Posted on 04/23/2016 5:20:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
Despite his big win in New York on Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has had a pretty bad week. But will it matter? It should -- and just might.
During an NBC "Today" show town hall Thursday, the host read a question from Twitter concerning Trump's views on LGBT issues and how he plans to be inclusive as president. "Speak about North Carolina bathroom law in particular."
Trump responded: "I had a feeling that question was going to come up, I will tell you. Well, look, North Carolina did something that was very strong, and they're paying a big price, and there's a lot of problems. ... North Carolina, what they're going through, with all of the business that's leaving and all of the strife -- and that's on both sides -- you leave it the way it is. There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble."
In response to a follow-up question, Trump said he would not support putting new bathrooms in Trump Tower. "I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way."
These politically correct answers from the alleged king of political incorrectness have to be music to the ears of Democrats -- not only those far left enough to agree with Trump's view but all others because they know this will alienate Trump from the tons of Republican voters who recognize such lunacy. Perhaps Trump should have been more forthcoming about his true New York liberal values.
Before you buy into Trump's inevitable walk-back of this disaster, remember how he began his answer: that he had anticipated the question. I'm not sure whether that should be more damning than if his answer had been purely spontaneous, revealing his true feelings apart from political calculation, but it's greatly troubling either way.
Trump says he is concerned about the strife and "the economic punishment (North Carolina is) taking." But it seems he also sees the issue from the perspective of adult men who want to use little girls' bathrooms. Has he even considered this from the perspective of the parents of these girls and all other sane people who don't feel comfortable sharing bathrooms with people of the opposite gender?
Who thinks like this, other than a candidate pandering to new constituencies? Who actually believes that prohibiting grown men from using little girls' bathrooms is discriminatory against the transgender community rather than against the 99 percent of people who have always had the comfort of going to public restrooms without the fear that people of the opposite gender could invade their privacy? Isn't protecting public safety one of government's chief duties?
It will be interesting to see how Trump's infinitely forgiving fans explain this one away or whether they'll even bother to try. I get it; all they think about is unfair trade and "the wall," so maybe they'll explain why Trump wants to tear down public bathroom walls.
Also on Thursday, Trump said he would support raising taxes on the rich, which should concern all economic conservatives who support reducing taxes across the board to stimulate robust economic growth. It should also concern Trump's defenders who believed he was standing by the tax plan posted on his website, which includes a cut to the top rate, from 39.6 percent to 25 percent.
Those convinced that Trump has few ideological moorings and an inclination toward liberal positions are vindicated -- again. No matter what written plans Trump has proposed for use in his campaign, his instincts are to support the liberal position on many issues. And for those who buy that he's made a strong conversion from his previous liberal ways, you should know that there has apparently been no change in Trump's views about taxes since 1991, when he testified as a Democratic expert witness and described Ronald Reagan's tax cuts as "catastrophic."
Those who still believe in the sincerity of Trump's conversion to conservatism should be aware of the other bombshell that exploded this week in Camp Trump, which may be the most troubling of all.
In a private meeting aimed at reassuring concerned GOP leaders about Trump's positions and electability in a general election, Trump's "chief lieutenants" reportedly told them that Trump has been "projecting an image" up to this point in the primary season and "the part that he's been playing is evolving" in a way that will make him more palatable to general election voters. How utterly comforting.
Trump's new campaign guru, Paul Manafort, reportedly told Republican National Committee members that Trump has two personalities -- a private one and another one when he's onstage. "When he's out on the stage, when he's talking about the kinds of things he's talking about on the stump, he's projecting an image that's for that purpose. You'll start to see more depth of the person, the real person. You'll see a real different guy."
So his own campaign chief just comes right out and says Trump has been playing a role -- pretending to be someone he's not? This is just incredible stuff, folks.
For the life of me, I don't understand how Trump's most ardent supporters can feel comfortable relying on his always-shifting promises -- even on immigration. Those who still feel comfortable about his candidacy baffle me.
Yes, Trump won his liberal home state resoundingly, but looking back, this could be one of his worst weeks of the campaign.
Don’t know how to post a link but Beth Still #812 has an interesting video on you tube about the bathroom controversy in light of the threats we face from ISIS.
Your “concerns” cannot be implemented without the consent of congress. They don’t seem to be in the mood to bend over backward to please Trump.
There’s an easy way to correct this. Hide in the shadows and wait for someone else to make a mistake while leading. Remind you of anyone?
Trump’s words, in context before everyone went batshit crazy made sense - he said that making the new laws was a stupid thing and designed to generate turmoil and he was right. Too many Federal-Butting-In” laws are what got us to this point - need to repeal/modify a thousand other “protection” laws instead of piling new laws on top of n=bad laws - and the feds need to get the hell out of a lot of the States’ business.
Good news is never good news and bad news is always the worse news.
It seems that is all they have left against Trump. Downplay any success and broadcast any perceived weakness. Ho Hum!
“people of the opposite gender?”
Let me fix that for you Mr. Limbaugh (who would be a nobody if not for your famous brother)
people of the opposite SEX?
Gender is a grammatical term referring to the use of words such as his (masculine) hers (feminine).
Stop using the word “gender” in place of the word “sex”, it’s grammatically incorrect. The liberals have bastardized the word.
