Trump’s Enemies Underestimate Him

The president’s endorsed candidates had lost in the midterms. And the vultures in the press and the Republican Party were circling.

“Never before had a president involved himself so intimately in the selection of Senate candidates,” said one observer. Words like “fiasco” and “bumbling” were used to describe the president’s selection of candidates and the resulting losses. As a result, his own reelection was now doubtful, endangered at best.

Then there was another president. The midterms were a disaster for him. As the election losses of his supported candidates sank in with the media, it was an “axiom” that he could not possibly be elected again.

No, neither president was Donald Trump. The names and times were President Richard Nixon after the 1970 midterm election and President Ronald Reagan after the disastrous 1982 midterm election. Reagan’s situation was seen as so dire that one political reporter who had covered his career — that would be the Washington Post’s Lou Cannon — said in his 1982 biography, Reagan: “I believe that Reagan will not run again.”

Suffice it to say that not only did Reagan run again, but two years later, in 1984, he won in a 49-state landslide.

The point is obvious. All the naysayers who insisted that the results in 1970 and 1982 guaranteed disaster if Nixon and Reagan were nominated again were proved wrong — big time.

This comes to mind, of course, in the wake of Herschel Walker’s narrow loss in the Georgia Senate runoff. Trump’s critics are going after Trump for the loss in just the same fashion that the Nixon and Reagan critics went after them when their candidates lost.

In short?
Regardless of what his critics say, former President Trump is seriously disciplined in these 10 rules.
There is no rocket science in realizing that Trump’s critics are underestimating the unwavering support of his base.
Not to mention that they are seriously underestimating the former president’s ability to win.

Again.

As I posted before, I was warming to DeSantis after the election debacle, but then found out just who I’d be in bed with...so back to Trump, 100%!

(similar to Ukraine, do I REALLY want to be in bed with Soros/Neocons/Globalists/Biden - well, not this conservative)

The problem with analogizing Nixon's midterm losses in 1970 and Reagan's 1982 midterm losses to Trump's midterm losses in 2018 and 2022 is that both of them won their reelections, and Trump lost his.

There is no rocket science in realizing that Trump’s critics are underestimating the unwavering support of his base.

I don't think anyone is overlooking that he has a base that would vote for him - to use his own words - even if he "stood in the middle of 5th Avenue and shot someone."

The problem is that base alone isn't enough for him to win an election.

Problem with the premise is the analog to incumbents Nixon and Reagan would have been 2020 and there’s someone else occupying the White House. Trump owns his 2020 loss but won’t accept responsibility for it. He’s doing crazy things like hoarding his PAC money instead of passing along meaningful dollars to races he claimed to be raising money for (Walker had to call him out). Walker didn’t have a narrow loss in the actual runoff. Tens of thousand voters for him in Nov didn’t show up on Dec. Trump’s ill timed announcement didn’t help. The Kanye dinner, the trading cards… Nixon and Reagan had self discipline while Trump is a self sabotaging mess after 2020.

That’s a PR BS tactic to hide the failure of his choices in key competitive races. Those are the ones that acted as a proxy for him on the ballot. Endorsing people without competition means nothing. Walker probably ended up in a runoff rather than winning easily like every other GA statewide candidate because of his Trump connection. It probably hurt in AZ, PA as well.

>> “Suffice it to say that not only did Reagan run again, but two years later, in 1984, he won in a 49-state landslide.” <<

>I miss the point.<

Clearly, in 2020, Donald Trump will win in an astonishing landslide.

Of course you miss the point.

The article isn’t gushing about DeSantis or Tesla/Musk and how they’re both going to save the world, feed the hungry, house the homeless, cure the sick or build a super duper electric car/truck that has a bagillion horsepower and a thousand-billion ft/lbs of torque that uses 1/10th of a watt of electricity to circle the globe 17 times.

As busy as you are going back and forth from Tallahassee to Twitter/Tesla HQs, I’m surprised you have the time to post on FR. Must be on your flights back and forth.

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.