There are some strange theories flying around on this thread.
I’ve been watching Ed Rollins on Lou Dobbs and I think he’s a solid Trump supporter with wise observations. He’s called it right on predicting Trump wins and strategies.
How exactly do you blame Rollins for say a Michelle Bachman loss?
It’s like saying Karl Rove deserves all the credit for W winning. Although I’ve grown to dislike the Bush’s a big part of Bush winning in 2000 is just that he could somehow relate to people without coming off like a privileged elitist from a status family. Compare and contrast that with Al Gore. I don’t care about popular vote, I am talking about in Red States, the candidate had certain innate abilities that Al Gore did not. Gore was stiff and wooden.
This isn’t to say Rove had a bad strategy. However Rove could have ran Mitt Romney’s campaign and Mitt would have still found a way to lose it.
I personally value Ed Rollins’ input here. Trump style America First Republicanism with the right people can create a massive Mondale style beat-down. These days I don’t think you could get 49 states but if he wins swing states, and picks off NY/NJ it will be a landslide, and thus a mandate. During the Reagan years the Boll Weevil’s often supported Reagan because of the landslide win. They didn’t want to go back to their district and be seen as too “against” Reagan.
Rollins has been usually right more than wrong. Trump is the kind of candidate he would love to work with, and advise. Trump can make the decisions.
When you have many people working in the same direction you get results, unlike all the naysayers and do nothings out there like Rush, Levin and Beck who will have their sour grapes for ever.
Rush couldn’t stop the criticism of everyone pouncing on his boy. Fact is, Cruz was a lousy candidate, and make enemies. I think his whole campaign changed when he went after Trump in the debates, and brought on Beck and Romney.