Inspecting Trump’s honesty, a comedian leads journalists

Donald Trump is going to be the Republican nominee for president. Most news organizations are running stories today saying wins in most states on Super Tuesday tomorrow will lock things up.

Over the weekend, the New York Times used its ink to document in great detail the behind-the-scenes efforts of the Republican Party to prevent him from getting the nomination en route — the establishment says — to a loss in November. It said Senate Republicans, planning their own re-elections, are considering a strategy in which they distance themselves from the party’s own nominee.

Think about that. This is a party that had four — and really, eight — years to plot a White House comeback.

Even Trump’s clumsy response to being embraced by the Ku Klux Klan isn’t slowing him down, partly because coverage of Trump remains mostly about entertainment and strategy than about substance.

The way things are in the news media these days, leave it to a comedian to do the job.

After Oliver’s takedown of Trump, some newspapers ran stories today repeating some of his work, without mentioning their source.

Last week, Trump said if he’s elected president, he’s going to make life miserable for the nation’s newspapers, apparently singlehandedly changing the Constitution to be able to sue newsrooms that produce negative stories.

If the party leaders are wrong and Trump should win the White House, nine months from now journalists will be writing stories about how they gave him a free pass, and wondering how that was allowed to happen.

For now, however, there are dresses at the Oscars to talk about instead.

  • Gary F

    Since day one I’ve said he’s a plant for the Clinton Crime Syndicate.

    • Rob

      so you’re saying you won’t vote for him?

      • Gary F

        A clothes pin won’t work. Maybe a wood clamp on my nose.


        • MrE85

          Whatever. Just remember a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump, and all that he stands for. You’ll bear some responsibility for what happens next. As we all will.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            I don’t think anyone really knows what Trump stands for, but you are right. And I’ll shoulder that responsibility, because with the balance of the SCOTUS on the table, I’ll take a risk rather than allow the left a sure thing.

            We can get rid of Trump in 4 years if we have to, a leftist majority on the SCOTUS would last 30. I need to do better for my kids.

          • Rob

            Name three specific things that will benefit your kids if SCOTUS stays rightist.

    • jon

      He certainly is there to represent some sort of Crime Syndicate…

      Though my money’s on the Trump Crime Syndicate more than the Clinton one…

    • chris

      If you’re correct, it’s amazing how far the rubes are falling for it. All the GOP has done for 8 years is obstruct President Obama while dog whistling when they should have been building a positive message.

  • John O.

    If Trump is elected President, the White House press corps better strap themselves in for what will likely be a very unpleasant ride.

    • They will do what the white house press corps does best: dutifully act as stenographers, merely repeating whatever the president says without any significant inspection, so as not to be portrayed as having “bias.”

  • Thomas Mercier

    The irony involved of a fascist overthrow of our constitution by a Republican president is absolutely amazing.

  • MrE85

    I’ll be doing what I can, in my own small way, tomorrow evening. I’m wondering how many of my neighbors will join me?

    • jon

      Planning on heading out myself tomorrow evening…
      Though I’ll be doing little to stop trump at that time. Instead I’ll be discussing who will run against him.

    • Jim E

      Invite them to join you!

      Caucus meeting information for the DFL, GOP, Green, Independence and Libertarian parties can be found at:

  • Robert

    In the land of sound bites and reality shows America gets a political pretender vying for the throne. Are you not entertained? What a mess!

  • wjc

    I’m not entirely sure Drumpf actually wants to be President. Skipping a debate, saying he could shoot somebody and not lose support, saying he’d like to punch a protester, mocking Rubio in an incredibly juvenile way. He seems like he is trying to sabotage his own campaign, and it just doesn’t work.

    I think that in his ego-driven way, he wants to know that he CAN be elected, without actually bring elected. It is quite breathtaking.

  • MikeB

    Since politics and political coverage have morphed into entertainment events people want to be entertained. Clicks and ratings outperform real policy discussions. Sources of information are decentralized, people flock to sources that validate their views. People get to choose their own facts, let alone opinions.

    There are plenty of words being written and spoken about the sinking levels of discourse in our politics, they are lost among all the noise out there.

