The choice is easy :-)
Posted on 04/22/2011 11:49:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Keep one thing in mind when looking at the data from Gallup’s latest poll of the Republican field. Their sample includes “Republican-leaning independents” as well as registered Republicans. That’s important, because it helps explain Donald Trump’s sudden resonance in the field:
Donald Trump debuts in a first-place tie in Gallup’s latest update of Republicans’ preferences for the party’s 2012 presidential nomination among potential contenders. Trump ties Mike Huckabee at 16%, with Mitt Romney close behind at 13%. Sarah Palin is the only other potential Republican candidate to earn double-digit support.
The April 15-20 Gallup poll finds Trump leading the field among moderate and liberal Republicans, with 21% supporting him. Huckabee is the leader among conservative Republicans. Huckabee’s support and Trump’s support differ between ideological groups, while Romney and Palin get similar support from both ideological wings of the party.
Among the lower-ranked candidates, Newt Gingrich’s support and Michele Bachmann’s support tilt decidedly conservative. Trump is the only potential candidate who shows notably stronger appeal to liberals and moderates than to conservatives within the GOP.
Let’s point out, though, that even where differences exist, they’re rather small — the consequence of a large field with no one frontrunner at this stage. Huckabee’s support split is 13/18 in moderate-to-liberal/conservative voters; Trump’s is 21/13, Romney 14/13. Between the three of them, that accounts for 48% of the moderate-liberal voters and 44% of the conservatives, leaving plenty of room for another candidate to grab the brass ring when the race gets serious. Interestingly, Palin in fourth place splits almost evenly between the two, 11/10.
The Boss Emeritus did some digging on Trump and comes up with what should be a kayo on Kelo:
Too many mega-developers like Trump have achieved success by using and abusing the government’s ability to commandeer private property for purported “public use.” Invoking the Fifth Amendment takings clause, real estate moguls, parking garage builders, mall developers and sports palace architects have colluded with elected officials to pull off legalized theft in the name of reducing “blight.” Under eminent domain, the definition of “public purpose” has been stretched like Silly Putty to cover everything from roads and bridges to high-end retail stores, baseball stadiums and casinos.
While casting himself as America’s new constitutional savior, Trump has shown reckless disregard for fundamental private property rights. In the 1990s, he waged a notorious war on elderly homeowner Vera Coking, who owned a little home in Atlantic City that stood in the way of Trump’s manifest land development. The real estate mogul was determined to expand his Trump Plaza and build a limo parking lot — Coking’s private property be damned. The nonprofit Institute for Justice, which successfully saved Coking’s home, explained the confiscatory scheme …
Trump has attempted to use the same tactics in Connecticut and has championed the reviled Kelo vs. City of New London Supreme Court ruling upholding expansive use of eminent domain. He told Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto that he agreed with the ruling “100 percent” and defended the chilling power of government to kick people out of their homes and businesses based on arbitrary determinations:
“The fact is, if you have a person living in an area that’s not even necessarily a good area, and government, whether it’s local or whatever, government wants to build a tremendous economic development, where a lot of people are going to be put to work and make (an) area that’s not good into a good area, and move the person that’s living there into a better place — now, I know it might not be their choice — but move the person to a better place and yet create thousands upon thousands of jobs and beautification and lots of other things, I think it happens to be good.”
Silly conservatives still believe that the person who owns the property should decide what kind of private-sector use should be made of it, not the government, and not wealthy developers who play footsie with politicians to take what doesn’t belong to them. Property rights are the core of freedom; in fact, they are the first rights mentioned in the Constitution for that reason. Long before one gets to the First Amendment, Article I Section 8 grants the responsibility to Congress to “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries[.]“ And in the Fifth Amendment, we find that the Constitution mandates “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
Here’s my question regarding the Trump boomlet. If Republicans want to rally behind a pro-choice (before campaigning), pro-single-payer health care (before campaigning), pro-Kelo mercantilist, what exactly is wrong with Rudy Giuliani? His positions were far to the right of Trump’s on these issues before Trump decided to show up at CPAC, plus Giuliani has had a track record of success in executive office that didn’t involve strongarming people out of their property. Or for that matter, what exactly is wrong with Huckabee, Romney, Pawlenty, or the rest of the candidates whose conservative credentials activists question, in light of Trump’s sudden Republican advent?
Update: CNN demonstrates that Trump will be a pretty easy target if he wins the nomination:
I’d guess that Eliot Spitzer might have some personal animus he’s working out here, but that’s the point, isn’t it? Why offer the easy target?
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO
So Trump may be a stalking horse.
