Donald Trump Running for President

[WWGD]

No. Never posted that. I posted, if you read what I wrote, as an example why convicted criminals, drug dealers and rapists should be excluded. Open borders enable criminals to leave their home country and start their mischief anew. In fact it encourages them to do so.

"negative migration" is irrelevant to the point Trump is making. If good hard working, tax paying people leave and a smaller number of criminals continue to enter our country, that can't be good. Well it's good for Mexico, maybe.
Why should we admit even a 'small percentage' of convicted drug dealers, cartel members, gang members, rapists, criminals? I advocate we exclude all such ne'er-do-wells.

But there is _no evidence whatsoever_ that criminals , rapists , etc. are coming in in any significant amount. Of course, no one wants them, but no system can filter them all out. It is the price you pay for letting _any_ group in; no system is perfect at filtering undesirables. And, again, both sides benefit from the back-and-forth flow.

 

[WWGD]

Isn't the point of the border not to let any criminals in, even if most of the people are not criminals? Like at the airport, most people won't bring bombs on board, but the point is not to let any bombs on board at all, even if it would happen rarely.

Surely it would be better not to let criminals cross borders as they wish? Surely you would agree to a system that would let the same number of good people through, but would stop the criminals?

You say the net flux is negative. But why should new criminals be let in? It would be even better to keep all criminals out. You don't have to stop Mexican citizens from going back to Mexico. You just check that the new people who come aren't criminals and you let more people in around the world, not just Mexico. That sounds reasonable to me. Letting in new criminals because criminals are also leaving doesn't make sense.

To the point that it is easier for them if they can come and go as they wish, rules and regulations are for a reason. If you are running a business and have workers and you haven't registered anywhere, there is no control over whether you pay taxes, how you conduct your business, do you follow laws and standards etc. Laws have to be applied fairly, I am sure local workers and businesses would also want all sorts of regulations not to apply to them. You can make temporary and seasonal working visas easier to get, to lessen regulations to the level that you think is acceptable. Didn't know you needed a lawyer to work in the USA, if that's true then I agree the regulations are too much.

My point is that the next flux is negative, more criminals are leaving than entering. There is really no way of preventing (supposed) criminals ( the still _alleged_ criminals Trump mentioned) from coming in, even with border controls. You _cannot_ in the real world keep all criminals out. And not all regulations have a good reason for being; effective regulation is more of an art than a science.

Still, before going on with this discussion, we should establish the accuracy of Trump's claims.
If there is no wave of rapists, criminals and drug dealers coming in, the whole discussion is pointless: you _cannot_ , with _any_ system , prevent all criminals from coming in. If there are relatively few
coming in, this is the best you can do, since you cannot prevent all criminals from coming in, no matter what you do.

 

[chingel]

I understand that more criminals might be leaving, you don't have to stop them from leaving. I am suggesting not letting new criminals in, which surely nobody wants.

Also I don't think the question is whether the Mexican illegal's crime rate is higher or not. The thing is no criminals should get in. From other countries, if you are a convicted criminal you do not get a visa and they check your documents at the airport, you just do not get in. But the criminals from Mexico do get in if they want to. I think that is the difference and why they talk about Mexican crime waves. To say it again, it is not that Mexicans are inherently more rapist, it is that from other countries rapists are not let in, but from Mexico they just come if they want to and that is what people get mad about.

This is what I am saying, the border should be strong enough to not let in criminals. Other questions about how much workers are needed etc are a separate issue, there are plenty of workers around the world who would come if you give them the green light and you can check their background.

I don't think it is currently strong enough if millions of illegals have got through and Kate's killer got in 6 times. Investing more in border control a lot of criminals can be kept out I think.

 

[Finny]

My point is that the next flux is negative, more criminals are leaving than entering.

Your source??
Why would criminals leave?

But there is _no evidence whatsoever_ that criminals , rapists , etc. are coming in in any significant amount.

Your source??

Even the federal government, who in all probability catches only a small percentage of illegal alien convicted criminals that are actually in the US, reports this:

In FY 2014:

• ICE conducted 315,943 removals.
• ICE conducted 102,224 removals of individuals apprehended in the interior of the United States.
  • 86,923 (85 percent) of all interior removals involved individuals previously convicted of a crime.
• ICE conducted 213,719 removals of individuals apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. http://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics#ft4
• 56 percent of all ICE removals, or 177,960, involved individuals who were previously convicted of a crime.

http://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics

There is really no way of preventing (supposed) criminals ... from coming in, even with border controls. You _cannot_ in the real world keep all criminals out.

