Donald Trump A Trojan Horse To Knock Out All Other Republicans But Jeb Bush?

[Enlightened1]

I heard this "theory" from a friend, and decided to throw it out to Free Republic.

My friend (no proof) said that he believes Donald Trump is a Trojan Horse....

Trump's is only there to pull people away from the other campaigns of Cruz, Walker, Paul, etc.... in order to eliminate them.

Then once it's down to Trump and Bush in the Primaries, then he will step down.

Leaving us with Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton will easily defeat Jeb Bush, and she will be the next President.

Hopefully this nightmare scenario will never come to pass.

Thoughts, comments, or opinions?

[Ohioan]

There has long been confusion over the Perot campaign, and whether he cost Bush, Sr. the election. That is far from clear. Before Perot had a paranoid episode--I believe over something at his daughter's wedding--he was showing as a real contender--could have won, had he kept climbing. His dropping out, and then back in, reduced his potential vote, and ended that possibility. That does not make him a Trojan Horse for the Clintons.

Another problem that he had, was he absolutely did not know how to make a TV speech--his eyes were always staring at a prompter, as he read his speeches, looking spaced out.

I do not believe Trump would use TV that poorly. (Now I am not endorsing anyone yet. I lean towards Ted Cruz, actually. But, at this point am delighted with what Trump is doing to bring the debate back to the actual social dynamics--the realities that others are too cowardly to address.)

While I could never support Jeb Bush, Cristie or Santorum, etc., I could easily support Trump in 2016. God Bless his efforts to wake people up.

[rickomatic]

I am betting if one would poll the under 30 years olds, Jeb might get 4 votes.

I have not yet run into ANYONE who's supports Jeb. Where are all of his so called supporters? Have any freepers run into family and friends who honestly think he is a viable candidate?

[Tallguy]

I see the opposite playing out: Trump’s firebrand rhetorical style will make the conservatives look “moderate” while depriving the Bush campaign of any oxygen. Bush drops out. Trump eventually goes down from weight of the Media negativity (when they realize he ain’t going any other way).
And then you get the first conservative nominee since Reagan.

[ansel12]

Newt? Newt wasn’t there to help Romney, but Michelle Bachmann and Santorum were.

The anti-Reagan Santorum started out as Romney’s stalking horse, and the dislike for Romney was so strong that Santorum came to think that he had a chance.
“Santorum 1990: I’m not a Reagan Republican
The Reagan line echoes Romney’s own memorable remark from his 1994 Senate campaign, when he said that he didn’t “want to return to Reagan-Bush.”

Santorum reportedly made a similar statement on a separate occasion. According to an October 28, 1990 piece in the Pittsburgh Press, the afternoon newspaper that eventually became part of the Post-Gazette, he described himself as a “progressive conservative” in his campaign manual…”

Santorum comparing Romney to Reagan, (Romney really despised Reagan and left the party because of him).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMy5J_UJw4U

Santorum was a Romney/Arlen Specter man.

[G Larry]

Na...He may clear the weaker candidates, but Cruz, Rubio, and Walker will outlast Trump.

[bkepley]

Both Trump and Perot pretend that gvmt can be run like a huge business. Maybe in China or N. Korea. They are fools.

[ansel12]

Conservatives have always believed that the pro-abortion, anti-gun Perot was a stalking horse for Clinton, he made Clinton president twice.

Trump is also pro-abortion and a gun banner.

Who leaves the GOP and becomes a democrat in 2001 to 2009?
The party of Al Gore, and Hillary, and John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama, and tells us 2 weeks ago that his favorite president is Bill Clinton.

[FreeReign]

Trump on Jeb Bush: 'The last thing we need is another Bush'

Trump on Hillary Clinton:Trump Donated At Least $100K To Clinton Foundation

Trump gives us Bush, which gives us Hillary...or so the theory goes.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Your friend is a moron. One of the reasons Trump got in the race is because he hates Jeb Bush and wants to make sure he does not get the nomination.

