Last night’s fifth Republican presidential debate will probably go down as one of the most out of control, worst moderated and least informative debates in a long time. The winner? Anyone who found a better way to spend two and one half hours of his or her time.

From my perspective, two things became clear from last night’s dysfunctional family melee. One, Jeb will be withdrawing from the presidential race sooner rather than later. And two, Ted Cruz will be the Republican presidential nominee.

Jeb Bush came out swinging against his nemesis, Donald Trump, calling him a “non-serious” candidate. “You can not insult your way to the presidency,” scolded Bush.

As much as Jeb tried to bloody Trump, the in-your-face attitude was too little, too late. Yes, Bush landed a few punches but not enough to turn around his moribund campaign. The only question is when will GOP establishment leaders and donors finally see the light and pull the plug on a rotting corpse.

Jeb could be right. Trump may not be able to ride his Don Rickles routine all the way to the presidency but he could certainly insult his way to the Republican nomination!

But Trump does not want the nomination.

When asked about his recent criticisms of his nearest competitor, Ted Cruz, Trump demurred. Earlier in the week, Trump questioned Cruz’ temperament and judgment to be president. He went so far as to say Cruz was “a little bit of a maniac.”

When Cruz was asked about a comment he had made in private questioning Trump’s competency to be commander in chief, Cruz skirted the issue. But then, in the most telling moment of the night, he and Trump looked at each other … adorningly.

In an interview with Chuck Todd on NBC’s Meet The Press, Trump was quoted as saying he would leave the race if his poll numbers started to slip. “I’m not a masochist,” said Trump. “And if I was dropping in the polls where I thought I wasn’t gonna win, why would I continue? I’d go back to my business. I have no problem with that.”

Trump and Cruz have what some like to call a “bromance.” I think it is more than that. (My Trump Question For Upcoming Debate.)

Look for Trump to lose Iowa to Cruz. Watch for Trump to employ his exit strategy. See Trump throw his support behind his amigo, Raphael Edward Cruz, born December 22, 1970, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Oh the irony!

Photo | cnn.com

The next Republican presidential debate will be held in Las Vegas next week. With Ted Cruz gaining significant ground on Donald Trump in the most recent polls, especially in Iowa, here is the first question I would ask the billionaire Republican frontrunner:

“Mr. Trump, during your campaign, you have aggressively attacked some of your fellow Republican candidates. You’ve called Jeb Bush “low energy,” Marco Rubio a “lightweight” and Ben Carson “borderline nutty.” Yet you have not offered any such criticism of your now nearest opponent, Ted Cruz. Why is this so? Especially when some people are questioning his right to even run for the presidency, having been born in Canada?”

I can just hear the cop-out answer now, “Well you know I think Ted Cruz is a fine man. We agree on many issues. It’s that I would just make a better president. And for the Canadian birth, some very smart people who know about such things have told me he is eligible to run as his mother is an America.”

Of course, the fact that Obama was also born of an American mother did not stop Trump from questioning the president’s place of birth as a disqualifying factor in his right to hold the office of president of the United States… even though, unlike Cruz, Obama was actually born in the U.S.!

To me there is one obvious answer to Trump’s “soft on Cruz” tactic and the corresponding failure by Cruz to attack Trump. They have a mutual non-aggression pact going on. Cruz is Trump’s heir apparent when he decides to employ his exit strategy and go back to being a billionaire realty TV star. Once Trump loses Iowa and starts seeing his national numbers slip, Trump will tell his rabid followers that Ted is the right man for the job.

If I am wrong, and Trump is really in this thing to win it, it will be easy to tell. The attack line is so obvious. Trump will mercilessly go after Cruz as a Cuban-Canadian who has no business running for president of the United States. And Cruz will come out swinging, lambasting Trump as not a true conservative but a RINO, Republican in name only.

And for all those threats of Trump running as a third party candidate if he is not treated nice-nice by the Republican Party? Fugetaboutit! It’s all about leverage.

Photo | thedailybeast.com

Hillary and Bill Clinton have been hated by the right since first stepping onto the national stage in 1992.

