Posted on 12/09/2011 7:32:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
CBN’s David Brody gets the scoop on Michele Bachmann’s response to the invitation to the Donald Trump forum on December 27th in Iowa. Apparently, she has something better to do one week before the caucuses than ring-kissing:
Michele Bachmann’s campaign tells The Brody File that she will NOT attend the Newsmax debate moderated by Donald Trump on December 27th. Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have also declined. That leaves Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as the only ones who have said they will attend. A Lincoln/Douglas debate anyone?
In order to have a Lincoln/Douglas style debate, Trump would have to keep his mouth shut. Odds on that? You’re better off betting that Buddy Roemer wins Iowa in four weeks.
Brody thinks that Bachmann might be working on an upset:
The Brody File has said that Bachmann’s organizational strength among pastors and homeschoolers gives her the real shot at doing very well in Iowa.
And let’s face it — if that’s the demographic she’s aiming to get into her corner, Bachmann won’t convince them by cavorting with Donald Trump, of all people. With Romney not terribly popular among social conservatives and Gingrich carrying a hefty amount of personal baggage in this area, Bachmann could well make some inroads in her native state by hewing to social-conservative positions and venues. Rick Perry has already reached the same conclusion, making overt arguments along faith-based themes in Iowa. Again, Trump isn’t exactly a model for that argument.
So the question now becomes this: will Gingrich and Santorum stick to their commitment to Trump, or will they suddenly find something else to do on the 27th? I’m betting that they find some way to distance themselves from this event, and that it gets quietly forgotten.
It’s not even so much the debate as it is to the damned fealty to Trump! What part of that isn’t being understood here???
<><><><
The Trump defenders, at least on this thread, appear to love him for one reason. The BC issue.
Some of us apparently remember Trump stating categorically about his investigators in Hawaii, and “you won’t believe what they found.” Apparently what they found was crickets that don’t even chirp, cuz we’ve heard spit since then.
I wouldn't vote for him, but I see no problem with him asking the questions during a News Max debate. He's smart enough to understand world events.
Just because he's wealthy doesn't make him "unworthy." That's just an Obomas Alinski tactic. I don't hold his wealth against him.
Charisma. You are right. The frustrating thing about Bachmann is that as a legislator and Tea Party speaker she -did- have it! It evaporated as soon as she ran for POTUS. I hope she can find it again.
Listen to her here:
http://conservativedailynews.com/2011/10/michele-bachmann-999-is-the-devil/
Why did she just not STOP at 38 seconds? The gratuitous add at the end made her finish up as inane and absurd, when her previous points were valid and her demeanor serious and compelling. A friend of mine is of the opinion that she is being sabotaged from within, but she is an attorney and -knows- she is responsible for her words.
I just don’t get it. I hope the old Michele comes back someday.
Just because he’s wealthy doesn’t make him “unworthy.” That’s just an Obomas Alinski tactic. I don’t hold his wealth against him.
<><><><><><><><><
I mentioned nothing about his wealth, perhaps your response was intended for another?
I’m sorry, and I mean no disrespect, but I think Trump is a joke. All the gravitas and sincerity of another reality star ... Snookie.
When Bachmann had her surge, most who would have been her supporters were quietly waiting for Sarah Palin. Now that Palin and Cain appear to be out, Bachmann ought to be the one re-capturing the social conservative vote, not Newt.
So, she could be a surprise the night of the Iowa caucuses. I can’t imagine evangelicals getting fired up for Newt or Mitt.
I agree. Newsmax is a legitimate conservative news outlet.
Trump will enter the race now as an independent to siphon off votes solely for the purpose of seeing Republicans lose.
Now she doesn’t have to worry about Trump introducing her to the tune of “Lioness Bits.”
It IS Reality TV and that's how it was described from the beginning. Trump would interview the candidates, ultimately decide who he's would give his endorsement to, and if he didn't think that any of theme deserved his endorsement, he would run 3rd Party himself. This isn't some hypothetical; it's Trump's own words.
So a potential leader of the Free World is suppose to prostrate himself before the Donald and submit to the Donald's will? If they do, they aren't worthy of consideration for the office -- a US President bows before no one except God and submits to no one except the will of the American people.
In an article I read a few days ago, it said Newt Gingrich and Rick "I will show up in a Chicken Suit to Get Free Airtime" Santorum -- were going to be there. So the Donald has already succeeded in setting at least one Republican candidate up for humiliation.
Earlier this year, Trump stiffed the Iowa Republican Party for their biggest fundraiser of the year by being a last minute pullout when he dropped out of the presidential race --they had to cancel the event -- their biggest fundraiser of the year. So what is the Donald doing as a moderator for an Iowa Republican debate?
The Donald has also been a generous Democratic donor, giving $50K to Rahm Emanuel's Mayoral Campaign.
Democratic leaning, Potential 3rd Party run, humiliating the Republican candidates, humiliating the Iowa Republican Party — Donald Trump is there to blow things up for the Republican Party, not just to “moderate a debate”. I agree this is going to be a disaster.
I wish they’d all boycott the rest of the debates; they’re nothing but fodder for Dems at this point.
How crazy am I? I’m still supporting Sarah Palin. And still worried that Hillary is going to be the nominee and all this craziness is for nothing.
I like Trump, and not because of the BC issue, although I did like the fact that someone had enough guts to publicly stand up to Obama, something none of our "candidates" would do.
I think Trump is a patriot who loves his Country and is sickened by what politicians, from both parties, have done to it.
I like Trump because he is successful even though he has been knocked down a number of times.
I like Trump because he recognizes how our Country is being totally screwed over by foreign countries with the help of our "leaders".
I like Trump because he is honest, he says what he thinks, unlike most of those running for the presidency.
I like Trump because he does not suffer fools gladly and this is especially true with the media.
I like Trump because he has the guts to call out punks like Karl Rove, unlike our presidential candidates.
Trump does not share all of my political views, but neither does any of the Republicans running for the presidency.
I think those candidates attending the debate will get a huge boost. Bachmanns decision virtually buries her candidacy.
So be it.
“I can’t imagine evangelicals getting fired up for Newt or Mitt.”
I’m not an IA evangelical, so can’t really speak to their motivations. I would assume, however that they wouldn’t so much get “fired up” over either Newt or Mitt, but over the prospect of defeating Obama. If either of them can do that, or are perceived as able to do that, he will get their votes. I doubt anyone truly believes MB could beat Obama. She’s neither SP or HC. And, frankly, has done more damage than help to herself in this campaign, at least from my perspective.
You can like trump for any or all reasons. I only mentioned this thread cuz that’s what the frame of reference was.
I do think that you are projecting values on him that I don’t think exist.
I’ll reserve comments until after the debate. It could go either way with those that attend and for those that do not attend. I’m not being evasive. What happens if it turns out Trump keeps a very low profile and just asks some pertinent questions and gives each debater full time to go into details with their answers. In short those that watch it find nothing offensive.
You might want to think about this hypothetical a bit more.
Maybe Rachael Maddow will welcome Newt on her show after the Newt-Trump love-in.
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.