Posted on 09/19/2015 8:30:50 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Yesterday Trump released his position on the Second Amendment.
It’s one of the best position papers (2nd Amendment relate) I’ve seen. I’m sure there are other candidates out there now with ones that are similar, so I’m not trying to say his is the absolute best. Still, it is very good.
We have had a group of FReepers that have hurled accusation after accusation at Trump. One of them was related to the Second Amendment, and how Trump favored gun control
So now we get his actual position paper, and the old slander can’t fly, so now it’s, “I can’t believe him.”
These people are damaged. They can’t even be honest with themselves.
Confronted with the reality they’ve been lying about him, they now claim they can’t believe him.
As I told Starstruck a few minutes ago, some folks say they want something for decades. Then they get it, and still find an excuse to be unhappy.
This reveals a person who is incapable of being happy. They derive meaning in life from complaining.
I’m an ex journo with over a decade in the media. I have personally sat in editorial meetings discussing how to lie in baldface without ‘seeming’ to lie in order to push an agenda. Believe nothing a ‘journolist’ prints in today’s media.
I was also exit polled during the AP in 08. After giving my answers I noticed the pollster had written NONE of my answers down.
Believe NOTHING you read.
No one’s pushing the line you keep talking about...
Actually, Trump has an anti 2A history. It is great that today he is Pro 2a. I liked what he said. I want him to do everything on that paper. I hope he is honest and believes them going ahead.
But it does not erase his past positions. They did happen and are true.
you stated that a candidate may release fake numbers if his polling results are bad, so how is then that we can trust a candidate’s polling data?
/yawn
At least be original. You’ve already posted the exact same thing before.
Yeah, yeah, I know, if you don’t support Trump you must be a GOPe hack according to people like you. Heard that nonsense when I pointed out Herman Cain wasn’t a serious candidate during his poll boomlet during the last election cycle, or that Palin was stringing people along and had no intention of running during her 2012 tease campaign, etc, etc.
And when people look back and wonder how so many supposed conservatives supported an anti-intellectual, populist protectionist like Donald Trump during the beginning of this election cycle, people that post the kind of nonsense you just did will slink away and have nothing to say.
It would interesting to confirm if his laid back demeanor is natural or if he's medicated. At times when I watch him speak in his measured cadence and soft monotone, slightly swaying and closing his eyes, I can not help myself from wondering if he'll start snoring or just topple over...............I am in no way trying to be demeaning to the doctor but it is what it is.
To a certain extent I agree Norm. So the question is, do we never forget things people have done in the past?
If that is true, why do we continue to voice the desire to have politicians buy into our beliefs?
To even voice that desire, and then not accept people who do, would reveal us to be some very strange people. We would be wasting our time voicing a desire that we would never accept.
Trumps kid was evidently a hunter. Trump has come around. He has a lifetime membership in the NRA. (granted, anyone can get that easily and it doesn’t necessarily mean much, but a Leftist isn’t going to brag about that)
If you want something else to shake your confidence, the other day he granted an interview in which he stated a policy. The interviewer asked if he was afraid of releasing a policy and being held to it. He stated something to the effect, “Look, these are my thoughts on this subject. Life being what it is, we may have to make mid course corrections. Hardly anything remains constant.” (paraphrased)
I guess you could look at that and say gotcha, but a guy that is lying to you isn’t going to make a statement like that. He would just say, “Hey that’s my belief and you’ll have to take it or leave it.”
I don’t think he’s lying. These are his beliefs.
He has had to sit down (for the first time) and put his beliefs to paper, making a declaration in light of all that he now knows.
What Trump will pan out to be, none of us knows.
What we do know, is that we can’t get a Conservative other than him nominated anyway. It’s really Trump or the same old RINO on election day.
I’m taking my chances with Trump. At least I can vote for the guy based on what he’s hawking.
I have to post the same thing, sometimes many times in order to get through to Trump-hating knuckleheads like you.
Go play with your bow and arrows. Clean the suction cups first.
Sure we can forgive. If he proves he’s honest about it. We forgave Reagan for his mistaken amnesty.
