National Review is Against Trump

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by craigepo

As I've said before, anybody in the GOP field is preferable what the Democrats are offering. But the point remains, that the GOP needs to put forward the best we have.
Here's one huge problem as an illustration: Imagine you're Hillary's campaign manager (disgusting, I know, but bear with me). One of your jobs is to put together Hillary's commercials, emails, facebook posts, mailers, etc. Your goal is to galvanize your base, demoralize the GOP base, and to try and get independents and cross-over voters.
The script against Trump writes itself. Trump has traded in two wives for younger women, he owns casinos, he was previously pro-abortion, and his religious faith is lukewarm at best (how many Christians now stay home). He was previously for an assault rifle ban (now the NRA folks get squeemish). He is for expanding use of eminent domain (property rights issues are pretty important in rural areas). He received a ton of deferments to avoid the draft (now your veteran groups are groaning). So, how many commercials could we come up with so far, and we haven't even had a Hillary-Trump debate?
So far, the field has been so broad that he hasn't had to answer any tough questions. He hasn't had to put forward a tax plan, proposals on foreign affairs, etc. Once the field narrows, his off-the-cuff remarks must be replaced by solid policy proposals. I hope that he doesn't come up with anything too crazy, but Trump's history shows that there is no guarantee.
It's one thing to say that a person will vote for Trump vs. the democrats. It's wholly another to say that he should be the GOP nominee. We have some pretty impressive candidates up there, but the problem is that Trump steals the oxygen from the room with a lot of bluster and zero substance. The voters in Iowa and New Hampshire go to the polls in the next few weeks, hopefully they send us some pretty good winners.

I'm not arguing with your logic/facts.
With this election, the populist beast is in charge, though; not reasoning men.
The cross-section is just too frustrated with the status quo because of Obama.
I think even college kids and many gun-bearing dems will vote for the guy.
He'll be quite a cagy saddle bronc to ride, but it beats the alternative.
I don't hold out much hope for sanity to overcome the swell, though it would be outstanding to wake up and have Cruz in the driver's seat.
My druthers would have been a Carson presidency, but he lacks dynamism. Pity.

[I am Al]

Originally Posted by Dusty

...
We may not have a choice other than Trump or a Marxist. What are you gonna do?

Not a big Trump fan, but if that's what happens, Trump's an easy choice.

My concern is that Trump savages the GOP field to the point no one viable is left standing, he decides it isn't worth the hassle, drops out, and his followers stay home. That leaves an opening for someone like Michael Bloomberg to step in to the gap as an independent. What if the choice ends up being Bloomberg vs a Marxist?

If Trump doesn't end up being the nominee, his slash and burn tactics with the other GOP candidates is only benefiting the Dem's and someone like Bloomberg.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by I am Al

Not a big Trump fan, but if that's what happens, Trump's an easy choice.

My concern is that Trump savages the GOP field to the point no one viable is left standing, he decides it isn't worth the hassle, drops out, and his followers stay home. That leaves an opening for someone like Michael Bloomberg to step in to the gap as an independent. What if the choice ends up being Bloomberg vs a Marxist?

If Trump doesn't end up being the nominee, his slash and burn tactics with the other GOP candidates is only benefiting the Dem's and someone like Bloomberg.

Normally, I'd say you're stretching it and being paranoid, but these aren't normal times.
Who knows?
All I know is, the Country's carrying a bone in her teeth right now, and it's The Donald.

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Dusty

I'...
I think even college kids and many gun-bearing dems will vote for the guy...

My 18yr old kid who can vote follows him on twitter and will likely vote for him.
My 15yr old son's friends that will be 18 by the time the election rolls around follow Trump on twitter and will probably vote for him.

They are both in different places so we are not talking the same circle of friends. Its not in any way a statistically valid sample size but it is to me, an indicator.

Young people will not be turning out en mass to vote for Benie Sanders or the Hildabeast...assuming of course that she will evade prosecution and actually be the nominee...which is not certain.

Trump is a showman. He is entertaining and he and his campain are doing a masterful job of using the media. Both mainstream and social.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by Dusty

Here's what will never change: not voting for the non-dem gives the dem half a vote.

The way I look at Hillary, Jeb, Rubio and Sanders is a continuation of Death by 1000 cuts, I really like Cruz but he pisses too many people off and then we have the surprise package of Trump.

What are we going to get with Trump? One can only speculate what a President Trump will bring, but I would wager he will cause the reset button to be hit.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by UWOA

I don't expect anyone to save me ... I'll take care of that myself (using a few close friends). That's what sheeple expect -- a saviour ....

.

Same here.

[SF-TX]

Phyllis Schlafly is no fan of National Review.

Phyllis Schlafly: National Review Is Not the Authority on Conservatism

Living legend and conservative heroine Phyllis Schlafly slammed National Review for their efforts to take down GOP frontrunner, Donald Trump.

On Friday’s program of The Laura Ingraham Show, Schlafly declared, “I don’t recognize National Review as the authority on conservatism.” Schlafly blasted National Review for being more eager to fight Donald Trump than they are to fight the Republican donor-class, whom Schlafly calls the Kingmakers.

