2016 Presidential Horse Race

[irishfan]

FWIW there have been studies showing that Politifact is at least somewhat biased. They do seem to cherry-pick what statements they go after, and also seem a bit biased in their final "rating." I definitely read more right-leaning sites and forums that highlight these things (so I'll admit I haven't examined Politifact that closely), but it seems like Politifact shows a lot more leniency to rate questionable things as "mostly true" or "mostly false" for Dems while they don't hesitate to do "pants on fire" or "four Pinocchios" for similarly questionable things that Republicans/Trump say.

Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans - US News

Donald Trump: Chevrolet in Tokyo, Japan, 'doesn't exist' | PolitiFact

^this one is a pretty good example. IMO they would have given this "mostly true" if Hillary or Bernie had said it.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Sooo... Did you click through and read all the questions>? Laughable. Poltifact and every other are not non-partisan. 90% on every site are paid for articles. Same goes for radio talk shows...all paid for talking points in one way or another. This all tells me that these people are terrified of the great American, Donald Trump. Scares the shit out of those that rely on the Government to pay their bills...I LOVE IT

We can agree to disagree but at the end of the day...


TRUMP 2016 MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

This is a mindless Trump sheep in a nutshell. Every single one I've debated has absolutely nothing when it comes to policy and that pesky little thing called facts.

Dude, I pay my own bills thank you very much. I don't need to be angry like you at the world because Democrat or Republican in office, I work hard and will never make excuses. Try a little harder. Your "great American" had a choice: give jobs to Americans or hire foreigners so he could line his pockets. He chose Donald. But yet his sheep think he cares about them lol. I'd love for you to explain that one, but of course, like every other sheep, you can't. So you'll just scream "Trump!!!!!" and watch him usher Hillary into the WH because most of America hates that fraud. Well done sheep.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Good Lord, it's like talking to an idiot.


That won't get us far.


ALways weak attacks by those who don't agree, never any real points....low information, poorly educated....blah ...blah...blah.

Simple question: if Trump cares so much about AMERICANS and Americans having jobs, why has he consistently given thousands of jobs to foreigners? Why move his business to China? Is 9 billion not enough, so he had to go for 10 billion, at the expense of Americans who supposedly he suddenly cared so much about?

A simple question.

 

[irishfan]

Simple question: if Trump cares so much about AMERICANS and Americans having jobs, why has he consistently given thousands of jobs to foreigners? Why move his business to China? Is 9 billion not enough, so he had to go for 10 billion, at the expense of Americans who supposedly he suddenly cared so much about?

A simple question.

My guess is that he didn't think he would realistically ever make it this far in a presidential campaign so he didn't really care about cutting out American jobs. Once he became a frontrunner, he had to use his knowledge of this to appeal to voters. It certainly makes him a hypocrite, but this is one of the very few areas of business/trade/politics where he can actually use his experience to sound like he knows what he's talking about and that he can "solve" this issue. Better for him to try and be the leading voice on the issue than waiting for others to bring it up first and attack him. So, ya, to many people he sounds like a hypocrite, but his only play was to harp on this issue continually. He's done his line about how he's been greedy his whole life in business, and now he wants to be "greedy for America." I don't think he's going to be able to do anything to actually solve the issue, but it's not a terrible soundbite.

 

[IrishLax]

Good Lord, it's like talking to an idiot.


That won't get us far.


ALways weak attacks by those who don't agree, never any real points....low information, poorly educated....blah ...blah...blah.

Yeah you're done. I try to give people tons of rope in political threads, but you've used all of it and then some. Over the past few weeks we've gotten many complaints about you and been discussing it and it's just too much. Both here and in sports threads you're either outright trolling, or just such an antagonistic jerk that you can't have fruitful discussion with literally anyone. I'm not sure which is worse character flaw.

I'm giving you off until the start of football season, if you come back and actually want to talk ND football in a productive manner than you're welcome to stay. If you want to continue to display the emotional intelligence of a pre-teen then good riddance.

