Blog Archives

Debating CNBC by Andy Peth

10/30/2015

We all recall CNBC’s GOP Debate a bit differently. Here’s how I remember it:

Moderator: “Thank you all for being here. Let’s start tonight with the same question for each candidate: What is your biggest weakness, and how could Hillary Clinton best exploit it?”

Rubio: “That’s a despicable question! None of us will dignify that with an answer—”

Fiorina: “I haven’t smiled since I was six.”

Rubio: “—except Carly.”

Trump: “Let’s each share one for the person on our right! John Kasich won’t have to, since he’s on the end.”

Kasich: “Hey!”

Trump: “Speak up, John. Can’t hear you down there.”

Kasich: “Well, I think it’s a great question! Since I’m from Ohio, my biggest weakness is…Cleveland!”

Moderator: “Governor, you can’t actually use a city.”

Kasich: “Ever been to Cleveland?”

Fiorina: “I was sad in Cleveland.”

Trump: “Okay, here’s mine. I’ve had more wives than a sheik. I don’t even know the current one’s name, so I call her ‘The Trump 2000.’”

Carson: “This really isn’t instructive. Shouldn’t we discuss issues?”

Moderator: “Fair enough, Dr. Carson. Let’s talk government programs. If America had a gay astronaut, would you defund NASA?”

Carson: “What?”

Moderator: “To clarify, if John Glenn were gay, would you have left him on the moon?”

Carson: “Well, I don’t think that’s—”

Kasich: “—I wouldn’t leave him there! I’m no hater! These are great questions, by the way. You guys are doing a great job.”

Moderator: “Thank you, Governor.”

Trump: “Yes, thank you, Governor Kiss-up.”

Kasich: “Kasich! It’s Governor Kasich!”

Trump: “Sorry, I must have hit a raw Cleveland.”

Kasich: “Stop it!”

Trump: “Waddya gonna do, shoot me? To hit me from there, you’d need a scope.”

Kasich: (rushing to attack Trump) “Aaaaaaaaaa!”

We now interrupt our programming with this commercial message

(Jeb Bush is pictured, pushing a toy car along a table)

“You own your presidential campaign. You name it, ‘Brad.’ You love Brad! (pushes car off table) And then you total him! No Brad, no!”

“You try to save Brad, paying staff with bogus money that has your face on it! It doesn’t work! You beg for help from former contributors—who you find at a nearby Rubio beach party…”

“C’mon, everybody! We gotta fix Brad! You there—the Cuban with the hot wife! You did this! You killed Brad! YOU! KILLED! BRAD!!!”

“Your family calls a meeting, at which you are officially disowned. In closing, your brother George says he now regrets the Iraq War—after hearing you defend it. The gavel strikes…everyone’s in such a rush…something about a beach party.”

“Let’s return to the debate. I’ve prepared a great attack on Rubio. Pray for Brad. Thank you.”

We now rejoin our scheduled program, still in progress.

Christie: “—fantasy football? Why are we talking about fantasy football? My team sucks!”

Cruz: “This is why no one trusts the Main Stream Media! Listen to these questions! You asked for our weaknesses! You asked Ben about gay astronauts! You asked Carly why she frowns all the time, and that took us all to a deep, dark place with images that will haunt us forever!”

Fiorina: “My soul is a wellspring of unconscious torment.”

Cruz: “You see? I don’t even know what that means!”

Bush: “Yeah! And what about Marco’s missed Senate votes!”

Cruz: “You see? Now you’ve got Jeb doing it!”

(Jeb looks frustrated)

Moderator: “Let’s move to Governor Huckabee, who hasn’t spoken yet.”

Rand Paul: “Neither have I.”

Moderator: “We know. Governor Huckabee, this question is for you and all the other Jesus people. Does Donald Trump have the moral authority to lead this nation in your crusade against all non-Jesus people?”

Huckabee: “That question is shameful! Donald is fine! I’m wearing one of his ties!”

Trump: “Mike, you’ve got class! Tell you what, if you want any of these non-Jesus people taken out, just say the word. I know a guy.”

Huckabee: “That won’t be nec—”

Cruz: “These questions are insulting! None of the moderators are voting for anyone on this stage! They’re wearing ‘Ready For Hillary’ T-Shirts, for Pete’s sake!”

Moderator: “These were on sale! Besides, Governor Kasich is wearing one!”

Kasich: “It was on sale! You guys are doing a great job, by the way.”

