Posted on 02/04/2016 9:01:35 AM PST by don-o
In the lead-up to Donald Trump's loss in Iowa, staffers sought additional funding for campaign infrastructure and were denied.
Now, six days from the New Hampshire primary and looking for his first win, Trump is still refusing to shake up his ground game. He has added just one paid organizer in the state, a move that came a month ago. Instead, he is pushing ahead with plans to campaign outside of the state in the final week of voting and will count on the glamour of famous surrogates, including his sons, who plan to tour New Hampshire beginning this weekend.
snip
But while the campaign has shifted resources into the first primary state, that move amounted to a single staffer - Stuart Jolly, a former Americans for Prosperity operative brought onto the campaign to focus on the Southern states that vote on March 1.
One person familiar with the move said Jolly was brought in because New Hampshire state director Matt Ciepielowski, a 2011 college graduate, was "in over his head."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
He is 20 points ahead!! If it ain’t broke— don’t fix it!! Trump did great in IOWA. I think if Cruz had not lied about Carson “dropping out” . Trump would have won. Cruz only had to fool 4 voters per precinct to change the outcome. “Tricky Teddy”
I have to think that if Trump was really serious, he would be building a serious ground game.
For someone who has said he’s “self-funding” his campaign, Trump seems pretty chintzy.
I agree. I love this. He says no to his campaign who is supporting him....can you imagine another campaign doing that. Think about it....if he does this to his own campaign, what do you think he will do to the budget of the United States. That is the best news I think I have heard all campaign.
Sounds like he really cares about the voters in New Hampshire. . . .
Read my number 5 please.
That’s what will destroy him. The rich hate spending their own money.
He had better win by 20 or more or it comes off as he's fading. That's just how this works.
You’re delusional. Cruz won by over 6,000 votes. There is no way Carson lost 25% of his vote exclusively to Cruz.
Just. Didn’t. Happen.
Absolutely DID happen. IMO
Funny how the media’s answer- to everyone about anything- is “spend more!”...
Government, consumers, politicians: “Spend more!”
Of course they get a cut of all that spending.
You should spend what something’s worth to you.
The early primaries have an extra value, but not much in the long run.
In the latest national poll Trump has dropped 9 points.
Trump 25%
Cruz 21%
Rubio 21%
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/268192-trump-down-rubio-cruz-up-in-new-national-poll
So... I was suggest something IS broken and needs to be fixed quick, before we get stuck with amnesty Rubio.
Although a popular candidate, he is a novice campaigner at the tactical level. However, he will learn and adapt or fade away. Since Iowa, I’m starting to get a little concerned about some of the things I’m hearing/reading about the campaign. Not sure if that stuff is fact, conjecture or counter intelligence put out by rival campaigns. Fingers crossed that Donald’s ego won’t be his undoing and he finds some humility to listen to those in the know about election tactics.
Trump is his own man, calling his own shots, and running his own campaign with his own money, and in the end he will have to live with whatever the result and can say “I did it my way”.
Cruz or no on other candidate can say the same. They are reading scripted statements by staffers, spending Other Peoples Money, and following the advice of political operatives who would have as well been working for John Kerry or John McCain.
Trump may step in it once in a while but it will be his own doing, not some 30-something back in the campaign HQ or a result of some poll-tested phrase that sounded like a good idea at the time.
What a great man. I agree.
You’re opinion is not based on anything but wishful thinking. Carson was running at a 7.7% RCP average going in. He beat that with a 9.3% showing. If you added on every single Cruz vote that put him ahead of Trump, Carson would have ended up at 12.7%.
No one in their right mind believes that Carson was surging by 5 points in Iowa. He had been on a downward slope. As it is, he did very well. For him to have scored 12.7% would put him in the same breath as Rubio in terms of over-performing.
Did. Not. Happen.
That comes out of nowhere, what a shock!
That is only on FOX. The MSM is doing women “feel good” cutesie stuff and never covers any news. About 1.5 million watch Fox ( it is declining). The GOPe spin goes into thin air.
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.