trump

[Brad69]

With today's propaganda machine any GOP candidate will get torn apart. The last two were center right the GOP traditional voter base is not large enough to elect a President. If DJT loses its a non point the country as we know it it's lost. It will be one party rule.
The demographic shift is from people that work to the entitlement class. The view that the government should provide food,shelter,health care, higher education. This is not race based this is a shift of culture. The Robin Hood hats at the DNC convention are some of the most dangerous they completely support government takeover of most businesses. The vision of a northern Europe social democracy. Is not as far away as you think once in power all they have to do is resettlement into red states. This has been the ALT-Lefts dream since the 60,s. BHO found out by mistake just ignore Congress and do what you want. It's quite likely in our lifetime we will see property money and business seized for the good of all

 

[BugI02]

Which raises an interesting question - why didn't Romney or McCain win, in your opinion?

McCain couldn't overcome the lack of excitement/enthusiasm about him within the GOP and the high level of excitement generated on the other side for 'hope and change'. Given the built in advantage the Dems have in the EC Reps have to over perform. And Palin was just a major WTF? moment

Romney lost because another patrician, dark money powered wall street apparat had only marginally more appeal than McCain. The seeds of Trump were already planted. How many 'little people' do you think expected Romney to share their concerns. Bain was responsible for the job losses some of them experienced

 

[BugI02]

The question was asked why they last two GOP candidates lost. McCain lost because He was framed as a old man who represents the establishment. His running mate was portrayed as a loon that was not very smart. The propaganda machine kicked into high gear and proclaimed BHO the winner. Game over
Romney is a slightly different issue after 4 years of BHO it was thought Romney would win. Wrong "binders full of women" dog on roof of car" "didn't pay taxes in 10 years.
The propaganda machine used the tag lines and destroyed Romney. His religion played a much bigger role than most will admit there are lots of voters that do not trust Mormons or view them as much worse.
I believe this also showed the effects of the change in demographic shift of power in the USA.
Oh by the way Bill Clinton stated today that using Syrian refugees would be a great way to rebuild Detroit and other inter cities. This will be a key policy of the 3rd Clinton administration resettlement of "new Americans" into both rural areas and city's

Well, if you want to create Sardaukar you need to confine them in hellish conditions

 

[jamil]

McCain couldn't overcome the lack of excitement/enthusiasm about him within the GOP and the high level of excitement generated on the other side for 'hope and change'. Given the built in advantage the Dems have in the EC Reps have to over perform. And Palin was just a major WTF? moment

Romney lost because another patrician, dark money powered wall street apparat had only marginally more appeal than McCain. The seeds of Trump were already planted. How many 'little people' do you think expected Romney to share their concerns. Bain was responsible for the job losses some of them experienced

McCain lost because of Obama's appeal to hope and change and being the first black president. McCain probably could have beat Hillary, especially if he'd not have picked a nutbag running mate.

As for Romney, it was his to lose and he lost it.

 

[BugI02]

If you believe turnout (or lack thereof) was truly the key to the Romney loss (and I honestly cannot remember where you are at on this) then enthusiasm for the candidate and his/her/its ideas would seem to be crucial

I see a lot of enthusiasm for Trump that might have been engaged and built upon instead of fought to the death

The #NeverTrumper Pundit Class Should Man Up | RealClearPolitics

 

[Twangbanger]

Wow, you guys are hitting home runs. I'm away from the thread one day, and the brainiacs take over.

With today's propaganda machine any GOP candidate will get torn apart. The last two were center right the GOP traditional voter base is not large enough to elect a President...

Central problem, right here: the GOP's current appeal is only big enough to "govern," when the field of play is no bigger than a Mid-Term election. It may in fact be impossible for any single GOP candidate to tweak the conditions right enough to win the Presidency, given this fact.