 

[Buster Bluth]

FWIW there have been studies showing that Politifact is at least somewhat biased. They do seem to cherry-pick what statements they go after, and also seem a bit biased in their final "rating." I definitely read more right-leaning sites and forums that highlight these things (so I'll admit I haven't examined Politifact that closely), but it seems like Politifact shows a lot more leniency to rate questionable things as "mostly true" or "mostly false" for Dems while they don't hesitate to do "pants on fire" or "four Pinocchios" for similarly questionable things that Republicans/Trump say.

Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans - US News

Donald Trump: Chevrolet in Tokyo, Japan, 'doesn't exist' | PolitiFact

^this one is a pretty good example. IMO they would have given this "mostly true" if Hillary or Bernie had said it.

PolitiFact is great if it's used correctly. Stay away from looking at the totals of their assessments (ie X candidate lies more than Y candidate) and only use their research for a specific statement, with which obviously we are free to disagree with them.

In the context of using the website as a resource for researching political bullshit on any give topic, it is objectively one of the best sites available.

 

[irishfan]

PolitiFact is great if it's used correctly. Stay away from looking at the totals of their assessments (ie X candidate lies more than Y candidate) and only use their research for a specific statement, with which obviously we are free to disagree with them.

In the context of using the website as a resource for researching political bullshit on any give topic, it is objectively one of the best sites available.

Oh, I agree. It is the best one out there I think. There are just times when you compare one statement next to another and the ratings don't seem very objective. I do agree that for individual statements, they do great research for the most part.

 

[IrishLax]

PolitiFact is great if it's used correctly. Stay away from looking at the totals of their assessments (ie X candidate lies more than Y candidate) and only use their research for a specific statement, with which obviously we are free to disagree with them.

In the context of using the website as a resource for researching political bullshit on any give topic, it is objectively one of the best sites available.

Exactly. It's an incredible resource, and most people's qualms are with the classification of a statement which requires a degree of subjectivity when assessing the "truthiness" of a claim (to borrow a term from Colbert).

 

[BGIF]

GOP WS Cruz/Anti-Trump Spending $1.84 MM on Ads. Trump 0

GOP WS Cruz/Anti-Trump Spending $1.84 MM on Ads. Trump 0

Trump Heads to Wisconsin, Cruz Has Head Start | RealClearPolitics

By Thomas Beaumont
March 28, 2016

OSHKOSH, Wisconsin (AP) -- Donald Trump is planning to make his first campaign visit to Wisconsin on Tuesday, where the upcoming Republican presidential primary could mark a turning point in the unpredictable GOP race.

But rival Ted Cruz has gotten a jumpstart on the contest, racking up influential endorsements, campaigning in key regions and supported by bullish advertising campaign.

...

Cruz's campaign was airing about $500,000 in advertising over the final two weeks before the primary - a sharp contrast to Trump, who aired no commercials in the state. The anti-tax group Club for Growth announced its plans to spend $1 million on pro-Cruz ads, while an anti-Trump group was spending roughly $340,000 in the final two weeks.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich has also visited Wisconsin, and is advertising in the state as is a group that supports him. However, polls show him trailing both Trump and Cruz.

 

[BGIF]

GOP WS Polls Indicate Toss-up

GOP WS Polls Indicate Toss-up

Tuesday, March 29
Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Wisconsin Republican Presidential Primary 0ptimus (R)* Cruz 27, Trump 31, Kasich 29 Trump +2


Friday, March 25
Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Wisconsin Republican Presidential Primary Free Beacon (R) Cruz 36, Trump 31, Kasich 21 Cruz +5


Wednesday, March 23
Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Wisconsin Republican Presidential Primary Emerson Cruz 36, Trump 35, Kasich 19 Cruz +1

 

[Legacy]

What a Surprise

What a Surprise

Trump, Cruz, Kasich Back Off Pledges to Support Nominee
At Milwaukee town hall, Donald Trump rescinds Republican party loyalty pledge, saying 'the establishment' hasn't treated him fairly

New York businessman Donald Trump flatly backed out of the party loyalty pledge he signed in September when he swore off an independent bid, though in November he insisted the pledge was made on the condition he be treated “fairly.”

Mr. Cruz on Tuesday repeated his hesitation to support Mr. Trump, saying “I’m not in the habit of supporting someone who attacks my wife and attacks my family.” Pressed on whether he would support Mr. Trump, Mr. Cruz hedged the question by vowing to beat him to the nomination. Pressed once more, Mr. Cruz said, “I gave you my answer.”

