Posted on 08/01/2015 5:34:40 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
While perusing the articles and stories one can find on the computer (my wife says I spend way too much time on this thing), and the posted comments related to the articles, I came across a comment concerning Donald Trump (imagine that) and his lack of qualifications to be the next president.
A poster had commented that Republicans can’t seem to get it right in their selection of candidates; notably, with Trump in the mix.
Deciding to have a little fun with this person, I pointed out that the Democrats hadn’t done such a hot job picking a candidate in the past two elections, either. I also pointed out that the president wasn’t all that qualified in the job department when considering his prior job experience.
After all, when all you have for a job recommendation for the highest office in the land is having been a community organizer, and junior senator in one of the most corrupt and bankrupt states in the country, that isn’t saying much.
I proceeded to explain to this person that Trump’s strategy is to continue building a large lead in the polls; then, call a news conference to announce he’s withdrawing from the race.
The only reason Trump entered in the first place, he explains, was to set the tone of the dialog. He recommends his followers get behind Sen. Ted Cruz.
Sen. Cruz breezes through the Republican primaries, defeats Hillary in the general election, and is now our new United States president. Wahoo.
The only possible way i would vote for Trump is if he continued to absolutely crush the competition and his VP pick, and his cabinet appointees, were solid conservatives or at least they have actual lifetime backgrounds in the private sector (reality).
I will not vote for a Jeb. And i will take anyone over a Hillary.
PS if Trump bombs out the last month of this election cycle then we will know we have been duped yet again.
Mmmmmmm.......a “pick-me” tactic.....n-i-c-e insight on your part.
Wouldn’t surprise me at all.
The fact that Trump, Cruz and Palin all seem to be on the same sheet of music should tell us that something is going on.
Can you imagine if we had a candidate of Trump’s charisma, and Cruz’ intelligence, and debating skills?... This thing would already be over with
I fully expect Fox to cherry pick the polls it wants.
**************
Yep it’s there show and they said up front they were going
to pick the five polls that will be used.
But for Cruz to fall below the cutoff he’s got to drop
three places in the avg.
No.
Voters who do not strongly identify with the ideological spectrum will decide the next election, as they do all watershed elections. As they did 1980.
1976: Carter 40 million, Ford 39 million. 1980: Reagan 44 million, Carter 35 million.
Democrats (-5 million) Republicans (+5 million), in a year when Democrats dominated the legislatures, the state houses, and the House of Representatives.
The winner in 2016, if he is a Republican, will need 5-9 million Obama voters to win.
If your assumption that voter behavior is determined by the voter's position on the ideological spectrum, and that all voters wear that like a uniform, then there really is no point in having an election for President in 2016.
Appealing across the ideological spectrum as McCain and Romney did is a disaster, as you rightly point out - but that's because they were targeting the wrong Democrats, and using the wrong strategy to boot.
Ronald Reagan "reached across the ideological spectrum" very successfully, by targeting white working class Democrats, and he kicked ass.
Best regards.
Delusional. At the top in fundraising.#1 among conservatives.
I think you are wrong here.
A President does not have to be the smartest man in the room. He has to be smart enough to realize his own limits and smart enough to surround himself with the best advisers he can get. And then he has to be willing to take their advice.
The thing he needs in addition to intelligence is big brass balls that clang together when he walks. This is where many fall short.
Based on actual results in life, Trump has demonstrated that he is qualified. He has demonstrated this through success in business, not politics, but he has quite thoroughly demonstrated it.
Look at Trump's campaign organization. He's got some serious players in the campaign, people who would not sign on if this was just a lark. This is not a clown operation. Already, every county in New Hampshire has an org chart.
I also think Trump has a teflon coating. He seems innoculated against the kind of gaffes that would cripple any other campaign. It's almost like people expect him to be outrageous and over-the-top. That's just Trump being Trump.
The conventional media have not figured out how to handle him. Those who aren't old enough to remember Reagan (most of them) have never seen anything like this before.
Unfortunately Trump has never demonstrated any consistency.
He’s got a record of conservatism stretching back several weeks.
Fun speculation but totally inaccurate.
Donald Trump is running for President because he believes he can make a big difference and turn the country around. I agree that he has the best chance for success. Donald Trump is not a stalking horse for anybody of either party.
Everyone knows that.
I agree with you on the fact that Democrats will not cross over and vote for Cruz or Palin. However, many of them will vote for Trump. Not because he is a liberal, as some suggest -he may be on some issues, but because they genuinely like him. I’ve spoken to many Dems, who are all in for Trump. I know that Mark Levin wants a pure conservative to run, another Reagan, but, that isn’t going to happen. A Ronald Reagan comes along once in a lifetime. I think Mark is living in a wonderful, warm bubble of yesteryear and his time in the Reagan administration. Times have changed and this country has changes - unfortunately. I can say that if Trump isn’t the nominee, then those same Democrats will vote for the D candidate. Cruz has his place in politics, I just don’t think it’s going to be as president.
Look, I want Ted Cruz to win but I do agree he lacks charisma. Trump has spent 30 years cultivating himself as a media figure, a pop culture star. He is attracting low information voters (LIVs) who have seen him regularly on TV and watched him hobnob with the rich and famous. What he says, to the LIVs, is less important than who he is - a guy who got to play “boss” to a ton of other celebs who may have the IQ of cockroaches (cough, Dennis Rodman, cough) but whom the pop culture identifies with.
Ted Cruz is the opposite of this. Cruz is all-serious, all-the-time. He’s a man of great intellect, great debate skills and the charm of an undertaker. What he says is everything. He’s spot-on with most of it to our conservative ears and he’s fiercely brave to attack the pols in both parties and tell it like it is but that doesn’t play well with the “cool” crowd as much as hanging with rappers and reality stars.
If Trump bows out, the LIVs will gravitate back to whomever the MSM tells them is “cool”, which is Hillary. For now, they’re hitched to Trump because he’s the anti-president and he’s stirring the pot. The less Trump talks about policy, the better he’ll be received by the LIVs.
Ok, this needs to be addressed. I’m positive that there are some genuine categories of Trump supporters that don’t fall into what I’m about to point out below, but this needs to be called out for what it is: straight up Anti-Semitism. Liz was asked to clarify her comments by several FReepers and ignored it.
She’s not the only one though and I find it alarming that a lot of professed Trump supporters tend to come from the Ron Paul camp pushing the same terminology.
Last week, Liz said this more than once:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3316779/posts
Comment #14
“Mr Opportunist—the flailing Cruz—collapsed in the polls after stupidly trying to latch onto the soaring Trump aura.
At a recent “In Defense of Christians” event, Cruz was booed off the stage.....he demonstrated his appalling ignorance of the plight of Christians in the middle east.
The obsessively-opportunistic Cruz used the audience’s goodwill to promote his agenda, rather than comment on Christians’ plight....he was booed off the stage.”
The first paragraph is fine. That is the nature of politics. However, she brought up a well known event last year where Cruz was speaking to Arab Christians when Cruz rightly pointed out that Jews face the same persecution and terror from Jihadists that Arab Christians do and he was booed off stage because of the Arab’s anti-semitism towards Israel (which brings into question whether their conversion to Christianity was genuine and understood).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2ZVihACwQ0
Anyone who heard of the story and saw what transpired knew that Cruz was absolutely correct in what he said and was right to walk off the stage.
But Liz refers to that as “opportunistic” and saying he “misused the audience’s goodwill”. Only a Paulbot could make such a claim.
But then, Liz also posted this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3316774/posts
Comment #20
She repeats her comments that posts a “Backstory”
“THAT’S SCARY: Ted Cruz as a Cabinet Secy in the Trump admin?
At a recent “In Defense of Christians” event, Cruz was booed off the stage.....he demonstrated his appalling ignorance of the plight of Christians in the middle east.
The obsessively-opportunistic Cruz used the audience’s goodwill to promote his agenda, rather than comment on Christians’ plight....he was booed off the stage.”
BACKSTORY: Is the Canadian-born Sen Ted Cruz really a Washington outsider or just another neocon establishment player willingly following the globalist agenda?
Back in 2014 a writer questioned the opportunistic Cruz’s self-proclaimed “outsider” status....in light of his background as a Harvard-trained lawyer who worked for George W. Bush and Congressman John Boehner.
The writer also mentioned Cruz’s wife Heidi’s banking and Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) affiliations: “Cruz’s wife Heidi is a Goldman Sachs Regional Manager, which is a little unnerving, given the massive bailouts and their involvement with the Federal Reserve in deflating our currency and killing our economy.
Heidi was also a member of a CFR task force that produced a report in 2005 called “Building a North American Community”.” Cruz himself once referred to the CFR as a “pernicious nest of snakes” working to undermine US sovereignty. This apparently includes his wife.
The CFR is a Rockefeller-funded group that is said to be occupied with the task of promoting the acceptance of global governance by Americans. Members there have written about why Americans must give up some of their sovereignty for a new order.
CFR’s “North American Union”, many believe, would indeed undermine the sovereignty of The United States.
Cruz is a recipient of over $106,000 from foreign pro-war lobbies, and once suggested that pro-abortion Democrat ex- Senator Joseph Lieberman would make a good Secretary of Defense. Lieberman himself has taken more than $2.2 MILLION from pro-war lobbies, the most of any US Senator.
This proclivity to support war, is said by many pundits to be “spawning the New World Order abroad.....perhaps a Police State at home”.
Wow, in that “backstory” we have the terms “Neocon”, accusing Cruz of being a “War Monger”, as well as references to questioning his American loyalty and Natural Birth Citizenship (Canadian), and that Cruz is somehow apart of the NWO, which if you listen to these people long enough, they believe NWO is controlled by Israel.
I called Liz out on her comments and another poster asked her to clarify her comments on Cruz at the Defense of Christians events, but she did not and sunk back over into the cooking threads after being exposed.
My reason for bringing this up is “Liz” isn’t the only Trump supporter that fits this same category. There are others. Most notably many of the Cruz-birther lunatics, but also many that harbor the same disastrous Ron Paul lunacy on foreign policy and those with anti-semetic tendencies have for whatever reason gravitated to Trump. Interestingly, I could not find a single comment from Liz on the Iran Nuke deal Probably because she supports it or thinks Trump would make “a better deal”.
“I personally don’t think a president needs to be charming”
Maybe a sitting president doesn’t need to be charming but, sadly, candidates do. It started with JFK looking better than Nixon. And now, with shallow and superficial idiots being able to vote, it’s even more so. If you put a charming candidate up against the smartest one of the bunch the outcome won’t be ideal.
Best case scenario is finding one person who has both assets.
Thanks for the correction. I did not know that Jindal is unpopular in his own state. FWIW, Kasich isn’t popular in OH. His victory was about running an excellent campaign against a seriously deficient (indeed, laughably so) opponent.
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.