Trump Released Graham's Cell Number

[ClydeR]

Unfortunately, CNN beeped out the number in the video -- after they tried calling it and got Graham's voice mail. I guess they think only the media should be able to talk to politicians.


(CNN)Speaking in front of hundreds at a rally in South Carolina on Tuesday, Donald Trump read a number he said people could use to reach South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham's private cell phone.

Trump and Graham have engaged in an ongoing feud in the past few days as they battle for the Republican presidential nomination. In Trump's speech Tuesday, he called Graham an "idiot," after Graham called him a "jackass," in an interview Monday with CNN's Kate Bolduan.

Trump gave out the number and urged attendees to call it.

"Give it a shot," Trump said, urging people to call the state's senior senator.

When CNN called the number, it went directly to voicemail and the recorded message said it was the phone number for Graham. The mailbox was full.

More... (http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-lindsey-graham-cell-phone/)

[elcidcannon]

he's lost some points in my book for his last couple moves: the john mccain comment and now this.

[Astray]

Oh fuck. BAIL TRUMP! BAIL!

[Shaps]

Trump was doing well.. then he just got stupid.. Shame, because I thought he might have done okay by us all.. but now.. he doesn't have the tempermant to be President IMO.

But hell.. who knows.. cause Hillary is a lying shitbag too.. so pretty much we're all fucked.

[Tgo01]

Who else you guys going to vote for, Hilary?

Get real. Vote Republican!

[Archigeek]

Go Bernie!

[elcidcannon]

Maybe a Christie/Trump ticket....but trump would never accept a vice position

[Archigeek]

Is there anyone who doesn't really know that Trump is a jackass who's going to fall on his own verbal sword the moment he has to actually do anything other than spew crap? He's a joke, and he's just out there to keep his face in the media, on the assumption that even bad publicity is better than no publicity. In 4 months he'll be nothing but a late night punchline. Anyone who actually thinks he'd be a good president should go ahead and get in line for a lobotomy now. You'll be better for it.

[Taernath]

but now.. he doesn't have the tempermant to be President IMO.

That should have been apparent for years now.

[subzero]

the john mccain comment

Jon Stewart did a pretty good number on him for that one.

He goes about it the wrong way, but ultimately, I think he says a lot of things many people want to say and won't.

[Nephelem]

Pretty sure he is just a lock for his friends the Clinton's. He will shit up the republican primaries with his shenanigans then run as an independent when hes gets tossed/loses and pull the 3 or 4 percent needed to ensure a Hillary win.

[elcidcannon]

I think he says a lot of things many people want to say and won't.

Yeah, definitely....and I can see where he was going regarding McCain, and he's right: McCain isn't a war hero because he got captured, he's a war hero because he kept the faith and upheld the Code of Conduct during 5 years of captivity.

[Back]

Like anyone even really considered Trump seriously? Really?

[Atlanteax]

Trump was doing well.. then he just got stupid.. Shame, because I thought he might have done okay by us all.. but now.. he doesn't have the temperament to be President IMO.

This. He was a real longshot, but it is unfortunately evident that his candidacy is purely a publicity stunt.

[elcidcannon]

Like anyone even really considered Trump seriously? Really?

I think it's really refreshing to see someone who bucks some of the "politically correct" speak, calls things out as he sees them and sticks to his guns through the backlash. That takes a lot of cojones.

I believe if he had a bit more tact, just enough to take the edge off, he could really make a run. Unfortunately, it's that edge that's given him a lot of attention through the years and he's unlikely to lose it.

[~Rocktar~]

Pretty sure he is just a lock for his friends the Clinton's. He will shit up the republican primaries with his shenanigans then run as an independent when hes gets tossed/loses and pull the 3 or 4 percent needed to ensure a Hillary win.

Kinda like this guy did for the Clintons in the past:


https://youtu.be/eJmaaX_7uhg

Scary thing is, he was very accurate in his predictions about the economy, jobs, NAFTA and so on.

[Methais]

Like anyone even really considered Trump seriously? Really?

You're voting for Hillary.

Let that sink in for a moment.

[Kembal]

I don't think Trump's going to flame out that quickly. The support he's getting are exactly the people that are pissed off the rest of the Republican Party doesn't act like he does, and those people weren't fans of McCain or Graham to begin with. My read is that it's a fairly sizable number. With 16 (17?) candidates in, that's enough to do well in the Iowa caucuses. It's not like he lacks for funding...the question is campaign organization.

