Posted on 02/27/2016 5:06:39 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
An exchange on the BBC after the Nevada caucuses had given Donald Trump 46 percent of the vote said it all. A perfectly pleasant BBC interviewer asked a political consultant (as best I recall): "But how are the Republicans going to deal with Donald Trump?" "Well, at present they're voting for him," he said. Good heavens, so they are. Not fellows wearing three-piece suits in Washington, the consultant added, but people who think of themselves as Republicans or as conservatives in towns and cities across America.
Now, that might not continue. It's always an error to suppose that the future will be nothing more than a continuation of the present. Extrapolating current trends gets both economists and political pundits into big trouble. Besides, Trump is a phenomenon, like a comet, and sometimes they just cross the sky and disappear in a welcome blaze, like, for instance, a tax-returns scandal. Even without that, he has high negatives in national polls, which means there's a real risk of his being denied the nomination or imploding after getting it....
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Did you bother to read the article?
This is not the original article by Peggy Noonan which was excellent but the National Review’s hit piece on the article.
If he were to be eliminated, I would almost certainly prefer Trump to Rubio (for reasons that will emerge later). And though it’s just possible that I would endorse a worthy third-party conservative if nominee Trump were shown to be even more of an unguided missile than hitherto, I cannot see myself casting a vote for Hillary Clinton — not least because, as a British citizen with a green card, I don’t have a vote to cast.
I don’t read anything from the biased NRO
Ok, haven’t read this yet. Honest impression of the headline is that this is some kind of attack on Rubio and Cruz being undocumented aliens
First look is the source. If I see NRO, I’m done. We know their slant. No need to keep flogging the dead horse. They’re not bringing anything new to the game.
Was not the usual hit-piece I am accustomed to expect from National Review.
The writer’s first choice is Cruz, then Trump, but cannot vote because he is a British citizen.
He does not like Rubio at all.
Holy crap.
A balanced article from NRO?
Thanks for posting - and I actually went to NRO and read it. You know I’m Trump all the way, but I recognize his faults, and the article mentions them but doesn’t focus on them.
What Sullivan seems to be getting at has been reported in the Washington Times which was the loose conduct of that caucus suggesting fraud . In some of the FR postings the trumpbots immediately bring up Iowa. Which was well conducted no compairison to what apparently went on there and Cruz legitimately won. And should be dismissed as sour grapes.
It's National Review. No need to read it.
They suck at being right.
I read it and it was a pretty thoughtful article. Worth the time spent.
Translated: I'm not Hispanic, D@mmit, so I can't move to California, Arizona, Texas, or Florida in order to vote for Rubio four times and Hillary another four.
As they say across the pond, "Sod off, swampy."
Go deal with your own influx of "Asians" (Pakistanis) who gang raped thousands of working-class teenage girls with the collusion and praise of the authorities.
Dipshit limey poofter.
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.