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is running a distant third in delegates, said, “I’ve been disturbed by some of the things that I’ve seen, and I have to think about what my word and endorsement would mean in a presidential campaign, so I want to see how this thing finishes out.” He added that none of the candidates should have taken the party loyalty pledge. “If the nominee is somebody that I think is really hurting the country and dividing the country, I can’t stand behind them,” he said.

Trump is upset (if not posted prior to this) about ten more delegates expected to go to Cruz from Louisiana.
Trump to Fix Crazy Primary Process by Suing Louisiana

As explained in a recent Wall Street Journal report, while Trump beat Ted Cruz by 3.6 percentage points in Louisiana, the Texas senator may walk away with ten more delegates. Technically, Trump and Cruz won the same number of delegates, 18 each, but since Marco Rubio dropped out of the race, his delegates are now free agents. They're expected to back Cruz, along with the state's five unbound delegates. Cruz supporters also snatched up five of Louisiana's six spots on the committees that will write the rules of the GOP convention, which could be key in determining the winner of a contested convention.

 

[BGIF]

Second judge says Clinton email setup may have been in 'bad faith' | Reuters

NEW YORK | BY JONATHAN ALLEN
Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:31pm EDT

A second federal judge has taken the rare step of allowing a group suing for records from Hillary Clinton's time as U.S. secretary of state to seek sworn testimony from officials, saying there was "evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith."

The language in Judge Royce Lamberth's order undercut the Democratic presidential contender's assertion she was allowed to set up a private email server in her home for her work as the country's top diplomat and that the arrangement was not particularly unusual.

He described Clinton's email arrangement as "extraordinary" in his order filed on Tuesday in federal district court in Washington.

Referring to the State Department, Clinton and Clinton's aides, he said there had been "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials."

...

"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA (freedom-of-information) cases,"

...

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Oh, I agree. It is the best one out there I think. There are just times when you compare one statement next to another and the ratings don't seem very objective. I do agree that for individual statements, they do great research for the most part.

The final ratings are the most difficult part to do. That said, they are probably the least important.

Their research is top notch and they always cite their sources. Where it gets tough is rating the intent of the statement, which they try to do. There are some "half true" ratings that are given to statements that are objectively true as worded. But if they deem the context to be intentionally misleading, they will bump it down.

Final rating...Politifact is excellent.

 

[Irish YJ]

I always tell myself to stay out of the political threads, but its like passing slowly by a an accident on the highway. Hard not to look even though you know you should keep your eyes on the road and look straight. Regardless of views or political affiliation, it's hard for me to understand how anyone could be happy with either of the front runners.

Is there really anyone on the board that genuinely likes, trust, and has confidence in Hilary or the Don?

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I didn't vote for Trump but the press conveniently isn't going after Hillary.

That's not a coincidence. Comcast and Time Warner are among HRC's top 10 donors. They're invested in her success, hoping to get a decent ROI once she's elected. That's the problem with big money in politics. The American people deserve better. They deserve to hear the facts. The media needs to go back to being the watchdogs and stop buying politicians. Hell, just this past Monday, MSNBC reporter, Tony Dokoupil, admitted that the mainstream media trade favors with politicians in the form of softball interviews in return for access. That shouldn't surprise anyone. But what it says is that the media cares more about playing patty-cake with politicians than they do actually providing the public with true facts.

I want to add: It's not just HRC though. The mainstream media gets in bed with a lot of top politicians, on both sides. It drives me nuts to hear Repubs bash Hillary as if their guy isn't bad, just as it pisses me off to hear people defend HRC while bashing Ted Cruz, etc. Stop paying attention to mainstream media and actually do your own independent research, people. It'll do you some good. (Not directed at you, Rizzo. Just a general statement.)

 

[Irish YJ]

That's not a coincidence. Comcast and Time Warner are among HRC's top 10 donors. They're invested in her success, hoping to get a decent ROI once she's elected. That's the problem with big money in politics. The American people deserve better. They deserve to hear the facts. The media needs to go back to being the watchdogs and stop buying politicians. Hell, just this past Monday, MSNBC reporter, Tony Dokoupil, admitted that the mainstream media trade favors with politicians in the form of softball interviews in return for access. That shouldn't surprise anyone. But what it says is that the media cares more about playing patty-cake with politicians than they do actually providing the public with true facts.

