E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNEW YORK -- During a town-hall discussion held over the telephone Monday night, Michele Bachmann had a special guest -- Donald Trump. The “tele-town hall” marked the first such event Trump has done with any of the GOP candidates for president.
The idea for the call, the Bachmann campaign says, came during a meeting the two had over breakfast last week, at Trump’s home in New York.
Bachmann dialed in from a hotel room in Las Vegas – the site of tonight’s GOP debate – and Trump called from his office in New York. Though both the Bachmann and Trump teams said yesterday the event did not mark an endorsement, the two met eye-to-eye in a wide-ranging discussion.
“We have a country with tremendous potential. Unbelievable potential. It's untapped,” Trump said during introductory remarks, before calling attention to competition with China. “We don't have the right leadership, and we're really falling badly. By 2016 China will overtake us economically. Hard to believe it would have been impossible to say that 10 years ago.”
Bachmann said later in the call that China’s rise has “profound implications,” and added, “One thing Ronald Reagan understood is you have to be the economic super power if you want to be the military super power.”
It’s a message Bachmann often delivers during stump speeches – and though Monday’s call was billed as a discussion about the economy, national security and international affairs often crept in.
Trump attacked Democrats and Republicans for avoiding discussing OPEC’s hold on oil prices, and suggested that if the United States were to stop doing business with China, “they would go into a depression the likes of which you have never seen before.”
The Bachmann campaign says Tele-Town Hall events are a regular part of Bachmann’s strategy, helping the campaign to identify supporters and key issues to voters. But the campaign acknowledges this event was unique.
“The reason we brought him on is that he’s a well respected person on issues of the economy, but he’s well versed on foreign policy issues and the politics of the day,” says Bachmann Campaign Spokeswoman Alice Stewart of Trump.
On Friday, over Twitter, the campaign teased a coming announcement “sure to fire up this race.” Stewart said tens of thousands of people were on the call, and that Bachmann and Trump spoke privately beforehand.
A poll taken during the call identified key initiatives voters thought should be undertaken to revive the economy. Cutting spending ranked first, followed by repealing the federal health care law, opening domestic energy resources, cutting taxes, and clamping down on illegal immigration.
“This gave her an opportunity to engage the people,” Stewart said. “And an opportunity, for sure, to get an idea on where the focus needs to be paid in terms of improving the economy.”
Leave a Comment:
OK Stupid story so I am going to ask this question here. Off topic, but the topic blows...
I’m just a dumb engineer so I have a question for all the smart lawyers out there.
By stating the CLASS act is unsustainable and setting the Republicans up to repeal it, is the Administration trying to get precedent set that the law has severability and when this goes to SCOTUS it can no longer be argued to throw the whole thing out if one section is found unconstitutional?
I'm not really one of those "smart lawyers," like Spanky for example, but just offhand, I'd say the Administration is probably relying on this, and not on severability analysis:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/politics/health-care-program/
No sustainability, no certification.
Because severability doesn't factor in, the failure to certify CLASS should have no effect on whether the mandate is severable or not.
Just my unlearned opinion, however. Others may know more about this.
First AM, and as rubbed in my face last thread - you like Mixed more than me. What gives?
As for sever-ability - either it has a sever-ability clause an therefore can be enacted/exectuded in parts, or it does not, which means it ether stands as a whole or fails, as a whole.
I gotta say I cannot figure out what they [obama] is doing. Friday Class was out. It was unsustainable, unworkable, and going to cost far more than advertised.
So they were going to abandon it.
But today, it's still there, and Obama will veto any attempt to get rid of it.
But it was Sebelius that said it was out, not any republican.
Also it was $86billion debt savings. If it's gone the savings is gone and the fact that is was passed via reconciliation is HUGE.
Seriously, what gives? Gross incompetence or sinister plot?
Maybe the big brained reporters here can do an actual story? Sure they will. They understand Obamacare less than Gun Runner or Solyndra.
According to the way the law was written, Spanky, they have to abandon the CLASS portion of the law because there was a specific finding by the Secretary that it was unsustainable.
In other words, Congress delegated that to the Secretary in the legislation, and she merely fulfilled that function.
But that has nothing to do with severability of the mandate, as far as I can tell.
But it might be similar to what the Republicans did to the Post Office in 2006 when they demanded that the Post Office fund its pension plans 75 years out and make these huge annual payments, which have effectively made the Post Office unsustainable at current revenue levels.
