Posted on 07/24/2015 7:11:59 AM PDT by HarleyLady27
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump opened the door to a third-party run for the White House if he does not win the GOP nomination.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
If there are any, they will be stillborn.
Trump has commandeered all the oxygen.
LOL!
I notice you too are relying on the old adage ‘repeat a lie often enough.....
No evidence is available?
One teensy weeny problem with your theory, and that is a theory not fact. Perot admitted publicly that his alliance was with the dems, and the whole thing was to get Clinton elected.
Balding, go look at the posts under Trump yesterday and all of the discussion on Amnesty. I think Weekly Standard or some other Conservative magazine, said he was for Amnesty..that started the debate.
AGain, am I wrong that he said we should put he wall on certain parts of the border?
LOL!
I’M supposed to look for nonexistent evidence?
I’m insulted that you think I’m that stupid.
Trump can.
As long as he doesn’t drop out, just as he is gaining serious momentum, because someone (Arabs?) threaten his family (daughter’s wedding?).. Wasn’t that the explanation?
Since you chose not to back up your assertion that Cruz was for amnesty I trust you won’t repeat that particular untruth again.
Trump can.
As long as he doesn’t drop out, just as he is gaining serious momentum, because someone (Arabs?) threaten his family (daughter’s wedding?).. Wasn’t that the explanation?
Huh?
Not you
It isn’t non-existent...again, it was posted on FR last night.
Um, I don’t think I said Cruz is for Amnesty...
I said Trump is though...or seemed to hedge on it some last night. Will have to look through FR links to see.
However, if you look at posts 9, 11 and 15 its easy to see why a mistake in interpretation in what you said could be made.
Then it won’t take you long to find it.
Cruz has repeatedly said he’s for legalization, which is amnesty.
Those who have been in the country illegally for over a year are supposed to be deported and not allowed to set foot in the country for a decade. So to let them stay and make them legal is a massive amnesty.
Was the Bracero program amnesty?
Not as I understand it.
But it is legalization.
It was worker permits, but not for those who had illegally broken into our country and committed numerous felonies over the years in order to work and collect benefits here illegally.
It wasn’t allowing those who should have been thrown out for at least a decade to stay here and be made legal (and undoubtedly, soon enough, citizens).
Trump has enough media experience to use TV broadcasts effectively. That is an absolutely immense difference.
If you can hold an audience; speak forceful truths that people are starved for hearing, why deny the possibilities?
I do not know what the significance is even supposed to be, as to Perot's motives. How does that alter my point as to Trump's potential?
I was sorry to see Clinton elected in 1992; but that did not alter the dynamics of the campaign.
Look, I have personally challenged the Republican regulars, using TV for delivering ripping attacks, back in the 1970s. In 1974 I lost to the party endorsed candidate in the Primary by a 52% to 45% margin. Sounds bad; but plug in these factors:
1. The endorsed candidate had a name, which between him and his father, had been on the ballot for the Cincinnati City Council, every two years over a 36 year period.
2. He spent 5 times as much as I spent during the campaign.
3. He had the then very effective Party precinct organization, in his corner.
That was also the time when Nixon was in deep trouble over Watergate; but while I as a critic of Nixon's could have distanced myself to advantage, I elected instead to treat Watergate as little more than a bad jok, and delivered a TV extemporaneous half hour attack on "Forty years of pusillanimous betrayal," absolutely pillorying the Washington politicians for forty years of betrayal of the Constitutional limitations on Federal power.
A California Republican State Committeeman, who just happened to be in town overnight called me the next day to get a copy, so that he could send one as a model for how to fight back, to each Republican Congressional candidate in California. But, of course, there was no copy, as the speech was completely extemporaneous. He was going to call the station, to see if they had taped it, as it was delivered live, and would give him a copy. To this day, I do not know if he was able to get one.
Analysis shoed that if I had only been outspent by a 3 to 1 margin, I would have gone to Congress.
Now to return to Trump. Do you see him being outspent by more than 3 to 1?
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.