Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump endorses Romney, cites tough China position and electability
FoxNews ^ | Feb 2, 2012 | Staff

Posted on 02/02/2012 1:00:27 PM PST by nuconvert

Edited on 02/02/2012 2:14:45 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Donald Trump endorsed Mitt Romney for president Thursday, saying he's impressed by the Republican candidate's debate prowess and believes he could easily beat President Obama in November. 

"Mitt is tough. He's smart. He's sharp. He's not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love," Trump said in Las Vegas, telling the candidate to "go out and get 'em." 

The real estate mogul, speaking briefly with reporters before the announcement, said that even though he "never knew" Romney before the race began, he's come to know him in recent months. 

"His general attitude and the last two debates were very impressive," Trump said. 

He also cited Romney's position on China, calling the former Massachusetts governor

Read the rest at Fox News


TOPICS: Breaking News; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: biggirlsdontcry; braking; china; electability; endorse; endorsements; romney; trump; trump4romney; trumpcankissmyass; trumpisaleftistpos; trumpisaliberal; westicktogether
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-382 last
To: HiTech RedNeck
Other medicines might taste better but Newt may be the only one with the pound of cure now.

Another good one! You're on another roll!

Go Newt Go!!!!!

351 posted on 02/03/2012 12:02:40 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

I wish someone else would jump in this race. We either have to pick between a liberal or an adulterer. As much as people here like Newt women will not vote for this man. And I dont buy that idea that he can ‘change’ Washington considering he has been there for over 30 years. The guy is a hothead and it will show during these primaries at some point. Romney will run away with this and I will end up voting for him because a non-vote is essentially a vote for Obama. I can’t see how he can be any worse.


352 posted on 02/03/2012 12:06:55 AM PST by Del Taco Lover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
I think the fact most are wondering if it mattered one way or another who Trump endorsed just evidences it wasn't all that significant. It could both hamper or help, I suppose pending on Trumps need for an audiance, which he does get.

Same with Hollywood stars....they all have an overenflated opinion of how they are seen by the general public. However WAshington likes them cause they bring home the bacon. It's always about the money and the power it welds.

353 posted on 02/03/2012 12:08:45 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: caww

Trump brought both pluses and minuses to the picture. The great danger for Mitt in Trump’s shadow is to be seen as an out of touch ultra rich, er as I’ve been saying, plutocrat. Had Newt been that one, I’m sure the Rats would have tried a similar tack to try to discredit him (look, he needs that cashy-trashy Trump). So yes, the question was intriguing but ultimately probably of little consequence.


354 posted on 02/03/2012 12:18:15 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: Del Taco Lover

Those going overboard branding Newt with the scarlet A in the present tense, I wonder how many call themselves Roman Catholics. (I’m not one myself, but I would think it especially ironic, since Newt went voluntarily to that church well after hooking up with the third wife, and lo and behold in the vetting process they never told him to bid Callista good bye.)


355 posted on 02/03/2012 12:23:54 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo

You are a mess...and I love your graphic!

I don’t know if Trump’s endorsement will help, or hurt, Romney. There are polls about that. lol


356 posted on 02/03/2012 12:24:09 AM PST by dixiechick2000 (This hobbit is looking for her pitchfork...God help the GOP if I find it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo

I can barely wait to see your “orange-haired Trump” and Romney graphic!


357 posted on 02/03/2012 12:42:40 AM PST by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; calcowgirl; org.whodat; ...
One poster you re-posted above in #232 sounds nuts :)

REFERENCE 1

This should play well with the Trump Chumps that actually believed he was running.
What ever happened to Trumps investigators on Hawaii? He said they uncovered striking evidence that Obama was not eligible to run, and he would SOON show it, then he disappears. Now the same MSM that made him a Republican star won’t ask him about his past claims.
Trump Chumps never learn!
41 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 12:41:01 AM by sickoflibs