By THAT faulty logic, we should not have neighborhood police either: In the 'real world' we can not stop all criminals, even with a criminal justice system. So let's create 'police free zones'. Let's give up our society.
But please, don't start that social justice experiment in my neighborhood.

If there is no wave of rapists, criminals and drug dealers coming in, the whole discussion is pointless...

I think not. We will have to disagree on that one.
//////////////////////
“Not all illegal aliens are crossing into the United States to find work. Law enforcement officials indicate that there are individuals coming across the border who are forced to leave their home countries because of criminal activities. These dangerous criminals are fleeing the law in other countries and seeking refuge in the United States.”

“A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border,” Majority Staff of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Investigations (October 2006),

///////////////////////
The Obama administration estimates roughly 60,000 unaccompanied children will come across the border to the US in 2014... In 2014 tens of thousands of women and children, many children unaccompanied by their parents, came to the United States from Central America. Most simply crossed the Rio Grande and turned themselves into to the Border Patrol, relying on the belief, partly well founded,[23] that United States law made special provision for illegal immigrants who were children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illeg...ed_States#Children_of_Undocumented_Immigrants

 

[WWGD]

Your source??
Why would criminals leave?
Your source??

The burden of proof is on you, you endorsed the claim made by Trump, so in that sense it is you who is making the claim..
In FY 2014:

• 
  

  <Snip>

By THAT faulty logic, we should not have neighborhood police either: In the 'real world' we can not stop all criminals, even with a criminal justice system. So let's create 'police free zones'. Let's give up our society.
But please, don't start that social justice experiment in my neighborhood. [\QUOTE]

That is not what I meant. When you have a system that is maximally-effective , here at keeping criminals out, changing it will do nothing. I do not suggest that just because we cannot keep all criminals out that we do nothing"

<Snip>

I don't have time to address all your points now, I will try to address them later.

 

[Finny]

My point is that the next flux is negative, more criminals are leaving than entering. There is really no way of preventing (supposed) criminals ( the still _alleged_ criminals Trump mentioned) from coming in, even with border controls. You _cannot_ in the real world keep all criminals out.

The burden of proof is on you, you endorsed the claim made by Trump, so in that sense it is you who is making the claim..

I think not. Again, I never said any such thing. You said 'more criminals are leaving than entering' is your point.
I wondered where you got such an idea. I have never heard anything remotely like that.

All I claim is that Trump said we should control our borders and stop criminals at the border. I agree with that.

 

[Finny]

Why is Trump popular?
A not-so-flattering analysis. And a sad commentary if accurate.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...ashington Secrets - 07/27/15&utm_medium=email

"...Donald Trump is leading in the polls, drawing the largest crowds and dominating the headlines. What makes him such an attractive candidate?...the most important ingredient is his celebrity.

The Donald is benefiting from the fact that some conservatives are desperate to have their worldview validated by celebrities. Conservatives often insist they are above caring about the culture of celebrity. They criticize pop culture and accuse Democrats of being in thrall to Hollywood. But conservatives are just as prone to getting starstruck.

The conservative cult of celebrity was evident when Republicans gave Clint Eastwood a primetime spot on the 2012 Republican National Convention agenda to deliver a rambling speech to an empty chair…….Republicans were happy just to have the Hollywood legend on their side.

There are numerous other examples:Justin Bieber,Phil Robertson,the Duggar family…. Then there's bodybuilder and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who won the 2003 California gubernatorial recall election on the strength of his celebrity. Schwarzenegger ran as a Republican, elbowing out several more conservative candidates to replace the scandal-ridden Democrat Gray Davis...

….Arnold's celebrity status blinded Republicans (and others) not only to his ethical problems but also to his liberalism and lack of competency. Schwarzenegger went on the advance liberal causes that helped bankrupt his state.

 

[jim hardy]

.the most important ingredient is his celebrity.

I'd say that article by Daniel Allott deserves a " red herring " award.

Trump is tapping into the subdued anger harbored by many over the economy, inflation, and the mass psychological manipulation that thrives under the euphemism "Political Correctness" .

