After testy VP debate, Trump rebuffs claim he ‘loves’ Putin
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Sen. Tim Kaine leaves the stage with Republican vice-presidential nominee Gov. Mike Pence during the vice-presidential debate at Longwood University in Farmville, Va., on Tuesday. To the right is Anne Holton, wife of vice-presidential candidate Sen. Tim Kaine.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally today in Henderson, Nev. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
HENDERSON, Nev. » Donald Trump pushed back today on Hillary Clinton’s accusation that he’s cozying up to Russian President Vladimir Putin after the charge put Trump’s running mate on the defensive during the vice presidential debate.
Trump offered effusive praise for Mike Pence’s performance — but also claimed credit for it — even as both campaigns acknowledged that the sole vice presidential debate was unlikely to alter the race’s trajectory.
The celebrity businessman said his relationship with Russia’s leader would be determined by how Moscow responds to strong U.S. leadership under a Trump administration.
“They say Donald Trump loves Putin. I don’t love, I don’t hate. We’ll see how it works,” Trump told a rally outside Las Vegas.
Clinton today shrugged that off, saying Trump has “this weird fascination with dictators.”
“My opponent seems not to know the difference between an ally and adversary,” Clinton said at an evening fund raiser in Washington. “There seems to be some misunderstanding about what it means to have a dictatorship and provide leadership.”
The billionaire candidate sought to take away an argument that Clinton and her running mate, Tim Kaine, have ramped up in the final weeks of the campaign as they work to portray Trump as dangerous for American interests overseas. While U.S.-Russia relations nosedive over failed diplomacy in Syria, Trump has complimented Putin, calling him a strong leader and even encouraging him to track down Clinton’s missing e-mails, though Trump later said he was being sarcastic.
“You guys love Russia,” Kaine said in Tuesday’s debate. “You both have said Vladimir Putin is a better leader than the president.”
In a forceful rebuke, Pence described Putin as a “small and bullying leader,” but blamed Clinton and President Barack Obama for a “weak and feckless” foreign policy that had awakened Moscow’s aggression in Ukraine and meddling in the Middle East.
The U.S. and Russia back opposing sides in Syria’s civil war but both are fighting the Islamic State group there. The U.S. cut off talks with Russia about Syria this week after the latest cease-fire collapsed, blaming Russia for failing to fulfill its commitments under the deal.
“I can say this: If we get along and Russia went out with us and knocked the hell out of ISIS, that’s OK with me folks,” Trump said, using an acronym for the extremist group.
Since last week’s debate, Trump has faced a barrage of questions over a leaked tax return showing he lost more than $900 million in 1995. In turn, he’s sought to reframe his life story as a comeback tale he hopes to recreate on behalf of a faltering nation.
“America needs a turnaround. American needs a comeback. America needs a change. And that’s why I’m running,” Trump said.
Taking the stage in Henderson, Nevada, Trump took his own victory lap for Pence’s performance, which he called “phenomenal. Pence’s cool demeanor contrasted with Trump’s bluster during his own, top-of-the-ticket showdown against Clinton. However strong Pence’s performance, Trump made clear he considers it a reflection of himself.
“I’m getting a lot of credit, because that’s really my first so-called choice, that was my first hire,” Trump said of Pence.
Even Clinton’s team wasn’t claiming that Kaine had come out on top. Former President Bill Clinton, for example, his wife’s running mate “did just fine.”
Kaine acknowledged that even his wife gave him a hard time for his constant interruptions during the debate. But Kaine said he was effectively able to block Pence from attacking Clinton. “I’ve never played hockey but I think I’d be a good goalie, based on last night,” he said.
The big moment for their running mates behind them, both Clinton and Trump were shifting focus back to each other — and to Sunday’s debate, the second of three showdowns between the nominees.
Clinton was deep in debate prep Wednesday at her Washington home. She was huddling with campaign chairman John Podesta, top policy aid Jake Sullivan and her debate advisers.
Trump, meanwhile, was on the campaign trail, making several stops across Nevada. In Reno, the New Yorker appeared to lecture Nevadans on how their state is correctly pronounced and then did an exaggerated version of his preferred pronunciation of “Neh-VAH-da,” though most residents of the Silver State pronounce it, “Neh-VAD-uh.” He then declared that “nobody says it the other way.”
Campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said, despite Trump’s travels, the candidate was preparing “constantly” for the debate. Trump planned his own town hall in New Hampshire on Thursday, in an apparent dress rehearsal for the big event.
33 responses to “After testy VP debate, Trump rebuffs claim he ‘loves’ Putin”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What a bizzaro world we live in now where once the Republican party was a staunch enemy of communist Russia, now we have the Republican Presidential & VP nominees praising and admiring Putin and how strong a leader he is…
So Putin is not a strong leader?
