I’m here with some bread …

… just waiting for the circus to start. Open thread on the GOP debate.

16 Responses to “I’m here with some bread …”

  1. I didn’t watch the whole thing but someone who reportedly did wrote that “Donald Trump is jumping in in with his argument that the U.S. spends too much blood and treasure in the Middle East.”

    Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul says, “if you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate.” (about Chris Christie)

  2. Echo says:

    I’d rather catch the summaries. Don’t have enough booze to make it putupwithable.

  3. Sebastian says:

    Yeah, there really wasn’t enough liquor. I suppose I should be resigned, at this point, to thinking “I can’t believe I may have to vote for one of these assholes.”

    • Are they all equally objectionable? Is any one or two better than the others?

      • Sebastian says:

        I dislike Rubio the least. I gave Carly a good look, but I don’t think she has what it takes to get here over the finish line, but if she stays in the race I’ll keep an eye on her. I could live with Cruz at this point, but “midwest vacuum cleaner salesman” sticks in my head every time I hear him talk.

        The rest of them could all die in a fire and I couldn’t care less.

    • Whetherman says:

      “I can’t believe I may have to vote for one of these assholes.”

      You don’t have to. I don’t intend to. That doesn’t mean I’ll vote for the Democrat. I’m just hoping the Republican candidate isn’t so bad that I feel obligated to cast a vote to keep them from winning. Right now I’m hoping things break good enough that I can just withhold my vote for the office of POTUS.

      • Publius says:

        Unless the Republican is Rand, I’m probably voting for the Democrat (unless that turns out to be Hillary–then I guess it’s third party).

        • Whetherman says:

          “then I guess it’s third party”

          That’s a distinct possibility. I voted for Gary Johnson. But even the third parties have been leaning a little goofy with their candidates, and, even though they may have no chance of winning, I don’t want third parties to get the idea they can keep fielding goofy, encouraged by my vote.

          • Publius says:

            I feel your pain. I voted GJ as well. I deeply respect the not voting option, and sometimes think it would be better to go that route. However, I usually do for two reasons: I think that not voting is usually misinterpreted as apathy. I think that voting for a third party, when possible, sends a stronger voice of disapproval–it may be dismissed as “nutjob” but it counts for something. It probably helps that I currently live in a swing state. The second reason is as a buffer against vote fraud (by getting my name marked off the list of voters in the county).

            • Alpheus says:

              I would propose, too, that getting out to vote is a good reminder that there is more to elections than the President. If showing up to write in “Santa Claus” for President gets you out so that you vote for the local initiatives and Congress-critters, then I consider that a good thing.

              I think too often we look at the Presidential candidates and decide that none of them are all that Presidential, and then stay home…letting the Party of Evil win the House and Senate. Of course, the Party of Stupid is demonstrating, yet again, that they might as well be the Party of Evil…

              Incidentally, this is one of the big problems with the Libertarian Party. They lways field Presidential candidates. They usually field Governor, Senate, and House candidates. They sometimes field State Senators and Representatives. They rarely notice that there are plenty of County, City and Town candidates that need to be fielded.

              This leads to two sore spots: we need Libertarianism as much, if not more, on the local level, than we do on the higher levels; and getting experience on the local level is good preparation for moving up the ranks to bigger offices.

              • Publius says:

                A lot of times the local offices only have one candidate anyway, so there are some opportunities there.

        • Jim says:

          Same as a vote for Hillary don’t cha know.

          • Publius says:

            IDGAF anymore

            • Alpheus says:

              The way I see it, if a candidate can’t convince you to vote for him, then it’s their fault, not yours. This may sometimes be a problem strategically, but it’s the candidate’s problem just as much as it is the voter’s.

              Actually, I’m kindof tired of always blaming the third-party voters for voting their conscience, when it comes to winning and losing. Often, a vote for a third party is a vote that would have just stayed home otherwise…

              Perhaps we need to start pointing out that the Libertarian party would have won this time, if it weren’t for all those voters throwing their vote away on that tepid, spineless Republican candidate!

  4. Ian Argent says:

    Saw a headline today that said “Terro takes center stage at Republican debate.” I kind of hope the headline author was deliberately engaging in wordplay, but probably not.

    (A Trump Presidency would be pretty Terrific, in the old-fashioned sense).