some things never change.

    Parent

    Yman, for a long time (none / 0) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 11:49:18 AM EST
    I ignored you after I had banned you from my blog for your nasty personal attacks.

    Why? Because you just attack and be nasty. I noted what I had heard on CNN and you throw a hissy fit topped off by a fainting spell the likes of which I have never before seen outside of Aunt Fanny discovering her outfit revealed her panty lines.

    Have a nice day.

    ;-)

    Parent

    If being banned from a blog (none / 0) (#87)
    by jondee on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 12:32:19 PM EST
    that posts pictures of Obama with a bone in his nose isn't a mark of honor, I don't know what is.

    Parent
    Still (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 12:38:09 PM EST
    It bears the stigma of actually takeing the time to post there.

    Just kidding.  Badge of honor.  Sort of

    Parent

    Gasp! "Bannef" from a xenophobic,... (none / 0) (#89)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 01:23:39 PM EST
    ... racist, Islamophobia blog by the hypocritical blog writer for throwing his insults back at him.

    Oh, nooooooo!

    Can't blame you for trying to distract from your claims about Trump's "record" viewership.  Happens every time you get caught pushing false,  rightwing claims, which is to say ...

    ... it happens a LOT.

    Parent

    Maybe (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:23:29 AM EST
    Talk about their candidate and why his policies, proposals, and vision for the country should make people want to vote for him?

    Just a guess....

    Parent

    You didn't watch the speech (none / 0) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 06:06:45 PM EST
    Trump gave out many details.

    Watch Hillary duck and cover.

    Parent

    I watched it (none / 0) (#74)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 07:10:18 PM EST
    He gave out virtually none.

    Maybe she can hide under his hair ...

    Parent

    Details (none / 0) (#76)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 07:19:39 PM EST
    like this
    Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it.
    ?
    Do you think that statement is true or false?

    Parent
    Do you still beat your wife? (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 10:11:39 AM EST
    Is a similar question.

    Actually I disagree with part of it.

    I think Hillary knows the system better than anyone else and has used it masterfully. Her supporters are defined by understanding that and admiring her because of it.

    That's the only way anyone can support her after Comey's press conference and Congressional summons.

    From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information,.....

    ...there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

    ...any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.

    ....She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.

    Link

    Trump also understands the system and that will give him an edge in changing it. Will he?

    Like Hillary he has used the system to his advantage. And, unlike Hillary, he doesn't mind telling us what we know. Does that make it right? No. But he says he will use his knowledge to fix it. Will he?

    I don't know.

    Will Hillary keep on gaming the system? Yes. Every  chance she gets.

    Parent

    Quit (none / 0) (#83)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 10:23:35 AM EST
    deflecting, This is not a trick question. Do you or do you not think Donald J. Trump is the only person who can fix the system.

    Yes or no?

    Parent

    Do you still beat your TV (none / 0) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 11:53:04 AM EST
    Look, I gave you a sincere detailed and thoughtful answer.

    Yet you continue your game playing.

    If you cannot understand my answer then your lack of reading comprehension there is nothing I can add beyond...

    Have a nice day. I gotta go cut some grass.

    Parent

    Ok (none / 0) (#86)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 12:04:49 PM EST
    you win, my feeble mind is too weak to understand, your details and thoughtfulness. I would expect a proud social liberal as yourself would recognize my disability and offer me a simple yes or no answer to my question.

    Parent
    A few ideas (5.00 / 5) (#30)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:47:50 AM EST
    1.  Stop plagiarizing speeches,  then (laughably) deny it,  then after being forced to admit the obvious,  blame it on a speechwriter while giving her a pass. Also,  stop lying about getting a college degree.

    2.  Avoid having candidates make laughable attacks on HC, like trying to tie her to Lucifer.

    3.  Stop broadcasting tweets from white nationalist hate groups.

    That would be just a start.

    Parent
    Tweetys panties (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:19:30 PM EST
    Are all up in a bunch about Ted Cruzs "mutinous snub"

    Hilarious.

    Best convention coverage: (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:37:04 PM EST
    Armando's tweets.

    Cruz is definitely (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:42:48 PM EST
    The story of day three.  Steve Schmidt was just talking about how he was basically saying forget this guy he's going to lose vote for down ticket republicans and let's start planning for 2020.  Cruz went about twice as long as he was supposed to.