Putin is not a leader he is an autocrat. There’s a difference. Trump has said about Putin, and these are quotes: “he’s doing a great job”, “I respect Putin”, “Will he (Putin) be my new best friend?”, “I think I’d get along very well with Vladimir Putin. I just think so.”, “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond,”. It really is beyond dispute that Trump has a man-crush on Putin…
If you had any lick of sense and intelligence, you would know Putin is a horrible leader. A quick survey of what he has done to his country: diminished currency by 40%; slashed the national economy by a third; lost most foreign investment; cultivated a judiciary, that is by far, the worse in the industrialized world, so much so, that countries are beyond hesitant to do business in Russia; a profound population decrease with droves of their brightest and best leaving; an autocrat rule in which thousands of people disappear at the hands of the national security forces; and an extreme intolerance with any dissonance whatsoever.
You can say he has approval rulings in the 80%, but when you control all media and communications, and you use polonium to silence distractions like we pour ice tea, well, you don’t have a leader, you have a ruthless autocrat-huge difference. Get a clue….
Well said…..
It’s really shocking when (purportedly) educated people seem to describe or defend Putin as a strong leader. Putin has his opponents murdered. It’s easy to get good approval ratings when public employees gather that information and dissenters either disappear or they are murdered.
How did Americans become so dense? What happened to our education system that so many people actually think like this?
From a liberal perspective, “http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/09/09/is_putin_really_stronger_than_obama_what_does_that_even_mean.html”. I enjoy seeing our resident intelligentsia get their panties all twisted. You may not like Putin, I certainly don’t, but to deny his having maintained a firm grip on Russia isn’t reflective of a strong leader is overreaching. You have every right to dislike Trump, he’s brought it on himself, but let’s keep the conversation real.
hawaiikone – The fact is that I, and I would hope most thinking people, would totally reject the characterization of a dictator, thug and murderer as a “leader”. Any kind of “leader.” Leaders don’t murder people to keep them in line. Fear is not a leadership quality.
I’m not getting my “panties twisted” whatever that means in your mind.
Please, unless you are to able to start the conversation with the extreme caveat that national intimidation, murder, intolerance, total control of media and the press and systemic prosecution are not factors to be weighed against the individual when weighing the merits of his leadership, the conversation is already over. If not for these elements, he would not be able to run the county into the ground like he has already done the last 8 years….
I thought you were referring to HiLIARy…http://www.govtslaves.info/comprehensive-clinton-body-count-list/
Therefore, because neither of you consider Putin a “leader” by your standards, that somehow makes him not Russia’s leader? Whether he fills your particular requirements or not is totally meaningless, and has absolutely nothing to do with his strength, or my question. His methods are frequently despicable, and the antithesis of a democracy’s expectations of leadership, but to try and imply they aren’t initiated and maintained from a position of strength is simply refusing to acknowledge the obvious. Your insistence on equating my query as implied approval or admiration is simply rooted in your own overzealous misinterpretation.
To imitate ikey, wassup sa?
Re Russia President Putin:
I recall that he got 60% of the vote in the election in 2012.
I appreciate that there are questions of the integrity of the voting system.
But with our system, in which billions of dollars from special interest groups are spent, we have our own problems.
Taking the broader view, I think we could get alone better with the Russians than we do.
There are some important issues on which we have common ground.
(Not the least of which, they might stop giving us rides to the space station.)
I do not think the insults, such as Pence calling him a “small and bullying leader” are a wise thing to do.
I think President Obama was correct in not taking stronger steps when Russian took over the Crimea.
It was historically part of Russia for a long time, and its being part of the Ukraine was a leftover from the old Soviet Union when the whole of the Ukraine was, in a sense, part of Russia.
If the next US/Russian president can set up cooperative goals like those achieved by Reagan and Gorbechev we will all be better off.
“Look, the average Democrat voter is just plain $tupid. They’re easy to manipulate. That’s the easy part”
Hillary Clinton, as told to Dick Morris in “Rewriting History”, 2005
Please do some kind of fact checking. Multiple websites tout that there is no evidence of such a quote ever being uttered. Fact check everything you hear from Democrats and Republicans. You commented online so you do have the resources available to check your sources. We are not sheep. Feel free to debate me. Be warned though; I’m logical.lol
https://www.truthorfiction.com/hillary-clinton-called-democratic-voters-stupid/
This was posted in a Tumblr page that makes statements that are intriguing and what they want you to do is click on the links but these links never actually send you to the source to be verified. Same page also incorrectly states that Trump said the same thing about Republicans but he did not.
The bigger issue is why didn’t your post acknowledge or even defend what Trump said, why did you try to distract by pointing at what Clinton (falsely) said?