At first glance it looks like Allott should stick to critiquing "Dancing With the Stars".

But to be fair to him, this phrase was almost accurate,

... it is his wealth and penchant for saying things other conservatives believe but won't say.

and Examiner is reputed to be conservative.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner
I suppose maybe he just won't quite say it ?

The fellow doth protest too much, methinks...

 

[Finny]

I'd say that article by Daniel Allott deserves a " red herring " award.

yes, sort of limited in scope...perhaps too simplistic...still, different perspectives people develop are interesting.
This is the line that lost me: "But conservatives are just as prone to getting starstruck. "

Why would I want to shake hands with most Hollywood stars...Clint, yes. Arnold? not so much. Also, maybe Pitbull: he's funding a high school in his old Miami neighborhood for disadvantaged kids...I passed it by boat maybe three/four years ago, likely open by now. Bravo.

Besides, Isn't any 'Trump celebrity' a different style than 'Hollywood celebrity'? Did Reagan 'celebrity' help him get elected? As I recall, the mess media made fun of him for being 'only an actor' trying to portray him as an empty suit. I don't think many conservatives voted for him because of his Hollywood celebrity.

 

[jim hardy]

"Pitbull" ? I never heard of him 'til now.
He's running for mayor ? http://whereby.us/daledade/
Probably you will get to shake his hand.
Small world - i grew up in Miami, near the airport. Before South Beach was 'discovered' .

Did Reagan 'celebrity' help him get elected?

I was in my early twenties when Reagan ran.
What turned me to him was his morning radio broadcasts about current events, i was impressed by his common sense, listen-ability, and apparent integrity.
He seemed just what the country needed after Johnson, Nixon, and almost Agnew. Mind you Ford and Carter were honest fellows, just the country was so rife with anger at "the system" (like now) we wouldn't have re-elected George Washington.
For me to vote Republican was a turn of events as my parents worshipped FDR and the Democrat party. Dad said I caused the earthquake in California.

I think Allott's characterization underestimates the average person's insightfulness.

We'll see.

Politics makes strange bedfellows . So long as we're speculating,
What would you think of a Donald Trump / Jon Stewart ticket ?

 

[Finny]

Jim Hardy:
I think you mentioned being a former Miami resident...and the Mariel boat lift...See the 2015 'boat lift' "migrants' come ashore in this video from a Miami area newspaper.

Maybe Trump has a point about stopping criminals?? That looks like a $150,000 boat they left bobbing on the shoreline!

The "Broward/Palm Beach New Times" newspaper apparently missed the irony of their "New Times" name and their politically correct need to call the illegals "migrants" in their headline.

http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/new...uring-miami-beach-fashion-shoot-video-7133271

"...U.S. Border Patrol spokesperson Frank Miller said, "That's a testament to how confident these organizations are — what we call transnational criminal organizations — who smuggle criminals and narcotics right onto the beach." He said the incident was under investigation and noted, “There has been an increase in known maritime smuggling in Florida — from Key West all along the Florida coast — from fiscal year 2014 to now."

Makes one wonder what is 'unknown'.

I happened to talk with USCG patrol boat personnel in Maine, Station Jonesport and Mass, Station Gloucester several years ago. I learned new USCG recruits are often trained in small boat handling in relatively drug free northern waters [read that as 'safe'] and are then transferred south to Florida where they are normally armed with automatic weapons for drug interdictions. The Bosuns in charge knew what they were doing but the newly recruited youngsters were not so steady.

They need boat handling experience first, then get to add weapons handling. Don't want our guys accidentally shooting holes in inflatables! [Actually the newest boat tubes are closed cell foam which don't sink when bad guys shoot back.]

 

[Finny]

Some tentative 'evidence':

First Ted Cruz calls Mitch McConnell a liar regarding some legislation. [I think 'ol Mitch likely was lying]. Too boring a story to describe.
edit: For anyone interested, just stumbled across a brief description in the early paragraphs here:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/m...ashington Secrets - 07/29/15&utm_medium=emailThen House Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina filed a resolution in the House of Representatives to declare the Office of the Speaker of the House is vacant. In his resolution, Rep. Meadows lays out the case for why the Speaker's chair is effectively vacant. Meadows is surely going to start taking arrows from the establishment for this one.