Moderator: “Thank you, Governor. Turning to Senator Rubio—”

Kasich: “Can I sit over there with you?”

Moderator: “Maybe next time. Senator Rubio, as the poorest candidate here, can you explain why you missed Senate votes to raise money?”

Rubio: “Well, you just answered your own—”

Bush: (glaring at Rubio) “You killed Brad.”

(Rubio slowly moves away)

Moderator: “I’m sorry, Governor Bush, what was that?”

Bush: “Glad you asked! Oh man, I’ve waited so long—”

Trump: “Boom! Time’s up! I, the Great and Powerful Don, negotiated this debate down to two hours!”

Bush: “But, but—”

Trump: “Sorry, Jeb! I can’t hear you over my awesomeness! Let’s get the hell outta here!”

And with that, the debate ended. Setting a CNBC record, the event drew 14 million viewers—who will never watch CNBC again.

1 Comment

Pre-Debate Warning Signs by Andy Peth

10/28/2015

2 Comments

Let’s get serious about tonight’s debate. Now that Hillary is the Democrat nominee, it’s time to honestly assess the GOP field. With each candidate, we must ask, “How would this person do against Hillary?”

Notice I didn’t say, “correctly assess,” as it’s too early for cocky prognostications. So far, the only bold prediction I’ve made was stating (for more than a year now) that Jeb Bush had no chance to be the nominee. Score one for me. But starting tonight, let’s share brutally honest opinions on candidates.

Notice I said, “honest opinions.” Not chest-thumping bravado ignoring weaknesses. Not Facebook hit-posts with attack lists against rivals—which are always littered with out-of-context exaggerations.

I’ll go first. For several candidates, I will provide a couple strengths and at least one concern—hard questions I want asked about that candidate before we commit. In closing, I’ll give a 1-10 score for how well I believe this candidate would do against Hillary Clinton.

Notice I said, “against Hillary Clinton.” This score reflects how I feel a candidate’s broad appeal and debate style work against Hillary, not how much I like the candidate. If liking the candidate was my top criteria, this entire article would proclaim Bobby Jindal as “The One.”

Spoiler alert: Bobby’s not even on this list.

Ready? Let’s begin.

Donald Trump

Strengths:

Uncanny gift for tapping into deep passions on key issues.
Tremendous “Star Appeal,” creating strength across multiple demographics.

Warning Sign #1: Can a candidate win today with only 15% Hispanic support? That’s amazingly low.

Warning Sign #2: Can a candidate with such lack of focus perform well debating Hillary Clinton? Hillary’s weaknesses must be exposed with the skill of a prosecuting attorney, not generalized insults.

Score Against Hillary: 5

Ben Carson

Strengths:

Most disarming verbal style I’ve ever seen. Like, ever.
Superior intellect combined with plain answers.
Black and popular.

Warning Sign #1: This week, Dr. Carson voiced opposition to abortion in cases of rape and incest. While he didn’t say he’d outlaw abortion in these cases, he didn’t say he wouldn’t. I was curious how this might affect Ben’s run, so I asked on Facebook, “Could Carson win with such a view?” Though nearly all respondents were in my socially conservative sphere, not one felt this view helps Carson—many said he couldn’t win with it, period. Wow. Since very few Americans would outlaw abortion in such cases, this markedly drops Carson’s score against Hillary.

Warning Sign #2: As with Trump, Carson lacks focus in cornering a wily defendant. Can his debate style pin down an immensely corrupt Democrat who receives full media protection?

Score against Hillary: 6 (before this week, 8)

Carly Fiorina

Strengths:

Perfect, blunt approach to exposing and weakening Hillary.
Quick, understandable answers, both in untangling complex issues (foreign policy) and thwarting criticism (Carly’s record at HP).
Female and popular.

Warning Sign: Can Carly go beyond her stump speech in addressing issues? Her “first two phone calls” answer on foreign policy is becoming threadbare, as are her comments on what we could do but haven’t yet done in the Middle East. Carly lacks Marco Rubio’s complete command on issues.

Score against Hillary: 9

Ted Cruz

Strengths:

Smart, effective debater.
Supremely principled; trusted by base.
Great ground game.

Warning Sign: In head-to-head polling against Hillary, Ted polls among the very worst in the field. New numbers aren’t available, but Real Clear Politics over the summer gave him a devastating -7.7%. Question: I love Ted, but can he beat Hillary when we’ll need to re-win millions of voters?