REFERENCE 2

HA-HA. This is supposed to HELP Romney??
This looks even worse for Romney than it would have for Newt if he was the one blessed by Trump. Romney wouldnt even join a debate moderated by Trump, yet Trump picks him. .
As I recall there were a few threads in December where some giddy with Newt were singing the praise for Trump.
85 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:30:20 PM by sickoflibs

358 posted on 02/03/2012 12:44:22 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine; sodpoodle; caww; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; calcowgirl; ...
Good work, But if you really like to compare past comments with current ones then this thread is a gold mine:

Gingrich: ‘Strategic Blunder’ for Palin to Mock Obama as ‘Community Organizer’ American Spectator ^ | June 23, 2011 | R.S. McCain

this one too
Gingrich Will Star In Democrats' Anti-Ryan Medicare Attacks US News & World Report's Washington Whispers ^ | May 19, 2011 | Paul Bedard

359 posted on 02/03/2012 1:25:35 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The endgame for Trump could be a switch away from Romney later on in the campaign to endorse Obama.


360 posted on 02/03/2012 1:25:51 AM PST by Nextrush (PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN IS MY DREAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GR_Jr.

Maybe Trump was trying to help Gingrich the most he can by endorsing Mittens lol


361 posted on 02/03/2012 5:01:08 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

I hear ya - yesterday was a bummer for me as well. Personal things to cope with and then the news about Trump/Romney. And, as far as voting on who’s left, my state (MO) is having an asinine “primary” Tuesday where Newt’s not even on the ballot. What we have to do to show we don’t want Romney is to check the “Uncommitted” box - but I’m sure most people don’t know that. And no delegates will be awarded until we then have a caucus March 17th. Bizarre and we’ve never done it this way before. Things aren’t looking good at this moment, but Newt needs to hang tough though it’s got to be hard.


362 posted on 02/03/2012 6:18:07 AM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: llandres

“primary” Tuesday where Newt’s not even on the ballot


Newt blew us off here in Missouri and CHOSE not to be on the ballot. Santorum is going to win the primary and is odds on for the caucus at this point.


363 posted on 02/03/2012 6:29:48 AM PST by magritte (Nevermind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: magritte

Damned right


364 posted on 02/03/2012 6:55:19 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Major riots notwithstanding, let us kick this Marxist imposter out of office once and for all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: xzins; JFC; P-Marlowe; betty boop
The math favors the creation of a new, REASONABLE conservative party.

It may come to that.

I think on a national basis if it is going to happen it will be the Tea Party Caucus leaving the Pubs and forming their own party. The problem is at the local level redistricting is controlled by the Rats and Pubs every 10 years and they will draw districts to minimize the ability of a 3rd party to grow. Also, the media is in bed with the Rats and will do everything to marginalize any conservative party.

Finally, how would this new conservative party handle the populist bent emerging within conservatism. I doubt I'm alone in being surprised at the recent condemnation of people who have done well and the idea that unless you "sweat" you really aren't working.

365 posted on 02/03/2012 6:56:06 AM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

I’ll believe Romney’s position on trade, when I see it.

Bill Clinton said the same thing.


366 posted on 02/03/2012 6:58:29 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (What if Obama isn't the anti-Christ after all? What if it's Romney?...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

“I doubt I’m alone in being surprised at the recent condemnation of people who have done well and the idea that unless you “sweat” you really aren’t working.”

-

Well whether you are or not in a small minority still sipping on the “free trade” koolaid, sending American factories to China and firing the American employees, certainly doesn’t qualify as “working” to this poster.

Perhaps we’ll just agree to disagree.


367 posted on 02/03/2012 7:01:27 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network (What if Obama isn't the anti-Christ after all? What if it's Romney?...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; JFC; P-Marlowe; betty boop
and the idea that unless you "sweat" you really aren't working.

The bible does say that men shall live by the sweat of their brow. So quite honestly WM if you are getting rich without ever having broken a sweat, then maybe there really is something sinister about the way you make a living.

Gen 3:19 "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

The "populist" criticisms of the manner in which Romney made his millions is not so much envy as it is wonder. I don't envy Romney's millions, but there is something sinister in the manner in which he leveraged companies and borrowed against the assets of failing companies to enrich himself that is clearly worthy of criticism.