[Parkbandit]

When he does things like this, he comes across as a petulant little child who only wants to "get back" at the mean people who said bad words about him.

Grow the fuck up.

Once intelligent conservatives see his actual record and stances from the past 30 years, they will quickly throw him on the trash heap where he belongs.

The big winner in his voter enthusiasm will probably be either Cruz or Paul.

[Parkbandit]

I don't think Trump's going to flame out that quickly. The support he's getting are exactly the people that are pissed off the rest of the Republican Party doesn't act like he does, and those people weren't fans of McCain or Graham to begin with. My read is that it's a fairly sizable number. With 16 (17?) candidates in, that's enough to do well in the Iowa caucuses. It's not like he lacks for funding...the question is campaign organization.

He has probably the best name recognition in the field and yea, I think you are right about his attraction.

He's a self promoting blowhard though. He will crash and burn soon. I just hope he makes it to the first debate.

I'm disappointed that Jindall and Fiorina probably won't make the debate, but Huckabee and Trump will.

I'm glad Christie might make the cut and that Santorum, Kasich and Graham probably won't.

[Candor]

Is there anyone who doesn't really know that Trump is a jackass who's going to fall on his own verbal sword the moment he has to actually do anything other than spew crap? He's a joke, and he's just out there to keep his face in the media, on the assumption that even bad publicity is better than no publicity. In 4 months he'll be nothing but a late night punchline. Anyone who actually thinks he'd be a good president should go ahead and get in line for a lobotomy now. You'll be better for it.

An excellent summary of the issue. My only disagreement is that I don't think it's going to take 4 months for Trump to be nothing but a late night punchline - I would estimate 2 months or so.

[Archigeek]

It is a curious state that, in an open election with no incumbent, the Republican field is filled to the gills with a wide range of candidates, while the Democratic field is small. I think it's a mistake for Democrats to treat Hillary like an incumbent, which seems to be the cause of the small field. All you have to do is see the crowds that Bernie Sanders draws to see that anything is possible. There are a lot of people in the Democratic party that either don't like Clinton, or like much of the US, aren't particularly interested in political dynasties. I would love it if we had two candidates in the final election who were not anointed by the party elite. IE: two people other than Jeb or Hillary.

[Methais]

What I really wanna know is why Graham is even running, as if he would have a shot of winning anything.

Same with Huckabee, but he seems to run every election now so nobody even notices anymore.

[Taernath]

My sister just told me she's going to work for Trump's campaign.

http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt7bie7lTL1r4ghkoo1_250.gif

[Ker_Thwap]

Is there anyone who doesn't really know that Trump is a jackass who's going to fall on his own verbal sword the moment he has to actually do anything other than spew crap? He's a joke, and he's just out there to keep his face in the media, on the assumption that even bad publicity is better than no publicity. In 4 months he'll be nothing but a late night punchline. Anyone who actually thinks he'd be a good president should go ahead and get in line for a lobotomy now. You'll be better for it.

I don't know anyone whatsoever who thinks otherwise. Anyone! I can only assume that it's a false flag operation by devious Democrats in an effort to put an easily defeated clown on the Republican ballot.

[Methais]

Trump to Anderson Cooper During Interview: "The People Don't Trust You And The Media" (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/07/22/trump_to_anderson_cooper_during_interview_the_peop le_dont_trust_you_and_the_media.html)

Regardless of how you feel about Trump, he still deserves props for calling shit like this out when everyone else is too chicken shit to say anything.

Except for Back, he believes everything the media tells him.

[Parkbandit]

Trump to Anderson Cooper During Interview: "The People Don't Trust You And The Media" (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/07/22/trump_to_anderson_cooper_during_interview_the_peop le_dont_trust_you_and_the_media.html)

Regardless of how you feel about Trump, he still deserves props for calling shit like this out when everyone else is too chicken shit to say anything.

Except for Back, he believes everything the media tells him.

Everyone else running is a politician who honestly believes that if they placate to the media, then they will write positive stories about them and help them win.

That only works with Democrats though...

[Archigeek]

"Oh no, oh no, the liberal media!"

I got news for you guys, "the media" is not one entity and its political stripes are varied and have always been there at one level or another. Fox News is part of "the media" just like CNN is. The lack of trust of "the media" is just as much a construct of "the media" as anything else... just different media doing the constructing.

[elcidcannon]

"Oh no, oh no, the liberal media!"

