Trump threatens to sit out next GOP debate


Trump threatens to sit out next GOP debate | TheHill

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Wednesday continued to bash CNN’s debate coverage and GOP rival former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush a day after the network’s Tuesday night debate. The real estate mogul appeared at his first campaign rally in Mesa, Ariz., since the last GOP debate of 2015, again suggesting he may not attend the next debate.
“I’ll bet you they get big ratings,” Trump said at Wednesday’s rally about CNN. “I think next time I won’t do it,” adding “just to see it tank.”
Earlier this month, Trump had proposed only appearing at the debate if CNN paid him $5 million, which, he said, he would donate to wounded veterans. After CNN’s president said the network would not pay, Trump reluctantly agreed to participate.

We need a serious person as the nominee, not Donald Trump.


Yeah we need Raul Paul ** NOT**


Putin says that Trump’s a “really brilliant and talented person”. link

Demogogues need to stick together and be “nice” to each other.


Yeah I heard the sun rises for him in the morning. We are blessed that he resides in this nation. Remember to vote Republican Jazz. Solidarity!!!


Oh, no danger of that. Jazz only believes in “solidarity” if one of his RINO buddies gets nominated. He’s made that plain enough here.


More lies. I’ve made it clear that will vote for any of the eight superb conservatives on that stage this week. Only if Trump is the nominee will I vote - as an American, as a patriot, as a thinking human being - to defeat him.


Oh. So if one of your “approved” candidates wins the GOP nomination you’ll vote for them in the general, but if someone with whom you “disapprove” wins, you’ll vote to elect Hillary. How very “conservative” of you! NOT Seems to me that it was YOU who castigated and took severely to task those who merely sat out the general in 2008 and 2012 because they didn’t agree with YOUR choice, but now that the shoe’s possibly on the other foot that’s somehow “different?”


I castigated the fools who stayed home rather than vote GOP, and enabled the election/re-election of Barack Obama. My charge was that they helped enable Obama’s election, and have no moral authority to criticize Obama’s highjinks, since they did nothing to oppose him.

I do not intend to stay home if Trump’s the nominee. I intend to vote for his opponent in order to defeat him. If it comes to that, and I hold my nose and vote for Clinton, I will have the same moral authority to criticize her as anyone else who voted for her. But I will have voted - not spit the bit and stayed home to assuage my ego.


Jazz’s stance is to vote Democrat…yep Democrat if Trump is the nominee. Some nerve to criticize others who voted their heart, as an American would/should do. I guess we do not get that privilege the Jazz affords himself.


True. The hypocrisy is startling, in fact. Conservatives didn’t all “sit home” in 2008 and 2012. The total votes cast weren’t much different than they were in 2004. Lots of them voted for a 3rd Party candidate because they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for the RNC’s “anointed one.” Almost none of them voted for Obama, though.


Why are you suggesting I have “nerve” to refuse to vote for a bigot?

I’d suggest that one should vote with both the heart and the head. It’s not always easy to do. My heart says to vote for Paul, my head says to vote for Kasich, and I honestly haven’t made up my mind just who to support. Except that it cannot be Trump. There the head and heart agree - the man objectively lacks the grace and temperament to be President, his grasp of policy is feeble, he’s flip-flopped so much as to be untrustworthy, and he exploits the weak-minded as is typical for a demogogue.

But if you want to make this all about you and your precious ego, then go ahead and slam me for my “nerve” in daring to criticize you for enabling Obama. If I’m forced to vote for Clinton, I’ll own the consequences of my decision. But so will you if you vote to give the reins of the Presidency to a assclown like Donald Trump.


Only on talking ego here is you and your position Jazz. You toss labels around to justify it as well. I voted for what I though was right in 2012 and will do so again in 2016. I will not be voting for Trump but I sure as hell will not vote for the Democrat Hillary like a spiteful child. I had hoped that you would see the stupidity in your views when faced with a situation that many of us faced on 2012 but instead you find an excuse and claim you are “forced” to vote the way you do. Grow a pair and admit you positions are flawed and stupid a move on.

I will leave you with one of my favourite quotes:

I think voting for the lesser of two evils in game theory always leads to more evil. ~Penn Jillette

EDIT: And no, I am not suggesting you vote for Trump.


Are you suggesting that if it’s Trump-Clinton, the better course is not to vote at all (or cast a meaningless vanity vote)? Why? Why am I “stupid” to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than not vote at all?


I agree with your assessment of Donald Trump…and he’s still better than 95% of the GOP!


Jazz that is all your vote for Hillary is by your own standards, a “meaningless vanity vote”. Evil is Evil Jazz and voting for evil is stupid and foolish. Plain and simple. Casting a vote for either of these candidates(Trump or Hillary) is doing a tremendous disservice for America and Americans. Enabling Hillary for no other reason that your hatred of one man. If that’s not ego I don’t know what is.


Trump is wrong on Trade and probably is annoyed at issues like funding Planned Parenthood because they seem like time whores robbing us of attention that could be spent on things he thinks are more important; but wrong is not evil.

