Posted on 07/25/2015 3:12:03 AM PDT by Biggirl
Donald Trump will not be the Republican presidential nominee in 2016. He does not have the infrastructure, he does not have the organization, he does not have the discipline. So why are so many Republican ThoughtLeaders intent on casting him from the race like a leper?
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
later
“Mitt Romney could have won 69 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2012 and still have lost. Romney lost...because white turnout was too low, and because he didn’t drive outsized turnout from Evangelical Christians, among others. “
This is a REALLY GOOD POINT, but they could have taken it a bit further. There are also MILLIONS OF WHITES that vote Democrat today that just might vote Republican, if Republicans gave them a reason (like border control). Those are double-votes, as they take one away from the Democrat and add one to the Republican. But the GOP ‘advisers’ (most of them gay, by the way) won’t permit our candidates to talk border security...so those voters are lost to us.
Texas and the rest of the South showed how that worked in 2014, when Republicans SWEPT THE REGION, with a lot of help from white former Democrats - Republicans, at least here in Texas ran AGAINST Open Borders, and did so LOUDLY, so people knew where they stood. And, although the media will never remind us, the Democrats were supposed to be competitive in Texas last year, given all the Hispanics here...but the Republicans WON BY 20 POINTS and talked a VERY STRONG conservative message.
I won’t go there any longer, Breitbart freezes my computer for 3 or 4 minutes. Totally rediculas, their web site must be built and maintained by a couple of teenagers.
“Donald seems to be doing pretty well.
I’d say there’s a fair chance he’ll win this.
For real.”
And for party bosses and elected leaders that REFUSED to listen to us on Open Borders, FOR DECADES, they have only themselves to blame.
Trump wouldn’t have a damn thing to stand on if Republicans had simply tried to implement the PROMISES they made while campaigning...but they didn’t, and we are THROUGH WITH THEM.
” he does not have the discipline.”
Is that the GOP code word for “he won’t go along to get along?”
After all, that is the main requirement to be a member in good standing in the “good old boy” club.
Cruz is a free traitor. Sorry he is.
Didn’t we just hear that Trump is building a solid organization in places like NH?
Not sure why Breitbart says he has no organization.
Do you think, honestly, that the 4 million plus Conservatives/evangelicals that stayed home for Romney would honestly turn out for Trump?
I don’t see it.
“Do you think, honestly, that the 4 million plus Conservatives/evangelicals that stayed home for Romney would honestly turn out for Trump?”
Fair question - we’ll have to see how Trump comes down on other issues. If he says a few wrong things on abortion or gun control, he will quickly deflate. We’re watching.
But keep in mind, he only has to pull over 2 million Democrat voters (i.e., less than 2%) to overcome the 4 million, and I think he’s well on his way there - there are a LOT of fed up white voters that are as sick of typical Republicans as they are sick of Democrats.
From day one everyone including their pet kitten have been predicting Trump will eventually fall out of the race, or will be a third party Perot, or whatever excuse they can make up.
He’s not perfect, far from it. But he’s giving pushback, standing up for the electorate shunned by the MSM & Uniparty.
Unquestionably he’d be a better President than any RINO or commiecrat and the electorate knows it, that’s why he is so popular.
I just cannot see why everyone thinks he’ll be gone soon, I think it is wishful thinking.
I don’t go to Breitbart’s site so don’t know what all the article says but Trump is gaining the infrastructure
http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/us_politics/2015/07/trumpeting_the_donald
>> Trump . . . is either a total fraud, crazy, or exactly what he says he is <<
If one should omit the adjective “total” from your statement, then perhaps the three possibilities aren’t mutually exclusive.
(Alternatively, should the “total” descriptor be retained, DT’s status may depend on the day of the week.)
You site ghostery.com, but wouldn’t that sight be better if someone visited an optometrist to make sure their cite was good?
Trump is using Alinsky tactics against the left. Mainly ridicule, “man’s most potent weapon”.
I doubt that Trump is playing the pasty for anyone.Trump has an unfair advantage; he has (serious) money, and even if other candidates find supporters with similar financial strength those supporters respect “campaign finance reform laws" which restrict their right to spend their money on politics. That is certainly unfair, but it is also blatantly unconstitutional as an abridgment of Americans’ "freedom . . . of the press.” Under the Ninth Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,the First Amendment should be understood as a floor under our rights, not a ceiling above them. And the Patent Office authorization explicit inshall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Article 1 Section 8. The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . .combined with the Amendments provisions in Article V, imply that if the “useful art" of “the press” becomes problematical for republican government with the advent of TV etc, a constitutional amendment is the proper remedy.Nobody has freedom of the press who is not allowed to spend his own money, in the way of his choosing, to propagate his own opinions. On that basis I assert that the campaign finance landscape should be entirely different from what it is. Some, perhaps most, of the money which would freely enter campaign coffers would support candidates I favor less than others, if at all. But scale of the money that “the mainstream media” spends attempting to “flatter [our] prejudices to betray [our] interests,” as Alexander Hamilton put it, makes that a moot point. IMHO.
I do think that Cruz has no desire to cross Trump unnecessarily - and that of all the other candidates he is the one least unlikely to benefit from the considerations this article proposes. The unfortunate part is that Trump would be utterly miscast as a VP. It just doesn’t fit. If it did, Trump would be able to self fund his campaign in the general election.
LOL,yes indeed.
I think Trump believes what he says at the time he says it, which is why he has in the minds of some “flip flopped” on issues. Although his book pretty much adheres to what he has said on the campaign trail.
Huh??????? Please explain.........
He stated he is favor of Free Trade, in that youtube video.
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.