Capitalism is a great system, but like all systems there are those who skirt the line between morality and immorality, between legal and illegal.

368 posted on 02/03/2012 7:32:18 AM PST by P-Marlowe (NEWT!!! The Anti-EstablishMITTarian Candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; JFC; betty boop; xzins
The bible does say that men shall live by the sweat of their brow. So quite honestly WM if you are getting rich without ever having broken a sweat, then maybe there really is something sinister about the way you make a living.

Thank you for illustrating why a 3rd party would probably be marginalized pretty easily.

369 posted on 02/03/2012 11:05:56 AM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; JFC; betty boop; xzins; Alamo-Girl
Thank you for illustrating why a 3rd party would probably be marginalized pretty easily.

Perhaps you need to include in your political analysis some of your theological perspective., i.e, total depravity.

People are by nature self centered, selfish, envious, wrathful, jealous and in open rebellion to God.

So people will vote their self interest unless they have a good theological reason not to do so.

So no matter who we put up as a candidate, if they are not at least somewhat "populist" they are not going to garner enough votes to win dog catcher, must less the presidency of the United States.

Romney is the worst of all possible candidates in that he not only has no political foundation, he represents all that is wrong with Capitalism and nothing that is right with it. He represents the culture of greed and corruption that most people see as a problem whether it is real or imagined.

No candidate is going to win without stoking the fire of the populists in the electorate. I want a candidate who has a solid conservative base and record who can communicate a conservative message to a selfish, envious, wrathful, jealous electorate and convince them that what he is proposing by way of his platform and ideas is in their best interests.

WM, in regard to the Capitalism criticism, one can criticize certain legal methodologies for amassing riches without being an "Anti-Capitalist". There are "moral" Capitalists and there are "a-moral" Capitalists. IMHO Romney would be numbered among the "A-Moral Capitalists".

By pointing that out, does that mean I oppose Capitalism? Or does that mean I oppose the methodology of Romney's and Bain's Capitalistic a-moral model?

Cannot one support Capitalism in principle and argue that some people have utilized it improperly and for improper motives? Or is any attack on any "Capitalist" somehow an attack on all?

370 posted on 02/03/2012 11:49:36 AM PST by P-Marlowe (NEWT!!! The Anti-EstablishMITTarian Candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: wmfights; JFC; P-Marlowe; betty boop

I don’t think the issue is people who have done well.

The issue is honesty. There is a backlash against people getting rich dishonestly, and folks consider crony capitalism to be dishonest whether illegal or not.


371 posted on 02/03/2012 6:50:27 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; sickoflibs; GOPsterinMA; Clintonfatigued; fieldmarshaldj; Longbow1969

Not only does “The Donald” hence force referred to as “The Supreme Earth Pimp (sorry inside joke)” endorse Mitt after blasting him as a “jobs destroyer” but first he apparently strung along the Gingrich camp. Boy does anyone who ever took him seriously have egg on their face!

If Romney would snort 10 kilos of coke and put a dead marmoset on his head he would BE Donald Trump!!!


372 posted on 02/04/2012 3:27:41 AM PST by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: cricket

Souter was John Sununu’s idea.


373 posted on 02/04/2012 3:58:54 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; JFC; betty boop; xzins; Alamo-Girl
By pointing that out, does that mean I oppose Capitalism? Or does that mean I oppose the methodology of Romney's and Bain's Capitalistic a-moral model?

What was the last criticism of Romney. It wasn't how Bain made money, but that because he had done well he has 20 million a year come in on his investments without "sweating" for it. So we've seen the evolution of this high minded populist condemnation of "vulture capitalists" to condemning anyone with investment income. A lot of us saw this coming with the first attacks. It's surprising to me that some of my FRiends have fallen into this.

So no matter who we put up as a candidate, if they are not at least somewhat "populist" they are not going to garner enough votes to win dog catcher, must less the presidency of the United States.

This line of thinking will defeat Gingrich in the general election. He doesn't have clean hands. He traded influence for millions when he lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. BTW, he didn't sweat when he did this.

