22 Comments - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:01 am: watching this convention is so bizarre. I would never vote for hillary clinton under any circumstances. with that said, this RNC spectacle is surreal and cartoonish and more than a little scary and uncomfortable. Everybody is so angry and everything is so dark. Do these people have any coherent ideas on how to move the country forward? On the theme of “Make America Work Again,” all they could talk about was lucifer and locking hillary clinton up. It’s one thing to disagree with a party or candidate. Lord knows I’ve done plenty of that. But watching this I’m having a hard time convincing myself these people are even worthy of a moment of my brain time. It’s like being asked to seriously consider whether donald duck would make a good president. Well, he seems like a good guy, but on the other hand, he’s a cartoon duck. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:07 am: I once attended a keynote by a prominent farm broadcaster who was speaking about family. I was agreeing with his points and stories up to the moment he ended his speech. His last example was spending quality time with his very young grandson, allowing him to ride along on the mower while they mowed the lawn. Directly after his speech, I had a very interesting conversation with an equipment dealer who was of the opinion that this was acceptable, especially if the lawn needed to be mown, and there was no one to watch the child. It was a bonding experience. My reply was so is a trip to the ER, and that mowing the lawn could wait until childcare was available from another family member. I also pointed out that even if the child never, ever fell off the mower and was accidently run over, the adult is still subjecting the child to hearing loss, just to name one unintentional effect. The RNC may be a “bonding experience” but one does not have to get on the “mower” with Trump. Those who feel strongly that he still does not represent the GOP, and in fact is hijacking it, need to stop waffling and state their cases. Trump is interested in the glory of the national stage. He is not going to help out local and state races. He’s not going to fundraise for them. He’s not going to stump for them. So, grow a backbone. If he wins, GOPers need to realize, they are still on their own. - Mama - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:17 am: ==Hillary Clinton, who he says is an “entirely unacceptable candidate” for President of the United States.== How on earth is Hillary less qualified than Trump? The man who has zero experience in government. - sal-says - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:20 am: == A “binary choice,” except when it isn’t == But it is. Others like Jeb Bush & former IPI columnist/propagandist Scott Reeder who recently said in a column that he’d be voting for a third party candidate, acknowledging the candidate couldn’t win and concluded by stating: “Isn’t that what democracy is supposed to be about?” And, my answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT. A US voter may not like either candidate for Prez, but both ‘winnable’ candidates have been ‘vetted’ in every State by millions of people winnowing them out of multiple other choices. That ‘write-in’ or ‘third party’ candidate vote is like throwing away one of the most precious things a democracy has, our vote. Might as well tell people to stay home & not vote, like many third-world-countries. Resulting in the antithesis of democracy and pretty much un-American. Democracy is messy; most everything is a compromise; a give and take. So. If a voter doesn’t like either candidate, what the voter needs to do is PICK THE LEAST WORST. In this particular case, we get a binary choice of crazy or competence. The choice is ours. Each of us has OUR single vote & it must not just be thrown away to ‘make a point’. - JS Mill - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:22 am: Adam Kinzinger- “Profiles in Courage” /s - Fusion - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:31 am: I’ve often wondered why a Ross Perot-type-third-party figure hasn’t emerged yet. Until it dawned one me … Donald Trump is that figure. If we compare this race to 1992, we have a binary choice between Bill Clinton (Hillary) and Ross Perot (Donald). So, now, I’m wondering: Who is going to play the role of George H.W. Bush? It appears that Libertarian Gary Johnson is unable to do so. So no one will, which is interesting, because I imagine a George H.W. Bush-figure would play pretty well right about now. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:35 am: If a voter doesn’t like either candidate, pick the least worst??? I would prefer not to vote for either one and prepare for the next round with hopefully a better candidate. I didn’t realize that in a democracy it was mandatory to vote all the time and for every office/cause. If that was the case, then voter turnout would be much, much higher in every election at every level. Non votes can sometimes signal voter dissatisfaction too. Our State GA does that all the time! - AlfondoGonz - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:36 am: It’s a tough time to be a republican. The smart ones know that supporting Trump will leave a black stain on them; Trump will lose and go down as the worst candidate to run in modern history and anyone who supported him will forever have that used against them. However, don’t support him and risk being blamed for the impending loss. I suppose this is a time where good judgment and a strong moral compass is better served than political expediency. - Cubs in '16 - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:37 am: ===How on earth is Hillary less qualified than Trump? The man who has zero experience in government.