  • Rob

    Now that it’s all but settled that he’ll be the repubican nominee, the big question is: who will Drumpf tap for VP unning mate?

    • jon

      Short list includes his daughter, the people’s republic of China, Chris Christie (who was promised the job in exchange for his endorsement), Sarah Palin, and the person he really wants to be president because he will resign as soon as he learns what the job actually entails.

      • KenB

        Chris Christie wants to be Trump’s Secretary of Transportation, doesn’t he?

  • BJ

    His support is 30% among the 5% of people who vote in primaries. I should know better but I think the general population is smarter, in this single case.

    Looking at electoral college, it could be close.

  • Rich in Duluth

    This whole Trump phenomenon is really a statement about us, as voters. There are many loud, obnoxious people in the world. But, to see the support this hyperbolic, blowhard gets is just scary. There seems to be no thought, among his supporters, about realistic, workable policies. If you go to his website, you’ll see his list of issues range from Competent Leadership to Live Free or Die, The 2nd Amendment, Political Correctness, and making the biggest military force in the world even bigger. His 30 second sound bites on each of these non-issues amount to, “leave it to me, I’ll fix these things”.

    So, what about fixing Social Security, getting affordable healthcare to all of the people, fixing our infrastructure, the cost of education, climate change, women’s/LGBT rights, campaign finance, and corporate greed to name a few other issues? Where are the policies on these and how do they get fixed? Politics should be about issues and reasonable solutions.

    • wjc

      It’s also a statement about the anti-intellectualism that particularly afflicts the GOP. (Who need any stinking facts?) It’s why John Oliver and Andy Borowitz are so funny. After one of the Republican debates, Borowitz declared that the fact checker was hospitalized for exhaustion. When the nominating process becomes a circus, it shouldn’t be a surprise that the comedians are shining the brightest light on the process.

    • lindblomeagles

      Now you’re seeing what I’ve been talking about for months. Washington certainly has its issues, campaign financing surely being one of them. But Republican voters LITERALLY kicked out many of their Senators and Representatives for politicians that would obstruct Washington from working in 2010, 2012, 2014, and now 2016. That PURPOSEFUL sea of change is why guys like Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul wound up going to Congress in the past 6 years, and then running for President this year. The dominant part of Republican voters, some 50% when you toss in Ted Cruz’s support with Donald Trump, are STILL ANGRY an African American was elected President (twice), the Supreme Court passed gay marriage, and Latinos have found jobs and homes in rural America. Trump’s ascendancy is about that – stopping and reversing the social diversity America has achieved since the 1960s.’ That’s why he gets support from the Ku Klux Klan and other racists groups. That’s not the Republican Party’s fault. They’ve actually made it pretty clear they don’t like Trump and think he hurts them long term. But it is the fault of the voters who declare themselves Republicans; and right now, those voters, are very proud that they are voting the way they are voting.

  • Fred, Just Fred

    We’d be remiss not to take note that in 2008, a smooth talking community organizer was elected on nothing more than a promise of “Hope and Change”. We kept waiting for the press to ask the candidate for details, but they never did.

    “Make America Great Again” will appeal to the same Hopey-Changey voters.

    • KenB

      False. The Obama campaign had plenty of policy details in the press, enough for me to know, for example, that his health care/insurance reform plan wasn’t a very good one.

      Many people who were engaged in the 2008 campaign knew about plenty of policy. The fact that all your apparent hero Palin could come up with was “hopey-changey” doesn’t alter the facts, and those included lots of Obama policy proposals people discussed then.

      • Fred, Just Fred

        Obamacare was still a complete mystery to the Democrat congressmen and women who passed it. But ol’ KenB had it all figured out.

        Here’s a transcript of the community organizers health care speech. He spends 3/4 of his time criticizing McCain’s plan, which was quite detailed, and 1/4 tossing out nebulous promises that never materialized. In fact, the only detail he did follow through on was preexisting conditions.

        Get a load of this tripe: “And I want to be clear about exactly how I will pay for my plan. First, I will aggressively cut health care costs by reducing waste, greed and paperwork; lowering the cost of prescription drugs; and eliminating
        wasteful subsidies to private plans in Medicare.”

