Posted on 01/27/2016 6:46:26 AM PST by TaxPayer2000
WOW!!! Excellent research!!! You’d think TV news election specialists would’ve known this.
I wonder if DT was seeking to make a parallel with RR or if he just proved he naturally is similar in thought to Reagan.
“Ronald Reagan Skipped Last Debate Before IA Caucus – Went on to Win in Landslide”
completely meaningless.
It would be interesting to know the debate ratings in Iowa and New Hampshire
Couldnt find any youtube related to that event, but here is something from that campaign that is just background history:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfHN5QKq9hQ
TRUMP (HE RISES ABOVE ALL) IS NO REAGAN-—far from it.
This is different because longer time for Reagan between debate and voting. This is 3 or 4 days. Trump stands to lose votes if he debates. He hopes things stay same and he is in lead. He leaves Cruz alone to take the hits on stage. Will it work for Trump? I have no idea.
Reagan didn’t quit because he was afraid of a girl. Or because he thought the moderators would be mean to him.
I have a theory, and I wonder if it is backed by history:
If a candidate wins both the disparate states of Iowa and New Hampshire, it seems they will win everything.
True or false?
Will the Fox Debate advertisers continue to advertise or will they want some of their money back since Trump will not be present?
It was a stupid move on Reagan’s part to skip the Iowa debate. He was able to recover, by winning decisively the next debate.
I find it insulting that you would call a woman a girl!
Blaming Fox and not attending a debate in which Cruz can train 100% of his fire is strategically smart.
Trump could only lose a debate with Cruz, not win one.
So, Trump has exited beautifully.
I’m a Cruz guy, but I know fantastic strategy when I see it.
Cruz gets to take his shots, but Donald can respond in time with his Tweets.
Fascinating play. Gentlemen, your A Game is appreciated.
So you’re saying Trump is the next Reagan?
Let’s not talk about Trump’s views from 1999-2013, but instead go back to something else from 1980...
Fox will have to provide rebates to their debate advertisers or additional free advertising to make up for the audience deficiencies.
If a candidate wins both the disparate states of Iowa and New Hampshire, it seems they will win everything.”
Absolutely correct.
But we don’t know that strictly speaking from history....because it has (I think) never happened. (Except like Reagan in 84 or Bush in 04 but those are not true primaries).
In other words, if Trump wins IA and NH...we can say...WOW, that is unprecedented!
And it would be. And I think therefore right to predict that Trump would win every state thereafter.
Are you crazy? That would involve actual effort rather than just parroting the DNC talking points which they are supplied daily.
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.