Trump Thread

[Peter_J]

Most delegates are party loyalists rather than candidate loyalists. Trump is the least likely candidate that unbound party loyalists would vote for. It is far more likely that unbound Rubio delegates would vote for Cruz - or Kasich - than for Trump. In fact, even the delegates assigned to vote for Trump on the first ballot would be more likely on a second ballot to vote for someone they believe is a more fitting representative of the Republican party.

This isn’t much of a development, but the story has now hit the major news outlets, e.g.

cnn.com/2016/03/29/politics/marco-rubio-donald-trump-delegates/index.html

Personally, I’ll be interested to hear what the Trump campaign has to say about it, given their past complaints about one candidate’s delegates possibly voting for another candidate.

Anyhow, I very much hope Rubio will stay involved. I’m sure I’m not the only one of his former supporters who would like to know whom he would endorse.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Older folks do bruise easier. You will to as you age.

Not looking forward to that, Mary, but it’s sure not the worst thing. My mother bruised easily even when she was young, too. She’s a strawberry blonde, with very fair skin, so maybe that has something to do with it. I don’t know. My father is dark, and as he has gotten older, he has gotten so he bruises easily, too.

 

[Siegehammer]

Trump’s doubled down on defending his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, against charges that he physically assaulted Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields. This sustained defense is absolutely incredible, as he borrows every move from the Rape Apologia 101 playbook, right down to "destroy a man’s life, repurposed for physical assault.

Description of linked video:

Trump, speaking to reporters on what appears to be his private jet: I looked at the tape—there’s not even a change of expression on her face! And then I looked at internet, and you take a look at the tweets, and people are saying, “You gotta be kidding me!” [crosstalk as reporters ask questions] I think it’s something that’s disgraceful. I think that you, as a reporter, and all of you as a reporter, probably get treated a lot rougher than that on a daily basis. I have never seen anything like it. I cannot imagine how they did it. He’s got a very good lawyer; they will fight it. I told him he should never settle that case. And I know that’s not to my—that is not to my benefit—but I think when people see that tape, and they take a look at that tape, and they take a look at her initial statement, before she knew that she was on tape—take a look at that; you have to see it. You take a look at her initial statement; it sounded like she got thrown out of a building. You take a look at that, and you, and then— [reporter interrupts him] Excuse me?

Female Reporter off-camera: She did get bruises on her arm.

Trump: I don’t know if they were bruises from that! Why? Who said they were bruises from that?! How do you know those bruises weren’t there before?

Female Reporter off-camera: That’s what the police said—

Trump: I don’t know what the police said! How do you know those bruises weren’t there before?! I’m not a lawyer! But she said she had a bruise on her arm. I mean! To me, you know, if you’re gonna get squeezed, wouldn’t you think that she would have yelled out a scream or something if she has bruises on her arm? She— Take a look at her— Take a look at her facial expression. Her facial expression doesn’t even change! So, you know, you say bruises on her arm—how did they get there? Who put 'em there? I don’t know that he put 'em there! In any event, I’m sticking up for a person because I’m not gonna let a person’s life be destroyed over somebody that we have on tape and— You just take a look at what people are saying when they see that incident on tape. And no jury, in my opinion, no jury would convict a man and destroy a man’s life over what you witnessed.

This guy needs to stay as far away from the Oval Office as possible.

 

[Songcatcher]

Yes, one short sincere apology would have headed this entire thing off. That’s the only point I am trying to make. For a Presidential campaign to NOT be able to see and extend that flummoxes me.

Trump doesn’t benefit from things like this dying down. He’s a drama queen and this is his new reality show: Celebrity Apprentice Presidential Edition. He’s in his element when this kind of drama is taking place and is completely out of his element when the topic shifts from his latest drama du jour to substantive issues.

This was painfully clear if you watched his press conference yesterday or the town hall last night. In both cases, when he was asked about the new drama, he was animated and excited in his answers-going into great detail with his responses. He even brought the incident back up when the subject did switch to other issues. In contrast, when he was asked about substantive issues like NATO, the effects of his proposed immigration policies on the agricultural industry, etc., his answers were short, perfunctory and filled with his standard talking points about his poll numbers and the wall and how great a business man he is. Much better for Trump when the topic stays in Kardashian/Honey Boo Boo territory-a.k.a Trump territory.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Feelings hurt?