[Ohioan]

Not sure, why you think that the Government--the legitimate Government, that is--cannot be run like a business? Our Federal Government has very limited functions--important functions, but very limited.

If you strip out the present aspects--the unconstitutional aspects--which go to redistribution of the fruits of the labor of a free people; the efforts to control the thoughts of a once free people, etc., and to force a species of Nazi like uniformity on them; you are left with functions that basically benefit from being handled in a business-like manner.

[bkepley]

It’s a Democratic Republic not a business. Have you ever worked for a large business?

[hadaclueonce]

I have not yet run into ANYONE who's supports Jeb

I think the Media likes the idea that Jeb has supporters with deep pockets and they keep throwing his name out there seeing the potential of Ad dollars.

[LS]

Nah. First of all, no one (maybe Cruz, a little) is even discussing illegals. Rubio trying to finesse it.

Second, it's not just the illegals message, but it's the way Trump is delivering it, as "in your face," challenging the media. THIS is what people are responding to as much as the specific issue. Cruz has done this some. Paul has cow-towed. Most of the rest have just slinked away under the first media attack. Where was Rubio when the Times tried to slime him with the boat? Trump would have turned that against the media, and Hillary.

Do not confused Trump's position on issues with his very apparent appeal to conservative voters who are desperate for ANYONE on our side to aggressively fight back.

[LS]

And he doesn't need to. We all know what the solution is. But none of the nine dwarves want to talk about the problem, save Cruz. I don't know where Fiorina is on this yet.

Again, though, don't confuse specific issues with the symbolism that people are cheering which is anyone standing up to the libs. Trump can't be bribed or shamed or embarrassed, not even by his own money. In short, he has the Dem playbook.

[Ohioan]

Perot was drawing about equally from both parties. I am sorry that Bush, Sr. lost in 1992; but blaming Perot implies that there is some duty to support someone you do not agree with on major issues. There is not. The election was Bush's to win or lose, and he lost.

I was very unhappy about it at the time; not because I have been a Republican since the Goldwater election; but because Clinton's moderation was obviously phoney--he was not only a draft dodger, married to a Marxist sycophant; but he was a Southern turncoat--and I cannot respect a native of any State, who dishonors his State's traditions.

[central_va]

Trump is the only one acknowledging the depth of the immigration threat. It is a good start.

[LS]

Perot got 17% of the vote as a third party. Can't remember what TR got, but 17% has to be huge.

Perot's problem was what Trump's CAN be: he got by for a while on generalities: "Larry, we gotta get under the hood and fix the economy." That will work for a while, but at some point, you have to have a FEW big-picture solutions. For Reagan, it was tax cuts and rolling back regulation. It was winning the Cold War through a military buildup. Trump's first answer to ISIS was "I'll find the right general." Down the line, that won't work at all.

Now, he has plenty of time to develop these---and he needs to stay FAR away from very detailed solutions like Cruz has proposed with his "replacing" Obamacare. (I spoke with Cruz about this: his HSA solution is a total loser because people a) don't save and b) don't see tax benefits if they ain't paying taxes to begin with).

My point is, most presidential elections are NOT won on specifics of policies, but on the inspiration generated by confidence and connecting with people. And Trump definitely has those two covered.

[Ohioan]

Never worked for the Government, except when I was in the Army. What has working for a large business got to do with anything?

As a voting citizen, one is more in the position of a stockholder in a large business than a servant in a large business. And any shareholder in any business wants it run in a businesslike manner.

[ansel12]

The media has tried to sell that, and conservatives have never bought it.

Perot had a personal dislike for Bush, and gave us Clinton.

[bkepley]

In a large business everything is top down and whether you like it or not you must abide by the decision. Not even Obama could command in that way. There are three branches. There are the voters. There are the permanent gvmt employees. There is the media. You have to be a politician that’s all there is to it. I don’t think a gvmnt run as a business would be any more successful than a business run like a democratic republic.