Could it be conservative Republicans are getting, at long, long last, some backbone from Trump's firm stand on issues? I doubt it: too much money for the taking and power to be secured for most mortals to resist. But one can hope. If Trump continues to poll well and the sissy Republicans don't, maybe they'll wake up.

 

[lisab]

Some tentative 'evidence':

First Ted Cruz calls Mitch McConnell a liar regarding some legislation. [I think 'ol Mitch likely was lying]. Too boring a story to describe.
edit: For anyone interested, just stumbled across a brief description in the early paragraphs here:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/mcconnells-vision-of-governing-drags-gop-astray/article/2569141?utm_campaign=Washington Examiner: Washington Secrets&utm_source=Washington Examiner: Washington Secrets - 07/29/15&utm_medium=emailThen House Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina filed a resolution in the House of Representatives to declare the Office of the Speaker of the House is vacant. In his resolution, Rep. Meadows lays out the case for why the Speaker's chair is effectively vacant. Meadows is surely going to start taking arrows from the establishment for this one.

Could it be conservative Republicans are getting, at long, long last, some backbone from Trump's firm stand on issues? I doubt it: too much money for the taking and power to be secured for most mortals to resist. But one can hope. If Trump continues to poll well and the sissy Republicans don't, maybe they'll wake up.

I agree with parts of your post, but I would disagree of your characterization of well-behaved Republicans as "sissies". I expect politicians of either party to be reasoned, measured, and civilized - people who behave this way are not being sissies, IMO.

Maybe that's the problem with the electorate - they see boorish, loud, obnoxious behavior as "having backbone". Sad.

 

[Finny]

I expect politicians of either party to be reasoned, measured, and civilized

Ah, if only...sigh...

I happened to read some early American newspaper articles about politicians a few months ago...I couldn't believe the acrimony, exaggerations, accusations and foul language that went flying about hundreds of years ago. Lincoln, I recall, was especially hated,ridiculed and criticized, especially about his height and appearance. It has gotten better, believe it or not.

...people who behave this way are not being sissies, IMO.

Good point to explore. Too many "go along to get along". I could be convinced they are either 'greedy' or 'self absorbed' or 'power hungry'...'acting like children'...or maybe all those... and 'sissies' as well.

Whatever the name, hardly the inspiration of a wartime Winston Churchill. Last poll I saw politicians were still even less well regarded than car salesmen!

 

[mheslep]

... from Trump's firm stand on issues?

If only. I'm unaware of any issue on which Trump has had a firm stand, firm meaning discovered earlier than the beginning of his current campaign. Now, change firm to loud or bombastic and the question somewhat answers itself.

Still, Trump is having an effect because in bits and pieces along with the garbage he's loudly right on some issues, even at times understated. When he says 60% of the media is profoundly dishonest he's in the ball park IMO, and he says this to a talking head in an interview.

 

[Finny]

Here's an interesting local news item from McAllen Texas, Ricky Perry Country

Responders Anticipate Possibility of More Illegal Crossers
Border Patrol apprehending about 3,100 people a week

http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/Responders-Anticipate-Possibility-of-More-Illegal-Crossers/34407978

Here is the catch: The news video makes no mention of what's happening to those 'apprehended'. It appears about 100 per day are 'released at the border', whatever that means, by Border Patrol, but end up at the local Sacred Heart Catholic Church in McAllen, Tx.

In the video interview an apparently illegal alien woman at the church with a child says she will be calling her husband back in Hondurus saying "C'mon on down, We are in America."

That doesn't sound like what Rick Perry is saying about his state border control efforts. Be interesting to see if Trump 'whumps' Perry on this issue in debates...if Perry makes the debates.

 

[WWGD]

Here's an interesting local news item from McAllen Texas, Ricky Perry Country

Responders Anticipate Possibility of More Illegal Crossers
Border Patrol apprehending about 3,100 people a week

http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/Responders-Anticipate-Possibility-of-More-Illegal-Crossers/34407978

Here is the catch: The news video makes no mention of what's happening to those 'apprehended'. It appears about 100 per day are 'released at the border', whatever that means, by Border Patrol, but end up at the local Sacred Heart Catholic Church in McAllen, Tx.