Understand, there's nothing wrong with Ted. What's wrong is an American electorate that can only absorb so much truth between reality TV shows and Bernie Sanders rallies.

Score against Hillary: 4

Marco Rubio

Strengths:

Gifted communicator in all 3 settings—speeches, debates, and interviews.
Young, good-looking Hispanic who speaks fluent Spanish.
Innovative thinker on tough issues (higher education) with total command of most issues.

Warning Sign: Rubio is smooth and a fine debater, but he isn’t a forceful interrogator. He also lacks Trump’s and Christie’s blunt, plain-talking style that connects with listeners. Ask yourself, “Am I confident Marco would relentlessly pin Hillary to the wall on her corruption? Am I really?”

Score against Hillary: 9

Chris Christie

Strengths:

Ideal interrogator for pressing the issue against corrupt opponents (see: Hillary)
Excellent in interviews, both on Conservative stations like Fox or liberal nighttime talk shows.
Blunt, “every guy” style that connects with apolitical viewers.
Wins big in liberal state.

Warning Sign: Can a guy win without devout support from the GOP base? Really?

Score against Hillary: 8 (but only a 2 against the GOP field)

Rejecting Andy-ness

Is my analysis perfect? Does Andy know all? Of course not. But right now, we must share opinions, discussing candidates as dispassionately as possible. Tonight and going forward, we must put each suitor under our collective microscope, asking, “How would this person do against Hillary?”

I’ve already eliminated my favorite. Startling as it may seem, the last quality I seek in candidates is "Whoever agrees with Andy the most.” Why? Because the Republican Party—and Conservatism as a whole—is a family. It isn’t millions of Andy’s walking around (though that would be glorious). It’s millions of liberty-loving people who see liberty in different ways. And when I look out upon this movement, I realize I couldn’t love their individualism if I demanded they agree with me.

So I reject Andy-ness. When I watch tonight’s debate, I don’t want candidates forcing the Conservative family to act like me. I want to be part of something bigger than Andy; something challenging me daily, extending our impact far beyond my limited scope. As I watch, I’ll ask myself, “Who does the best job selling Conservatism to a nation that has long abandoned it?”

I want someone who sells all of us. Not just my kind. Not just me. All of us.

You’ve heard my opinions on our candidates. I’d welcome yours.

2 Comments

First Downs to Touchdowns by Andy Peth

10/23/2015

0 Comments

Whether you like football or not, you’ll understand two things that drive me crazy—and how these apply to politics:

The first is players who do celebration dances when they only get first downs—and their team is getting killed.

“Yeah baby! I got a first down!”

“We’re losing 42-10. Come back to the huddle.”

“But I have to do my dance! I start with some pelvic thrusts…Uh! Uh! Uh!...then mock opposing players by pointing at them…You! You! You!...then fold my arms and lean back…Mmmhmm!!”

“That’s great. Come back to the huddle.”

“Actually, I was hoping you’d carry me off. Ever see ‘Rudy’?”

“It’s 42-10. We’re holding a group suicide. Here’s some punch.”

“This tastes great! Can I do my dance again?”

“Sure. You’ve earned it.”

The other thing I hate is when teams keep throwing long bombs that have no chance, rather than moving the ball down the field. It almost never works.

“Coach, can’t I hand it off just once? We could get a few yards, maybe build a drive.”

“That’s loser talk, son! It’s un-American! What if General Washington had said, ‘Let’s just get a few yards.’ Huh? Huh?! He’d have gotten run over by Commies, that’s what!”

“Commies?”

“Just like Custer!”

“Who?”

“No compromise! Throw deep!”

“We’re losing 52-0. We can’t just throw deep every—”

“Don’t you want a play that can score, son? Why bother if you’re not gonna score?”

“Look, just one handoff—”

“Whose side are you on, anyway? Maybe you’re playing for…for…”

“The other team?”

“The Commies!”

(On a side note, I wish the Washington Redskins would change their name to the Washington Commies)

Political Football

These days, two groups dominate Republican politics: The First Down Only group, and the Touchdown Only group.

For the First Down Only group—often called “The Establishment”—getting first downs is plenty. Just get Republicans elected. Those are first downs, and they’re good enough.

“We got a first down, baby!” they gloat. “We got the majority! Goooooo, Team GOP!”

“But, you haven’t won anything but seats. What about defunding Obamacare?”

“That would take a shutdown, and those aren’t popular! We could lose seats! Have you seen all the seats we’ve gained? Uh! Uh! Uh! Yeah, baby!”