I want to add: It's not just HRC though. The mainstream media gets in bed with a lot of top politicians, on both sides. It drives me nuts to hear Repubs bash Hillary as if their guy isn't bad, just as it pisses me off to hear people defend HRC while bashing Ted Cruz, etc. Stop paying attention to mainstream media and actually do your own independent research, people. It'll do you some good. (Not directed at you, Rizzo. Just a general statement.)

BBG - I agree wholeheartedly but it's somewhat difficult for the normal person.
Question - would you call Trump anti media? Have you found incidents where he's horse trading with the media. My perception is that he just doesn't give a $#!+. Not that I like him, but I do like the anti-establishment components to his campaign.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

BBG - I agree wholeheartedly but it's somewhat difficult for the normal person.
Question - would you call Trump anti media? Have you found incidents where he's horse trading with the media. My perception is that he just doesn't give a $#!+. Not that I like him, but I do like the anti-establishment components to his campaign.

Trump is a media mastermind, without question. He knows exactly what buttons to push to get his ratings up. The guy has been involved in reality TV for years. Trump gets ratings and the networks drool over ratings. So whenever they have an opportunity to get him on, they do. But they know, don't piss off The Donald, or else he'll stop coming on the shows, ie ratings won't be as high. Look at how many softball questions he gets. Look at how quickly they back off when he gets irritated with a question or accusation. The whole David Dukes thing...they tried to call him out for it and he side stepped it like he always does and literally no one forced the issue. Let's dispel with this fiction that Donald Trump doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing.

 

[woolybug25]

Good Lord, it's like talking to an idiot.


That won't get us far.


ALways weak attacks by those who don't agree, never any real points....low information, poorly educated....blah ...blah...blah.

Comical... First of all, I don't have to defend my posts to you, as no one is calling me out for posting in bad faith. That's all you.

Secondly, when have any of your posts had real points, information or have come off as educated? There are posters from both sides of the fence debating respectfully every single day in this thread. You are the only one being divisive.



@Mods... have there been any talks about Loomis' behavior? I cant imagine that his daily trolling in this thread, insulting posters (like in the post above for instance) and posting in bad faith should at least merit a pm from you guys. I'm not sure if it would faze him or not, but at least it would make him aware of the standards of posting. Just my $.02

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Comical... First of all, I don't have to defend my posts to you, as no one is calling me out for posting in bad faith. That's all you.

Secondly, when have any of your posts had real points, information or have come off as educated? There are posters from both sides of the fence debating respectfully every single day in this thread. You are the only one being divisive.



@Mods... have there been any talks about Loomis' behavior? I cant imagine that his daily trolling in this thread, insulting posters (like in the post above for instance) and posting in bad faith should at least merit a pm from you guys. I'm not sure if it would faze him or not, but at least it would make him aware of the standards of posting. Just my $.02

I was under the impression that LAX gave him a temporary ban until football season. That what he said in an earlier post anyways...

Yeah you're done. I try to give people tons of rope in political threads, but you've used all of it and then some. Over the past few weeks we've gotten many complaints about you and been discussing it and it's just too much. Both here and in sports threads you're either outright trolling, or just such an antagonistic jerk that you can't have fruitful discussion with literally anyone. I'm not sure which is worse character flaw.

I'm giving you off until the start of football season, if you come back and actually want to talk ND football in a productive manner than you're welcome to stay. If you want to continue to display the emotional intelligence of a pre-teen then good riddance.

 

[Irish YJ]

Trump is a media mastermind, without question. He knows exactly what buttons to push to get his ratings up. The guy has been involved in reality TV for years. Trump gets ratings and the networks drool over ratings. So whenever they have an opportunity to get him on, they do. But they know, don't piss off The Donald, or else he'll stop coming on the shows, ie ratings won't be as high. Look at how many softball questions he gets. Look at how quickly they back off when he gets irritated with a question or accusation. The whole David Dukes thing...they tried to call him out for it and he side stepped it like he always does and literally no one forced the issue. Let's dispel with this fiction that Donald Trump doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing.

