Palin Defends Trump: We Need a ‘Tough’ POTUS, Not a Master of Trivial Pursuit

mediaite.com ^ | Josh Feldman

[Lazamataz]

Really? It’s ok for someone who wants to be President to confuse Kurds and Quds because the names sound alike?

Absolutely. In a written form, GOPe, it would be one thing. But this is a verbal form, and the names are similar in pronunciation. Kurds exist in Iran, so it would be easy to confuse. Certainly an Establishment fellow like yourself could concede that.

PS: All you guys do, when you attack Trump, is boost his poll numbers. Keep doin' what you do! LOL!

[CPT Clay]

oooo did she really say that? I love it!

[CPT Clay]

I hope a team is forming.

Trump, Cruz, Carson, Palin ...?
vs.

Jeb, Kasich, Rubio and supposedly Fiorina?

[McGruff]

Palin said, “I’d rather have a president who is tough and puts America first than can win a game of Trivial Pursuit.”

How can you not love this woman. The perfect answer to these Gotcha questions.

[DoughtyOne]

There was nothing sophomoric and meaningless about that line of questioning.

Factually incorrect.

Hewitt mentioned Quds and General Sulemani, asked Trump if he knew who they were, Trump said yes, and then Hewitt continued on with his question--a substantive and timely question about the effect of the Iran deal on Suleimani and Quds.

That's becasue Trump heard Kurds, regardless of what Hewitt said.  It's a telephone call.  Has anyone misheard a word in a phone call conversation before?  Well yes... we all have.  

Then here we go off an the al Quds Sulemani issue again.  LINK

Folks can use that link to see how often al Quds is mentioned compared to other terrorist groups in the Middle East.  Al Quds shows up 0.83% out of the total mentions.

They don't even rank 1% of the total mentions, but Trump is supposed to know who the group is, the leader's name, and if he will change his was after the agreement is finalized.

Sure, Hewitt doesn't ask Trump to name the group or the leader, but what he does do is ask how things are going to change with a group that is hardly ever talked about in public.

This is one of the most asinine examples of interview logic I've ever seen.

Trump, unprompted, then interjected with a comment about how the Kurds have been treated (revealing Trump's apparent confusion between the Quds Forces and the Kurds, and his apparent ignorance of General Sulemani).

Here you go again.  Did he confuse the two names, or did him simply hear Kurds?  Kuds/Kurds.  It's a phone call.  Naturally you jump to the worst conclusion you can and run with it.  That is moronic.

Here's a terrorist group that hardly anyone has heard of, and you're dumping on Trump for not knowing how their policies will change.

It's like asking a baseball fan who pitches game 2 of the 1957 World Series, and them trashing them if they don't know the pitcher's name or the number of pitches he tossed.

This is very obscure stuff.

He wasn't being quizzed, there was no "gotcha" question.

Agreed. So Soleimani runs the Quds Forces. Do you expect his behavior is going to change as a result of this deal with Iran?

Hardly anyone has heard of al Quds, and even fewer have heard of Soleimani.  But of course Trump should know right now what the Quds policies have been and how they are expected to change post agreement.

That's not a gotcha question?  LOL

Hewitt wasn't asking if he knew who Suleimani was for the sake of asking -- it was a leadup to a line of questioning about Suleimani and the impact of the terrible Iran deal.

I just did a Google search for Sulemani's name and found 403,000 items.  That compares to 210,000,000 items for ISIS.

So who does Hewitt question Trump on?  Sulemani...

Bogus issue.  Bogus charges.  Bogus tactics.  

He showed his ignorance on his own, without prompting.

No, actually Hewitt and you are the only one who have showed there ignorance.

Trump has no need to know of this group or their leader at this time.

[DoughtyOne]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3333656/posts?page=126#126

[DoughtyOne]

That was my thought as well.

That’s why I corrected it later. I notified the people I had posted it to as well.

I just saw your note regarding the problem.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3333656/posts?page=108#108

[DoughtyOne]

It must really gripe you that nobody is buying what you’re selling here.

I post figures that show this item doesn’t get even 1% of the internet traffic on well known terrorist groups, and you still plug away trying to look relevant.

Fail.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Crikes even Maura Liason semi defended Trump this morning on one the Sunday shows. She said Trump did keep saying “did you say Kurds?” multiple times. When Maura Liason starts defending Trump HH is in big trouble. LOL! Even HH was pretty tame about the whole thing when he was talking about it.