    They were just showing headlines for tomorrow.  Boston herald - BOOS CRUZ

    Daily News - CIVIL WAR


    I think Josh Marshall nails it (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:08:33 AM EST
    Making Sense of the Conflagration. Long piece, so I will quote part of it :

    Cruz is a thoroughly awful person. This is entirely apart from his politics. I know many people with awful politics who are wholly creditable people. But as I noted tonight, perhaps it was only Cruz with his icy indifference to the hatred of everyone, his ravenous aggression and unalloyed devotion to himself and his benighted ideals who could land this kind of blow. Years from today we will still wrestle with the meaning of Cruz for once leveraging the awesome power of his assholery in a righteous cause. Perhaps there is a salutary bravery or solidity there I hadn't noticed, or at least a quality vouchsafed for this moment.


    Parent
    i love the way the right is (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:56:37 AM EST
    trying to spin this as "we planned that  -  nothing to see here  -- we TOTALLY planned that  -  to make Cruz look bad"

    it started last night.  morning joe was hilarious today.

    Parent

    Best statement IMO (none / 0) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:30:22 AM EST
    Now they will hate him all the more. The Republican apparatchiks will despise Cruz out of their own envy, because he demonstrated the courage to do what they would not: resist Trump to his face. They resist him only through their mealy-mouthed endorsements. They will hate Cruz for making them trash a vote of "conscience" while they defend a Trump candidacy they loathe. Cruz has provoked defense hawks like Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) to denounce him strenuously as "not a true conservative," on the same night Trump put into question the whole NATO alliance in a tossed-off interview in The New York Times. Cruz has caused Trump's useful idiots to out and embarrass themselves further.


    Parent
    this (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 12:20:57 PM EST
    Trump put into question the whole NATO alliance in a tossed-off interview in The New York Times.

    as president, Trump would approach the NATO alliance in the spirit of a cost-cutting middle manager at Sam's Club

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#52)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:42:08 PM EST
    I am not altogether pleased with us subsidizing Europes defense,
    And then everyone points to their "safety net" as a model.
    Nice, if someone else provides most of the security blanket

    Five NATO members are expected to meet the alliance's 2 percent target for defense spending in 2015, according to data released on Monday.  

    Poland joins Britain, Estonia, Greece, and the United States as the only members of the 28-country alliance to meet the threshold.

    NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg commended the change, but warned that total alliance spending will decline by roughly 1.5 percent this year.

    Of the 28 countries, 18 are increasing their military spending in real terms, the data indicates. Still, alliance members will spend a collective total $892 billion on defense in 2015, down from $942 billion in 2014 and $968 billion in 2013.



    Parent
    I agree (none / 0) (#54)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:48:06 PM EST
    up to a point, but everyone misconstrues the structure of NATO, except for  some relative chump change shared cost, there is no direct funding. The disparity in the "funding" comes from the overall Defense spending.

    While it would be nice if all of the NATO countries met their mandated defense spending, it would also be nice if we could reduce ours closer to the 2%.

    It's not clear that these mostly smallish nations raising their spending a tick or two would enable us to reduce our spending that much. To the contrary, Trump and the Republicans want to increase spending.

    What's the sense of throwing NATO under the bus and not even saving money?

    Parent

    Trump just does not know what he is talking (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:52:21 PM EST
    about. Sheer ignorance.

    Parent
    Bob Frum (none / 0) (#31)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:48:01 AM EST
    Both on CNN and Twitter this morning made the point (correctly, I think) that in 4 years, everyone in the hall last night will be saying they supported Cruz's statements and didn't boo.

    And Trump's lawyer commented that this will prevent Cruz from "running in 2020".  (Because he thinks Trump's not gonna be POTUS to run again??)

    Parent

    HA! Cruz is running in 2020 no matter who (none / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 10:58:05 AM EST
    wins this year. That much is clear. He may not get the nomination for the same reasons he did not get it this year, but he is not stopping the attempt.

    Parent
    Cruz may run (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 06:11:24 PM EST
    no one can keep him from doing so.

    But he cannot win. His actions, as Kasich and Jeb did, have placed them outside the party.

    They could, of course, start a new party.


    Parent

    They have? (none / 0) (#75)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 07:12:20 PM EST
    So the guy who claims to be an "independent" and "social liberal" is speaking for the Republican party, now?

    Heh.

    Parent

    They have what?? (none / 0) (#77)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 09:41:16 AM EST
    You didn't read. Again.

    BTW - Being a Social Liberal is not the same as being a Left Wing Democrat.

    Parent

    Slower - for the reading impaired (1.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 09:46:46 AM EST
    His actions, as Kasich and Jeb did, have placed them outside the party.

    The "independent" and "social liberal" Jim, claiming to speak for the Republican party.

    Seriously funny stuff.

    Parent

    It looks like there are a record-setting (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Sat Jul 23, 2016 at 09:55:06 AM EST
    number of Independent Social Liberals tirelessly shilling exclusively for the GOP again this year.

    Not.

    Parent

    CNN reporting (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by ragebot on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:02:56 AM EST
    Cruz sent out fund raising emails right after he left the convention.

    Not sure how wise his gamble was.  Some Democrats saying he was brave to distance himself from Trump and position himself for a run in 2020.  He did break his pledge to support who ever got the nomination.  No one has ever suggested Cruz was a team player for the Republicans and he has few friends in the Senate.

    The real problem Cruz may have is both he and Trump went after similar voters and some of them may view Cruz stabbing Trump in the back as stabbing the voters in the back as well.

    In any case starting to fund raise so soon after his poorly received speech, that ran about twice as long as it was suppose to, seems like poor judgement.  Not to mention if Trump wins Cruz is probably finished as a pol.

    Poorly received in that convention hall is (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:47:08 AM EST
    a badge of honor. He would have no shred of integrity left if he had praised Donald Trump. the bitterness of their primary fight went beyond anything I have ever seen. Look at what eunuchs Christie and Rubio look like now.

    Yes he is highly disliked for good reason, but I don't think what he did last night hurt him one bit, and probably helped him. I bet he raised more many than Trump did last night.

    Parent

    Have to disagree with (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by ragebot on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:27:56 AM EST
    Jeralyn about the convention being unwatchable.

    This is based on the TV ratings being up compared to previous years.  It may be like watching a slow motion train wreck but it does get eye balls.  Speaking of Eric Trump's speech this line from the HR caught my eye:  "He boasted that his father had turned political debates into "must-see TV" (although, so, for a time, was The Gong Show)."

    I have to admit I did not watch a lot of the convention as I was channel surfing.  But I did read this review from the Hollywood Reporter and really enjoyed it.  Perhaps the key blurb from the review is this.

    By making a lengthy speech in which he neglected to endorse Trump, the Texas senator pulled off the nearly impossible feat of making Trump seem sympathetic.

    Well, I've seen this movie before. (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:14:37 AM EST
    "This whole country's just like my flock of sheep. Rednecks, crackers, hillbillies, hausfraus, shut-ins, peapickers -- everybody that's got to jump when somebody else blows the whistle! They don't know it yet, but they're all going to be 'Fighters for Fuller.' They're mine. I own 'em. They think like I do. Only they're even more stupid than I am, so I gotta think for 'em."
    -- Larry "Lonesome" Rhodes (Andy Griffith), A Face in the Crowd (Elia Kazan, Dir., 1957)

    Parent
    I don't know if Brando (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:19:47 AM EST
    ever gave a better performance than Andy Griffith did in that movie.

    Parent
    Most film critics today recognize that ... (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:19:36 PM EST
    ... Andy Griffith's glaring absence from the Best Actor nominee list at that year's Academy Awards is one of the great travesties in Oscar history. When you compare his performance in "A Face in the Crowd" to his subsequent "ah, shucks" TV persona, you come to realize that he was cast completely against type, yet brilliantly brought to life one of the most singularly loathsome and despicable characters to ever grace the silver screen.

    Sad to say, most Academy voters were still furious with director Elia Kazan for having sung like a canary before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, and they took out that anger on "A Face in the Crowd," which was pointedly ignored and completely excluded from that year's Oscar considerations. Nearly 60 years later, Kazan's 1957 film stands out as one of the very best of that decade, certainly on par with his earlier 1954 classic "On the Waterfront." And that renders the Academy's shocking petulance as all the more remarkably petty and vindictive.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    petulant, petty, vindictive (none / 0) (#43)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:27:11 PM EST
    that's a company town for you

    Parent
    Elia Kazan's Hollywood colleagues ... (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:08:19 PM EST
    ... were absolutely right to criticize him vociferously for having embraced his inquisitors when testifying before HUAC about his leftist activities and associates, which occurred two decades prior. He ruined people as a result and trashed their reputations and careers.

    But they were wrong to punish by association Andy Griffith, Patricia Neal and everyone else affiliated with Kazan's "A Face in the Crowd," a powerful film with a timeless message about the perils of political extremism and propaganda.

    People further tend to conveniently forget that in the early 1930s, the Communist Party was then the third-largest political party in the United States, with millions of members and sympathizers across the country. Even the beloved Lucille Ball had become a member in 1936, although she later claimed to have joined merely to humor her socialist grandfather.