I got news for you guys, "the media" is not one entity and its political stripes are varied and have always been there at one level or another. Fox News is part of "the media" just like CNN is. The lack of trust of "the media" is just as much a construct of "the media" as anything else... just different media doing the constructing.

To be fair....Trump didn't address one side or the other....just "the media."

Unless you were responding to PB for his "only works for Democrats" quip......then carry on.

[Parkbandit]

"Oh no, oh no, the liberal media!"

I got news for you guys, "the media" is not one entity and its political stripes are varied and have always been there at one level or another. Fox News is part of "the media" just like CNN is. The lack of trust of "the media" is just as much a construct of "the media" as anything else... just different media doing the constructing.

Are you really denying that most media in this country has a liberal slant to it?

Because that would be entertaining.

Please say that's what you're saying.

[Archigeek]

Are you really denying that most media in this country has a liberal slant to it?

Because that would be entertaining.

Please say that's what you're saying.

A significant part of "the media" has a liberal slant. I don't think there's any doubt about that, but there's no great entity known as "the liberal media". Media runs the gamut of biases, from liberal to conservative. There's an irony that the idea of media bias is mostly preached by guess who: the media! In an effort to get your eyes glued to their media instead of someone else's, they tell you that other media can't be trusted. Who's biased now?

My personal experience has been that media personalities on average lean liberal, but ownership on average leans conservative. Print media is more easily directed towards ownership's bias than TV is, where personality becomes a bigger selling point.

[Parkbandit]

A significant part of "the media" has a liberal slant. I don't think there's any doubt about that, but there's no great entity known as "the liberal media". Media runs the gamut of biases, from liberal to conservative. There's an irony that the idea of media bias is mostly preached by guess who: the media! In an effort to get your eyes glued to their media instead of someone else's, they tell you that other media can't be trusted. Who's biased now?

My personal experience has been that media personalities on average lean liberal, but ownership on average leans conservative. Print media is more easily directed towards ownership's bias than TV is, where personality becomes a bigger selling point.

So.. if most of the media leans liberal, which party do you think that benefits the most?

Which party does that benefit the least?

[ClydeR]

If only there was a way to change your phone number without destroying your phone..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXSFRMJhlgY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXSFRMJhlgY

[Archigeek]

So.. if most of the media leans liberal, which party do you think that benefits the most?

Which party does that benefit the least?

If ownership leans conservative, but on air personalities lean liberal, which party do you think that benefits the most?

[Back]

You're voting for Hillary.

Let that sink in for a moment.

You're wrong. Let that sink in for a moment.

[Parkbandit]

If ownership leans conservative, but on air personalities lean liberal, which party do you think that benefits the most?

Give me an example of this scenario.

[Methais]

There's an irony that the idea of media bias is mostly preached by guess who: the media!

There's also that thing where certain media outlets don't cover most stories that would make the liberal agenda look bad, and will sensationalize the fuck out of anything that either makes it look good or makes anything conservative look bad, regardless of any facts involved.


You're wrong. Let that sink in for a moment.

If she makes it out of the primaries, I'm right.

http://funnyand.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Sink-In.jpg

[Archigeek]

There's also that thing where certain media outlets don't cover most stories that would make the liberal agenda look bad, and will sensationalize the fuck out of anything that either makes it look good or makes anything conservative look bad, regardless of any facts involved.

There's also that thing where certain media outlets don't cover most stories that would make the conservative agenda look bad, and will sensationalize the fuck out of anything that either makes it look good or makes anything liberal look bad, regardless of any facts involved.

[Methais]

There's also that thing where certain media outlets don't cover most stories that would make the conservative agenda look bad, and will sensationalize the fuck out of anything that either makes it look good or makes anything liberal look bad, regardless of any facts involved.

Maybe so but there's only 1 of them compared to 438729047320 on the left. And the 438729047320 tend to be much worse about it.

[Ashliana]

There's also that thing where certain media outlets don't cover most stories that would make the liberal agenda look bad, and will sensationalize the fuck out of anything that either makes it look good or makes anything conservative look bad, regardless of any facts involved.


While that is true at face value, the key is in the difference between the two. Liberal-leaning outlets report on stories that have a basis in reality. They might be politically useful to the left, but in as far as the ethical implications are concerned -- the stories are true (usually based on some totally retarded thing a conservative said) and it's something their viewer/readership is interested in. Or if it's bad, they usually cover it in some way without really addressing the political implications. Is that bias? Well, it depends on if you want straight reporting or opinion coverage.

