Posted on 11/10/2016 11:33:44 AM PST by Rummyfan
But Trump really did shatter the glass ceiling. We're told that "anyone can grow up to be president", but in practice you have to be a politician or have won the Second World War. Trump is the first non-"public servant" to shatter the glass ceiling. He's proved you can win the presidency without being a Bush or a Clinton or a lifetime member of the political class. He's proved you can shatter the glass ceiling and win without the consultant class, without donors, without focus groups, without a gazillion-dollar ad budget, without your own party's office-holders and intellectuals, and without a "ground game" - without turnout models, without field offices, without three lame-o cardboard mailers poking out of your post-office box every day. In dispensing with all the rubbish that makes American politics as remote and ritual-bound as Chinese opera, he has performed a signal service to this republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...
Someone told me....don't step into the ring unless you're going to win.
Few write as well as Mark Steyn; “Yesterday, the dispossessed said they’re tired of being told they don’t count - and, in terms of the electoral arithmetic, demonstrated that in fact the experts CAN’T count.”
Made me LOL - but I’d cordially disagree (the expert LIED) - still a wickedly funny line!
The problem is that there were 16 of them. If there had been 2 or 3, that would have been different. But the GOP has no party discipline - that is, figure out who’s viable and who’s not - and thus was an easy target for somebody who really wanted to win.
I didn’t like Trump because I didn’t think he was conservative and I didn’t vote for him in the primary, but I voted for him in the general election because he was the last man standing. So the GOP needs to totally reevaluate its whole party operation. Which is a good thing, thanks to the unlikely Trump.
I learned a new word today.
L
“Trump also proved you can shatter the glass ceiling and lead the biggest Republican Party victory (White House and Congress) since 1928[.]”
Wrong. It was an even larger victory because he’ll probably get four SCOTUS picks, making it a hat trick plus a 100 yard runback for a TD.
Has anyone given any thought to Mark’s new TV show? I rarely watch tv (or video), so I wouldn’t get much out of a subscription, but it might be a good Christmas present for #2 son, who really likes talk radio and always has a beeber-like device or two on him.
Rigging the system is what got Democrats into trouble this time around.
Even the Dems would never have picked Hillary if other candidates had been allowed to run. But Hillary was picked in advance by the Dem party power brokers, probably because a lot of money (not hers or Bill’s, obviously, since they don’t contribute to anything) was expected to flow in. It probably did, but she was so horrible and in fact the Dem platform was so horrible that probably even most of the traditional Dem voter base - white male blue-collar union voters - went out and voted for Trump. Actually, even a lot of white middle class women abandoned the Dems.
My feeling is that we need a shorter primary and a better way of selecting the candidates. I can’t go through another 18 months of campaigning...heck, you can give birth two times in that period!
The long campaigns don’t bother me any. I just tune it out. The advantage of longer campaigning is it gives voters a longer time to evaluate candidates.
The usual Steyn.
The article said a lot of ‘traditional stuff’ that Trump didn’t have, what Trump has (had) is that he’s a marketing genius, and know how/what to use those venues effectively to sell his ‘stuff’.
Even now, we hear other analysts tearing into the buffoonish Trump, and wouldn’t give him credit.
For me, I can live with that, a president Trump who’s a billionaire celebrity but doesn’t have gravitas (whatever!), as long as we hold him to his top campaign promises.
Nobody’s mentioned that Hillary lost after spending twice the amount that Trump spent. That he spent some of his OWN money says a lot!
I’m afraid I can’t agree, even if there were only 2 others they were typical mainstream candidates except for Cruz who failed in debating because he couldn’t debate issues without sounding like a lawyer, which he admittedly is and also he lacks charisma and needs voice lessons. The other candidates were quickly characterized by Trump as he did Crooked Hillary so he was fighting a new war while they were fighting the last one.
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.