Nah, Dishonest Donald never said anything like that. Just like he never said anything bad about women, Mexicans, Blacks, Asians, poor people, Muslims, so on and so forth. If you want proof Dishonest Donald never said these things just ask Pence.
“Just like he never said anything bad about women, Mexicans, Blacks, Asians, poor people, Muslims etc.
You are confusing “some” with “all”
If you say a bad thing to one woman, a beauty queen who had a contractual obligation not to get fat, you are not making a statement about all women.
If you make a statement about violent illegal Mexican aliens, you are not making a statement about all Mexicans.
If you make a statement about the Blacks who have to live in the hell of the violent parts of the inner cities, you are not making a statement about all Black lives.
etc.
This kind of phony logic seems to be the trick of the day for some Republicans, such as Kaine, a man who seems to have admitted publicly that his most basic principles play second place to political expediency.
I meant “some Democrats, such as Kaine.”
Looks like none of this matters. Mrs. Clinton is heading for a real landslide victory.
Thanks again to all the Trump supporters who helped to nominate the worst candidate to ever run for President!
Wasn’t it Kaine who said his son was a Marine and therefore was glad to support HiLIARy. Lucky his son wasn’t at Benghazi.
Question, would you want your daughter to marry Trump? Someone who says he doesn’t treat women well…and that it’s hard to be a 10 if they are flat chested…now what about all of the Republicans who are refusing to endorse him? Doesn’t that send a message to you? What Democratic trick of the day is that?
Would you want your daughter to marry Bill Clinton? He treats all women as he sees fit. Donald talks while Willy acts.
Thirty Republicans who served in Congress signed a letter saying they couldn’t vote for Trump in the general election.
“In nominating Donald Trump, the Republican Party has asked the people of the United States to entrust their future to a man who insults women, mocks the handicapped, urges that dissent be met with violence, seeks to impose religious tests for entry into the United States, and applies a de facto ethnicity test to judges. He offends our allies and praises dictators. His public statements are peppered with lies. He belittles our heroes and insults the parents of men who have died serving our country. Every day brings a fresh revelation that highlights the unacceptable danger in electing him to lead our nation.”
Let’s not forget Colin Powell’s email that Trump is a “national disgrace.” But, good old Sarge above knows better. And so Keonigohan and the rest know, I have voted for members of both parties, even in Presidential elections…so it isn’t a blind CNBC or Fox News based opinion.
Your reference to Sarge and “the rest” imply that actually you know better. Then tell us exactly why?
Well, Sarge never does anything except offer the exact same pot shots with no substance. Feel free to go back and look, no matter what the topic at hand is, you will see the same lame duck posts…
My point regarding “the rest” was that I am not a blind party line voter, so I don’t offer partisan opinions. I think, like your comments with Klastri, you are misinterpreting the positions we are taking.
That being said, do I think I know better than sarge, yes. If for no other reason than even entertaining the thought of voting for Trump is lunacy. Even the Republican establishment thinks so. Didn’t that letter also say he didn’t have the intellect to be president? Or maybe that was another letter. Heck even Arizona’s main newspaper wouldn’t endorse him (and neither would AZ Senator McCain)…and last I checked, AZ is a Republican bastion.
No argument regarding “pot shots”, it’s actually one of the reasons I get involved, as a pot shot either bluntly written or articulate in composition remains simply a pot shot. There’s far more to this election than either Hillary or Trump, and it’s too bad that’s rarely addressed. I’m also by nature an independent, and, quite frankly, continue to be puzzled by the inability of Johnson to garner more support, as this cycle, more than any other in my memory, offers the ideal opportunity to go third party.
I’m also curious as to the specific reasons you feel I’ve “misinterpreted” comments? Your posts largely reveal a relatively moderate take on issues, so we’re not too far out of alignment, however, klas invariably chooses a style that I feel negates rather than seeks any commonality. Disagreeing is natural, how we comport ourselves during it is our choice.
The inevitable “awaiting moderation” appears. Patience..
hawaiikone – The basic reason Gary Johnson isn’t taken seriously is that he doesn’t seem to know a whole lot. We already have one candidate that’s ignorant of foreign policy and world affairs, so why have two?
I’m not looking for commonality. I’m looking to efficiently state a case based on facts and law.
Of course you misinterpret comments. For instance, you argue about calling Mr. Putin a leader when he’s simply a thug with power. A head of state is not necessarily a leader. Is Mugabe a leader? Assad? Of course not. They are thugs that rule through murder and intimidation. They lead nothing and no one.
By definition Putin is a leader. The person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country. A thug with power is a leader while a female felon who provided the enemy with classified information should never be our leader.
klas, I’ll give you a get out of jail card if you can offer us just one thing. That being any article, whether left or right in origin, that labels Putin as a weak leader. Only one. And then I’ll let this one ride. Any misinterpretation here certainly wasn’t committed by me.