“Please don’t do that…you’re like, 70 years old…”

“Do you have a microphone, so I can drop it and walk off stage?”

“No! What about defunding Obama’s Amnesty? Do you want Democrats stacking up illegal voters?”

“Those ‘illegal voters’ are real people! Inexpensive people! For inexpensive labor! It’s an act of love—for our contributors! You! You! You! Mmmhmm!!”

“Stop that! The border is wide open! The deficit is $19 Trillion! Keystone is dead! The EPA is out of control! Your hearings achieve nothing! Planned Parenthood gets federal dollars! You keep getting first downs, but you hardly ever score!”

“Uh! Uh! Uh! Sorry, what was that? I was celebrating.”

“Seriously, stop that!”

“I may have to stop—I threw out my back. Good thing I exempted myself from Obamacare. Could you carry me off?”

“Oh, if only…”

Oblivious to the scoreboard, First Down Only people drive the base to desperation. It’s infuriating. For decades, we’ve watched electoral victories lead to governing compromise and defeat, making candidates with an “R” by their name look like D’s.

Emerging from this frustration is the Touchdown Only group. “No more settling for the lesser of two evils!” they shout, demanding complete victories with each election. Every candidate and legislation must represent a score right now—or else. Otherwise, they’ll vote 3rd Party, or not at all. So, they throw deep—or worse yet, they just punt.

“Yay! We threw deep! We were principled!”

“But the scoreboard reads 52-0.”

“Doesn’t matter! It’s a principled zero! Throw deep!”

“A principled zero?”

“At least now we’re not embarrassed by our vote!”

“You’re not?”

“Team Republican was doing nothing to stop Team Democrat!”

“But if you don’t vote for the most numerically viable option to Team Democrat, aren’t you doing nothing to stop them?”

“Yay! Throw deep! What’s your point?”

“What’s my point? You’re doing nothing, then complaining when others do nothing! You’re wasting time with 80-yard throws!”

“No we aren’t, ‘cuz we’re not voting anymore! Voting is compromise! Voting is participation in a corrupt, two-party system! We’re gonna punt!”

“On second down?”

“Power to the people!”

“You’re punting on second down?”

“You bet! This will fake out those Democrats! They won’t know what hit ‘em!”

“But, but—”

“What are you, a RINO? A mushy moderate? A Commie???”

(On a side note, I wish the Washington Redskins would change their name to the Washington Commies)

Winning Again

There’s a better way, you know. Rather being complacent or desperate, we can be strategic—with “First Downs to Touchdowns.”

It’s simple. Get a first down, moving the line of scrimmage. Then get another. And another. The key is, don’t stop until you score.

So let’s say your district or state is moderate. Maybe even liberal. To move the ball, you put forth candidates and initiatives offering elements of Conservatism that can succeed in that setting--but don’t stop there. Immediately after getting your first down, go to work persuading more people of Conservative values, creating a setting where more Conservatism can win. The next election, you move the ball further, with better candidates and initiatives. Then, after getting another first down, you go back to work persuading voters.

Thus, there’s no settling for first downs, and no throwing long bombs that anger the electorate. Unlike “First Down Only” and “Touchdown Only,” this strategy works in the real world.

First Downs to Touchdowns. What a concept.

Branding and Blaming

But there’s a problem: Members of the other two groups will brand you as being their opposites. So, First Down Only people take your constant push for greater Conservatism as being Touchdown Only, while Touchdown Only people lump you in with the First Down Only crowd.

This is especially true with Touchdown Only people, since their group formed after seeing first downs amount to nothing. When you come along preaching “First Downs to Touchdowns,” they hear “First Downs to Nowhere.” This makes you their enemy, and getting them to listen is nearly impossible.

“But, but,” you insist, “I want to help you! Your strategy hurts your cause!”

“Doesn’t matter!” they shout. “We’ve got principles!”

“But principles have no vehicle without winning! Don’t you see that?”

Quietly, after staring you down, they say, “You’re one of themmmmm, aren’t you…”

This is frustrating, but the Touchdown Only crowd is not the biggest villain. Do you know who I blame? It’s the First Down Only crowd.

They started all this! They convinced people of a ludicrous idea: That first downs don’t matter. That electing Republicans over Democrats doesn’t matter. That there’s no such thing as moving the ball, no advantage to stopping “greater evils,” and no benefit to restoring society at a pace it can accept. This First Down Only crowd, with their idiotic celebrations and empty promises, induced millions of Conservatives to throw deep or punt on 2nd down!

Standing Up for Reality

Believe it or not, while the two extreme groups dominate GOP discussions, most of us live in the real world—“First Downs to Touchdowns.” Most of us want something that works.

It’s time we stood up, people. It’s time we told all Conservatives to stop claiming victory when the scoreboard says otherwise. If your election wins don’t bring governing scores, then you’re losing. If you step aside while Democrats overrun you, then you’re losing. There’s no “Uh! Uh! Uh!” There’s no “Yay! We’re Principled!” There’s only defeat, and no one’s handing you a microphone to drop.

But if we combine the patience of First Downs with the vision of Touchdowns, we can learn from each other…and start winning again. Really winning. With our combined forces, the Democrats won’t stand a chance, and America will begin that steady climb back—back to being the greatest nation on earth.

Then we can dance. Mmmhmm!!

0 Comments

Giving Thanks...For Donald Trump by Andy Peth

10/15/2015

0 Comments

I enjoy The Donald. I like The Donald. Sometimes, I largely agree with The Donald (ie. Immigration). But I’m not a fan. His debate skills would bomb in a general election—where merely throwing red meat strands you at 40%—and even if he won, I doubt he’d govern conservatively.

That said, because of his high negatives with primary voters, I don’t believe Trump will be our nominee. He’ll lead for now, but once the field narrows, support will consolidate behind other candidates.

Until then, some Republicans deem Trump’s presence to be disastrous. Not me. I think he’s a Godsend. And since I like thanking God, let me outline why I give thanks for the outlandish Donald Trump.

The Debates

Look at those debate audiences! Fox averaged 24 million viewers, while CNN netted 22.6 million. Want to compare? In 2012, the primary debates averaged less than 8 million viewers. That’s Trump, folks. That’s a chance for GOP candidates to impress millions of Americans who would otherwise ignore them.

So how did it go?

Fiorina, Rubio, and to a lesser extent, Chris Christie (?!), dominated the 2nd debate. Though testier than usual, Fiorina flourished, delivering concise answers and a home run on Planned Parenthood. I found Rubio much more impressive, as he dazzled with knowledge and style—but his delivery seemed almost too smooth; too “above the crowd.” Not so with Christie, who blended “working guy” relatability with lawyer-like skill. Were he not so despised by the grassroots, Christie would soar in the polls (but hey, he IS so despised by the grassroots). Honorable Mention? Ted Cruz. Though he received few accolades, I thought Ted’s second debate was very good—a noticeable jump from the first.

These folks should send money to Trump. Thanks to The Donald, unprecedented numbers saw them kill it on stage, and that equals big advertising bucks. My goodness, could you imagine a Rubio-Fiorina ticket right now? The Democrats would be ruined. And Cruz? 24 million Americans find him a lot less scary—again, thanks to Trump. Christie? He’s gone from nonexistent to almost existent.

The Money

Right now, Democrats are facing a division of campaign dollars. Hillary takes her share, as does Bernie. Should he enter, Joe Biden would get millions from Obama’s base, further spreading Leftwing money.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump takes virtually no campaign dollars. He’s using his own. This leaves donors either helping other candidates or holding back, waiting to see who breaks through before they over-commit. Either way, it’s great for Trump’s rivals. Bush started hot, but as his campaign fizzles, large bundlers will look elsewhere. Cruz and Carson continue raking it in, while Fiorina and Rubio are attracting wealthy supporters. As the field narrows, money pools.

On a side note, Trump claims Rubio is “owned” by his contributors, but that’s laughable coming from someone famously “owned” by his own business ambitions. Seriously, what’s the difference between Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers (who’ve yet to commit) owning Rubio, while Trump owns Trump? Think about this, folks. Since Trump has given far more to liberals than Adelson/Koch, and his views lay well to their left, then why is it better to be owned by Trump than them? Immigration? Trump never cared until recently, and Rubio’s current proposals achieve about 95% of anything Trump could do. After that, Rubio is far to Trump’s right—just like Rubio’s funders.

That said, Trump is still helping. A lot. Not only has he provided enormous free advertising via debate coverage, he’s also leaving campaign contributions to everyone else. Wow.

The PR Lesson

Whether good or bad, all moves by Donald Trump are BIG. His blunt talk on immigration? BIG. Foolish comments on universal healthcare? BIG. Heckling China and Mexico for “ripping us off”? BIG, BIG, BIG.