McCain couldn't overcome the lack of excitement/enthusiasm about him within the GOP and the high level of excitement generated on the other side for 'hope and change'. Given the built in advantage the Dems have in the EC, Reps have to over perform....Romney lost because another patrician, dark money powered wall street apparat had only marginally more appeal than McCain. The seeds of Trump were already planted. How many 'little people' do you think expected Romney to share their concerns. Bain was responsible for the job losses some of them experienced

McCain was never quite the bag of chips he thought himself to be, however, I do believe he was mainly the victim of the Credit Crisis. Wall Street, aided by Washington, absolutely destroyed the economy for many "little" people for at least a decade - and never faced any real accountability for that. And since the GOP was in the Big White House at the time, any Democrat who didn't chew the heads off babies (publicly) was going to win _that_ year. The 2008 Presidential race was the first opportunity the public got, after that crisis, to flip the governmental "toggle switch" the other direction from where it was. The President was effectively chosen the day the next-to-last candidate in the Democrat Primary (in this case HRC) dropped out. (The fact BHO had cool, black skin was a super-bonus point, for people who are into that kind of thing).

Romney was a Wall Street Private Equity guy. Running for President, 4 years after Wall Street had just trashed the economy and created a Lost Decade for little people. Game Over. He was a guy who wore wing-tip shoes with Blue Jeans. The average voter looks at that, and cries "phony!" They don't believe such a person is capable of caring about them. When the same voter sees Donald Trump wearing tennis shoes and a ball cap with his rumpled dress-shirt, they say, "Aha! That looks exactly like the old putzes I see shopping at WalMart after church!" It seems more real to them.

...I see a lot of enthusiasm for Trump that might have been engaged and built upon instead of fought to the death...

Imagine how different the Presidential race might be right now, if the GOP were to painfully, honestly gauge the magnitude of the chasm between themselves and public opinion, and say the following:

"Mitt Romney will not be speaking to you tonight. His time is up.

"We, the GOP, realize many of you believe we have drifted too far away from representing average people, and have become a party of lobbyists. We realize you think that we more or less facilitate uncontrolled immigration, not because we're Angela Merkel and we believe it's morally right, but simply for no other reason than because our donors personally profit from it. We realize you think we support "no-caveats" free trade, not because we're Milton Friedman nor from any bedrock belief that it's the moral expression of True Capitalism, but simply for no other reason than because our donors personally profit from it. You believe we are crass, and we'd just as easily reverse those positions, if the donors asked for it; it's just that the wind-sock of donor money steadily points the other way. So like Iron Roosters, we point that way too. Yes, we realize there are indeed some smartie-pants moderate Republican voters out there who project their own ethical goodness onto us, and genuinely believe we support those positions due to unvarnished ideological purity - and we thank those gullible guys from the bottom of our wallets! But the truth is, we have been swayed by the suitcases of donor cash, and it led us to the point we can no longer get a majority of voters in our own Primary to even believe us anymore.

"So. You rocked us back on our heels with the Trump thing. And we do not agree with him on many points. We think his style and divisiveness are a turn-off. Based on who we are, and the interests we represent, it would be tempting for us to simply call him a racist thug, oppose him hammer-and-tong, and disguise our opposition as nothing more than a response to that divisiveness. It would be tempting to just abandon the nominee, shift all our money to down-ballot races, and cover our asses & assets by protecting the Congressional Fiefdom that produces those suitcases of cash and future career opportunities for us. But that would be wrong, intellectually dishonest, and irresponsible. The truth is, we have drifted too far in the direction of corporate lobbyists, and as a result, we now realize Trump appeals to many of you on substantive grounds. And if we're ever to be a majority governing party again, we have to incorporate that reality into our platform. So we are going to recognize our responsibility in all this, and support your/our nominee full-heartedly. We cannot condone his divisive style, but we recognize he is only one person, and that HRC is our common enemy, and will work to ameliorate and modify any negative aspects of Trump's message while taking advantage of his substantive strong points to meld the GOP back into a majority governing party again. In consideration of the smartie-pants GOP moderates who believe Trump is a charlatan who is leading you all along, it's important to point out: whether or not Trump himself actually believes in any of this, is irrelevant; the point, as we have seen, is that you the voters care about it, and are willing to put your votes behind it. You have spoken, and that's a message we needed to hear. If we lose our Congressional majority as a result of Trump, so be it. We will get it back after two years of Hillary Clinton anyway. What damage she is able to do those two years is OUR fault, for drifting too far away from you, the voter. We intend to get ourselves "directionally correct" with the public, because we know that once we are in solidarity with you, nothing is impossible."

