Posted on 12/30/2015 8:27:24 AM PST by TangledUpInBlue
yeah, sorry but I can’t agree with that either. If he loses both of those - and worse, if he finishes lower than 2nd in one of them, he’s going to start losing support. His argument that he’s “way up in the polls” will no longer hold water if he can’t win a primary.
The coalition around Rubio-Bush-Christie-Etc.. can be pretty significant if they throw all of their might behind the one that’s left (or Cruz)
Former Trump Aide: He's DoomedWell yea but only "if"...
“Nunberg began consulting for Trump as early as 2011, and became a full time adviser in Trump’s office in 2014. But Nunberg was fired over the summer due to a series of racist Facebook rants”
But from the perspective of Sam Nunberg, a political adviser who worked for Trump until earlier this year, the Donald’s campaign is losing—and is just a couple months from total disaster.
“What I’m worried about is, I don’t know what his inner circle is telling him. I hope they’re being honest. I’m more worried, I’m not optimistic,” Nunberg told The Daily Beast. “Under the scenario that I’m laying out, I do not think that he will win... This is what I would say from a ‘glass half-empty’ perspective if I were talking to Mr. Trump.”
Uh huh, right. I’m SURE Sam Nunberg is DEEPLY concerned about the well-being of Trump’s candidacy.
Pretty ineffective Trump hit piece by the ultra-ultra-lib Daily Beast, even by their own poor standards.
Still, every time I see one of these continued media attacks on Trump, I know he’s the right guy: clearly the media is absolutely terrified of Trump.
Iowa means nothing. They are 50/50 on winners/losers.
Or GW Bush or Dole.
Rick wasn’t the one caught stealing furniture from the governor’s mansion.
Huckster is a fat married Lindsay Graham. For whom he campaigned.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/in-2008-trump-dismissed-clinton-sex-scandal-as-totally-unimportant/
“Former meaning disgruntled and likely proven incompetent.”
To the man’s credit he is on the record. Most stories quote anonymous leakers such as: “unidentified source”, “high level official”, or “someone close to ____”.
At some point, these stories become comedy.
As in a whack-a-mole gag.
A Pyrrhic victory for sure. We have tried so hard not to repeat the Rick Santorum experience. It would be a shame to go down that path once again.
He was FIRED?...............................
What sort of aid to he perform? Stamp letters and open mail? Is he privy to the strategy Trump is using?
This Nuremberg clown doesn’t deserve too much of my time, but I will make a few comments:
“What I’m worried about is, I don’t know what his inner circle is telling him. I hope they’re being honest. I’m more worried, I’m not optimistic,”
I’ve seen this before, they used it on Reagan a lot. The idea is to make Trump look like a big, stupid, oaf, who can’t think for himself...and only gets his information SPOON-FED by some shadowy bunch of ‘advisers’. Given what Trump has said regarding Muslims and Illegals, there is not a SINGLE POLITICAL ADVISER in this country that would have him do that. Trump has PROVEN HIMSELF more than capable of figuring out things on his own.
Regarding Iowa and New Hampshire...
The way things worked BEFORE TRUMP was that you needed early momentum in these small states, or else your funding dried up and you became toast. Obviously Trump does not have that concern. If this guy cannot figure that out, then it’s good that Trump fired him, because he is far more out of touch than Trump will ever be.
As to the caucuses and newly registered voters - that is complete bullshit (sorry, couldn’t resist). Most people, and the VAST MAJORITY of potential caucus goers are already registered - the ONLY THING that matters for a caucus is getting them to spend 2 hours in some stranger’s house arguing for their guy. Newly registered people don’t do that (in most cases).
As to losing Iowa and New Hampshire. I agree that Trump could lose Iowa to Cruz, considering the make up of the caucus goers - Evangelical types that don’t really like Trump. Big deal. New Hampshire is loaded up with spillover ‘moderates’ from Massachusetts...Trump probably does have a ceiling of no more than 35% there, but if half a dozen moderates stay in, Trump still wins.
But Iowa and New Hampshire COMBINED are less than 1.4% of the US population. They are expendable to a candidate that doesn’t have to worry about money - the difference being that Trump knows this, but the so-called ‘experts’ don’t seem to realize this, or they are not admitting this is possible - since they want Trump to lose anyway. If Trump continues to hold a 20 to 25 point lead over everyone else nationally, losing a couple of minor states will not affect the outcome, at all.
Excuse me but rather than insight into Trump this person is writing standard political analysis of the primary process?
I need him for that?
Trump won’t be the front runner even if he still leads in all polls?
I’d day this person knows nothing about what will happen - in advance.
Yes because as President Sanatorum and Hucabee can tell you, winning Iowa is vital to winning the Presidency.
;-)
That’s actually a pretty good retort.
It will be good to see Ted win some early races. I do only see Donald and Ted winning the vast majority of states, but Trump being favored, overall.
Appreciate the info DD - he was let go from Trump camp.
I actually don’t have a problem with that statement. :-|
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.