But he is proving that there is wide and deep suspicion by voters of Obama based on ineligibility.
It is about Article 2, section 1, natural born citizen requirement.
Obama can be beat and Trump is leading the way.
If Trump shouldn’t - for any reason - be the Republican candidate, then the others need to grow a pair.
My suggestion is stop beating up Trump and beat up on Obama. Republican candidates are behaving too stupid or cowardly to take advantage of reality: Obama can be beat on Constitutional eligibility!
Being openly pro-abortion will sink any Republican candidate.
And, this question assumes Trump won't fade when enough Republicans hear of some of his liberal views.
The choice is easy :-)
I pick Trump over Huck any day.
Please tell me how old is too old of a picture of a politician to be posted on the Internet.
I guess Hot Air in the tank for Obama and Romney, too
A lot of GOP and GOP donors support Kelo and benefitted from Kelo type laws....so nothing new here
Another Phony Con site more concerned with Trump than Obama Eligibility.
I won’t vote for Huckleberries or Romney.
Wow. Fake hair. Fake boobs.
At least the baby is real.
So Trump may be a stalking horse.
But he is proving that there is wide and deep suspicion by voters of Obama based on ineligibility.
It is about Article 2, section 1, natural born citizen requirement.
Obama can be beat and Trump is leading the way.
If Trump shouldn’t - for any reason - be the Republican candidate, then the others need to grow a pair.
My suggestion is stop beating up Trump and beat up on Obama. Republican candidates are behaving too stupid or cowardly to take advantage of reality: Obama can be beat on Constitutional eligibility!
Good advice....but too many just eat up the Liberal Media spin...and the Liberal Media spin regurgitated from a Not Really Conservative website
I know Trump is no conservative....but he is the only one standing up to Obama....while all the other GOP are cut and run. And, some of the ones who may be conservative, like Allen West, are attacking Birthers...and no way will I vote for someone who is actively or passively in the tank for Obama
The GOP is not going to win in 2012 until they get with it on Obama Eligibility.
“Please tell me how old is too old of a picture of a politician to be posted on the Internet.”
Get off it. You didn’t seek out that picture because of its age. You picked out the picture to for its humiliation value, and because you get off on being cruel. You know why you chose that picture, even if the Huckster and his family have all lost much of their weight. You wanted a derogatory pic of them, and that is what you posted. You afe showing a cruel streak and you know it. Would you deliberately pick out an older picture of the fat Rush Limbaugh and post it? Go ahead and do it, post it on this thread, one of the pics when Rush was really humongous, and see what kind of a reaction you get. You remain, cruel.
Hmmm ..... Let's look at your photos. The Huckabees are fat and the Palins are good-looking and physically fit.
So, let me get this straight. America should decide who should be President of the United States based upon how good looking and cute the candidate is?
Isn't that kind of brain-dead thinking how America elected Barack Obama as President of the United States?
I will not be voting for Huckabee but the reason has absolutely nothing to with the fact that he and his family are fat.
By your criteria, the women's vote should go to Levi Johnston.
Physical attractiveness is innate. We can’t help it. Attractive people get noticed....after which they need intelligence, integrity, patriotism and common sense to maintain interest.
The best case scenario - now that Trump has sucked all the oxygen out of the room - would be getting his endorsement.
First GOP candidate to get the thumb’s up from the Donald will be the winner. Palin, Cain & West are my favs.
taking bets;0
“You know why you chose that picture, even if the Huckster and his family have all lost much of their weight....Would you deliberately pick out an older picture of the fat Rush Limbaugh and post it?”
While both Huckabee and Limbaugh should be commended on their weight loss, I can assure you that at no time would an overweight Limbaugh be caught wearing stripes!
So, while we know that Huckabee has been able to shed a few pounds, he has not been able to shed his nanny state do gooder liberal views, nor has he been able to shed a really bad sense of fashion.
The store clerk that sold the Huckabees the three stripped jumbo ex large shirts must still be giddy that they were able to move those off of their rack.
Must have been one heck of a salesman.
I never did mention the word “fat.”
Stripes yes, fat no.
How depressing. Where is our Ronald Reagan? And no, Palin is no Reagan.
>Maybe it is time for a third party.
Don’t even say that. I do agree we have a problem finding a candidate with balls who isn’t some form of Liberal.
Does anyone know why Hunter, Cain et al don’t go on the attack?
The closet we have is Palin, but I’m not sure she would get enough votes, given what the media has done to her. Where is our Reagan?
I thought Duncan L. Hunter was, too. But they, including the GOP didn’t give him a chance.
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.