Fighting for freedom will win elections, not attacks on those that take risks and create economic activity.

374 posted on 02/04/2012 7:50:12 AM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]

To: xzins; JFC; P-Marlowe; betty boop
I don’t think the issue is people who have done well.

Then why the attack on the investment income Romney makes?

375 posted on 02/04/2012 7:52:36 AM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
Then why the attack on the investment income Romney makes?

Because the income invested was dishonest income.

If a drug lord invests money in the market is his investment income clean?

376 posted on 02/04/2012 8:21:00 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Because the income invested was dishonest income.

Wow, I can't believe you are saying this. If he had broken any laws you can bet the IRS would have been all over him.

377 posted on 02/04/2012 8:48:41 AM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Do you think the money he earned at Damon Corporation was honest money?

At the time they received the largest fraud fine in Massachusetts history for Medicare fraud...119 million dollars.


378 posted on 02/04/2012 8:50:52 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: kjo
Souter was John Sununu’s idea.

Remember the controversey; took a look back:

excerpt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Souter

The nine senators voting against Souter included Ted Kennedy and John Kerry from Souter's neighboring state of Massachusetts. These senators, along with seven others, painted Souter as a right-winger in the mold of Robert Bork. They based their claim on Souter's friendships with many conservative politicians in New Hampshire.

An opinion article by The Wall Street Journal some ten years after the Souter nomination called Souter a "liberal jurist" and said that Rudman took "pride in recounting how he sold Mr. Souter to gullible White House Chief of Staff John Sununu as a confirmable conservative. Then they both sold the judge to President Bush, who wanted above all else to avoid a confirmation battle."[20] Rudman wrote in his memoir that he had "suspected all along" that Souter would not "overturn activist liberal precedents."[7] Sununu later said that he had "a lot of disappointment" about Souter's positions on the court and would have preferred him to be more similar to Justice Antonin Scalia.[7]

Only a Liberal could call a friend and peer; 'gullible' because that Liberal was 'taken at his word' by his friend. And yes, mistakes happen; certainly if you trust a Liberal.

John Sununu would make a great president. How is it; we get the Massachussets Rino. . .stuffed down our throats. Sununu; with fewer generations behind him; nonetheless; certainly passes the 'North Eastern' test; and more; because of his talent and history.

379 posted on 02/04/2012 3:08:43 PM PST by cricket (America restored;. . .Newt CAN make it happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: cricket

Yeah...absolutely. The NE “Republican party” sold out to the FDR view of history, culture, and economics generations ago. Most thought they died when Goldwater got the nomination in ‘64, they didn’t, they just got a lot smaller. Rudman, Chaffee, Snow, etc...they are still about 20% of the party with 60% of the influence when it comes to presidential nominations.

One of these years...the party faithful is going to figure this out. The Northeast GOP liberal, media complex is still very, very important when deciding POTUS’ nominees. Most of these people vote Democrat in the end...but still have tremendous financial/political power in the GOP.

I’m ready to bolt...When the Whigs fractured and died over the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, the Republicans replaced them. We are a modern Kan/Neb Act from the same result.

Past time to look at building a third party.


380 posted on 02/05/2012 4:59:20 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies]

To: kjo
//. . .The NE “Republican party” sold out to the FDR view of history, culture, and economics generations ago. Most thought they died when Goldwater got the nomination in ‘64, they didn’t, they just got a lot smaller. Rudman, Chaffee, Snow, etc...they are still about 20% of the party with 60% of the influence when it comes to presidential nominations.

[. . .]I’m ready to bolt...When the Whigs fractured and died over the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, the Republicans replaced them. We are a modern Kan/Neb Act from the same result. Past time to look at building a third party.//

Think it is happening 'as we speak'. . .

381 posted on 02/05/2012 6:30:23 AM PST by cricket (America restored;. . .Newt CAN make it happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; wmfights

Thank you both for sharing your insights, dear brothers in Christ!


382 posted on 02/05/2012 8:01:13 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351-382 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson