During a two-part interview with buddy Bill O’Reilly, Donald Trump tried to show off his foreign policy mojo but wound up revealing how truly ignorant he is on the subject.
Of course, O’Reilly did not mention how Trump’s recent foreign-policy address had been slammed by editorial boards.
O'Reilly did, however challenge Trump on policy. "You did not mention Afghanistan in the address. …What exactly will you do about Afghanistan?" O'Reilly asked.
TRUMP: I’d stay in Afghanistan. It’s probably the one place we should have gone in the Middle East because it’s adjacent and right next to Pakistan, which has nuclear weapons. So I think you have to stay and do the best you can. Not that it’s ever gonna be great but I don’t think we have much of a choice. That’s one place, frankly, instead of going to Iraq, we should have probably gone there first.
Newsflash for Trump: We did go there first. The Afghanistan war began in 2001. We invaded Iraq in 2003. And here’s another newsflash for the birther: Then-candidate Barack Obama – you know, the one you can’t stop bashing – called the Iraq war a “dangerous distraction” from Afghanistan.
Not surprisingly, Trump’s milkshake BFF, Bill O’Reilly, did not point out the YUUUGE mistake.
Watch it below, from the April 28 The O'Reilly Factor.
Maybe you were thinking of the first Iraq war, during the first President Bush’s presidency? At one point, it occurred to me that maybe that’s what Trump meant but when I looked again at what he said, it was pretty clear to me he meant the George W. Bush invasion in 2003.
This from a supporter of the total embarrassment whose misstatements and gaffes made him the laughing stock of the world. I still have a daily calendar featuring 365 of Du(m)bya’s very best verbal eff-ups – published in 2003!
The problem with relying on memory alone is that one can flip events.
One critical point is how hard will Bernie campaign for Hillary, if at all (beyond post-primary mouthing the obligatory good wishes and the well foughts)? Will the youth vote (which tends not to vote) crossover from Bernie who they love? Hillary has her work cut out here.
The beauty of Trump is his mouth eventually gets him in trouble with about everyone. Catch the expression on Chris Christie wife’s face after he spewed Hillary only gets over 5% of the vote because she’s a woman? If you’re a Democrat, moments like that are golden!
A local poll here in Virginia of Republicans claimed 30% would never vote for The Donald. I know a couple of conservatives who express the same sentiment but I only believe one of them. They’re just very frustrated over their choices.
Trump and his buddies at FOX News gush primary vote totals for the Republicans are way up. They use this to pretend it’ll translate into a huge pro-Trump turnout in the general election. I doubt that. Sure, he’s brought out the Archie Bunkers sitting on the sideline (though I think that case is overblown) but he’s also brought out strong opposition. Thus far, Hillary has mustered 12,135,109 votes to Trump’s 10,056,690. And this is the primaries where typically the rabid vote. Trump supporters or more rabid by far than Hilary’s but his pool of voters, I suspect, is much shallower.
So we get into the intangibles of turnout, organizations, fundraising, the power of Trump’s free media exposure over more conventional political media campaigns, surprises (Trump’s mouth catching up with him, Hillary indicted, etc.), and all the other crap that makes me hate elections.
If Hillary lives up to expectations it could be a Democratic wave election. Or Trump (with a Republican Congress and right-wing SCOTUS majority) could drive me to Canada.
He’s going to have to deal with both – as well as Libya, North Africa, Yemen, Syria and Ukraine – other ‘adventures’ initiated under the present Nobel peace prize-winning Chief Administrator.
And it may well be that Trump can somehow convince more Republican voters to turn to him after Cruz is sent packing. It is also true that both Trump and Hillary are polarizing figures who have large unfavorable ratings. It will be very difficult to do anything with large numbers of voters who have already made up their minds that they strongly dislike Trump or Clinton or both.
That being said, I’ve noticed that Trump’s belief that non-white voters will turn to him as a positive alternative has not been going over well. This hasn’t been helped by awful displays such as his parade of “Victims of Illegal Immigration” at his rally last night in Southern California (which predictably caused a riot).