From the Republican perspective, it has been one scandal after another; from early “Travelgate” to the recent “Emailgate.” During the two Clinton administrations, conservatives feasted on Whitewater, secretive Hillary healthcare task force meetings, the Vince Foster “suicide,” lost Rose Law firm billing records, renting of the Lincoln bedroom, John Huang, Mark Rich “Pardongate,” Monica Lewinsky and the Clinton impeachment.

Surprisingly, hatred of all things Clinton is not limited to the opposition party. There is a very strong dislike coming from within the ranks of Democrats, most notably Party Progressives.

Progressives, who overwhelmingly favor Bernie Sanders, see Hillary Clinton as a political opportunist; one prone to political expediency. She is not seen as a true, trustworthy champion of the liberal agenda. Many Progressives she her as a moderate Republican too cozy with Wall Street and the moneyed interests who support her super PAC and Clinton Foundation.

The fact that many in her own party do not like or trust her would not normally be a problem. Progressives have found their hero in Sanders and will support him in the primaries. But what if Bernie is not the nominee?

For many Progressives, the idea of voting for Hillary if she were to become the Democratic nominee is a nonstarter. It’s Bernie or bust. Even though they might see Hillary as the lesser of two evils, many have vowed to stay away from the polls.

Are these the fickle feelings of childish Democrats or are they genuine? Would a Democrat not vote for their party’s nominee based on their dislike for the candidate’s progressive purity, making the possibility of a President Trump or Cruz more likely? I hope not.

Progressives are a passionate bunch. I am betting cooler heads will, in the end, prevail.

Photo | dailycaller.com

Like everyone else, I have been amused by the rantings and ravings of the Republican presidential frontrunner, Donald J. Trump. Watching the GOP establishment try to figure out what has hit their party has been nothing but pure pleasure.

It doesn’t say much for your brand when a narcissistic, racist, xenophobic, loudmouth carnival barker is running rings around your experienced, career politicians. This is truly beyond embarrassing.

But even an entertaining buffoon can cross the line.

In his most outrageous proposal to date, Trump has called for a “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

Of course this idea is patently absurd and has been soundly criticized by both Democrats and Republicans. Perhaps no one summed up the situation better than fellow Republican presidential nominee, Lindsey Graham, when he urged his party to rebuke Trump by telling him to “go to hell.”

Trump’s fanning the flames of Islamophobia plays right into the hands of ISIS and all other radical groups who want to perpetuate the narrative that the West is at war against the religion of Islam. Trump’s remarks are nothing short of a national security risk.

On the domestic front, USA Today reported that attacks against Muslims are on the rise in the United States. Since the Paris massacre, nearly two dozen attacks have ranged from a cab driver in Pittsburgh being shot, to a pig’s head thrown at a mosque in Philadelphia yesterday and vandalism across the country.

In a country awash with guns in the hands of the unstable, Muslim Americans are rightfully afraid for their lives.

Donald Trump will not be president. You can rest assured of that. But that is beside the point. His hateful rhetoric needs to be called out in as strong a manner a possible.

In the unequivocal words of Lindsey Graham, the GOP establishment needs to grow a pair and tell candidate Trump to “go to hell.”

Photo| Jeff Malet/Salon.com

The pattern by now is all too familiar. No matter how outrageous the comment or how verifiable the lie, Trump supporters will stick with their man. The truth simply does not matter to devout Trump backers. They are too enamored by the force of his personality.

Donald Trump has found what few of us ever find in our lifetimes: unconditional love. So he lied about seeing thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate the attack on the Twin Towers. So deporting eleven million illegal immigrants is a ridiculous idea. So what!

Trump is like a divine shepherd who can lead his sheeple anywhere… even if it’s to the slaughterhouse!

The mainstream media can spend all the time it wants pointing out Trump’s distortions, misrepresentations and outright lies. It will not matter in the end. Trump has found unconditional love from his acolytes.

And as with all unconditional love, the more their revered one is attacked by his critics, the more his followers will circle the wagons and come to his defense. Logic and facts do not matter for those blinded by true adulation.

Will the steady, roughly 25% support of Republican base be enough to carry Trump to the presidential nomination? Probably not… unless Trump can build on his base of die-hard, smitten supporters. The odds are that all those Trump followers who have found unconditional love for their candidate are all present and accounted for.

Photo | ammoland.com

Muslim terrorists have long pushed the narrative that they are at war with the west in a “clash of civilizations.” It’s the death match they so long for between Islam and the infidels of western society. For most of post 9-11 America, this notion has been rejected by a majority of Americans. But, as we have seen since the Paris attacks, this idea of a “clash of civilizations” is gaining wide acceptance among a fearful American populace. A large segment of Americans now believe all Muslims are terrorists, or all terrorists are Muslim, and that we are indeed at war with the Muslim faith.

While this narrative is patently false, it is being shamefully hyped by many of the Republican presidential candidates, most notably Donald Trump. The frontrunner for the Republican nomination has irresponsbily called for warrantless searches of mosques and tracking Muslim Americans in a database or giving them “a special form of identification that noted their religion.”

Once again, as Trump’s rhetoric has become more repulsive, he has seen a spike in his poll numbers. In a recent NBC/SurveyMonkey online poll following the Paris attacks, Trump’s support is at 28%, Carson 18% (down eight points from the previous survey), Cruz 18%, Rubio 11% and Bush at 4%.

What Trump’s ascendency as the leading Republican candidate has done is put our country in a clash of its own; a clash of identity and direction; a fight for the soul of the country. And this is a good thing!

We, as Americans, need this fight. Whether it’s Trump or one of the other Republican fear-mongers, the results of the upcoming presidential election will show the country who we are as a nation and inform the world if we are the America they have long respected and admired.

While the Republican establishment will do all it can to derail a Trump nomination, it may be too late. Having Trump as the Republican standard bearer would be the best thing for our country. It could very well signal the death of the GOP or the start of a dark future for the land of the free.

Ever election is billed as the most important election we will ever face. This time around, it may actually be that.

Image courtesy of anankkml at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

After having hinted at his campaign’s exit strategy (Trump’s Exit Strategy Finally Revealed), Donald Trump has chosen the 2016 Republican presidential nominee: Ted Cruz.

Of course Trump has not announced his exit from the race… just yet. Nor has he come out in favor of Cruz as the presidential nominee. Trump speaks in ways that require one to read between the lines.

Trump’s backing of Cruz as the Republican nominee came in the context of discussing his VP pick.

During an interview with Lifezette, Trump revealed his possible choice for vice president, “Ted Cruz is now agreeing with me 100 percent.” Later on the Laura Ingraham radio show, Trump elaborated, “Well, I like him. He’s backed everything I’ve said.”

There has always been a cozy relationship between Trump and Cruz. Unlike the other Republican presidential candidates, Cruz has mostly refrained from attacking Trump, even appearing alongside him at a rally in September against the Iran nuclear deal.

The pair has struck similar notes on topics such as border security, illegal immigration and the Syrian refugee crisis.

Many pundits believe Cruz is primed to pick up Trump supporters if (more likely when) he exits the race.

Speaking about the results of a recent Texas Lyceum poll, Joshua Blank, research director, said. “It’s safe to say Cruz would benefit most in Texas if Trump were to drop out. I think he would benefit most in a lot of places, amongst the traditional candidates.”

The Trump Republican presidential run has finally come full circle. Cruz will be the beneficiary of Trump’s rabid group of supporters. They will be handed over, on a silver platter, by Trump to his fellow racist, xenophobic, hate-mongering compatriot.

It’s Trump for the money, and Cruz for the show.

Photo | toprightnews.com

As with the first Democratic presidential debate hosted by CNN, the second debate sponsored by CBS did not produce a clear winner. Hillary supporters will claim she won the debate; Sanders supporters will say he was the winner and O’Malley supporters, all seven, will give him the nod.

Unlike the case with the Republican presidential candidates, there are very few policy differences among the Democrats. It is more about the details of those policies, whether it’s on healthcare, Wall Street, campaign finance or a fairer tax system.

The dynamics of the Democratic race have not changed. Barring an act of god, a Bill Clinton sex scandal or damaging revelations about the Clinton Foundation (Clinton Foundation … The Real Hillary Scandal), Hillary Clinton will become the Democratic presidential nominee.