In the video interview an apparently illegal alien woman at the church with a child says she will be calling her husband back in Hondurus saying "C'mon on down, We are in America."

That doesn't sound like what Rick Perry is saying about his state border control efforts. Be interesting to see if Trump 'whumps' Perry on this issue in debates...if Perry makes the debates.

May not have been a good idea to send those street gang members from L.A and other places back to their home countries in Central America, where police do not have the resourcs to keep them under control. Gangs like Mara Salvatrucha . 677 murders in June alone, in a population of around 6 million (Time Magazine, August 3 2015). Equivalent to around 36,000 murders in one month in the US, extrapolating to 430,000 a year. Salvadorean police, country itself lacks the resources to control gangs Estimated murders committed in the US last year: 14196, a ratio of 30-to-1. .
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...lent-crime/murder-topic-page/murdermain_final

Honduras has the world's second highest murder rate. What do you suggest people living in these countries do, Finny? I know it is not the US' responsibility to address these problems, but, do you blame these people for wanting to leave their country at any cost? Do you think they have the time to file for formal applications ( if they have access to money an lawyers) to go through the mainstream channels?

Why doesn't one-trick-pony Trump also address this, to give a full picture and not incite hatred against many who are just trying to survive? Of course I don't mean let criminals in, just paint a full picture to start a discussion based on facts.

 

[JonDE]

Figured I would update the numbers, since it doesn't seem to have been done in awhile. This is from RealClearPolitics, this is not their poll, but an average of all the polls run by pollsters. Their hope is that all the partisanship will balance each other out, not sure if that's true or not, just thought I would give a disclaimer before I posted.
2016 GOP Nomination
Trump19.2
Bush13.4
Walker12.6
Rubio7.0
Carson6.0
Huckabee5.8
Paul5.6
Cruz5.0
Trump +5.8

So Trump is still winning. I'm kind of in shock that he could get almost 20% TBH. I find it even stranger that he has kept it up for this long and hasn't disappeared yet.

Even if he was doing this for media attention, would he drop out of the election if he was winning? Kind of scary to think that someone could potentially be trolling their way into being the POTUS.

 

[mr166]

I swore that I would not post on this link again but this statement is hard to ignore.

"May not have been a good idea to send those street gang members from L.A and other places back to their home countries in Central America, where police do not have the resourcs to keep them under control."

In other words it is better to have them sell drugs and murder here in the US! Trillion dollar a year deficits just don't matter eh. We have plenty of money, just tax the 50% of US citizens that actually pay income tax a lot more.

 

[WWGD]

I swore that I would not post on this link again but this statement is hard to ignore.

"May not have been a good idea to send those street gang members from L.A and other places back to their home countries in Central America, where police do not have the resourcs to keep them under control."

In other words it is better to have them sell drugs and murder here in the US! Trillion dollar a year deficits just don't matter eh. We have plenty of money, just tax the 50% of US citizens that actually pay income tax a lot more.

Does that follow from what I said , really? Is that the only other option? Keep them jailed in here while training officers from other countries and while helping their police departments find better funding. It I not a black-or-white issue. It is more expensive in the long run to do nothing about it, and thn having to deal with all the people from these countries trying to come in to the US to escape a war zone. And, re deficits , maybe we can avoid starting wars based on such strong grounds as Bush's " he attacked my daddy" , which has cost more than $1 trillion, while lowering taxes, because that is one of the 2 things. Dubya learned at Bidness school.

 

[Finny]

From the guy who all the pundits said 'wouldn't run'...'would drop out'...'could not survive his comments about McCain'...funny to see all the 'know it alls' crash and burn...


Trump's lead GROWS over Jeb and other Republican rivals as he captures 25 per cent in new Reuters poll

• Trump picked up nearly 10 points in the national poll of Republican voters since Friday
• He's risen to 25 per cent support, with Jeb Bush in a distant second place at 12 per cent

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...percent-Reuters-Ipsos-poll.html#ixzz3hNlRZyAm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

If Trump doesn't drop out soon, poor guy may have to live in Washington for four years...a horrible let down from Trump Towers...

I'd love to know what's going on inside each campaign...Democrat and Republican... to know what they really think about Trump and the plots to foil him?? Wonder if Trump would run with Carly Fiorina...two outsiders??
Not so sure Carly could withstand attacks about her leadership at HP and acquisition of Compaq. She must have laid off thousands...