Conservative-leaning outlets repeatedly showcase stories that have either no basis in reality, or an extremely shoddy basis in reality -- portraying crackpot minority voices as if they were on equal standing with everybody else. This is seen repeatedly, from the birtherism that Fox trumpeted directly or indirectly for years, the climate change naysayers with almost no scientific support (or with faux research conducted by petrochemical proxies), to the endless narrative-over-facts reporting on Benghazi (simultaneously giving basically no press attention to Republican congressional reports that they found nothing)--all made worse by the fact that the line between reporting and opinion on right-leaning outlets has become TOTALLY obscured in recent years.

The right's distaste for facts and veneration of the super-rich is exactly why Trump is leading the polls. And even the "serious" candidate Bush is making insanely stupid statements like "Uhh, Americans just don't put enough hours in* at work!" *Claims not based on hours Americans actually work. How, as a conservative, do you watch the primary season going on with anything but ridiculous embarrassment?


The big winner in his voter enthusiasm will probably be either Cruz or Paul.

Cruz is every bit as unserious as Trump. In many ways, he's worse. Cruz denies reality when it's right in front of him, and he does it with a shit-eating grin. Paul is a total sell-out with none of the integrity his father has (and had to discard that integrity in order to have a chance in Republican politics), but he's still never going to get the support of the "defense" hawk conservatives.

The RNC knows exactly what the problem is--their own candidates. That's why they're limiting the debates in both scope and number. They're pulling the political equivalent of when a movie studio knows a movie is hot garbage, so they skip the critic screenings and go right to release. The conservative clown cavalcade marches on.

[Warriorbird]

For all our high minded ideals the primary modern basis of all networks (no matter their theoretical bias) is making money.

[Archigeek]

Maybe so but there's only 1 of them compared to 438729047320 on the left. And the 438729047320 tend to be much worse about it.

You must only watch TV or something. There are a lot of biased sources on both sides. Also, the idea that the <insert # here> are worse about it than the 1 (it's ok to say Fox News, they're not Voldemort) clearly shows how much you've been brain washed by the 1. Like I said before: Fox complains about "the liberal media" like it's a thing, until enough people believe it, all the while skewing reality in their own reporting. There is no more biased a source for news than Fox News.

[Methais]

You must only watch TV or something.

I pretty much never watch TV unless you count Netflix/Hulu/torrents.


There are a lot of biased sources on both sides. Also, the idea that the <insert # here> are worse about it than the 1 (it's ok to say Fox News, they're not Voldemort) clearly shows how much you've been brain washed by the 1.

Well I mean manslaughter isn't as bad as first degree murder even though the other person is still dead. I also never claimed that Fox or whoever else isn't biased.


Like I said before: Fox complains about "the liberal media" like it's a thing, until enough people believe it, all the while skewing reality in their own reporting.

Like it's a thing? So the liberal media isn't biased towards a liberal agenda now?

I think you're splitting hairs here. Other than talk radio, most of the MSM is slanted left.


There is no more biased a source for news than Fox News.

Well...I disagree.

[Archigeek]

I pretty much never watch TV unless you count Netflix/Hulu/torrents.

Then how do you know they're biased?


Like it's a thing? So the liberal media isn't biased towards a liberal agenda now?

All media is biased. The "liberal media" is not some entity like the Umbrella Corp. Relax.


Well...I disagree.

That's because you're biased too.

[Methais]

Then how do you know they're biased?

Because I used to keep up with all that shit a lot more.


All media is biased. The "liberal media" is not some entity like the Umbrella Corp. Relax.

I think you're focusing way too much on the semantics of this.


That's because you're biased too.

Let me guess. You're not?

[Archigeek]

Let me guess. You're not?

Maybe we're all weak, and prone to influence by others. I know I'm biased, but I'm trying real hard to be neutral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMN5uQhF-Ro

[Parkbandit]

Maybe we're all weak, and prone to influence by others. I know I'm biased, but I'm trying real hard to be neutral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMN5uQhF-Ro

You should try harder.

Like 10,324x harder.

[Atlanteax]

People are overlooking one simple fact...

Despite the chaos of Trump's candidacy, he would still be a better president than Obama has been.

[Methais]

People are overlooking one simple fact...

Despite the chaos of Trump's candidacy, he would still be a better president than Obama has been.

http://i.imgur.com/WO2s0o4.gif