Posted on 02/22/2016 8:35:56 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
To me, Trump’s victory in the Republican primaries seems inevitable. To the clueless Republican political establishment – not so much
The results are in from the most recent Republican primary in South Carolina. As predicted, Donald Trump won his second consecutive primary contest. Trump- 32% and the runners up- being Senator Cruz and Rubio, both at about at 22%.
I hate to the bearer of bad news to the Republican political establishment, the “Anyone But Trump†cabal of fat cat fossilized old fogies; those die-hard denizens of the National Review and the Weekly Standard- the sanctimonious keepers of the conservative flame; and of course, those hundreds of long-time wealthy and well-connected conservative politicos who have been backing Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.
“You’re right Trump is not a Liberal, he is to you what ever you see in the mirror. He is the Obama of the republican party without the ideology. He stands for nothing, believes nothing, worships nothing but his own image in a mirror, “mirror mirror on the wall who’s the wining est winner of them all.—
Trump doesn’t need to win the Presidency to show himself, his family, his friends and associates or the world in general that he is an incredibly smart and successful guy. He doesn’t need to be POTUS to ensure that he, his kids and grandkids, or several generations of Trumps will be very wealthy. He’s made his bones in this area. Frankly, while any particular endeavor might be challenging or exciting, the whole process has probably gotten boring for him - he’s like Alexander, wondering what new worlds there are to conquer.
Well, here’s your answer:
Trump is smart enough to see that this country is very close to having the wheels come off, and that another term or 2 for the Dems will ensure that the country is tossed on the ashheap of history. He also knows his family background - his grandfather came here in the late 1800s and made some decent money, and his father made a fortune, which he multiplied by many times. What motivates Trump, IMHO, is 2 things: First, making sure that his family has a similar legal, economic, social and regulatory environment in which to continue to make money and, second, to be not only President, but among the best ever - the man who saved the country. THAT would stroke his ego like no amount of money possibly could - and we’d benefit mightily from it. Why? Because in order for his family to continue to make money for several generations, they need a large and highly prosperous middle class, they need a government that is kept within certain limits, a culture that will continue to elect reasonably sensible officials who won’t deviate much from the basically center-right path that led to his fortune. That middle class is US - you, me, the rest of the FReepers, everyone we know and their kids and grandkids.
Like the guy or not (and, to be honest, he’s easy to NOT like), I think that if you really examine his motivations you will see that this country will be in good hands for the 4 or 8 years of a Trump Presidency. He will move us in the right direction, and do so quickly because that is how he does things in his own business right now.
Just my $0.02.
“See, my guess is Rubio.
Trump has signaled that he prefers someone from a battleground state.
He also said he wanted a politician... “we don’t need two of me”... which I take to mean that he’s going to be the “big picture” guy who communicates broad initiatives, and his VP will be the guy that makes the trains run on time. That’s probably consistent with his business model.
If you were looking for someone to get the various factions of government to cooperate to achieve great things, I don’t think you’d pick the guy who is almost universally disliked in DC. That’s really not intended as a slam towards Cruz... “
“...proving my point, ...whatever you see in the mirror ...”
What? Trump’s real and actual position on illegal immigration is not a mere projection that I somehow created in my own mind.
Trump has a stated, existing-in-fact plan to keep our borders secure(build a wall); I support the need for the wall so therefore I support Trump.
Speaking of talk shows, I was listening to the radio on my way home from the doctor this morning. Now it may not make sense to you, but the talking head tried and tried to explain that Trump lost SC. You see, you have to add Rubio and Cruz totals together 44%....so Trump really lost by 11%. Must be that common core thing I keep hearing about.
I do not want Rubio one heart beat away from the presidency.
I don’t care about that. I want a winning ticket.
Didn't anyone vet this guy?
so your ok with a Rubio presidency...I’m not.
I’m ok with a Trump/Rubio ticket or a Cruz/Rubion ticket if it brings about a victory.
As I said, I favor a Pluto/Goofy ticket over Clinton/Sanders.
“You’re right Trump is not a Liberal, he is to you what ever you see in the mirror. He is the Obama of the republican party. He stands for nothing, believes nothing, worships nothing but his own image in a mirror, “mirror mirror on the wall who’s the wining est winner of them all.”
Well, I’ve seen dozens of Trump rallies and heard him repeat, again and again, what he stands for and believes. For you say “he stands for nothing” and “believes nothing” simply means you either haven’t heard what he’s said or don’t believe him.
Thanks for that reference - I was aware of the Minor v. Happersett case, and that is the reason that I believe that Cruz has a definite problem with becoming POTUS legally under the Constitution.
Nonetheless, it is not conclusive...and the Court itself says so explicitly in the case:
“The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
So, you see, for someone like Trump there is NO doubt that he’s a NBC - both of his parents were citizens at the time of his birth. Cruz and Rubio fall into the second category - where it is not automatic by the Common Law, but where NONETHELESS, they MAY be considered NBCs if the law in effect at the time of their respective births allowed for such. The theme here is that both Rubio and Cruz MAY BE NBCs - there is doubt, as the “Minor” Court mentioned, AND EXPLICITLY REFUSED TO RULE ON - and the present Supreme Court may have need to put this issue to the test.
So you can’t refute what anyone has posted to you on this thread. We accept your sniveling concession.
So as o has been successful so will Trump be successful in reversing o’s making amerika SUCK to making America Great,,, again!-)
Too many knowledgeable folks have repeatedly said that the Scotus has not yet had a case on this specific issue.
“Irrelevant”
With that curt reply, you’ve inferred that our Constitution is irrelevant. Say it ain’t so.
“I agree, if a deal is made, it would most likely be Trump/Rubio.”
That pairing makes no political sense. Trump’s signature issue is banishing the illegal horde to the third world hellholes they came from, while Rubio’s signature ‘accomplishment’ in the Senate, was as the face of amnesty.
Political oil and water.
I don't know if ANY deal will be made. I'm just saying that IF one were to happen, that's the most likely.
I distrust Rubio immensely.
I mean in the sense that every time any discussion of Cruz and Rubio comes up we can spend our time debating NBC. I was discussing which person makes more sense for Trump to tap in terms of their strengths/weaknesses.
Another NBC debate wasn’t where I was headed.
“...we can spend our time debating NBC. I was discussing which person makes more sense for Trump to tap in terms of their strengths/weaknesses.”
Their relative strengths and weaknesses are a moot point, as neither of them is eligible to hold the office of VP anyway. More than that, no matter how one defines NBC, you can rest assured the Democrats will freeze them out via the courts, should either of them be chosen.
It’s a waste of time to even speculate about which of them would be a better choice for Trump.
I don’t feel like debating NBC all the time every time.
It gets old and stale and repetitious.
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.