        Then he’s gonna tax the rich to pay for the rest….and you fell for that.

        • KenB

          Yes, ol’ KenB, who’s been studying health care systems since about 1992 did figure out a few things.

          Ol’ FredjustFred seems to think a person had to read the ACA bill that didn’t yet exist in 2007-08 to know that the campaign plan wasn’t a good one.

          • Oh, snap.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            I went through the trouble of including Obama’s speech on the subject. As I pointed out it was smoke and mirrors. If you are suggesting you saw that, and knew he didn’t know what he was doing, I’ll buy it. But to suggest there was enough information to make an informed decision is a non-starter for me.

            I pointed out the fact that Democrats in congress voted to approve a plan they didn’t understand just to illustrate how far Obama ran his sleight of hand trick, not that he had a 10,000 page program in his coat pocket.

          • KenB

            We’re discussing Presidential candidates, not the intelligence or effort level of Congress people. Anyone who paid attention during the first campaign knew exactly what kind of insurance system was coming if Obama won. I did, and I didn’t like it.

            I’m not talking about the bill that was introduced. You keep doing that if you like.

    • Brian Simon

      Right. In 8 years a bunch of young, racially diverse, often college educated voters have turned into older white high school graduates.

      • Fred, Just Fred

        If we’ve learned one thing, it’s a college education is no guarantee of intelligence, and racial diversity means absolutely nothing to anyone but race obsessed bigots.

        • Not really. What I’ve learned is one thing: People believe whatever they believe as fact and present it as same. But that doesn’t make it fact.

          From a practical standpoint, I’m a fan in my business of racial diversity. I see the difference that different perspectives can make . The only way it doesn’t matter, it seems to me, is if you believe one’s own perspective is the only legitimate perspective. That there is no gray in the world.

          I think there are legitimate, intellectual exercises that can only be invoked with diversity of thought and diversity of thought quite often comes from diversity of experience and quite often — too often, some think — diversity of experience comes from racial experience.

          Why this scares people so, I can’t quite understand yet. But clearly people are scared by diversity of thought. Liberals, conservatives. Everybody.

        • Brian Simon

          Perhaps, Fred, I misunderstood your point about hopey-changes voters. Please clarify your point, if there was one. Because it sure seems like you’re just moving on to another meaningless soundbite, not unlike the subject of the parent post, above.

          • I’m going to be cutting down on the trolling and part of that is eliminating as much baiting is possible by all “sides.”

            If posts disappear, that’s why.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            People who buy into a cult of personality are equally as ignorant be they left or right.

    • I get it. I’ve obviously seen this response before, but in reality there’s much more indication that the election of ’08 was much more about ideas than you care to indicate, particularly on the question of terrorism, world view, and Guantanamo, which were actually issues of both candidates. And, obviously, then he wasn’t about to embrace same-sex marriage, although I can’t recall whether that was a significant part of the campaign or not.

      Clearly, his association with Jeremiah Wright was an issue in the campaign which got plenty of coverage, and also led to the speech on race in America, which was a significant component of his campaign, obviously.

      He obviously supported legalized abortion and the specifics on that are pretty simple: just don’t rollback legalized abortion, though he said he favored limits on late term abortion.

      Now many of his specifics turned out to be flat out wrong. He ran on more transparency, ending earmarks, providing ability to track government earmarks, and rolling back executive authority, believing that Bush overclassified information.

      We ended up with more espionage and one of the least transparent administrations since Nixon.

      Anywhere, here is the FoxNews look at Obama’s platform:

      1) Guantanamo Bay

      As a candidate, Barack Obama repeatedly stated his intentions to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, calling the facility a recruitment tool for al Qaeda. With Monday’s announcement by Attorney General Eric Holder that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other alleged plotters in the September 11 attacks would be tried in military courts, it has become even more obvious that Gitmo will not be shutting down anytime soon.

      However, some Obama supporters say they don’t see Guantanamo Bay shaping up as a huge problem for the president in 2012.

      “President Obama is still trying to shut down Gitmo as soon as possible, it’s just turning out that it’s not possible,” said Democratic strategist Joe Trippi. “But I don’t see that promise really hurting him in 2012, his base probably won’t abandon him over that.”

