Posted on 02/28/2016 6:00:35 AM PST by Kaslin
There he was, stripped bare and standing in the middle of the debate stage. Donald Trump was eviscerated in Thursday's debate. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz took turns pummeling the founder of Trump University with his own words, his own history, and delivering body blow after body blow.
It was more than enough to convince any thinking person he was not a serious candidate for president. But Trump isn't your typical presidential candidate. He's Barack Obama-light, in every sense of the term.
What does Donald Trump stand for? What will he do if elected? What core conservative principle will he advance?
If you're being honest, the answer to each of those questions is you have no idea.
Don't feel bad, neither does he.
That's not entirely true. He was fairly unambiguous about one thing he'd like to do: change the law so he can sue newspapers. When it comes to solutions to the nation's problems, Donald Trump is the equivalent of a constitutional dumpster fire; and that's just fine to his worshipers.
The day after being embarrassed in front of the world, in part because of the lack of specifics he's provided as to what he would do as president, Trump held a press conference to get specific - or at least specific-ish - about this proposal. He said:
"One of the things I'm going to do, and this is going to make it tougher for me...but one of the things I'm going to do if I win...is I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We're going to open up those libel laws. So that when the New York Times writes a hit piece, which is a total disgrace, or when the Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected."
By the way, the reason "they're totally protected" right now is the First Amendment, that whole "Congress shall make no law" bit about freedom of the press. But who cares? Right, Trump fans?
It's the same stifling of speech outraging conservatives on college campuses; only it's Trump advancing it. If it's fascism when a student group proposes it, what is it when a billionaire does?
His supporters don't bother with strings of words ending in question marks. Their kryptonite is a simple "How?" or the dreaded "What?"
What does Donald Trump want to do as president? There is no answer yet articulated that wouldn't fit nicely on a bumper sticker. He wants to "make American great again," or "build a wall," or "destroy ISIS," etc., etc. How?
He has no answer. He makes proclamations like a dime store Juan Perón. Only he has no clue how a president must work with Congress to create or change laws. Trump supporters appear content to adopt the Barack Obama model of rule by executive fiat. They don't mind a despot as long as he's their despot.
Trump's "specifics," such as they are, about his signature talking point is a wall that grows by 10 feet each time Mexican officials say they won't pay for it. It's at least 30 feet higher than when it started, but we're no closer to learning how it will be paid for. It just will be...apparently.
Cheerleaders aren't even bothered by the fact that on his signature issue, immigration, he's imported workers rather than hire Americans. His claim of it being "impossible" to find Americans to do his jobs is right out of the liberal playbook of "jobs Americans won't do" for illegal aliens.
His supporters don't give a damn about his hypocrisy any more than Hillary Clinton's, Barack Obama's or Al Gore's do.
They love he's "self-funding" his campaign because he "can't be bought." Do they think that will hold? A general election will cost at least $1 billion. Will Donald Trump mortgage his business on the possibility that, after alienating more than half the GOP, he'll win?
He doesn't have a billion in cash lying around. Since he's hiding his tax returns, most likely because he's not nearly as rich as he claims (he's sued over that before and lost), there's little chance he'd be able to fund a tenth of a general election campaign.
He's gotten this far through free media. Sure, he's spent a few million once he absolutely had to, but the majority of his exposure comes from the cable networks taking every speech of his live, allowing him to phone in whenever he wants and being willing to broadcast any sycophant wannabe Trump staffer representing him unchallenged. Against Hillary Clinton that ends. He will need money, money he doesn't have.
He does have rich friends, and those friends would love to have a friend in the White House. And not because they'd find it "cool" to sleep in the Lincoln bedroom.
When Rubio and Cruz exposed Donald Trump's inability to explain what he'd do, and how, on any issue beyond his memorized bumper stickers, they did the country a great service. Unfortunately, blinded by anger and hatred, his devotees refuse to see their emperor has no clothes, nor clue.
There is no issue on which you can find Donald Trump speaking eloquently, passionately, and with any detail that doesn't involve his poll numbers or his wealth. We have only his word to go on about his wealth, and his word has not always been accurate. That people are willing to believe him, unchallenged, and take offense when others do challenge him, is the mentality that has led to dark places in world history.
Scapegoating is a powerful weapon of manipulation, and Trump deploys it better than anyone in 80+ years. His followers want to "burn it all down," so they're willing to blindly follow a pied piper down a very dangerous path. If they refuse to open their eyes, the dumpster fire they're franticly cheering will burn them down eventually too.