=== Mama, “entirely unacceptable” doesn’t necessarily mean less qualified… - illinois bob - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:39 am: @mama =How on earth is Hillary less qualified than Trump? The man who has zero experience in government.= And Hillary has shown she’s an absolute DISASTER in foreign policy, and the only economic success she’s supported is lining her and Bill’s pockets by peddling influence and using a non-profit’s funds to live the high life. You DID hear than her daughter stuck the foundation with a $34,000 per night tab on her last vacation, right? Trump has no less bonafides in running the executive branch than Obama did. - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:39 am: The more IL Republicans who acknowledge Trump will have their inevitable support, the harder it will be for Rauner to refuse to even talk about the presidential nominee for his party. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:45 am: Wensicia- I’m sure the tight lip and frown and “No questions” will be the norm between now and the General as Rauner continues to “bazinga” around Illinois. The true heat will be on if Trump actually wins (heaven help us all). Then, maybe, Rauner might reconsider his retirement plans. - pundent - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 9:59 am: =Trump has no less bonafides in running the executive branch than Obama did.= So a president who was a constitutional law professor, state senator, and U.S. senator has no bonafides? Exactly what would you deem to be acceptable? - G'Kar - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 10:23 am: I’m writing in Limberbutt McCubbins. Meow is the time! http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/07/08/421140664/for-limberbutt-mccubbins-the-time-is-meow-to-run-for-president - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 10:39 am: –“I’ve switched out Petraeus now that Colin, being much more experienced at the national level, is the better way to go,” Kirk told the radio station.– LOL, I wondered here a couple of weeks ago why Kirk didn’t say Powell if he was going to pull this stunt. - downstate commissioner - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 11:01 am: “binary choice, except when it isn’t” I agree-because I saw a (long-chance) scenario involving Libertarian Gary Johnson, the electoral college, and the house and senate majorities that end up electing Paul Ryan as president. Silly idea? Maybe, but better than the binary choice. Unauthorized write-in votes are a total waste of time; throwing a vote for and organized third-party candidate is a legitimate way to show disapproval of the two-party candidates. - Amalia - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 12:21 pm: poison or policy. the poison that we’ve seen the last two nights is so strong that the only choice is the strongest, and most likely choice, the democrat with whom most likely Stein & Johnson voters agree, HRC. poison looms too large to vote otherwise. - Illinis bob - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 3:14 pm: @prudent =So a president who was a constitutional law professor, state senator, and U.S. senator has no bonafides? Exactly what would you deem to be acceptable?= First of all, he wasn’t a “professor” of constitutional law, he was an adjunct instructor who has shown little knowledge of the subject. He never had “executive” experience before POTUS, and he showed precious little leadership in either senate. In fact, didn’t he set the record for “present” votes in Illinois? There’s no substitute for having to run things from an operational, financial ,and personnel level. Trump has that. Obama doesn’t. - Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 3:33 pm: Downstate Commissioner plus 1 - @MisterJayEm - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 4:08 pm: “There’s no substitute for having to run things into the ground from an operational, financial, and personnel level. Trump has that.” FIFY. – MrJM - pundent - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 4:17 pm: Illinois Bob - You may have an argument that Trump is in fact more familiar with the legal system given the number of times he’s sued and been sued. He certainly knows his way around the bankruptcy court I’ll give you that. If Trump’s success as an “executive” qualifies him to lead the most powerful nation in the world than by extension Kim Kardashian should be secretary of state as she’s well traveled. - Mama - Wednesday, Jul 20, 16 @ 7:36 pm: IB, You can not run government like a business. It does not work. They are two different birds. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.