But my point is that past actions aren’t just derezzed. They happened and have to be considered. Pols say anything to get elected one week and then the next, say something opposite to get elected if they calculate it will benefit them. If Trump sticks to his position paper, then he should be supported for that position because it shows he changed his ways on the subject.
Despite his claims not to be another run of the mill politician, Trump is "evolving" on issues as is politically expedient just like so many others. I agree with his immigration positions and from what I read his 2nd Amendment policy paper looks solid, but this guy has been all over the map on issue after issue after issue - and in some cases all within a short period of time.
It's amusing that so many Trumpkins won't overlook other candidates policy position changes, yet Trump's they gloss over as if these flip flops never happened.
Trump is now the standard bearer on securing the border and dealing with illegal immigrants? Maybe, but to believe that you'd have to accept "the Donald" has done a complete 180 from his position just a couple years ago. In 2012 Trump claimed Romney was too TOUGH on illegals and lost the Hispanic vote (and therefore the election) because of it. And Romney's position wasn't half as tough or intrusive as Trump's is now. Romney was simply for using eVerify, punishing employers that are caught hiring illegals, and letting the jobs that attract illegals dry up so they won't come here. Heck, that is one of the few things Romney actually got right - it's vastly cheaper and more realistic than trying to deport 12 million people, and it punishes businesses with fines that don't attract the same kind of media sob stories rounding up and deporting a bunch of illegals would.
In the end, the nomination will go to an unscarred Cruz. That's the important thing.
Polls are manipulated by the question.
When the effetes did not take the trump seriously the poll was more direct.
Polls tied to debates are ALWAYS suspect no matter who wins.
Fiorina may have “won” but she has no CASH.
The ONLY candidate with donors is jbush and that is still bad.
Consider with the other donor obligated candidates (see blood money) as they drop out, they are mandated to kow tow to the donor’s second choice (or first) and transfer insfrastructure to the establishment candidate. Who will get walkers IOWA caucus chairmen.
I think Cruz has some cash to work with.
It just makes you look unoriginal, unable to think on the fly by replying to current comments and, quite frankly, intellectually lazy.
And you're little insults make your comments sound as if they were posted by a 12 year old.
Cruz has not caught on. sad.
btw are not the numbers of this poll a bit off? 59+40+40?
They are pushing Carson because they know the only way he can beat Trump is if they give him tons of Chamber of Commerce and GOP funds. They will make him beholden to them. And right now they think he will be the easiest (not Jeb Bush) candidate to manipulate.
Carson is just too un-enthusiastic to gain significant grass root support.
Face it. He’s just plain dull.
I put no faith in media polling, I don't care what label it'd done under. Media poll are not about truth. They're about audience acquisition and retention. Truth is relative in that pursuit. Or not a factor at all. Achieving the desired objective is the only consideration.
There are only 2 polls that I give any credence to. George Washington University's Battleground poll, run by GOP'er Ed Goeas of The Terrance Group and Celinda Lake of the liberal Lake Research Partners is one. They cross check each other's methodology and questioning before they launch the poll. The IBD/TIPP poll is the other. The TechnoMetrica Institute for Policy and Politics(TIPP) is a market research firm that sell their market projections to industry so they have to get it right. I"m not sure when these two crank up their polling but it will probably be after the primaries. They're probably doing what I'm doing; viewing the current polling as so much background noise.
That would be great. Unfortunately that’s wishful thinking. In the end during the 12 election, the entire GOP field was more conservative than the guy that got the nomination. And that happened because the vast majority of the right flushed their principles to ‘win’ with a guy that BBQs dead aborted babies for profit. (Stericycle)
Do not depend on your fellow ‘conservatives’ to do anything but rush like stampeding cattle to someone other than the best guy for the job. They proved what their conservatism meant once. They will do it again.
I am hopeful for that outcome, but Cruz is an actual ideological conservative - to stop him the media, academia and the entertainment establishment will do anything. Trump is more an amusement for them, Cruz would be a dagger in their hearts - and they know it. If the left senses Cruz might win the nomination they will not let him go unscathed.
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.