If Trump did win it all it could be the end of the bastardized GOP, meaning a genuine alternative might actually have a shot; until the GOP is returned to the pit nothing good will ever get to any Presidents desk.

I want Cruz and I think now that he might pull it off in the Primary but as far as taking the kneecaps of the GOP, who besides Trump and possibly Cruz could realistically smash that pinata?

I know the temptation is to see every election as “do or die for all posterity” but the long game is the only way to get a payoff that will endure, halting the Establishment GOP is one of the first steps in that long game; it would be great if a solid and principled Conservative could also be that chess piece but if Cruz fails we still need the chess piece.

For those who think that America can be restored with the GOP intact as it is now I can understand the rejection of Trump, I just don’t see any path to genuine solutions that can coincide with the current GOP power players; Trump has value in that agenda in addition to many issues which he is on the right side of.

I could not vote for Romney and I regret having voted for McCain, Jeb, Kasich, Paul and now Rubio have convinced me that they are ready to drop their pants whenever the GOP tells them to so they are non starters as well.

But I will vote for Trump if he gets the nomination, not because his Populist campaign aligns with my ideology but because I would rather have that chess piece in place than another which will glean nothing.

For the United States to endure long term, the GOP has to be replaced in my opinion; I want the United States to endure.


No…but voting positively FOR someone like Hillary Clinton is MUCH closer to being a “good German” than voting for Trump would be. Hillary and Adolph share a lot of common ground politically, as a matter of fact.


Seravee, I respect your position but, IMO, staying home on Election Day (or voting for a vanity candidate) is a cop out. Obama was re-elected in large part because conservatives stayed home. Whether because of indifference or ego, those conservatives who stayed home share the blame for the last four years. That’s been my position and I’m sticking to it. In 2016 I have every intention of voting GOP as I always have. The only exception is if Trump is the nominee. I won’t stay home. I won’t cop out. I will vote to defeat evil, even if I must vote for a lesser evil to do so.

Life isn’t perfect sometimes, or even good. I am announcing my stand now in the hope that I will never have to make such a choice. I can see signs that other conservatives and patriots will, in time, man up and take the same stand. There is still time for good people to come together and reject this assclown. He’s got Putin’s endorsement, he won’t get mine.


If I were able to vote, I would use a basic analysis of this situation on a Risk-Reward Continuum. If voting for someone like Trump, I would have to consider if any positive benefits he might provide would outweigh any potential damage he might cause simply because of his erratic behaviour and that he doesn’t pass the “smell test”. Is he reliable, trustworthy or even a Conservative?

Without a doubt, any damage or risk, not just to America by policies or reputation but possible risks to humanity outweighs any potential benefit, at least as far as I can surmise. He has already done great damage to the GOP and their prospects of being elected in 2016 as I anticipated early, but what might he possibly do on the world stage if he somehow won a general election (still a long shot)?

Under these parameters it is easy to vote for someone you might not philosophically agree with rather than to vote for someone who would in all likelihood cause more damage on so many levels. It’s a tough situation, this is what Trump’s rise has created. Just as Americans will have to face another four years of Democratic rule, some running as Socialists for Heavens sake (unheard of in American politics), imagine how some feel about seeing this man rise to the top and getting massive coverage by those who want to see the Conservatives fail. In his success so does Conservatism fail.

There is no doubt America needs a strong president, the entire Western world does. Is Trump truly the best there is to offer? I don’t believe so by any measure one can offer.


Under these parameters it is easy to vote for someone you might not philosophically agree with rather than to vote for someone who would in all likelihood cause more damage on so many levels. It’s a tough situation, this is what Trump’s rise has created. Just as Americans will have to face another four years of Democratic rule, some running as Socialists for Heavens sake (unheard of in American politics), imagine how some feel about seeing this man rise to the top and getting massive coverage by those who want to see the Conservatives fail. In his success so does Conservatism fail.

Well said, SC. You’re right that Trump represents the downfall of conservatism. But for me it’s more than that. Seravee’s view that evil is evil doesn’t take into account the quality of evil. Hillary’s evil is of the usual corrupt kind. She’s dishonest, petty, partisan and wrong on the substance of issues. Trump’s evil is that of the megalomaniac and demogogue, stoking fear and exploiting anger and prejudice for cynical ends, but with a twist that Hillary can’t match - he’s reckless, shameless and unable to deal with criticism without lashing out in anger. His critical flaw is temperament - he represents a danger that transcends ideological disagreement.

German voters in 1933 didn’t understand what Hitler represented. My characterization of Trump supporters as good Germans isn’t meant to imply that his supporters are Nazis - far from it; they are genuinely angry and frustrated at the diminution of their life prospects in a country that has suffered an unprecedented period of slow to no growth. A demogogue will exploit such frustration by empathizing with the volk’s anger, assuring them of their superior virtue and instead fixing the blame on “others”, and then promising to fight the straw men he’s set up.

It’s worked time and again throughout history, from Hitler and Mussolini to Chavez and Putin. The time to reject demogoguery is now, before Trump can secure the nomination. Then I and folks like me won’t have to make a Hobson’s choice.