Trump’s idea of buttering up Bernie Sanders voters and suggesting that Sanders run as an independent is hilarious. Sure. Sanders is going to suddenly declare an independent run and siphon voters away from Hillary Clinton to help Trump? Not so much. He’s mad clear that he’ll support Clinton and he’ll tell his supporters as much during the convention and afterward. (There was an article out yesterday indicating that Trump’s notion here is way off – Sanders voters have indicated that at least 80 percent of them will never vote for Trump or anyone like him. It’s true that some will refuse to vote for Clinton – but that doesn’t mean that they’ll vote for Trump – at best, they’ll vote for Jill Stein.)
Eyes is absolutely right that Trump is hitting the sweet spot for the right wing radio listeners – the guys who love the Rush Limbaugh approach – “Well, SOMEBODY had to have the guts to say it!” when it comes to saying the most vile racist, sexist or just generally offensive comments. That’s not a group that’s inclusive in any way. It’s an almost completely white male group with a laundry list of grievances against everyone else.
The fall campaign we’re about to see is likely to be the nastiest and most personal one we’ve ever seen. Trump will throw every bit of personal mud he can at Clinton, including every single affair Bill Clinton ever had. Clinton will respond by using Trump’s repeatedly offensive statements against him. Nobody will be campaigning positively for voters. The votes will mostly be to say NO either to Clinton or Trump. On both sides, there will be some stalwarts who will refuse to vote for their party’s choice. But based on the tendencies of conservatives and liberals, it is far more likely that Democrat Sanders voters will reluctantly pull the lever for Hillary than embittered Cruz supporters will opt for Trump. This is simply because liberal voters pride themselves on being more open-minded, while conservatives tend to be angrier and more fixed in their opinions. I tend to think that Ted Cruz will either refuse to endorse Trump or will play the card of saying that his supporters will have to decide for themselves what to do. I believe that most of them, and most of the Kasich/Rubio supporters will similarly have a big problem with giving Trump their vote.
On the Dem side, with Sanders openly supporting Clinton, that ratio should reverse. As I said, there will be some stalwarts who will make a point of NOT voting for Clinton but instead voting for someone like Jill Stein as a protest. There may even be a very small number of Sanders voters who somehow decide to vote Trump as a protest – this will be much likelier if the national polling holds and Clinton runs away with it. But Trump’s values are diametrically opposed to everything that Sanders has been saying. The media is assuming that Sanders voters will like Trump because he’s opposing “the system”. They’re forgetting that the reasoning behind each man is completely different. Sanders opposes various policies because they’re not inclusive enough. Trump’s opposition is based on the fact that he personally thinks he’s being mistreated and that everyone should love him because he’s the greatest. Sanders has actually proposed multiple serious policies. Trump has offered hollow promises to do things like build a wall with someone else’s money and somehow make everything so much better. Sanders voters are intelligent enough to see right through that.
When Trump actually has to debate Clinton this fall, we’re likely to see him quickly resort to the most vicious personal insults, just to try to throw her off. Right wing radio hosts are already salivating over this – they’re hoping he can “get under her skin” and “take it to her” by personally attacking her early and often. After having seen Clinton easily bat away that kind of nonsense from multiple GOP tribunal hearings in Congress, I think it’s far more likely that she’ll calmly point out that his behavior is not something that most people want to see from their President, and that the American people deserve to hear real answers to debate questions. I wouldn’t be surprised if her speechwriters aren’t already preparing more zingers like “Deal me in!” after Trump fumbled his “woman card” insult.
It’s true that Clinton has included Sanders’ perspective in her campaign – and that’s a very good thing. Back in 2000 and 2004, Ralph Nader practically begged the Dems to take his issues. He even sent people to the Kerry campaign offices with platters bearing his various ideas on little cards. Both of those times, the Dems ignored Nader to their peril. This time, Clinton has taken Sanders in a serious way, and while some Sanders voters will still never accept her, the rest will go with her in the end. It would be a different story if she’d given him the Nader treatment. And it’s true that Clinton is just as much of a policy wonk as her husband. For me, that’s a stronger option than someone like Trump who keeps demonstrating he has no idea what’s actually going on in the country, let alone the world.
