Posted on 10/22/2015 7:22:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
In December 2014 I wrote the column "Why Trump Should Run." It started with the line, "The elite media will scoff at a potential Donald Trump candidacy for president." They did; I didn't. And if Donald Trump the candidate had been a stock on the NYSE in my new book "Newsvesting" (which, I'll shamelessly note, is available from Amazon and Barnes & Noble), I would have been the lone pundit in America to have reaped a big "profit."
Back then Trump actually retweeted my column, to which one Twitter respondent tweeted, "Matt who?" Well, "Matt Who" is still here, and is still right.
Why was I right when almost every Washington, D.C., expert wasn't? Because I'm a pollster? No. My polls can't predict the future in politics.
Because I ran campaigns for names such as Newt Gingrich, or ran as a statewide GOP nominee for lieutenant governor at age 30, or because I actually served in office as a legislator? Nope. There are plenty of us has-been, washed-up political types out there.
It was and is because I have been and remain a true businessman. No, not at Trump's level or near it. But I have run very successful businesses, along with my share of not-so-spectacular ones. I knew then and know now that building any sizable business, whether closely held or publicly owned, requires more brains, marketing talent, negotiation skills and guts than most politicians could ever even conceive of.
So when I heard the endless media chatter that Trump "just wasn't smart enough or polished enough to be president" I chuckled. My immediate thought was, "OK, pundit, you go figure out how to become worth billions of dollars, and then we will talk about who is smart."
Then he announced for president and allegedly offended the world by having the gall to talk about real issues in a real way, such as immigration and our one-way open gate to some individuals who Mexico itself deemed too dangerous to keep. Most elite media and GOP establishment talking heads buried him. I did not. I did give him presumptuous advice in a June column. It was unsolicited and most of it turned out to be useless. Still, I felt he was in the game.
After the first debate, when focus groups and high-brow commentators were once again burying him, I knew instinctively that he had won the contest and advanced his cause. In my column on Aug. 13 I proclaimed, "Trump Survives." Yes, he did indeed.
Admittedly, my past years of experience polling for such media outlets as Politico, Newsmax, Fox network affiliates and others added to my evaluations. For example, most national writers never note that Trump runs about six to eight points ahead of the national polls in Southern states. Those states will likely decide the '16 nomination and will keep him competitive way into the race for the nomination.
And as for the general election, the media big deals buy all these head-to-head "fantasy polls" that somehow show Trump getting waxed by Democrats such as Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders? Give me a break. First, these way-too-early polls are complete garbage. And more importantly, our polling suggests that Trump might attract and actually hold on to more young voters and, yes, African-Americans than any other potential GOP nominees. Why? Because he's a reality-TV star in a reality-TV-driven world. Duh.
Add to that the fact that he has an entire well-known family who are just like him and working just as hard to get him elected. For his opponents, it's like facing an army of Trumps.
Sure, Trump could fade, but then that's what the GOP establishment sat around saying about Ronald Reagan in 1980. How do I know? Because I was a kid working with the master, a young Newt Gingrich and the great pro-Reagan-candidate-turned-U.S.-Senator Mack Mattingly that same election year -- earning my current right to comment some 36 years later. I heard the elite scoff at them and Reagan. We won; they didn't.
Yes, the race could change. Yes, I could be wrong. Yes, I'll poll it straight-up as always. But just like in my new book "Newsvesting," I chose the right "stock" when no one else did. In politics and the stock market, it's good to pick a potential winner before anyone else does.
www.predictit.org...I’m all in!
Could Donald Trump be to 2016 as Ronald Reagan was to 1980?
I have not seen one indicator where Trump is for limited government or limiting his office’s powers as he “gets things done”.
Or will we someday discover that Trump has invested in Matt Towery?
One very, very important aspect. He is comfortable in front of the camera and knows the workings of the medium. His "celebrity" and the backdrop of accomplishments is a tremendous asset as a familiar, friendly face to low information voters.
HOORAY accomplishments HOORAY Trump
Oh you’re not paying attention then. He says plenty about cutting EPA and Dept of Education, for example. I’ve not seen one indicator that you would mind the most government slashing conservative imaginable getting to the White House owned lock stock and barrel by huge government open borders donors.
Ronald Reagan was very comfortable in front of the cameras too, which greatly increased his ability to communicate effectively. This should not be considered a negative.
Trump has repeatedly said he will demolish the department of education, the EPA and that IS a start for a smaller government!!!!
Nobody is comparing them ideologically. What we see is Trump connecting with voters outside of the media crafted narrative. He has found a key issue that resonates. And he exudes optimism. Reagan was able to do that, and nobody since, until this year.
The actor was ridiculed, vilified, and not taken seriously. By his own party! What is going on today?
Nice! A good start. Still, I worry about his limited-government foundation. It seems like he is just for cutting the size of two large, unpopular, and useless departments. Again, a nice start, but it seems like it is more a popular move that improves the budget... not a philosophical imperative.
The left has a stash of fake evangelicals (or plain useful idiots) who are there to triangulate and divide.
The establishment is using this to push Hucksterbee and Carson as a Trojan horse to naïve and delusional evangelicals.
Given that Reagan's defining trait was his belief in limited-government, and the fact that he immediately followed a hyper-leftist and the previous title-holder for worst-ever president, I took it as an ideological reference.
He talks about limited waste and fiscal responsibility quite a bit
Limited power?
Lord Trump
I doubt it
Not many limit their power once they taste it
Eisenhower maybe
Wahington
It is more then we have been given for a long time.
Agreed. It is a very important positive, in that Trump created something and became the star in a time-slot of the medium, making money here…in addition to his other creations/accomplishments.
HOORAY Trump HOORAY accomplishments
(He's even called out the cameramen to pan the size of the crowd at his rallies..obviously against the wishes of their bosses/puppet masters)
Well Trump is seriously thinking about closing the Dept of Education for one thing. Are you good with that?
What Trump should do is have somebody pan the crowd at each of his rallies and then put a 30 second clip of it out on Youtube, Twitter and Instagram.
“Trump has repeatedly said he will demolish the department of education, the EPA and that IS a start for a smaller government!!!!”
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. - list of grievances; Declaration
https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies
BIG GOVERNMENT IS CRONY SOCIALISM
Socialism Is Legal Plunder - Bastiat
Oct 22, 2015: $18,415,208,276,074+
Oct 19, 2015: $18,411,508,566,936+
Up about 4 billion in about 4 days.
Good idea
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.