...and that's where Twangbanger's alarm clock goes off, Jennifer Lawrence puts her clothes back on and leaves, and I go mow the yard.

 

[BugI02]

One view from across the pond

From: Calling Trump names won't stop him becoming US President

"And they are right. First, Mrs Clinton remains unappealing to a vast body of Americans, including to many Democratic party supporters. The question of the potential security breach for which she was responsible in using a private email server has harmed her character. The FBI documents just published exposing her carelessness with classified information reinforce the impression that when it comes to important regulations, there is one law for her and one for everybody else." Hillary Clinton's conduct over questions about her email server may weaken her further

"She is funded by the sort of squillionaire Wall Street types middle America has come to blame for its financial woes. She has not given a press conference for over 270 days, which starts to cause some, even in the obedient US media, to wonder what she might have to hide. She has done nothing to consolidate the “bounce” she enjoyed after her convention, because she has very little new to say. Her campaign has consisted of telling people to vote for the profoundly under-achieving and corrupt political establishment that has so failed America since the Reagan years."


"Mr Trump, by contrast, has managed to engage with millions of Americans who had given up on politics, and offer them something different. It may be rank populism, it may be demagoguery, it may repel many other millions of people, but it has energised legions who have for decades felt that America’s political class disdained them. In some cases, but far from all, they are less educated and live in unsophisticated places, but their votes count the same as that of a millionaire on the Upper East Side with a PhD."

 

[JettaKnight]

So, if you wish to lay an enormous, multi-faceted responsibility at my feet I will return the favor

Why did you not get behind Scott Walker or (most especially) Rand Paul early on? Why did you present us with a cornucopia of candidates heavy on establishment hacks and apparatchiks?

Scott Walker I like, Rand Paul - I find him to be a nutter. And Cruz is a horrible legislator, plain and simple.

Kasich was always my #1 and many would agree he'd trounce Hillary because he had experience and no nasty baggage. Unfortunately, He, Rubio, Christie, Jeb and Fiorina and he were fighting over the same bloc of voters - true republicans (or "the establishment" as you'd put it). Trump won because he was the only true outsider and had that vote locked up.

 

[Brad69]

Kasich was and is a traditional GOP candidate. He would have faired no better than McCain or Romney. The GOP cannot elect a national candidate due to the shift in the population. I agree that Kasich made sense calm and experienced good center of the road polices that would work. That doesn't work anymore we need out of the box loud a little bit crazy. This may get enough people to the polls to overtake HRC.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Not A Cult: Trump lawyer suggests the Lord has chosen "the people's messenger"

 

[BugI02]

Scott Walker I like, Rand Paul - I find him to be a nutter. And Cruz is a horrible legislator, plain and simple.

Kasich was always my #1 and many would agree he'd trounce Hillary because he had experience and no nasty baggage. Unfortunately, He, Rubio, Christie, Jeb and Fiorina and he were fighting over the same bloc of voters - true republicans (or "the establishment" as you'd put it). Trump won because he was the only true outsider and had that vote locked up.

Kasich is not without 'nasty baggage', but more importantly wasn't that description even more apt in Romney's case? How'd that work out. Caspar Milquetoast only cuts it when he follows a Republican incumbent and the economy is awesome (think George Herbert Walker Bush)

 

[jamil]

If you believe turnout (or lack thereof) was truly the key to the Romney loss (and I honestly cannot remember where you are at on this) then enthusiasm for the candidate and his/her/its ideas would seem to be crucial

I see a lot of enthusiasm for Trump that might have been engaged and built upon instead of fought to the death

The #NeverTrumper Pundit Class Should Man Up | RealClearPolitics

Enthusiasm is emotional. I don't believe I've ever voted for a candidate because of enthusiasm, except for Ross Perot. I will claim temporary insanity on that one. I decide who I will vote for based on an evaluation of possible outcomes. If enthusiasm for a candidate is the thing that gets them over the top (and it seems to be) it is no wonder we are so ****ed up these days. I think continued use of enthusiasm as a criteria for candidate support is probably not the best thing for the future of the nation.

