Posted on 01/09/2016 5:59:55 AM PST by Kaslin
These days, people on the Right seem to be polarized: Either they think Donald Trump is a brilliant, unstoppable ball of winning or they believe he's the classiest, most luxurious demagogue to come along in decades. I have a bit of a different take.
I've read and enjoyed Donald Trump's books, he was nothing but gracious to me when we met, I have friends I like and respect a great deal who work for him and I even used a picture of the two of us together on the Christmas cards I sent out this year.
Moreover, Trump's willingness to take on issues ignored by the Republican Party, his lack of political correctness and the real genius he has for identifying important issues other candidates aren't talking about and bringing them to the forefront are nothing short of amazing. Additionally, no one should underestimate a strong leader whose name has been synonymous with business success for over a decade, especially when he'd beat the whole rest of the Democrat and Republican fields combined in the famous, "Who would you want to have a beer with?" test. As I've said before, other Republicans can learn a lot from Trump and anyone who can't see that is a fool.
However, even though I would certainly vote for Trump if he's the nominee and would also work hard to get him elected, I have two major qualms about him. The first is that I question how conservative he'd be if he gets into office. Given his mixed track record on conservative issues, I doubt if even the most diehard Trump fans would hold that against me, but the bigger problem is that I just don't think he can win a general election.
There are a number of reasons for that, but the largest one is that Trump couldn't be financially competitive. That may seem bizarre since we're talking about a man whose name is synonymous with wealth, but even Donald Trump doesn't have enough money to self-finance a general election run at the presidency. Keep in mind that Hillary Clinton and the Super Pacs supporting her will spend north of 3 BILLION DOLLARS. On the other hand, if you take away the value of his name, Trump's net worth is probably somewhere in the 3-4 billion dollar range and most of it is tied up in assets. Ask yourself if Donald Trump is really going to sell Trump Tower, the Trump International Hotel, his golf courses and his other properties at cut rate prices to pour the money into his political campaign. It may not even be possible, but even if it is, do you really think Trump would liquidate most of his fortune to run for President? When you consider that Trump has been so tight-fisted during the primary that he might run the first Presidential campaign ever to turn a profit, it seems very unlikely.
On top of that, keep in mind that Donald Trump has made the fact that he's self-funding a central part of his messaging. If Trump were to win and change his mind, not only would it hurt him with his core supporters, it probably wouldn't be all that effective. Trump's fund raising operation so far has understandably been mediocre and the Super Pacs that were gearing up to support him were asked to stand down. Those Super Pacs were particularly important because there are hard limits on what rich supporters can give to campaigns, but not on what they can give to a Super Pac. Without major help from Super PACs, it's highly unlikely that Donald Trump could win a general election.
Imagine a campaign where Hillary and her Super Pacs spend more than 3 billion dollars and Trump barely manages to stockpile 500 million in his war chest. In every swing state, Hillary would have a better get out the vote operation, better staffing and she would be able to blanket the airwaves with her ads while Trump couldn't compete. In a race like that, Hillary could win in a walk EVEN IF she goes to prison over her email server.
Getting beyond the money issue, most people would agree that Trump has done so well because he's been dominant when it comes to attracting earned media. However, a big part of Trump's success in that area has been as a result of relatively friendly blanket coverage from conservative radio hosts and online media. In a general election, those outlets will be much smaller factors and they definitely wouldn't be capable of delivering the election to Trump.
Of course, Trump has also gotten plenty of attention from the mainstream media as well, but do you really think the MSM liberals will allow themselves to be used to beat Hillary in 2016? Sure, they're happy to run "Can you believe he said this?" stories about Trump now when they think he's causing problems for Republicans, but if he becomes the nominee, every story about Trump will be a straight-up hit piece. If even that doesn't work, they'll just find some excuse to stop covering him altogether if that's what it takes to beat him. This is why it's so important for a Republican to have a huge war chest because you NEVER get a fair shake from the MSM. Even the Left's favorite Republican, John McCain, was savaged by the press when he ran for President. In fact, any Republican who hopes to win a general election by getting his message out to the voters through ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post, New York Times, etc. isdoomed before he starts. Unfortunately, that's the difficult position Donald Trump would be in during a general election campaign.
On top of all that, you have to look at Trump's demographic strengths and weaknesses. Trump does extremely well with blue collar workers and men with high school degrees. There are also some indications that he is particularly attractive to people who normally don't vote, but those voters are by their very nature tough to count on in an election. Trump might also do better than Republicans generally do with black men. However, beyond that, almost every indicator is negative. Trump does poorly with women, he will guarantee a huge Hispanic turnout for the Democrats and given the rabid hatred for him in some quarters of the Republican Party, it seems likely he’ll bleed even more GOP support than he would bring in from the Democrats.
Furthermore, although approval numbers don't generally mean a lot this early in the game, they are relevant when someone is as well-known as Trump. Right now, Trump has a 34% favorable rating and a 57% unfavorable rating. Candidates don't win races with numbers that bad and since Trump is already a known quantity, it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult to get his numbers up. Fairly or unfairly, when people know enough about you to form an opinion and have already decided they don't like you, it's very hard to change their minds.