By the way, tell me where did you get the idea that I like Bag Boy more than you, and why would you care, even if I did?
Putting aside the severability issue AM, why is Obama seemingly fighting the decision to abandon it, and what is with the talk about vetoes if a republican attempts to get rid of Class?
Is Class unsustainable? If so, what about the debt reduction/savings that they ascribed to it last year? And if there is not net reduction, i.e. the bill is a biug tax, then don't they need a full vote to pass it?
Not sure I understand your Post Office comment and who the "they" is here. This bill is 100% democrat. Any jacking up of payments is their doing.
And of course I care Am.
I never said otherwise, Spanky. The Democrats put that provision in deliberately to blow up the CLASS part of the bill if they didn't like where it was going. Easy-peasy.
It's nothing but a legislative trick, Spanky. A safety valve of sorts. Take it out for a spin, and if it doesn't, we haven't risked any more than a small down payment. Sounds fiscally responsible to me.
My question, however, was not whether you cared, it was why.
My 2 favorite FR Lawyers giving free answers (Well Kind of)!
OK AM, I understand the part that they wrote into the law that if it's not sustainable (Something they knew before they passed the law by the way) that they have to abandon CLASS.
But how can they write what appears to be a severability clause within just the CLASS portion of the entire act?
Doesn't it somehow let them have it both ways? Which I guess was the point.
My thoery is they needed the $86 billion to get it to pass, knew it wasn't going to be sustainable buit left it in anyway and wrote the clause to take it out after it passed and we all got stuck with it.
Aren't most politicians Attorney's? could splain a lot I guess.
Looks like a Big Democrat Shell Game to me.
So AM - let's go with legislative trick.
Does Obama know that? If not, why not, and if so why is he talking about vetoes and republicans?
It think you nailed it WCA. I think that's why Obama is now fighting so hard to keep that which everyone knows is dead.
It is a shell game, one that is quickly unraveling.
It's even better than severability because they don't have to wait for a judicial determination.
Do you mean there was a specific appropriation that went with it, and now the money can be reallocated? I don't know about that.
Apparently, there were some questions earlier in the year about allocating $120 million in start-up costs towards it, if it was already believed to be unsustainable, but I don't know what became of that.
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/150489-house-gop-questions-class-act-startup-funds
Anyone else?
LoL And the first thing we do, let's kill them all? ;-)
Actually, I don't think that many politicians are attorneys, at least at the state level, anymore. Besides Michele Bachmann, I don't know whether any of the other Republicans currently running for President are attorneys. Ron Paul, for example, is a doctor.
And of our last six presidents, only Clinton and Obama have been attorneys.
So, I guess that doesn't explain very much, does it?
WCA -- I see you took my snarky suggestion...lol
Anna -- It makes sense to me that it be written this way.
Spanky -- What is Obama saying in regard to vetoes and R's?
LoL Of course, it does. Trust me.
Now, if only Spanky could figure it out. ;-)
Anna -- He's still pondering the other question you posed earlier....tick tock....
No, No, AM Don't kill em all. Whatever would FR do without the wonderful legal banter?
I don't think it allocated money, it was a supposed savings to help pay for it. So yeah we are stuck with the non-savings.
LoL Isn't that just like a lawyer --
-- spending time pondering a question as to which the answer makes no difference.
How does that compute? It sounds like a sum-zero to me.
AM, thanks for making me laugh--I needed that.
Like I always say, I live to serve. ;-)
Wonder how much the Bachmann campaign paid him? Or is The Donald again trying to sell his TV show? His ratings must be slumping again.
Too funny!
Bat @!$%# crazy meets the birther...
Maybe The Donald can develop a new reality TV show for her & Marcus when she's forced to drop out... lol
Is EVERYTHING a childish, stupid gimmik with these fools?
For cring out loud.
Hey, Buzz, how about that teleprompter thing?
*hiccup* ;o)
I heard her campaign is running out of money--maybe he will pay her....
Holding teleconferences is way cheaper than face-to-face. Will be interesting to see if these are effective for her campaign.
"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly
[Hey, Buzz, how about that teleprompter thing?]
I wonder what NOOT's whereabouts were around the time of the theft...
Yes!
Just a thought, but why are the Teavangelists meeting/debating in Sin City?
On a mission to save souls?.....
Chilled - Vegas is an interesting venue.
