Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was Trump the only Republican who could have won this year?
Washington Examiner ^ | 11/15/2016 | W. JAMES ANTLE III

Posted on 11/15/2016 4:56:14 AM PST by iontheball

The conventional wisdom was that almost any of the other 16 Republican presidential candidates could have run better than Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton's team certainly believed it.

Now that Trump is president-elect, not only was his weakness clearly exaggerated. With the benefit of hindsight, Trump may have been the only Republican contender who could have broken Clinton's blue wall and pulled off the upset.

"I wouldn't have believed it," said a D.C. anti-Trump conservative. "Now it sure seems like it."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: election; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: iontheball

Yes.


21 posted on 11/15/2016 5:15:48 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball
A bunch of Freepers knew Trump would win from the day he announced.

Trump changed US politics in one fell swoop and this election and his strategy will be studied around the world way into the distant future.

22 posted on 11/15/2016 5:16:17 AM PST by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Very good article. Yes, Trump is the only one in the GOP field who could have beaten Clinton. All the others needed the UniParty’s money and therefore could not have defied the UniParty requirements for open borders and suicidal trade practices. None of them could have swept the Rust Belt as Trump did. Trump crushed the UniParty machine by self-funding.


23 posted on 11/15/2016 5:16:47 AM PST by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

there are some things I absolutely believe about this year and most will probably disagree with some of it.

Trump’s candidacy was like every other time he ran and he didn’t really expect to go far.

Until he said that comment about Hispanics. Then it all took a life of his own.

He is a showman. And he grabbed it by the horns.

He is the only person who could have won. This year is the only time he could have won compared to in the past. He is the only person I can think of with absolutely no political or military experience that could capture the WH at this time.

It was a perfect storm.

Unfortunately, I believe RINOs still don’t get it and think the American people want more of the same from them.

And personally, I think Trump will like running for President much better than being President. But he will do a good job.


24 posted on 11/15/2016 5:17:31 AM PST by RummyChick (Trump Train Hobo TM Rummychick. Example - Ryan Romney Kasich. Quit trying to Jump on the Train)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Too funny!


25 posted on 11/15/2016 5:17:51 AM PST by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

I doubt Cruz would have won. Trump won because absolutely nothing was off the table. Cruz took the “past” off the table early on. Not to mention he wasn’t likable at all and there is just no way he would have won in the rust belt


26 posted on 11/15/2016 5:17:57 AM PST by wiseprince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
Cruz had zero chance of winning in the upper Midwest in a general election.

I was a Cruz fan. I still think Cruz is the best Senator we have and I'm a pretty big Jeff Sessions fan as well. But compare voting records and Cruz wins.

But to your point. You are probably right about the upper Midwest but it would nice to hear the rational for the claim.

Nevertheless, we owe this election to WI, MI and PA. There is no doubt that the people of those states heard Trump's message. I was betting Trump would squeeze in with a close win in NH followed by a win in NV. I thought we had a good chance in MI and didn't even consider that WI was in play. And PA? We never win PA, we just get close.

It was an amazing election and this former (and still) Cruz supporter is inclined to agree: We probably did need Trump to take on and defeat the Wicked Witch.

27 posted on 11/15/2016 5:20:08 AM PST by InterceptPoint (Ted, you finally endorsed. About time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: grania

Anyone who is an honest and truthful conservative will admit that none other than Donald Trump would have beaten Hillary Clinton. None of them. Only Trump had the brass set necessary to go up against the world and win.


28 posted on 11/15/2016 5:20:16 AM PST by flaglady47 (TRUMP Rocked and WON!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

True-but I believe that from the start, Trump displayed a strong, focused and very consistently articulated personal conviction.

He didn’t let the MSM dictate to him or de rail him. It was ALWAYS apparent that it was HIS race... HE would control his image, his vision, his plans, his direction.

Not the MSM, not the DNC and no one was going to manipulate him or his campaign.

In the face of everything, that took a tremendous amount of conviction and courage. It was just what Conservatives have been waiting for.

As Winston Churchill said: “Intellect has nothing to do with fitness for the job.”