Trump and Clinton are extremely unlikely to move many voters from the opposite camp – although there have already been some interesting rumbles on the right about finding Hillary less repulsive than Trump. They’re also unlikely to move many of the independent voters, most of whom made up their minds about both candidates a long time ago. Trump and Clinton are both at about 100 percent name recognition in this country, so it’s unlikely that we’ll see much movement before November. I also note for the Trump cheerleaders that we’re not in a situation like 1980, where Reagan was able to come from behind. We’re not in a full-on recession, we don’t have gas prices and inflation going through the roof, we don’t have a badly perceived President trying to be re-elected, and we don’t have anything like the nightmare of the massive hostage crisis we had in Tehran at that time. Reagan was able to appeal to voters as a strong, calm, confident voice during a time of crisis. Of those qualities, Trump only shows confidence – he’s certainly not calm and his bullying tactics are not that of a strong person. And the demographics of the country have shifted a good deal from the primarily white look of the voting populace in 1980.
My expectation is that Trump will remain solidly upside-down in the numbers with all groups other than white males and conservative white females. I don’t see him getting anything north of 20 percent of the Hispanic vote. I certainly don’t see him getting much from other groups. And without those voters, this election could be a disaster for him and the GOP. From what I can tell, the GOP is already preparing for the disaster – they’re only other option is to block him at the convention. (I note, by the way, that the endorsements toward Ted Cruz by people like Lindsey Graham are not meant as votes of support for Cruz – they’re intended to stop both men at the convention and allow the GOP to substitute someone a lot less objectionable.)
I do agree that EVERYONE needs to turn out for this election and not just assume that Trump will defeat himself. We as a country will need to show up en masse to make the statement that Trump’s self-promotion is nothing we want in the highest office of the USA. The good thing that I’ve seen lately is that left wing voters are showing they’re aware they need to make their voices heard this year. Nobody is taking this election for granted, and nobody should. My hope is that the voting statement this fall will be an extremely strong one.
All kidding aside, the Trump supporter is that rare beast who doesn’t care if The Donald’s a know-nothing. They’re the frustrated Archie Bunkers who feel their jobs, religion, and social norms are under siege by liberals and their alliance of women, minorities, and non-Christians. Every time he spouts off against “Mexicans” (like all Hispanics are Mexican), Muslims (another name for ISIS they think), China, etc. their cheers swell.
The only issue is how deep is his well of support? Conventional wisdom and early polling suggest not very deep. However, despite encouraging polls a significant percentage of Republicans won’t vote for Trump, I suspect Republicans to vote for him anyway when push comes to shove. Add his new found ‘silent majority’ (who aren’t either).
Trump and Hillary are both too well known with too high of negatives to easily persuade true independents.
My hope is Trump cheeses off so many women and Hispanics it shoves some moderates Hillary’s way. Let Trump spout off against Black Lives Matter and the NAACP using the standard FOX talking points he’s memorized and watch blacks run to the polls to cast for Hillary.
Unfortunately, Hillary’s a boring policy wonk. Just as unfortunate, she’s shoved herself hard and uncomfortably to the left to appease the Bernie crowd (a hopeless endeavor?). Not only is she going to struggle to pivot to topics the general electorate (at a policy level) cares about, she lacks the emotional appeal in an election cycle driven by the heart, not the brain.
Cross your fingers.
If Cruz and Kasich don’t pick up on this, then they are even bigger idiots.
Boy! Talk about you’re deal breakers. This revelation, while perhaps not eyebrow raising for the knuckle dragger crowd ( I know they have just the one), to the rest of us it is scary. Don’t put Barry Goldwater in charge of the button.
I listened to Trump’s address on Wednesday and found it devoid of any substance whatsoever. This was essentially the same stuff he’s been delivering in off-the-cuff remarks for the past four months, only done in a markedly stiff manner.
The only conclusion one could arrive at after sitting through it is what we already know: Trump has no grasp on international issues and no earthly idea what he’ll actually do if he should somehow find himself in the White House in 2017.