    Elia Kazan was a rat and a charlatan for doing what he did. But that doesn't mean that he was therefore a lousy filmmaker. Nor are petulance, pettiness and vindictiveness traits which are necessarily exclusive to Hollywood. One need only tune into this week's events in Cleveland to see that.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The last (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:43:28 AM EST
    person who could make anyone seem sympathetic is Ted Cruz. It was obvious that Cruz was doing that for himself. Besides the entire rest of the convention was just like one screaming lynch mob and if anybody got any sympathy out of the whole thing it was Heidi Cruz who had to have a police escort to prevent the people at the convention from attacking her.

    Parent
    Not sure what you're looking at (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:27:12 AM EST
    But tv ratings are pretty much down across the board, especially compared to 2012.  Many more people are getting convention coverage through other media than TV.

    As for Cruz - did anyone really expect him to play nice after Donald called his wife ugly and accused his father of helping plot the assassination of JFK? (And anyone who thinks the Trump team was "surprised" by this is delusional - it's MADE for TV!)

    Parent

    Republican Convention (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 12:11:52 PM EST
    speaker, Laura Ingraham, ends her address with a salute.

    then there's (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 12:33:53 PM EST
    this (from her Twitter account)

    is there so little contrast between the candidates that we have to keep falling back on these silly internet memes?

    #Godwin

    Parent

    "So little contrast between the ... (none / 0) (#40)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:14:25 PM EST
    ... candidates ..."

    Pfffttttt ...

    #ridiculous.

    Parent

    so you think there's little contrast? (none / 0) (#42)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:24:55 PM EST
    or you can't read?

    Parent
    The contrast couldn't be greater (none / 0) (#46)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 02:10:30 PM EST
    But the premise is as ridiculous as your feeble attempt to insult.  While I don't find memes persuasive, I understand why others would use them ... goose/gander, etc.  They can do that AND draw the more-than-obvious contrasts between the candidates.

    Parent
    so you are saying (none / 0) (#48)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 03:08:45 PM EST
    that a closed binary symbolic exchange can generate information external to itself?

    not without extrasystemic inputs, which you appear to assume, but which can't logically be inferred from the existence of the closed binary symbolic exchange

    anyway, it's stupid & tiresome for political partisans to keep calling each other's candidate Hitler - David Sanger's interview with Trump in today's NY Times is so alarming that i see no use for juvenile Godwin games, but YMMV

    Parent

    I'm saying that your premise is flawed (none / 0) (#64)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 07:53:59 AM EST
    My response was very straightforward.   You really should be the last one to accuse others of being unable to read.

    But bonus points for dressing out the thesaurus ...

    Parent

    you need an editor

    but you are right about one thing: many if not most people vote on the basis of emotions, not issues

    by November, we'll find out if "America" wants a mom or a big bad daddy

    Parent

    Not me - for either claim (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 02:28:39 PM EST
    I already have a mom.   Iwant a competent, qualified,  smart POTUS who shares my values and supports policies I want enacted.

    Parent
    sure (none / 0) (#68)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 03:30:03 PM EST
    me too

    i'm talking about the people who aren't really paying attention yet

    Parent

    this is so ridiculous (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Peter G on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:42:28 PM EST
    It demeans the intelligence or seriousness of anyone promoting this absurd claim. It is easy to take a still photo (or a still from a video) of someone waving, so that it appears to resemble a Nazi salute at that moment. So what? Let's not act like the ad hominem (ad feminam?) nutjobs on the other side, ok?

    Parent
    Do not feel (none / 0) (#47)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 03:04:20 PM EST
    as if I am acting like a nutjob (ad hominem or other) by bringing the news of Laura Ingraham's controversial arm movement to the thread. The claim can not be dismissed so readily, as its possibility is not incongruent with the Trump campaign to which she was attesting in her Convention speech.

     True enough, there was no accompanying Sieg Heil, but the hateful dog whistles have become rather loud. For anyone attuned.  In the context of Laura Ingraham, nothing is ridiculous. It is dangerously gracious to give Miss Ingraham benefit to a not unreasonable doubt. So no, from my perspective it is not ok.

    Parent

    The only person whose personal reputation ... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 01:38:01 PM EST
    ... and professional credentials have actually been burnished and bolstered by this year's Republican convention is Tony Award-winning actress Laura Benanti. Nearly everyone is raving about her hilarious yet dead-on Melania Trump persona in the cold opening of last Tuesday's "The Late Show with Steven Colbert." She likely has a steady TV gig over the next few months, if she wants it.

    Yes, it was really good (none / 0) (#49)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 04:02:02 PM EST
    Had no idea it was Benanti. In fact I thought it was a female impersonator. Benanti might not take that as a compliment!