I think we all know that he knows what he's doing. But do you think it's horse trading, or I-don't-give-up-xxxx (he doesn't horse trades, but strong arms).

 

[woolybug25]

I was under the impression that LAX gave him a temporary ban until football season. That what he said in an earlier post anyways...

I missed that. Good on Lax. He put it better in his post than I could.

Back to civilized debate.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I think we all know that he knows what he's doing. But do you think it's horse trading, or I-don't-give-up-xxxx (he doesn't horse trades, but strong arms).

Strong arming on his part. Horse trading on the media's part. That's my opinion anyways.

 

[Irish YJ]

Strong arming on his part. Horse trading on the media's part. That's my opinion anyways.

Thanks BBG. Thinking that will be his tact in the political (US) and international arena as well.

 

[NDinL.A.]

Respectfully, who are you voting for LA?

I was actually going to vote for Rubio in the primaries, but he lost. Now it will be Kasich, which will basically be a lost vote, but I believe in him (despite what some of my Ohio acquaintances think of him) more than Cruz and WAY more than Trump, and I truly think he is the only one that can beat Hillary.

When it comes to the general, I'm not sure what I'm going to do. Definitely will not vote for Trump, as I think he will be the biggest disaster in American history. And many of his followers make me sick. Can you believe that a month ago I had some trashy lady tell me that, because I didn't support Trump, that I must be an illegal alien? Seriously, to my face. Because my skin is brown and I have a Spanish last name and I am anti-Trump, she straight up told me to my face that I must be here illegally. In 2016!!! Keep in mind that she was clearly uneducated - even if she went to college she was dumb as a rock - and she was blaming everyone else for her problems, and my parents and I have done more with our opportunities here (my parents were born in Spain and the Dominican Republic, and both have their doctorates from US universities) in a month than she has her whole life. But this is the type of crap that I'm talking about with Trump and his sheep.

So it will either be abstain, go third party (and waste my vote), or vote for Hillary. Hillary is much more of a centralist than many Republicans give her credit for, so I don't know - if it keeps Trump out office people like myself might have to do something we normally wouldn't do. I'm keeping my options open, accept I know I won't vote for Trump.

 

[woolybug25]

Thanks BBG. Thinking that will be his tact in the political (US) and international arena as well.

I do too. No question.

Which is a good point of debate. I'm in the camp that you can't strong arm the rest of the world. Bush tried that and it failed miserably. Now Obama swung the pendulum the total opposite direction, which is probably not going to work great either. I'm not the big Reaganite many of us are on this site, but I did like his approach to foreign affairs. There has to be diplomacy with strength. I'm not sure how Trump would act when Ali Khamenei calls him the "white devil" or Kim Jong-un says something crazy about him. Trump can say whatever he wants to in those situations, but they will call his bluff and try to force him into action. Which is scary, as he might just act. Which is as we all know... what they have wanted all along.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I was actually going to vote for Rubio in the primaries, but he lost. Now it will be Kasich, which will basically be a lost vote, but I believe in him (despite what some of my Ohio acquaintances think of him) more than Cruz and WAY more than Trump, and I truly think he is the only one that can beat Hillary.

When it comes to the general, I'm not sure what I'm going to do. Definitely will not vote for Trump, as I think he will be the biggest disaster in American history. And many of his followers make me sick. Can you believe that a month ago I had some trashy lady tell me that, because I didn't support Trump, that I must be an illegal alien? Seriously, to my face. Because my skin is brown and I have a Spanish last name and I am anti-Trump, she straight up told me to my face that I must be here illegally. In 2016!!! Keep in mind that she was clearly uneducated - even if she went to college she was dumb as a rock - and she was blaming everyone else for her problems, and my parents and I have done more with our opportunities here (my parents were born in Spain and the Dominican Republic, and both have their doctorates from US universities) in a month than she has her whole life. But this is the type of crap that I'm talking about with Trump and his sheep.

So it will either be abstain, go third party (and waste my vote), or vote for Hillary. Hillary is much more of a centralist than many Republicans give her credit for, so I don't know - if it keeps Trump out office people like myself might have to do something we normally wouldn't do. I'm keeping my options open, accept I know I won't vote for Trump.

