[TheThirdRuffian]

This is what concerns me, as Trump’s primary valid position is on immigration:

“Sources familiar with the recording and transcript — which have reached near-mythical status at the Times — tell me that the second sentence is a bit more than speculation. It reflects, instead, something Trump said about the flexibility of his hard-line anti-immigration stance.”

If Trump is really a squish on immigration, then there is no appeal.

[manc]

LOL I seriously doubt the NY Times would try and help anyone who they hate. if they had them they would release them in a frenzy.

[corlorde]

We will find out soon enough. I suspect Trump will soften his immigration stance right after he gets nominated...then, if he wins the election, there will be less talk about walls, banning Muslims and deporting millions, and will chalk it up to “deal making” of which is his signature. Maybe a few actions here and there tightening rules by executive order, but not much else. The Trumps will be too busy trying to be the Kennedy's.

[21twelve]

I was telling my daughter last night that I think a lot of Trump’s views are put out 1)To attract the mass of really upset Americans, and 2) to start off high on negotiations.

“I’m going to build a wall, it will be great. And I’m going to kick out all the illegals, and ban muslims.”

The logistics alone negate building a “wall”.

“Okay - it will be a double fence for 200 miles here, 300 miles there, and another 200 miles there. And I can live with increased monitoring and security in the other places.”

“Okay - I’m going to round up the illegals with violent and drug crimes, and enforce the existing laws, and double ICE investigations on companies. Most of the illegals will get so scared they’ll leave on their own.”

“Okay - muslims from known areas of terrorist support will not be allowed in.”

Nothing wrong with that, except then he just becomes another politician with broken promises. Plus - then he just sounds like another guy that is running.