 

[Finny]

I was reminded today of a comment by "Le Grande" Charles [DeGaulle]:

"Politics is too important to be left to politicians."

A good campaign slogan for a Trump/Fiorina ticket.

 

[WWGD]

It ultimately takes up a very simplistic personality to endorse someone like trump based on his (questionable) statements on Mexicans, while ignoring , or at least not asking serious questions on other issues: bankruptcy, military deferment , etc. The decision of who is the right person for the presidency is important -enough to merit a 360 evaluation of his qualifications. His followers do not seem to be doing that.

 

[russ_watters]

From the guy who all the pundits said 'wouldn't run'...'would drop out'...'could not survive his comments about McCain'...funny to see all the 'know it alls' crash and burn...

Today is July 31, 2015.

 

[mr166]

WWGD if you judge Trump only on his stand about criminals entering the US you are mistaken. He also is very vocal about American Exceptionalism, exporting jobs offshore and insuring that the US negotiates trade deals that are in the best interest of the US. He is the exact type person that the founders of the US envisioned running the country. They did not want to see professional politicians running the country but civilians that would serve for a limited period of time and then return to their chosen field.

 

[William White]

Trumps a chump with a dodgy barnet.

Hilary will win it.

 

[jim hardy]

Well, if nothing else he's shown that even a hint at honesty throws the whole PC political system into a frenzy.

 

[WWGD]

Well, if nothing else he's shown that even a hint at honesty throws the whole PC political system into a frenzy.

Honesty? Describing one side of the immigration issue, ignoring the fact that many who are coming are escaping a war zone. Calling into question John McCain's status (never mentioning his own 4 deferments )? How about some honesty about his bankruptcies? Trump is as honest as a $3 bill. I have no problem with having an _honest_ discussion on immigration. Trump never did any such thing; he cherry-picked facts. I am not going to defend the status quo, but Trump is hardly any better.

 

[jim hardy]

Trump is as honest as a $2 bill.

That may be more accurate than you think.

But that bill has Jefferson on it , and Trump is nowhere near Jefferson's level of intellect.

 

[WWGD]

That may be more accurate than you think.
View attachment 86611

But that bill has Jefferson on it , and Trump is nowhere near Jefferson's level of intellect.

Yes, that was a typo, and I edited it just as you were posting.

 

[William White]

I think a lack of PC is very refreshing in a politican.

However,

His comments about McCain's capture in the Vietnam war were just disgusting.
And the comb-over.

How can anybody with comb-over be in touch with reality?

 

[WWGD]

I think a lack of PC is very refreshing in a politican.

.

Is it OK to be un-PC while maligning most of the Mexicans , and without producing evidence to support his claim? How about also mentioning that many of the people trying to get in are trying to escape a war zone? If he is going to be un-PC , at least let him paint a full picture.

 

[William White]

I think people should say what they think and let the public be the judge.I thought his comments on McCain's terrible ordeal in the jungles of Vietnam were disgusting.

Others might have their own thoughts on his comments about Mexicans.

It IS refreshing that politicians say what they think, and let the public be a judge of that, rather than contorting and diluting their opinions so they are empty as sunlight so as to offend nobody.

 

[jim hardy]

I doubt i'd support a Trump candidacy

but i do think the system needed the shakeup he's caused.

TPTB must have noticed from his unexpected popularity how much anger is out there.
I fear the country is ripe for a "Pied Piper" who's savvy enough to appeal to that.
I think that's why we have the Electoral College as a 'check & balance' against 'national popular vote' .

 

[WWGD]

I think people should say what they think and let the public be the judge.I thought his comments on McCain's terrible ordeal in the jungles of Vietnam were disgusting.

Others might have their own thoughts on his comments about Mexicans.

It IS refreshing that politicians say what they think, and let the public be a judge of that, rather than contorting and diluting their opinions so they are empty as sunlight so as to offend nobody.

Yes, you have a point, but it would be even better if he tried to contribute with well-informed opinions, whether PC or not. And there are some risks in issuing inflammatory statements, which may lead to mistreatment of some groups. I am for free speech, but there are responsibilities that come with the rights. Ideas have consequences. I mean, if un-PC was enough, then, e.g., the anti-gay remarks by many on the far-right would be welcome.