If Trump speaks like a dock hand and commits avoidable and embarrassing political and policy blunders...so be it.... We have had 8 years (longer actually) of Democrats who do as much and worse while sustaining VERY LONG and active political careers - and never improve THEIR delivery.

Trump will be fine... and in addition, he is smart enough to defer to the right people. That’s worth a lot.

There will be NO ‘I hate America’ bast*&ds in HIS administration and there is a gargantuan step in the right direction, right there!!


29 posted on 11/15/2016 5:20:29 AM PST by SMARTY ("What is freedom? To have the will to be responsible for one's self. "M. Stirner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

Right you are. No one other than Trump had the guts to showcase the families of those harmed by illegals or victimized by Bill and Hillary. Oh and let’s not forget that no other Republican ever went after the inner city vote the way Trump did. “What the hell do you have to lose” was classic!

That press conference before debate number 2 was genius...as well as the “you’d be in jail” quip. I think that quip hurt PIAPS more than she and the MSM will ever admit, imo.


30 posted on 11/15/2016 5:24:43 AM PST by HombreSecreto (The life of a repo man is always intense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Amen. None of those others could have won. This was pointed out repeated here through out the contest


31 posted on 11/15/2016 5:25:28 AM PST by datricker (President Elect Trump is Here - as i said he would be - phew!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
People might think so but in reality probably not. Clinton was such a weak candidate that most of the Republicans who ran would have beaten her. On the other hand some of the Republicans who ran were weaker than she was so it all worked out in the end.

Which Republicans do you think were stronger than her?

32 posted on 11/15/2016 5:25:41 AM PST by COBOL2Java (1 Tim 2:1-3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Cruz withered when seriously facing Trump, devolving from a fine contender into a petty gnat. And I voted for him.
He’d not have lasted long against the Democratic machine. Neither would have most other candidates.

Trump survived because when the Left played dirty, he didn’t care because he was already dirty.


33 posted on 11/15/2016 5:26:06 AM PST by ctdonath2 ("If anyone will not listen to your words, shake the dust from your feet and leave them." - Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
Cruz would have had a difficult time winning Missouri. The cross-over democrats I know, did not like Cruz.
34 posted on 11/15/2016 5:26:32 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Is bacon delicious.


35 posted on 11/15/2016 5:28:17 AM PST by Leep (Last Days of Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Probably, I don’t think any other candidate would have “expanded the map” by appealing to rust belters.

With the exception of Cruz, the rest would have wasted their campaign trying to appeal to the media rather than the voters.

Cruz probably would not have been able to handle the media like Trump, and just would not have had Trump’s appeal. People want a president that will deal with the problems that affect them, and Trump was pretty much the only candidate who understood that.


36 posted on 11/15/2016 5:29:24 AM PST by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Trump was the only one who could beat HRC because he was the only Republican able and willing to verbally attack a woman to her face.


37 posted on 11/15/2016 5:30:47 AM PST by buckalfa (I am deplorable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Cruz would’ve been a great debater, but I don’t know if he would’ve been a great campaigner. Many of the GOP would try to “rise above” the attacks to let the public see them for what they were, except that the public probably wouldn’t have.


38 posted on 11/15/2016 5:33:04 AM PST by Tanniker Smith (Rome didn't fall in a day, either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iontheball

Trump was the only one who could have won since Ohio, PA, MI, and WI put him over the top.

ONLY his message of anti-NAFTA, phony free trade, removal of jobs and manufacturing would have resonated in those states.

Not one other candidate shared Trump’s pro-worker views on those subjects. Jeb, Cruz, Rubio, et al would not have won those states.


39 posted on 11/15/2016 5:35:34 AM PST by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Cruz was not going to take on the Trade Agreements or mass immigration.

Cruz is a doctrinaire Free Trade guy coming from a libertarian Right tendency. He’s a neo-globalist. His opposition to illegal immigration is simply a straight affirmation of law and order but does not go futher into the issue of who are the immigrants, or what it does to wage competition for the citizenry.

Trump was saying what people in Ohio and Michigan were thinking but afraid to say for fear of condemnation. They can vote for him without risking the wrath of their far left doctrinaire neighbors. So they did.

That would not have been the case with Cruz. They would have just stayed home.


40 posted on 11/15/2016 5:36:20 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson