Posted on 04/10/2011 11:02:20 AM PDT by Starman417
TRUMP - The analysis begins in earnest as it should. Obama has announced his reelection campaign from the vantage and with the advantage of the bully pulpit. Contenders are lining up as America as America struggles through a long recession, yearning for strong decisive leadership.
Donald Trump has teased the electorate in the past, pretending to seriously consider a run for the White House. This Presidential election finds Republican support for some politically green but very appealing potential candidates. These may well bide their time and wait until 2016 before displaying the audacity to become pretenders to the seat in the Oval Office. Past analysis such as Obama – The First Tell, was helpful in anticipating a President Elect’s road ahead. Trump’s superficial relationship with the voting public has been distorted by its inevitable distance from an unusual celebrity billionaire. Donald Trump has delighted in each moment of attention he has been able to attract by jumping onto the spotlight dot. His reach into our communal consciousness begs a little scrutiny.
• Trump is not ideologically anchored. This moves his appeal factor positively as he will carry little obligation to either political party. He will also present a more refreshing alternative to a public tired of Washington indebtedness to special interests. At the very least, he will be more honest with how he feels, and he will easily be more knowledgeable with on all topics than what we have seen subjected to since the last Presidential election.
• A lack of ideological fervor also makes it more likely that from his perch in the Oval Office he would be a pragmatist. Unlike the embarrassingly far “left” rooted individuals choking the Obama Administration, Trump would most probably pluck the best talent, however it might present itself, wherever he could find it, and in whatever political flavor it might be drenched.
• His insecurities mean his ego can be stroked to get his favor and attention, but he isn't narcissistic. In Trump’s case the insecurities also suggest that he is driven to succeed.
• Trump will surround himself with experienced talent, and it is unlikely that he will punt important decisions down the road, or to someone else, unlike Obama who is clearly controlled by his handlers and seems ready, willing and able, to have others take care of business. If and when America elects Trump, he will be the President, NOT one of his handlers.
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
I see just about the opposite, example of how he gets lost without the teleprompter, did you see the interview with Saddleback Church Pastor Rick Warren? Palin quite obviously has the talent you say she lacks, go look at the Biden debate, and Trump is haphazard Rino at best.
Apparently Obama won the debate he became President and McCain did not. As far as Palin debating Biden, I believe a fourth grader could beat Biden. So I don’t think you should really use him to make your case. Still waiting for a response on why Palin did not bring up the BC issue?
It may be next week if your waiting on me, but you could check her response here, and if you go by who won a debate, Alan Keyes never lost, and would have been elected over Bush and McCain;
Palin Talks Trump Running For Office
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4636857/palin-talks-trump-running-for-office
Thanks for making my point, Palin dodged taking a side. Trump has the guts to say something isn’t right here and needs to be further investigated. Palin’s answer is I believe he was born in Hawaii but if Donald wants to spend his money go for it. And Mr. Keyes apparently did not win the debate because he didn’t win the voters. FYI debates are won by the number of votes, because that is what matters at the end of the day.
Trump is late to the game, initially stated he also said Hawaii, so that seems to be a catch-all. There is nothing to dodge because there is nothing that can apparently be done until states require it for the ballot.
What Trump’s investigators find will be everything discussed here over the past 3 years, and what has been done? Nothing. So Trump can be as loud and boisterous as he wants, the popularity of Trump may have some appeal, but if it leads to more government dependents and other liberal policies, we will be right back here belly-aching about another RINO.
Spin, spin, spin. I don’t care if he came in the beginning, middle or late to the game he is the only one not afraid to open his mouth. If something is discovered you can be damn sure Trump is not going to lie down and keep it to himself. He will command the news and demand action, and it will happen. Squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Were you in another dimension or something in November? The people spoke and the Government, even Obama, listened to their voices. Our representatives either listen or they leave. The people govern this Country not the politicians. Trump as President will be one part of the Government but not its total. If he starts going lib on us, we have the power to stop him through the Congress. Trump is a true Capitalist so he can’t be a lib. Kind of like saying you are Catholic but being pro-choice. Either you are one or the other, can’t be both.
Perot was a nut of the highest order. You can think him for giving us Clinton. Perot screwed us good.
No, I was a conservative then too, and everyone at Free Republic was not afraid to open his mouth, and supporting Harry Reid is something we conservative didn’t do no matter what; even Joe the Plumber figured that out before the 2008 election, what took Don so long? Has Joe got a better ability to reason out which candidates to support?
Meet Donald Trump, Sudden Right-Wing Conservative: Contributions, Abortion, Health Care, and Taxes
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2700816/posts
Donald Trump Political Donations: Might as well start here:
Charlie Rangel (D-NY): 2006 – $10,000 Yes, he of corruption, tax evasion, and mass liberalism
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) $12,000 Total, $2,000 in 2006 Re-election
Harry Reid: Donated $4,800 in 2010 to Reid to defeat Sharon Angle. $10,400 to Reid overall
Chuck Schumer: Donated $4,000 during 2010 Election Cycle
Kirsten Gillibrand: $5,800 over past 2 cycles
Ted Kennedy: $7,000
John Kerry $5,500 ($2,000 in 2004 Pres race, which he also gave Bush $2,000. How bi-partisan!)
Democratic Senatorial Committee: $116,000 (versus $30K to GOP equivalent)
Donald Trump Now: “As you know, I’m pro-life… I’m forming an opinion, I’m forming a very strong opinion but I’ll let you know in about three or four weeks if I decided to.”
Healthcare,: “I’m a conservative on most issues but a liberal on health. It is an unacceptable but accurate fact that the number of uninsured Americans has risen to 42 million. Working out detailed plans will take time. But the goal should be clear: Our people are our greatest asset. We must take care of our own. We must have universal healthcare. “
“Perot was a nut of the highest order. You can think him for giving us Clinton. Perot screwed us good.”
My point was Perot’s superb idea: balance the budget.
Message vs. messenger, comprende?
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.