Unfortunately for Democrats, there is some significant resistance against a Clinton nomination among progressives within the Party. Some have said flat out they would only vote for Sanders in the general election. It is hard to believe, but some progressives have a hatred for anything Hillary that almost rivals that of some Republican conservatives.

This could be problematic if progressives stay home on Election Day and do not support their party’s nominee.

All Democrats need to take a deep breath. The presidential election is just about one year from now. Passions will surely cool among progressives given the possibility of a President Trump or Carson or Cruz or Rubio or Bush or…!

Photo | AP

Hillary Clinton supporters were beyond giddy after her epic smackdown of Rep. Trey Gowdy and his band of Republican henchmen during the House Benghazi hearing last month. She was universally declared the winner of the eleven-hour inquisition.

After her stellar performance, Clinton saw her poll numbers rise and political pundits started questioning Bernie Sanders’ continued viability as a presidential candidate. Barring some act of god, they said, she will be the Democratic presidential nominee.

Well, I don’t know about an act of god but there is something in Hillary’s past that could derail her hopes of reaching the While House. It’s called the Clinton Foundation.

The $2 billon charitable organization set up by the Clintons in 2001 could turn out to be, as one political analyst described it, “The Mother of all Clinton Scandals.”

While the foundation has done some praiseworthy work around the world, its finances have come under renewed scrutiny in recent months amid reports of extensive donations by foreign governments to the foundation while the former First Lady was Secretary of State in the Obama administration.

Hillary opponents have long questioned the operation of what many have called a “criminal enterprise.” They have suggested it is just a slush fund for the Clinton clan. There have been allegations that the Clintons have siphoned off foundation money for personal and political use by utilizing creative accounting tactics.

But the allegations that the foundation received donations from foreign governments while Clinton was Secretary of State could be the most problematic. Because of admitted accounting “irregularities,” the foundation will soon be filing amended returns for at least the last two years. The new returns are sure to come under heavy scrutiny.

While Hillary has brushed off any question about the foundation’s activities and finances, she has not addressed the organization’s admission to Reuters earlier this year that it did not comply with an ethics agreement Clinton signed with the Obama administration in 2008 in order for her to become Secretary of State. That agreement required the names of every donor be published annually, with the State Department ethicists screening new funding from foreign governments. Some of the foundation’s charities did not do this or did so incompletely, citing “oversights”.

Stay tuned folks as this real, potentially crippling scandal unfolds. As Rachel Maddow is apt to say, “Watch this space!”
Photo | Tannen Maury/Bloomberg News

Last night’s fourth Republican presidential debate produced some fireworks but no clear winner. Each candidate was able to hold his (her) own. In lively back and forths, the candidates disagreed on taxes, military spending, foreign policy, immigration and bank bailouts.

But to a man (woman), they all seemed to think Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic presidential nominee. The candidates painted the Democratic front-runner as just your typical tax and spend liberal. They suggested a Hillary win would be a continuation of the failed Obama presidency.

But in a rare occurrence for a Republican presidential debate, Hillary Clinton’s name was invoked more often than that of Saint Reagan.

While there might not have been a clear winner in the Fox debate, there was a loser: Jeb. I say that not because Jeb Bush did not do well; he just did not do well enough. He sorely needed a strong, breakout performance but it never materialized. The problem with Jeb is that his personality is not suited for a debate stage filled with more aggressive, animated candidates. He will always look weak by comparison.

It is fairly certain, however, Jeb will live to fight another day. But the writing seems to be on the wall: barring some miracle, Jeb will not be the Republican presidential nominee.

Besides agreeing that Clinton will ultimately be the Democratic presidential pick, the candidates did agree on some basic Republican orthodoxy: cut taxes and eliminate regulations. They also all agreed that raising the minimum wage was a bad idea.

I did not see anything in last night’s debate that would cut into the poll numbers of the two Republican front-runners, Donald Trump and Ben Carson. I look for Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz to fight for third place … with old Jeb firmly ensconced as a second-tier candidate.

Photo | AP/Morry Gash