A jungle is still a jungle, a bum is still a bum, global warming and climate change are still weather, illegal aliens are still illegal and are still aliens, choice/abortion is still murder, men’s rooms are still just for real men and women’s rooms are still just for real women.
BTW, just wait, it won’t be long before liberals INSIST that urinals be placed in women’s rooms for transgender people to use. I mean there are just so MANY of them that we must turn our whole world upside down to accommodate the multitude.
Liberals are experts at these mind games and we just go right along with it.
No, not by Trump’s definition. He has repeatedly said that he’d expedite the return of the good ones—that means changing the laws to bring them right back, when by current law most of them wouldn’t be eligible to return to the US at all. This week, he was seen explaining that Hispanics in a great, Uncle Trump—you’ll see, it’ll all work out, style.
I’m not sure about the way Sessions defended Cruz’s pro-amnesty amendment bid to the Gang of Eight bill either.
Why is it that Cruz supporters do not think it necessary to attack the candidate but his supporters. Do you think your candidate is so superior that it makes you superior? Why did His Holiness payoff Carley $500K?
Please don’t give the PAC dodge since we know the laws don’t apply to Saint Ted. Why would one campaign give a half million to another campaign?
Pray America wakes
A few more weeks like this and Trump will be in the White House
It’s clear that Manafort was talking about changing style, not positions. He noted that Trumps negatives have to do with personal style, which is fixable, while Hillary’s negatives have to do with character, which isn’t. For months these guys have been complaining about Trump being too bombastic and not presidential. So Manafort tells them that he’s going to project a more restrained persona, and they twist that into “Trump is a phony”. TDS indeed.
Well Kaslin, say goodbye to FR because you’re about to be banned for posting ANYTHING that reveals the true Trump (or the media that fawns over him).
And the same is likely to be true of this past week. I was just making a relative comparison, the week after Wisconsin, Trump was taking a real beating, not one over manufactured crises.
-- Ted could have come out and said "I agree with Donald that the outcome in Colorado was not optimal, and I have faith that a real election process would produce the same result. So, along with Donald, I call on the Colorado GOP to provide some means of allowing Coloradans to vote prior to the convention and the will of the voters be done." --
Or, better all around I think, if the zealots in Colorado had let the process run "fairly," the delegate allocation would have not caused a ruckus in the first place. I am not a big fan of popular vote. Maybe it works okay in one election or another, but on the whole, universal suffrage and popular vote are poison.
That said, if one accepts the premise that popular voting is good, then yeah, Cruz could have done as you suggest. If, on the other hand, one allows state parties to have a range of means of delegate selection, Cruz could have at least acknowledged that there are serious allegations of impropriety and unfairness, and those allegations will be worked out as objections are filed and dealt with. In other words, don't claim the result is certainly valid, instead acknowledge and admit that maybe some hanky panky was going on.
-- But nooooo. St. Ted had to greedily cling to his meaningless delegates and lose the issue. --
He does the same thing when he characterizes his opponents' positions. Misleading characterizations, and he never backs down. I think he's loopy.
But it wasn’t a Federal law that started this mess. It was Charlotte’s doing. The state law was to remedy that. Although so many so-called ‘conservatives’ seem to be taking more umbrage over that latter attempt to rectify the situation than the original pro-pervert city law.
As for Trump, it didn’t surprise me. I’ve been expecting this sort of thing all along. He’s been a part of that whole NY-media/entertainment milieu, where freaks, perverts and degenerates are the norm. It was bound to spring forth. One of the reasons I’ve always maintained a wariness of him.
that’s just proof that the devil is the great deceiver.
“Bathroom Law: He blew it.”
I don’t agree.
I DISAGREE with Trump (I certainly don’t want men using women’s bathrooms or vice versa), but I don’t agree he blew it. If he had answered otherwise, it would have given the media the biggest down-the-center-of-the-plate pitch they’ve ever had, and they would have used it to propagandize the issue and paint Trump as a bigoted neo-Nazi troglodyte. Trump’s attitude on the issue was “I don’t really care about this and... why are we paying attention to this ANYWAY?” - which might cost him voters among the hard right, but gain him MORE voters among the moderates.
how is he wrong on trump when he uses trump’s own words to prove he’s a frickin liberal????? good God so many here are deceived. Just like odumbo and the masses blindly followed him, never concerned about any of his positions, policies, etc.
If it is touch back amnesty why did Sessions:A, help write the plan, B, publicly approve the plan, and C, endorse Trump?
I saw him on Hannity the other night. When Hannity said he was going to post on his website a list of PA delegates, and the candidate they each support, David L didn’t look too happy.
“Why is it that Cruz supporters do not think it necessary to attack the candidate but his supporters. Do you think your candidate is so superior that it makes you superior? Why did His Holiness payoff Carley $500K?
Please don’t give the PAC dodge since we know the laws don’t apply to Saint Ted. Why would one campaign give a half million to another campaign?”
You don’t really expect the Cruzers to answer that, do you? They can’t even explain why they even LIKE Cruz, other than spouting talking points because “He’s the ideal conservative!”. Makes me suspect a vast majority of them are just leftist plants.
Trump had an incredible week. David must have tied El Slushbo up in a back room and forced him to make this a primary issue.
How pathetic. But Rush has become his brother now.
This issue will not be changed at the POTUS level.
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.