Nevada has a large Hispanic population, tonight's debate will most likely be about Herman Cain. Cain has made some statements that are not kind to Hispanics. If there is ANYTHING noteworthy about tonight's debate I'm guessing it will involve Herman Cain, immigrations, fences, electricity and alligators.
Of course, if I were the moderator, I'd also ask Cain about the savage murder of John Lennon's once great song, "Imagine." That's just me though.
So Feisty - it's getting on 5:00 your time.
So you getting all gussied up for the big night?
Mr. Feisty taking you out on the town?
I recommend the Outback, or Red lobster.
I'd stay out of downtown, I hear it can get pretty dangerous at night.
..you left off the moat, nisl....
Now I guess the movement will be from railing against Perry and his support for in-state tuition for children of undocumented to Cain and his crazy stance that he now says....... 'joke'.
Gators and electricity.....ha ha
Feisty -- I'm going to have a "Prayer Meeting" to pray that they stop breeding. It's being held at the DDI this Friday. Okay so it's really drinking to forget--I gotta shake that image out of my mind. Care to help sponsor this?
Punk, not everyone shares intimate details of their fantasy life.
Please, please, please tell me that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
I'm a bit tired of these debates. Here, let me give you a pre-recap recap of what will happen.
1) Mitt Romney won't make any obvious mistakes, nor will he prove that he isn't really a robot.
2) Rick Perry will, metaphorically, barf all over himself.
3) Bachmann will crush her urge to eat bugs on stage, and therefore consider the debate a win.
4) Ron Paul will make a comment or two that are rational and clear headed and then follow those comments up with some comments that show he knows less than nothing about about several important facets of governance and economics. Nobody will care about any of his comments though, any more than they cared when Dennis Kuchinich did the same thing in Democratic debates, and for pretty much the same reason.
5) Cain will say stupid things that the audience loves but most people find repulsive. The extra heat he will get tonight and how he will respond to it are about the only interesting part of tonight's debate.
6) Gingrich will insult the President in a way that is so ridiculously stupid that he'll end up insulting not the President, but the audience that cheers for him.
7) Santorum will... Nobody cares.
OMG! WTF! Only clown missing from this town hall is Cain!
Picking from the current crop of GOP candidates is like picking which Sexually Transmitted Disease you would like...
Mickey,NY,
Based upon your comments, the STD's you are mentioning have already gotten to your brain.
I guess you don't like Obama's suggestion about "raising the level of civility".
Ill take the one that makes the limp liberal fall off.
ABO 2012
So, LEONA...dsdsherm...
...which STD you prefer to get the GOP nod?
More important than the drivel Msnbc writes about..... Can you hear Obama: "My intention is to win North Carolina again. like we did last time. And it'll be close, because obviously folks are frustrated with the challenges we still face in the economy."
Mr.President, The only "challenges we still face in the economy" are the ones inflicted upon it by your administration !!!! ( i.e. anti- business regulations, anti NON Union JOBS agenda, bail outs, "green energy" killing jobs policies and open borders, just to name a few) .
Squaaaaaawk..Leonalotsanumbers..wanna cracker....Just what regs you speaking of sweetie...Comon now be specific...How bout this;
1. Lets start with the FDA and let the drug companies suspend CGMP and make products any way they want...You know that means no COA's on new raw material or final container assays or sterility testing...How bout we let the market decide.
2. Or how about the FAA...
I could go on and on but teaching something to a conservative is like teaching fractions to a hous cat. What's the use?
Torpedo
You do know that under Obama there has been more than 82,000 new regulations enacted which has cost consumers about 40,000,000,000 dollars?
That regulations cost consumers 1.75 trillion dollars annually?
Of course you don't
But.....since you asked for a couple of specifics....
• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units. Estimated cost: $10 billion.
• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Source Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters. Estimated cost: $3 billion.
• Standards for the Management of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Commercial Electric Power Producers. Estimated cost: $0.6-$1.5 billion.
• Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors. Estimated cost: $2 billion.
• Electronic On-Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents. Estimated cost: $2 billion.
• Hours of Service. Estimated cost: $1 billion.
Maybe someone should put some people to work going thru the regulations and pulling the ones not useful. I'm pretty sure there will be redundancy.
I lived in Minnesota Bachmann's home state. You do know the state bird is a loon...just sayin'
I would pay to see a Bachmann/Trump Tea Party ticket. Seriously. Run that campaign and I promise to donate to it. What else could match that kind of entertainment value?