PS: I urge you to watch this video, any part of it, and try to spot a coherent or even complete sentence from Trump. It's the ramblings of a man unhinged and incapable of serious or important discussion of any issue facing the country. It may make you laugh, but does it inspire? Is it remotely presidential?
I thought Trump won the debate hands down.
When he said to Cruz...I funded you...that was the end. Both of them. Put in their places in nice little rows.
It was over for the night. A knock out punch.
Trump must be on to something, the newsies are acting like scalded cats.
I don’t think N. Korea has an illegal immigration problem, does it? Thanks for proving my point that walls are effective.
Thanks, again!
As long as the ENTIRE Washington/Media Establishment is arcing out in drooling, pants-soiling paroxysms, we know Trump is the right guy. :)
To me the most interesting thing about this article and the many others like it coming from those supporting the GOPe is how completely they have embraced the same Alinski tactics of Obama. There is no substance to this article. It is all ridicule and over-simplification. And the author calling other people stupid. He might as well be advocating Global Warming or some other liberal causes.
This type of nasty hit piece has been fairly effective in the past. I think many people now recognize the form and I do not believe it resonates here except among those already supporting one of the failed campaigns. I am not sure about how it plays in other venues... but calling the intended target stupid is not a winning strategy in my opinion. If they had started with this tactic before Trump had a large following it might have had a greater chance of success. At this point it is just hurting the chances of a Republican taking the Whitehouse.
Another Parasite.
Forbes requires that we drop our adblockers. Never happen.
Thanks, again!
Awesome observation, bolobaby!
Baldwin - wonder if bolobaby has just created "GodKim's Law"... LOL! :)
It is clear that the author still does not understand what is driving support for Trump.
I, along with many Trump supporters concede he is not a conservative. I will concede he may in fact have his own agenda. I will concede in a nation of over 350 million he may not be the best person to be President. In fact I will concede all your point. So what!
If Trump was not in the race, many things that a vast number of Americans are concerned about would not even be on the table for discussion.
Can Trump solve these problems, who knows. I do know that the other candidates would prefer they were not on the table and that they did not have to address them.
Trump is the voice of the little guy, and the UNI party does not want that voice heard.
Someone earlier mentioned the French Revolution. It is a good analogy. At the time, Kings were god like, had great power over their subjects. The King did not want to hear how bad their rule have made life for the average Frenchman. In the end, even the King could not prevent what happened when the people finally said enough is enough.
You don’t like Trump, fine, don’t vote for him. But don’t wrap yourself in smugness in the belief that those that support Trump are some how ignorant, or just kool aid drinkers. You might want to consider we are smarter than you give us credit for.
People elect leaders with vision, not technocrats who are able to recite paragraph 11.b. from plank 4 of their “plan”.
Debates and campaigns are about themes, not details. Those come later, after a candidate has won and has put the best subject matter experts in place to develop the tactical implmentation plans.
I doesn't matter who the article is from. It's spot on.
The answer is no...they’re more interested in insults than substance........HUM!!! That’s about what the Donald is all about!!!
“.is I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”
This would allow Harry Reid to sue the bejeebers out of me for writing his biography. Along with the horde of lowlife’s that I also expose in my book.
Oh and Free Republic would go bye bye as well. Any time anyone here spouts anything ‘negative’, much less ‘false’ expect to be sued.
Neither is being born in Canada or being an anchor baby “presidential”.
But eh.
My theory is that Trump threw the "newspaper libel" thingee out there to suck all the political oxygen out of the tent before Tuesday.
He KNEW how the Media DeathStar would react. Can't wait to see the schedules on the Sunday talking heads shows. :)
So the ONLY thing you care that he does is the wall. If there were another candidate that also wanted to build a wall, would you consider him/her?
Considered.
Seriously.
Rejected.
If it was reality, trump would have taken a beating in the latest polls.......
Funny. What did Lincoln say he would do if elected? He said if he could undo secession by keeping skavery, he would do it. If he could restore the Union by eliminating slavery, he would do it. His ONLY clear policy (”build a wall”) was to “hold, occupy, and possess” the federal forts. And how Mr. Lincoln?
Didn’t say. He never laid out a plan EITHER for building an army and securing a military defeat OR negotiating a peace. In fact he had no plan for anything. Can you say Lincoln “kept his options open”?
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.