Posted on 02/29/2016 8:45:52 AM PST by TexasCajun
On Friday, Breitbart News Editor-At-Large and DailyWire.com Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro unleashed a video broadside against 2016 Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump.
In less than 24 hours, the video was viewed more than 850,000 times on Facebook and YouTube; it has over 1.4 million views at the time of publication of this article. In the video, Shapiro addresses three groups directly: Evangelical Christians, conservatives, and what he terms the “we want a winner crowd.”
Speaking to Evangelicals, Shapiro details Trump’s personal history with regard to treatment of women particularly. “Have evangelicals ever supported an unrepentant, pro-Planned Parenthood, adulterous strip club owner before?” he asks.
Shapiro then traces Trump’s political positions, which have vacillated wildly over time. “Just two weeks ago, Trump said, ‘I’m very capable of changing to anything I want to change to,'” Shapiro muses. “Is this someone conservatives should trust?”
Finally, Shapiro turns to those impressed by Trump’s acumen at “winning.” He details Trump’s long history of business failures and racking up huge debts, and the fact that his father presented him with his wealth. “Is Trump a big winner?” Shapiro asks. “Or is he a spoiled brat who grew up in the lap of luxury, had his dad sign his checks, and then bragged about how he’s a huge winner?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
My best guess is that Shapiro means Scores in the Taj Mahal. Although if Trump owns that, it’s news to me. While I agree that conservatives shouldn’t back Trump in the primaries, I think Shapiro plays fast and loose with a couple of things on this list, and that’s one of them.
\Well, at least Ben Shapiro doesn't frequent Russian "escorts", like Eliot Spitzer - as far as we know at this time... :)
No he was loaned seed money from his father.
This election is really shining a bright light on who is a bought and paid for member of the Establishment and who is not.
You wouldn't you call herself a FRumpster?
But I did vote for him in our Primary.
BAM! Nice one!
Free Republic Trump Supporter.
It doesn't bother me at all to be called a Cruzbot.
I'm a proud Cruzbot.
Breitbart has been solidly behind Trump.
Nope, sounds derogatory.
My intention was not to insult the Trump Supporters. ...on this thread. :)
I apologize.
Pick up your batting helmet and get back in the box.
In actuality, I've never seen a Trumpkin call themself a "Frumpster".
I've called myself a "Trumpswab" in the past, in honor of The Dread Pirate Trump. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton
TexasCajun could have used at least one Acton quote to beat our man about the head and shoulders... :)
Well done you idiots.
I guess I am unable to respond without attacking you, because I have had it with you sore losers.
I bet you are one of those who refused to vote for Romney or McCain because you are so principled, that you instead gave us 8 years of Obama. Go crawl back under your rock.
Tomorrow will be like the bottom on the 9th, full-count.
What a rant, drinking already today?
Who gives a shiite what this guy thinks? Conservatives talk about conservative things and do liberal things - F%^K them all!
No I don’t drink. I just call them like I see them. Too bad you cannot see your own stupidity.
who is a bought and paid for member of the Establishment
I don't really worry about what's going on behind the scenes; I'm just interested in what's done in public. I also don't get too wound about people who are honest but see the world differently than I do. I think Trump is a poor communicator, for example, but sometimes when he gets called on having said something stupid and clarifies, you can go back to the original interview and see that his clarification fits what he was thinking in the interview -- watching it the first time, you're wondering, "How did he get from here to there?", then the clarifying statement will fill that gap, demonstrating that it's not some CYA thing he came up with just because he got in trouble, but rather what he meant to say in the first place.
But there's a difference between poor communication, or seeing things from a particular perspective; and counting on your audience not to check out what you say. I actually agree with a lot of Shapiro's overarching statements here, but the evidence he offers is often so weak -- or, apparently, flat wrong -- that he ends up undercutting his position. The fact that I've done some research on some of these issues and know he could have backed them up with more solid evidence just makes Shapiro's cavalier approach all the more annoying.
Bless Your Heart! ...did mommy pull you off the teet too early?
Because you sound like a raging lunatic.
Oh yes that’s me raging lunatic, nad you are still stupid.
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.