      2) Letting Bush-Era Tax Cuts Expire

      As a candidate, Barack Obama said he opposed tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and if elected to the highest office in the land, he would let the Bush-era tax cuts expire. However as president, Obama found that he had to compromise in order to avoid raising taxes for most Americans. In the end, the only way for the president to keep the Bush-era tax rates for couples making less than $250,000 was to also extend current tax rates for what he called “the wealthiest two percent of Americans.”

      Once again, Democrats don’t see this as a deal breaker.

      “He fought against extending the Bush tax cuts the whole way, he just lost. But once again I don’t think his base will desert him for Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich over this,” said Trippi.

      3) Foreclosure Prevention Fund

      During the campaign, candidate Obama said he would create a $10 billion fund designed to come to the aid of homeowners at risk of foreclosure. “Too many families are unable to refinance because no one will lend to them, and they are unable to sell their homes because the housing market has fallen,” said Obama in 2008.

      The president actually tried to go above and beyond the initial promise by creating a fund that totaled $75 billion. This money came, in part, from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). The problem is the program, for a myriad of reasons, has failed to deliver. As of January 2011, the program had helped only about 500,000 homeowners.

      4) Immigration Reform

      As a candidate out on the campaign trail, Mr. Obama promised to provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. However, during his first two years in the White House, the president spent just about all of his hard earned political capital on passing health care reform and the economic stimulus. So by the time Obama went back to the well for immigration, he was politically broke.

      The DREAM act, a bill aimed to provide a path to citizenship for immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, passed in the House but died in the Senate during the lame duck session. With that chance missed, it could be a long time before Democrats and immigration reform backers have the numbers in Congress to make another run at it.

      Obama called the failure to pass immigration reform “maybe my biggest disappointment” of the lame duck session but maintains he is still committed to the goal.

      5) Restricting Former Lobbyists from Serving in Obama Administration

      As a candidate, Barack Obama deplored the prevalence of lobbyists in and around the White House. “No political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration,” said Obama in 2008.

      However, according to, the administration has granted waivers to several former lobbyists, allowing them to serve. The administration also allows “recusals,” in which a former lobbyists can recuse themselves from discussions surrounding interests they used to lobby.

      6) Iraq War

      As a candidate out on the trail, Mr. Obama made the Iraq war one of his main issues and hammered his Republican rival Sen. John McCain over and over on the subject. Obama said he would work with military commanders on the ground in Iraq and in consultation with the Iraqi government to end the war safely and responsibly within 16 months.

      Here is one that is widely considered to be a promise kept for President Obama. Although about 48,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq as a transitional force, the bulk of the combat forces were headed home by the end of summer 2010.

      7) Repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

      In the final weeks of a lame duck session, Congress overturned a 17-year-old policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” which banned gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military. The repeal calls for a transition period so that the Department of Defense can train all forces by this summer and implement the repeal in the fall.

      By signing the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” into law on December 22, 2010, President Obama kept another campaign promise.

      8) Sign a ‘Universal’ Health care Bill

      Last but certainly not least is the promise Mr. Obama made to sign a universal health care bill. Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has many detractors, this has to be considered a major promise kept by President Obama.

      On March 23, 2010 after months of political battles on Capitol Hill, President Obama signed Democrat-passed health care reform into law, triggering a firestorm that is still working its way through the courts. Many legal scholars and pundits expect the matter will ultimately be resolved in the Supreme Court

      Trippi adds that no president can keep all of his campaign promises, yet on the biggest issues, such as Iraq and health care reform, Obama did make good on pledges he made on the trail.

      “More importantly the 2012 presidential election will be won on issues of the day, not promises from 2008,” Trippi said. “The buck stops on President Obama’s desk now, you can’t blame President Bush anymore. So if the economy is good and we feel safe as a nation in November of 2012, he’s looking good, however if unemployment is at nine percent, the president could be in trouble.”