Just out of curiosity because I like to learn about other's perspectives, but what policies of Kasich's do Conservatives specifically agree with? I found Kasich to be the most authentic of the crop of GOP candidates. But his attacks on Planned Parenthood turned me off. I also support unions even though I know there's arguments against current unions in today's economic landscape; and didn't Kasich go after the unions in Ohio? I, admittedly, need to do some more research on him.

I agree on HRC - I think she falls somewhere between Kasich and Obama. Too many people don't realize that what she says is totally different than what she does. She's basically Center-Right on some issues and Center-Left on others. Depends on which crowd she's pandering to.

 

[NDohio]

I do too. No question.

Which is a good point of debate. I'm in the camp that you can't strong arm the rest of the world. Bush tried that and it failed miserably. Now Obama swung the pendulum the total opposite direction, which is probably not going to work great either. I'm not the big Reaganite many of us are on this site, but I did like his approach to foreign affairs. There has to be diplomacy with strength. I'm not sure how Trump would act when Ali Khamenei calls him the "white devil" or Kim Jong-un says something crazy about him. Trump can say whatever he wants to in those situations, but they will call his bluff and try to force him into action. Which is scary, as he might just act. Which is as we all know... what they have wanted all along.

This paragraph is scary('cause I believe it is accurate). It boggles my mind that there are so many people in this country that are Trump supporters and believe that this is the way foreign affairs should be handled.

 

[NDohio]

Just out of curiosity because I like to learn about other's perspectives, but what policies of Kasich's do Conservatives specifically agree with? I found Kasich to be the most authentic of the crop of GOP candidates. But his attacks on Planned Parenthood turned me off. I also support unions even though I know there's arguments against current unions in today's economic landscape; and didn't Kasich go after the unions in Ohio? I, admittedly, need to do some more research on him.

I agree on HRC - I think she falls somewhere between Kasich and Obama. Too many people don't realize that what she says is totally different than what she does. She's basically Center-Right on some issues and Center-Left on others. Depends on which crowd she's pandering to.

Yes - when you have a minute, look up Ohio Issue 2.

 

[woolybug25]

Yes - when you have a minute, look up Ohio Issue 2.

Wasn't that the monopoly they put in place for dispensaries? Ohio did bumble-fuq their marijuana reform pretty badly. But I suppose they at least put something on the ballot. Albeit a crooked, self-serving, legal cartel building option. ha

 

[wizards8507]

Just out of curiosity because I like to learn about other's perspectives, but what policies of Kasich's do Conservatives specifically agree with? I found Kasich to be the most authentic of the crop of GOP candidates. But his attacks on Planned Parenthood turned me off. I also support unions even though I know there's arguments against current unions in today's economic landscape; and didn't Kasich go after the unions in Ohio? I, admittedly, need to do some more research on him.

The biggest problem with Kasich is his expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare. People who don't pay attention to the details don't see why this is such a big problem, but they will in a year or two. Obamacare funded several short-term subsidies for states to expand Medicaid for the people who made too much money for existing Medicaid programs but not enough money to buy their own insurance as well as subsidies to insurance companies who are paying out more than they're taking in. So Kasich is "balancing the budget" in Ohio on the backs of the federal Medicaid subsidy. Well that subsidy is set to expire and Ohio taxpayers are going to be on the hook for the bill. Kasich's clock is ticking.

I agree on HRC - I think she falls somewhere between Kasich and Obama. Too many people don't realize that what she says is totally different than what she does. She's basically Center-Right on some issues and Center-Left on others. Depends on which crowd she's pandering to.

Secular progressive on social issues, center-left on economic issues, neoconservative foreign policy.

This paragraph is scary('cause I believe it is accurate). It boggles my mind that there are so many people in this country that are Trump supporters and believe that this is the way foreign affairs should be handled.

Trump supporters couldn't point out Iran on a map or tell you why we support Israel. I don't think they're out there looking at Trump saying "yeah, this sounds good and falls in line with my principles." They're saying "I don't give a f**k and don't really have any principles, but I know I don't like the people in charge and Trump is going to burn this mother down."