[trisham]

Good for Sarah!

[Nacho Bidnith]

Here’s what the GOPe is afraid of;

“If the hierarchy within the republican party loses an election to Democrats it’s only a lost election; they are still there, and still comfortable even in the minority.

However, if the hierarchy within the republican party loses an election to Conservatives, they are out of a job.”

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/07/30/nothing-unites-special-interests-like-a-common-enemy/

This is why I’m supporting Donald Trump. I don’t care if he’s not a conservative in the traditional mold. He’s telling us that he sees what illegal immigration is doing to this country and what he’ll do about it. He’s the only one able at this point to stand up to the “money men” because he doesn’t NEED their money and support.

Given the fact that a Uniparty has been established where each side is as bad as the other, our only chance to stop the destruction of the Republic is by him exposing and disabling the political machine being used against us.

I don’t know the origin, but I’ve always heard that in American politics, we’ve had the soapbox, the ballot box, and the ammunition box to address our grievances. How many more elections followed by broken promises can we survive before it becomes necessary to use box #3?

And while I’m at it, weren’t we told that the goal of the civil rights movement was to become a color blind society, where everyone would be treated equally and people would be judged by their character rather than skin color? Lately, I’m feeling pretty naive for ever believing that load of crap. If nothing else, the last 7 years have been a glaring example that what color or ethnicity you are determines who has your back. As an old white man I’m feeling a lot more like a target for the aggrieved minorities instead of the white privilege I’m supposedly enjoying. And BTW, if you think it’s hard being white now, just wait until we’re in the minority. I’m old enough that I probably won’t be here to see that, but for those of you that will, it ought to be something you start thinking about.

It seems that everyone other than white people can vote as a bloc and nary a word is ever said about it? We have the “black vote” and “latino vote”, so where’s the “white vote”? Oh, that would be racist! So far, Donald Trump and possibly Ted Cruz are the only ones that haven’t been caught pandering to the various “racial interest” voting groups like Ben Carson did just last week while talking to the elected “Hispanic” officials group promising that he heard their message.

I know I never considered voting or not voting for someone because of skin color before, but I’d certainly be hesitant to do so at this point in time, no matter who it is because of how easy it still is to deflect criticism by using the race card. Does anyone really believe that a white man wouldn’t have been impeached and thrown out of office for ruling as 0b0la has?

Donald Trump might not live up to his campaign promises, but at the very least, he’s not impeachment proof because of the color of his skin and he’s smart enough to know his business empire will be destroyed if he doesn’t keep his promises. I think that certainly qualifies as “having skin in the game.”

[DoughtyOne]

Now TAHT worries me!

LOL

That is interesting to note though.

Thanks for the mention.

[Nacho Bidnith]

“Pray tell me what any candidate can do about this SC ruling?”

“I am disappointed in how Trump is handling the Kim Davis things too. Weak very weak and this is an important issue. But nothing tops immigration this election cycle.”

If you can enlighten us on how Trump can logically damn this decision without destroying his campaign platform of deporting illegal aliens shielded in sanctuary cities, please do.

[VideoDoctor]

I'd say of the nominees TRUMP, CRUZ, and CARSON along with people like Sarah Palin and Mark Levin give middle class Americans a very good chance of tipping over the current political $hithouse.

Example: If Trump is elected I believe he KNOWS who he can call on and COUNT ON to help kill off the cockroaches once he's underway restoring America's GREATNESS..

[bramps]

Get your own facts straight. Where did I say he stood with anybody?

He was just limp wristed in his response to an issue that has previously gotten entire cities vaporized.

Watch and learn my FRiend. If he doesn’t show a backbone against the homosexual agenda, he will drop quickly in the polls.

[jpsb]

Read the first amendment. The first thing our founding father protected was speech and religious liberty. I’ve looked but I can’t find anything protecting illegal aliens in our constitution. If you have please provide a link.

[Labyrinthos]

Einstein said something like, “Why clutter my mind with things I can look up.”

[spintreebob]

Internet mentions are what is important; not what is actually happening in reality?

A presidential candidate should form knowledge and opinions based on internet mentions rather than reality?

The Kardashian with the most internet mentions should be Sec of State in a Trump administration?

[ConservativeMind]

Nicely stated.