    Parent
    I saw Eric's speech and for some reason found (none / 0) (#3)
    by Cashmere on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:22:17 PM EST
    him extremely annoying.  Too much buttering up of his father, followed by tooting his own horn...  at 22 starting his own foundation and expecting other foundations to be run in his example..  blah blah blah.  No personal stories at all about their father yet (just references to looking on Trump with extreme adoration.. what I see in is eyes, etc.).  I expect Ivanka will have more personal stories.  Now, I'm certainly not a Trump fan, which likely explains why I find all of his family "annoying".  Re: Newt, once I heard he was to be introduced, I turned it off.  I can't stand him.

    No personal stories (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:24:11 PM EST
    From anyone.  You know what.  There probably aren't very many what normal people would call personal stories.  

    Parent
    Newt was sad (none / 0) (#11)
    by FreakyBeaky on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 11:44:04 PM EST
    He's washed up & no one cares.

    Parent
    Eric changed his hairstyle... (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:29:32 PM EST
    The "kids" (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:30:51 PM EST
    Are starting to creep me out.  

    Parent
    Seriously, (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Suisser1 on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 12:11:22 AM EST
    they are in their 30's . Why does the media persist in calling them "kids"? Do they call Chelsea a "kid"? I think not.

    Parent
    Eek. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Towanda on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 12:51:53 AM EST
    At least Gekko had eyebrows.

    Parent
    just sayin' (none / 0) (#8)
    by linea on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:39:09 PM EST
    people have followed ivanka's twitter (1.9 million followers)  and #WomenWhoWork for years and it has never had anything to do with her dad.

    Do you think she would have (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 at 10:44:01 PM EST
    1.9 million followers if her name was Ivanka Jones?

    Parent
    A (none / 0) (#16)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 05:29:54 AM EST
    She was attracted to Dinesh D'Souza (none / 0) (#17)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:01:36 AM EST
    that pretty much tells you all you need to know.

    Parent
    And D'souza (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:36:41 AM EST
    was ordered to get mental health care by a judge no less. One big freak show.

    Parent
    Fear. (none / 0) (#32)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 09:34:20 AM EST
    On sale now in Cleveland, Ohio. Cheap.

    and (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 09:59:26 AM EST
    loathing.

    Parent
    The Republican Convention (none / 0) (#34)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 10:29:57 AM EST
    is all that I hoped it would be: The self-deconstruction of the Potemkin Village that is Trump and family.  What Trump and his wife were unable to do to assist in tumbling the tower, they delegated to their supporters--on stage and off.

    Of course, there was no discussion of policy because there is none.  That, in and of itself, is not unique to Republicans, but Trump and the fascist-bent moved to third world tactics, talk of murdering their political opponents. That seemed to fully satisfy the cravings of the crowd. We don't want no stink'n talk about policy. A convenient compact between Trump, who knows little of policy,  and his followers, who care nothing of policy, but are OK with it, so long as he makes America hate again.

    Ly'n Ted, who was so recently redeemed by Trump, will now need a new nickname. Truthful Ted is unlikely, but soon there will be one, if Cruz is not physically assaulted  by the Republican revelers. Ken Cuccinelli, the wingnuts' wingnut, is too liberal for that crowd, feeling he needed to escort Mrs. Cruz out of the Convention Hall fast"for her safety."  

    Yes, and this was just the icing. The cake is to be taken tonight.

    I was noticing how low tech the convention is (none / 0) (#36)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 11:00:19 AM EST
    Probably from doing it on the cheap. Very bad production values all around.

    Low energy. Sad.

    That will be abundantly clear next week by contrast.

    Their (none / 0) (#53)
    by Nemi on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:02:25 PM EST
    Officiel App also leaves much to be desired. Not that I really feel bad about missing out, but still.

    Hope the Democrats' app is both more informative and more user-friendly.

    Parent

    Seen on Twitter: (none / 0) (#51)
    by Nemi on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 06:40:28 PM EST
    Jerry Springer @jerryspringer
    The RNC Convention is just a parody of my show. Even the chanting. This is not how we run a country!

    There are a few more thrown chairs on his show (none / 0) (#55)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 07:51:13 PM EST
    Maybe the ones in  the hall are bolted down, or Cruz would have been a target.

    Parent
    I forgot Bobby Knight was there (none / 0) (#57)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:01:41 PM EST
    Maybe some chairs will be thrown yet

    Parent
    Next week (none / 0) (#58)
    by Towanda on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:04:17 PM EST
    by Sanders supporters from Nevada?

    Parent
    Ted got booed (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 21, 2016 at 08:06:27 PM EST
    For not endorsing.  It would be sad if Bernie got booed for endorsing.

    Parent
    Rubio's video address (none / 0) (#65)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 11:16:17 AM EST
    - the mind's eye evokes the image of video arraignment.