Last but not least, Trump may be the single most gaffe-prone candidate in history, primarily because no other candidate could survive saying even a fraction of the off-the-wall things that he does. It just goes on and on. McCain's not a war hero because he was captured, blood coming out of her "whatever," "schlonged," saying we should shut down part of the Internet, calling for killing the relatives of terrorists, "How stupid are the people of Iowa?," incorrectly claiming a group of black pastors was showing up to endorse him when it wasn't, having his spokesman express a desire to use nukes on TV, a gazillion tweets calling people "losers" for saying something he didn't like - and probably a half dozen other now forgotten mistakes or goofs with a larger point (No, "thousands" of Muslims in New Jersey didn't cheer 911 and, yes, Trump could have discussed Mexican criminals coming over the border without offending people if he'd used better language). As someone who writes about politics for a living, Trump is extremely entertaining, but most Americans want a sober and serious President, not someone who's "fun" because he might say the Pope got "schlonged" or Angela Merkel has blood coming out of her "whatever." I do think Donald Trump is qualified to be President, but he's not "presidential" and you can be certain that if he's the nominee, there would be many, many more gaffes before the election in November.
Just to reiterate, not only do I like and respect Donald Trump, but if he does turn out to be our nominee, I will support him all the way and hope he proves this column wrong. That being said, Hillary is VERY beatable, she's essentially promising to go EVEN FURTHER than Obama and I fear for the future of this country if we throw away this opportunity. I think Cruz would beat her handily, Christie could probably pull it off and, God help us all, maybe even Rubio would defeat Hillary Clinton. Since I don't think Donald Trump can get the job done, regrettably I cannot support him in the primary.
Going to be some surprised people next November.
I prefer Cruz but am starting to sense that Trump has a better chance than anyone else due to being able to appeal to such a broad base. I know some long-term hard-core Dems who claim they will vote for him over Hillary - don't know any other candidate that has such folks making such statement.
People are tired of career politicians.
>>Without major help from Super PACs, it’s highly unlikely that Donald Trump could win a general election.
Did Romney have support from Super PACs?
If a successful business man, who is running on the platform of making America great again cannot beat a lying, conniving, feckless, and unsuccessful person like Hillary Clinton, then the country is probably too far gone.
But the latest poll indicates even at this stage that he is leading here 47% to 44%.
Time will tell...but I think we are actually (hopefully) looking at a Reagan style, large victory. And that goes for either him (Trump) or Cruz.
The American Republic has devolved into ‘who has the most money/’ Not who is representing the people and the country. Why spend money on get out the vote when you can just cheat, as Dems have done for over fifty years. Why tell people ‘I’m here to represent you and your family, your job and your country’ if the Super Pacs are who you have to report to? We’ve allowed this to happen and our representatives on both sides (of the same coin) merely chortle at us.
That’s the only real phenomenon out there, well, other than people blindly going for Hillary, is people’s misguided view of Trump. He loves America. He’s a winner otherwise. He doesn’t backtrack and wimp out when he’s wrong, and he knows when he’s wrong- his advisors tell him if he doesn’t know ( he didn’t get where he is surrounding himself with schmoozing yes men )
People really ought to get used to his being president. He has the best chance of winning it out of all the candidates. By far
I know and respect where this writer is coming from. I agree with everything that he said but here’s where I disagree with his conclusion. Remember, the choice will be binary. Either Hillary or Trump. That’s it. People will have to go to the polls and pull the lever for Hillary or stay home which amounts to a vote for Trump. I’m not banking everything on a massive turnout for Trump but I believe it will happen. As far as ads are concerned, who cares? Bush has spent a FORTUNE and what has it bought him? The more people view Bush and/or Hillary, the worse they do. Give Jeb Bush a billion dollars and his numbers still won’t move. Same with Hillary. He has flipped his positive/negative ratings in a remarkably short time. Why can’t he improve on those numbers? My Democrat buddies talk about Hillary like we used to talk about McCain. “Ok. Yeah. Sure. I guess I’ll vote for the arrogant bitch.” I agree with the writer about money being essential for get out the votes efforts. He has an excellent point. But I don’t think that Trump agreed to pay for the GENERAL election himself, just the Primary. Also, with the best GOTV effort in the world you still have to have a product that people want to buy. I honestly believe that Hillary ain’t it. But then, I could be wrong...
Well, I think he CAN win.
I honestly don’t think Clinton has a chance against anyone, and I think the dems know it now, they are scared beyond belief.
It goes way beyond the word tired of career politicians, IMO. The people I talk to are livid over the amoral, corrupt vermin occupying We The People’s property in DC. It would seem historically appropriate to have stocks lining Pennsylvania Avenue so those who have betrayed this nation could be on display and remembered forever for their part in turning their backs on all those who sacrificed to keep this nation free. A trip to Arlington would be advised, however, self-serving, amoral vermin would be unmoved, ya think?
I don’t like Trump—and I think he’ll steam roll Hillary. No ones stopping him.
Isn’t all campaign money spent to sway the 10% of voters who are swing voters who supposedly decide national elections? So I wonder if generally ‘fed up with the system’ swing voters are more or less likely to vote for someone who has been on reality TV garbage and a regular on pro-wrestling for years and years, regardless of any political views that may be espoused or official campaign advertising produced. I think so, but I could be wrong.
Freegards
Blah, blah, blah #549,387,876,111
The more he speaks, the less I like him but if he is the
nominee I will vote for him because he might not be as bad
as Hillary. Not sure.
>> It would seem historically appropriate to have stocks lining Pennsylvania Avenue so those who have betrayed this nation could be on display and remembered forever for their part in turning their backs on all those who sacrificed to keep this nation free.
Considering the damage that the political class has done to our economy, standing, and psyche, I think that gallows, crosses, or impaling poles would be more appropriate than mere stocks.
another fail.
Trump will win in a landslide against Hillary.
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.