This provides two critical PR lessons for Trump’s GOP rivals:

Keep your message simple, direct, and bold. Yes, all candidates claim to know this, but they have no clue. In a superb example of marketing prowess, Trump took an issue where strong measures poll well (immigration), and he blew it up. Mexico? They’re ripping us off and sending us criminals. Birthright citizenship? It’s a perversion of the 14th Amendment (he’s right, by the way). The border? Build a wall—now. Criminals? Gone. Sanctuary cities? Bye-bye.

No delays. No compromise. No kidding. Fellow GOP candidates, this is how you awaken a nation that has given up. You strike a nerve, then soothe it. You ask for everything, then “compromise” at a place better than your real goal. It’s called “negotiation,” and Trump should charge exorbitant fees for the clinic he’s conducting.

Avoid petty sniping. Trump’s comments regarding other candidate’s looks, poll numbers, or wives should serve as examples to avoid—but some candidates aren’t listening.

Carly responded to Trump’s “face” debacle with a terrific ad and a strong debate comment, but her bristling tenor with Trump diminished her “above it all” mojo. Likewise, the normally unflappable Marco Rubio fell into labeling Trump a “freak show.” And Mr. Congeniality, Ben Carson, fumbled badly with a comment on Trump’s religious faith.

Two candidates who aced this lesson are Ted Cruz and Chris Christie. Cruz shows vision for the future, courting Trump’s supporters by respecting their guy. As for Christie, I felt he had the second best moment of the last debate (after Fiorina’s Planned Parenthood triumph). Chastising Trump and Fiorina for squabbling over business records, Christie noted how voters could care less, and how the squabbling wasn’t helping the American worker. Impressive.

Never before have GOP candidates received such bold lessons on the campaign trail. Beta-testing concepts most wouldn’t try, Trump prepares candidates for the modern era—an era of low information voters and reality stars. Scott Walker couldn’t sail these waters. Jeb Bush is drowning. Bobby Jindal’s sterling character and brilliance mean nothing, because they don’t “connect.” It’s a new age.

The Final Gift

Perhaps Trump’s greatest gift isn’t to other candidates, but rather, to GOP voters. Trump teaches us what to seek in a candidate, even if it’s not him. We need more than ideological purity, and much more than election victories bringing piddling results. We need to win again. We need some things fixed—like, really fixed. We need a sealed border, competitive schools, an energy plan that rewards production over activism, trade deals that level the playing field—we need action, people.

Most of all, we need to convince a skeptical electorate that good things can happen. Go big or go home, folks. When a nation tunes out and stops believing, it takes big messaging to tune it back in—and big results to help it believe. We need a salesman. We need a candidate who sells Americans on America, not one who assumes they already get it (or even like it).

Let Donald Trump be a lesson to us on the mopey Right. Let’s stop fixating on Obama. Combined with our hopelessness and rage, this obsession leaves us sounding like bitter ex-husbands re-re-re-explaining what their wives took. Enough! As we gripe, Americans nod their heads, then look for exits.

Let’s share great ideas. Listen to Cruz discuss the border, and to Jindal discuss energy! Listen to Rubio discuss higher education reform! Listen to Carson discuss healthcare, Christie discuss Entitlement reforms, or Fiorina discuss pretty much everything! For goodness sakes, we have all the ideas! Let’s learn from The Donald, selling these ideas with a wink and, “People, you’re gonna love it!”

What’s the starting point? Giving thanks. No, don’t overlook Trump’s problems, as these point us to better candidates. But let’s give thanks for huge debate audiences. Give thanks for freed up campaign dollars. Give thanks for big talk, bold marketing, glaring mistakes, and everything else our candidates need to see. Above all, give thanks that, once we replace whining with selling great ideas, we can tune in this tuned out society, and “Make America Great Again.”

Let’s all join hands and give thanks…for Donald Trump.

0 Comments

Debating CNBC by Andy Peth

Pre-Debate Warning Signs by Andy Peth

First Downs to Touchdowns by Andy Peth

Giving Thanks...For Donald Trump by Andy Peth

Author

Archives

Categories

Debating CNBC by Andy Peth

Pre-Debate Warning Signs by Andy Peth﻿

First Downs to Touchdowns by Andy Peth

Giving Thanks...For Donald Trump by Andy Peth

Author

Archives

Categories

Pre-Debate Warning Signs by Andy Peth