      The president meanwhile seems eager to talk about his accomplishments rather than specific promises. During a conference call with thousands of grassroots supporters Monday night Obama ticked off some of his signature accomplishments such as health care legislation, Wall Street reform and the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The president told listeners that in only two years his administration had produced “the most successful legislative initiative” of any president over the last 50 years. “I think it’s important to remind people what we have accomplished.”

      • Fred, Just Fred

        All campaigns are about ideas, Bob. But the reason we end up disappointed so often is we allow candidates to skip the details. For instance, I happen to think TARP was a huge mistake from Bush. Obama talked about how he was going to go after corruption in finance, but he never once said he thought TARP was so nifty, he’d double down on it. Obama promised to end the Iraq war, but no one asked him what his plan was to maintain peace there, and the result was disaster.

        Rubio held Trump’s feet to the fire during their last debate, and it is clear Trump hasn’t the foggiest idea how he is going to accomplish his goals. Sanders free tuition idea has received some attention, but no one is making an issue of it, and no one has any idea what Hillary will do.

        • Postal Customer

          “we allow candidates to skip the details”

          But any time a journalist presses a politician for details, they’re immediately called ‘biased.’

          • And thus the difference between today and yesteryear. Journalists have gotten far, far too timid.

            That’s why they’re stenographers more than journalists now.

            And that’s on them. It’s not a business for weenies.

            I tend to chuckle — and not in a good way — at the media reacting to Spotlight winning last night. It’s a nostalgic reaction for an earlier time when people had arguments — big screaming arguments — in newsrooms over stories that weren’t being covered or being covered right.

            As TV has overtaken the more journalistically sound newspaper industry and become the media of choice for people, that’s all been replaced with people who are more passionate about other things.

          • Jay T. Berken

            Bob, What do you think of public television’s and radio’s coverage? I think it has been good.

          • Better than commercial TV/radio. It’s a very low bar.

          • Jay T. Berken

            I’m at an in between age (early 40s) to not had been engaged enough before cable tv and in my mid twenties got hooked on MPR. I can not have a good feel for the difference from the (3) channel news reporting and what it is now.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            They’re biased when they press one side for answers, but give the other a pass.

          • I think they’re more incompetent than biased. The lab rat at the moment aside from Trump is Bernie Sanders, who has policy proposals that are obviously attracting a large following. But there’s no reasonable expectation that, given the government we have, they can be enacted. Trump, on the other hand, has no real proposals and is generally refusing to engage.

            In both cases, journalists are smitten with the personality of it all, the theater of it all.

            This is a natural extension of a long-standing decline which is amplified by the fact the presidential campaign now lasts almost four years. As we crank out more political scientists, and 24/7 cable channels, politics becomes nothing more than the OJ Simpson trial. It becomes talker for the strategies and not for the bigger picture; Americans don’t like big picture stuff.

            This is what entertains us now.

            But this is who we are which is why the value in these campaigns is as an opportunity to reflect on who we are and why we react as we do, why we believe what we believe.

            That can be messy and uncomfortable which is why we don’t take the opportunity.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            There has been a little investigating going on regarding the Bern’s proposals. There is no chance, given the debt we have, they can be enacted. $18 Trillion…whoo boy.


          • Postal Customer

            You’d vote for him if he reined in his ambitions.

            Wouldn’t you?

          • Fred, Just Fred

            Why would you think that?

        • But I don’t ever recall him ever having a platform of sustaining peace in Iraq. He said he’d end the war and get troops out in 16 months because sectarian violence was going to neuter any gains from the buildup. He said he wanted to focus more on killing bin Laden.

          and obviously once he got in office, trying to come up with a peace plan, he ran up against a corrupt Iraqi president who had no interest in sharing power with his religious rivals.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            All true, but he did know there were armed sectarian groups waiting in the wings. Bush obviously blundered in giving the Iraqi’s too much control, too soon; the only thing keeping the various Muslim jihadists from one another’s throats was the US Army. But Obama decided to deliberately overlook the danger involved.

            He went through with redeploying our forces to satisfy the far left, consequences be damned. And now, we can’t even quantify how much that decision will cost us in the long run.

            How much better might it have been to have the White House media press him on the details of the end game?

          • I think the end game was to get the hell out. I don’t think his concern was to govern Iraq.

            And obviously that was the center of the debate between Obama and McCain — perhaps more than any other issue. I’d have to go back and look at those debates, but I think his focus was on al Qaeda and his view was you don’t fight al Qaeda by occupying Iraq.

            It seemed to me his focus was on killing bin Laden and on that score the “how are you going to do that” question was part of the campaign. His answer was ‘by getting out of Iraq’.

            He viewed the future of Iraq as Iraq’s problem and while he attempted to negotiate with the Iraqi president to create a government that could sustain itself, in the end the Iraqi president wasn’t interested and Obama wasn’t interested in making it our problem if Iraq wasn’t interested in having a stable government.

            I think the question was how do you get out of their in 16 months and I think his answer was “by leaving.”

          • Fred, Just Fred

            Right! And now, in hindsight we clearly see that was a very bad decision. There were people out there who were asking questions, but not the people that had the ability to ask Obama himself.

            For all his bungling, in 2007 Bush himself foresaw the exact result that would occur if we pulled our troops out too soon:

            “I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous. The fight in Iraq is part of a broader struggle that’s unfolding across the region.”

            What might have happened if a reporter asked Obama to refute that prediction with detailed facts?

            Leon Panetta also warned about it:

            “I privately and publicly advocated for a residual force that could provide training and security for Iraq’s military.” However, he writes, the White House was “so eager to rid itself of Iraq that it was willing to withdraw rather than lock in arrangements that would preserve our influence and interests.” And finally, “To this day, I believe that a small U.S. troop presence in Iraq could have effectively advised the Iraqi military on how to deal with al-Qaeda’s resurgence and the sectarian violence that has engulfed the country.” His account directly contradicts Barack Obama’s latest story – that total U.S. withdrawal “wasn’t a decision made by me.” Actually, yes, it was, and it was a terrible and costly one.”

            Obama went through with the plan because no one was asking “what if?”.

          • I don’t know that it was or wasn’t. I watched a South Vietnam refuse to fight and I didn’t see a big difference in the situation. We all knew there was going to be sectarian violence because the only reason the surge worked is because Muqtada al-Sadr let it work knowing that we wouldn’t stay forever and the time would come.

            If I had to guess — and it’s only an anecdotal guess — I’d guess those who voted for Obama were just fine with the notion of getting out and letting Iraq take the steps necessary to provide a stable government.

            Once Iraq’s president made clear he intended to stymie Kurds and Sunnis to be part of Iraq’s governing future, I just don’t think there was any appetite here to continue sacrificing American lives for a corrupt government. I think Obama read that correctly.

          • Fred, Just Fred

            I’d guess those who voted for Obama were just fine with the notion of
            getting out and letting Iraq take the steps necessary to provide a
            stable government.

            That may be true, but I have to hope some of the cooler heads might have thought differently if the warnings coming from people who were in a position to know such things had been better publicized. Iraq was, and is, incapable of providing a stable government. Colin Powell was 100% correct; we broke it, we owned it.

            The assessments I’ve read from military commanders conclude Iraq could have been safeguarded with as few as 5,000 soldiers. It’s going to take five times that many to clean the mess up now, and mark my words, we will be forced to clean it up.

    • crystals

      In 2008 a sitting United States senator was elected president. Just, you know, for the record.

      I’d really like to see how you can back up the assertion that the same crowd of people who voted for Obama in 2008 are going to vote for Trump in 2016. (And to be clear, by back up I mean present evidence from something other than your own mind.)

      • Fred, Just Fred

        I mean the “same crowd” of people who head into the voting booth without having given their decision a moments thought. The ones that voted for Obama will stay home this time; their Trumpian counterparts will fill the gap with the same ignorance.

        I suppose I should say “Make America Great Again” will appeal to the same Hopey-Changey type voters.

    • kevins

      Intriguing comparison..I mean the one between Trump and Palin.

  • Brian Simon

    Good bit. But I doubt the people who need to see it will.

  • kennedy

    Minnesota tried the ‘elect an outsider with a personality’ thing by putting a former wrestler/entertainer in the governor’s office. I wonder if that past experience will influence people tomorrow.

  • KTN

    That was funny – made my day.