Schlafly said:

National Review is not the authentic conservative. You know, Bill Buckley was for giving away the Panama Canal, which was an enormous issue with conservatives. And in ten years they never wrote a single article about the Equal Rights Amendment, so they were no help against that. So I don’t recognize National Review as the authority on conservatism.

The 91 year-old Phyllis Schlafly helped launch the conservative movement and has been active in politics for more than one-fourth of American history...

...“The Kingmakers,” Schlafly told Breitbart, “have picked our last bunch of losers. And there’s one loser after another because they were more interested in maintaining their flow of money from the big donors and their cooperation with the Democrats—their bipartisanship—and that’s not my goal. I’m for America [Schlafly slams hand on table] and America first [slams hand on table again].”

“Trump is the only hope to defeat the Kingmakers,” Schlafly told Breitbart resolutely. “Because everybody else will fall in line. The Kingmakers have so much money behind them.” {I could be wrong, but from what I have seen of Ted Cruz, I don't think he will 'fall in line.'}

Continue reading

[SF-TX]

Pat Caddell claims this election is about an insurgency, not an ideology. He attributes the Republican party consultants with destroying the campaigns of all but Trump and Cruz (they didn't hire national Republican party consultants).

“The election is not about ideology, not about issues, it’s about insurgency,” noted Democrat pollster Pat Caddell told Breitbart News Network editor-in-chief Alexander Marlow.

Appearing on the Sunday edition of Breitbart’s radio show on Sirius XM 125 the Patriot Channel, Caddell gave his take on the state of the Presidential race.

With voting set to begin with the Iowa caucuses next week, Caddell’s take is a must-listen for those closely following the nomination contest in both parties. A veteran of Presidential campaigns stretching over four decades, Caddell has had a front-row seat at many political defining moments in recent history.

For Caddell, the 2016 election is about voters revolting against Washington and the political classes that have dominated government and policy in recent years. “The system is on the verge of coming apart,” Caddell noted. “The politicians in Washington aren’t going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.”

Most Republican campaigns have been left flat-footed in response, according to Caddell. He places the blame squarely on Republican party consultants, coming out of DC and the Republican National Committee, misunderstanding the mood of voters.

“They have less feel for the electorate than the man in the moon,” Caddell observed.

Caddell noted that the only two Republican candidates who have not hired or surrounded themselves with national Republican consultants are Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
97%
. Scott Walker, he said, surrounded himself with consultants out of Washington and out of the RNC and they immediately destroyed his candidacy...

Continue reading (in the article is a podcast of the interview with Pat Caddell)

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

Pat Caddell claims this election is about an insurgency, not an ideology. He attributes the Republican party consultants with destroying the campaigns of all but Trump and Cruz (they didn't hire national Republican party consultants).

And, this is one of the (many) reasons Trump and Cruz are both despised by establishment Republicrats.

IMO this is both an insurgency AND an ideology. Many folks want leadership that truly puts the nation (not party) first, again.

Add to that, too many folks also see the edge of the precipice for this once great nation...the irony is that with the right leadership we could DOMINATE the world stage like perhaps no other period in our history.

[GratefulCitizen]

People will tolerate many flaws in their leaders.
Weakness is not among them.

Most candidates demonstrate groveling at some point, usually towards the media.
Trump never grovels.

[akv]

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Trump never grovels

Is that due to a vast reservoir of grit or the fact he was born with a silver spoon, and acts like he's never been hit in the mouth?

[SF-TX]

The more Trump talks, the less I like him. If establishment republicans are beginning to support Trump, to me, that is a solid endorsement of Ted Cruz.

Monday on CNN’s “Wolf,” Republican front-runner Donald Trump said establishment Republicans are now switching to his side because they do not like his opponent Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).

Trump said, “Well I think the establishment actually is against me but really coming on line because they see me as opposed to Cruz, who is a nasty guy who can’t get along with anybody. Look, at a certain point, we got to make deals. We can’t have a guy who stands in the middle of the Senate floor and every other senator thinks he’s a whack job. Right you know — You have to make deals, you have to get along, that’s the purpose of what our founders created, and Ted cannot get along with anybody. He’s a nasty person.”

Link

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by akv

Is that due to a vast reservoirs of grit or the fact he was born with a silver spoon, and acts like he's never been hit in the mouth?

Reagan never groveled.
Not groveling doesn't also require boorish behavior.

Unfortunately, too many candidates equate polite behavior with submissive behavior.
It's the emasculation of the American male.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

The more Trump talks, the less I like him. If establishment republicans are beginning to support Trump, to me, that is a solid endorsement of Ted Cruz.

I hear you, Brother, but you gotta look at why the rinos are forming up on Trump rather than Cruz. They have no choice. There's 9 months left-they figure the die is cast.
We'll know the results of this nomination process immediately if Megyn Kelly gets stifled.

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

The more Trump talks, the less I like him. If establishment republicans are beginning to support Trump, to me, that is a solid endorsement of Ted Cruz.

You have a point there, however there is a Cruz commercial playing in our area where Cruz (imo) come off as a well scripted politician.......it actually reminds me of Hillary's speeches and makes my skin crawl. And I like Ted Cruz.


Trump's comment on shooting someone on 5th Ave could play out well in a Trump/HRC battle.