 

[bwframe]

Oooops...

Presidential poll: Donald Trump pulls ahead of Hillary Clinton - CNN.com

Washington (CNN)Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton start the race to November 8 on essentially even ground,
with Trump edging Clinton by a scant two points among likely voters...

 

[hoosierdoc]

It's odd how not present Hillary is. Rush points out her poll numbers go up when she goes into hiding. No press conference in almost 300 days.

Dems don't give a crap who/what she is, just that she's a dem

 

[bwframe]

She gave a press conference yesterday on her plane:

[video=youtube;CJdOkPES7dA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJdOkPES7dA[/video]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Heh, who does this remind you of?

The truly great Phyllis Schlafly, who honored me with her strong endorsement for president, has passed away at 92. She was very special! As a tribute to the late, great Phyllis Schlafly, I hope everybody can go out and get her latest book, THE CONSERVATIVE CASE FOR TRUMP.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/773113752271060992
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/773140702972801024

 

[T.Lex]

So by that formulation, a Republican Hoosier who voted for Obama in 2012 gets a pass, right? You can betray a party or an ideal as long as the argument can be made that it would not have affected the outcome? How many in aggregate can do this before it does affect the outcome?

For me, personally, it would depend on why that Republican voted for Obama.

But, you are clearly not understanding (either intentionally or not) what I'm saying.

Obama was NOT the clear favorite in Indiana in 2012. His win here was considered an upset -rightfully so.

If anything, Obama's 2012 win showed that the independent/unaffiliated voters are the ones that matter in the general. Perhaps more than the base.

So, maybe Trump is on to something....

McCain couldn't overcome the lack of excitement/enthusiasm about him within the GOP and the high level of excitement generated on the other side for 'hope and change'. Given the built in advantage the Dems have in the EC Reps have to over perform. And Palin was just a major WTF? moment

I will absolutely concede that McCain had a tough task trying to defeat Obama. That election was historic, and I think many (most?) of the general election voters went along for that ride.

I consider it an anomaly. At this point, most people realize bad presidents are not limited to old white guys.

Romney lost because another patrician, dark money powered wall street apparat had only marginally more appeal than McCain.

But that ignores the fundamental basis of your INGO-centered pro-Trump appeal. Would Romney have been better than Obama? If so, why didn't he win.

And your answer is... charisma? He didn't ...inspire like Trump? Well, in 2012, Trump didn't even inspire like he does now.

The seeds of Trump were already planted. How many 'little people' do you think expected Romney to share their concerns. Bain was responsible for the job losses some of them experienced

SO IS TRUMP!

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Chalk up another one in the "You've been conned" category

Confirmed by Trump insider: 'Trump TV' is Plan B after election

No interest in winning. Just helping himself.

 

[indiucky]

Chalk up another one in the "You've been conned" category

Confirmed by Trump insider: 'Trump TV' is Plan B after election

No interest in winning. Just helping himself.

That's awesome...I would hate for his ideas to die if Hillary coughs her way into an upset...I was going to be kind of bummed if he lost because I have gotten used to having him around...Knowing that a presidential candidate has the fore sight to plan for a possible loss and yet keep his name out there is very encouraging...

Thanks for keeping me positive on Trump GP...You manage to always find his awesomeness even though you are not a supporter....That makes you a pretty good dude in my book...

Respect...

 

[T.Lex]

Kinda like the Mike Huckabee plan, if he had the money.

I wonder if Pence will be a host, or if he'll fall back to Fox.