I saw the video and I saw the bruises on her arm. I believe he grabbed her. I read what a witness to the grabbing says. I am certainly willing to believe he didn’t mean to harm her, but why deny it? As I said in an earlier post, you should never grab someone hard enough to bruise them unless you are trying to save them from a worse injury. This is common sense to me.

Regardless, like I said before, the campaign SHOULD have apologized right away and not doubled down. General maturity goes a long way towards handling things like this. The Trump campaign has not shown that maturity.

Right, this is it exactly. It would have been so easy to resolve with a public apology to the reporter. I agree that the incident does not amount to much - it was a very crowded, high security situation. But everyone present knew she was a reporter (for proTrump Breibart no less); I am not sure what she was doing in pressing toward Trump as she was questioning him was violating protocol, or out of the ordinary if you will. Did she present a threat? Again, it was obvious she was a reporter.

In any event, there is video and audio evidence, plus an eye witness, confirming Fields story; she was manhandled by Lewandowski. He looks more like a boxer than a campaign manager in the video. Minor incident, but inappropriate, poorly handled. And the worst part is that - how the campaign handled it. Trump in there tweeting about how the reporter is lying, did the bruises come from something else, etc. It is disgraceful. A parody (deliberate?) of the denying, abusive husband syndrome. But I also think, ironically, it plays very well to Trump’s fans. Trump as heroic, loyal victim of media smear campaign.

But it also serves to broaden the wedge *between *Trump fans and the rest of the GOP. Last night Trump said he didn’t “need” Cruz’ endorsement, support. I believe that also applies to Cruz supporters. And it’s a good thing - because I don’t think that that is going to happen.

 

[Peter_J]

Trump doesn’t benefit from things like this dying down. He’s a drama queen and this is his new reality show: Celebrity Apprentice Presidential Edition. He’s in his element when this kind of drama is taking place and is completely out of his element when the topic shifts from his latest drama du jour to substantive issues.

This was painfully clear if you watched his press conference yesterday or the town hall last night. In both cases, when he was asked about the new drama, he was animated and excited in his answers-going into great detail with his responses. He even brought the incident back up when the subject did switch to other issues. In contrast, when he was asked about substantive issues like NATO, the effects of his proposed immigration policies on the agricultural industry, etc., his answers were short, perfunctory and filled with his standard talking points about his poll numbers and the wall and how great a business man he is. Much better for Trump when the topic stays in Kardasian/Honey Boo Boo territory-a.k.a Trump territory.

Not that he needs to work very hard to draw people’s attention. I’m reminded of how on this forum, a few weeks ago, we had page after page after page where 90-95% of the posts were either written by or in response to (fill in screen names of two Trump promoters).

 

[FollowChrist34]

Not that he needs to work very hard to draw people’s attention. I’m reminded of how on this forum, a few weeks ago, we had page after page after page where 90-95% of the posts were either written by or in response to (fill in screen names of two Trump promoters).

This is a great point though - right - Trump is back in the news fighting the good fight. Can you imagine three weeks without a Trump story? We’re being played.

 

[Peter_J]

Btw, funny that you should mentions “Kardasian” because I’ve been trying to get that straight recently.

Cardassians are a humanoid race from a planet in the Alpha Quadrant. Kardashians are … well, I’m guessing just about anybody here could say better than I could. But they’re humans.

 

[mary_bobo]

Right, this is it exactly. It would have been so easy to resolve with a public apology to the reporter. I agree that the incident does not amount to much - it was a very crowded, high security situation. But everyone present knew she was a reporter (for proTrump Breibart no less); I am not sure what she was doing in pressing toward Trump as she was questioning him was violating protocol, or out of the ordinary if you will. Did she present a threat? Again, it was obvious she was a reporter.

In any event, there is video and audio evidence, plus an eye witness, confirming Fields story; she was manhandled by Lewandowski. He looks more like a boxer than a campaign manager in the video. Minor incident, but inappropriate, poorly handled. And the worst part is that - how the campaign handled it. Trump in there tweeting about how the reporter is lying, did the bruises come from something else, etc. It is disgraceful. A parody (deliberate?) of the denying, abusive husband syndrome. But I also think, ironically, it plays very well to Trump’s fans. Trump as heroic, loyal victim of media smear campaign.

But it also serves to broaden the wedge *between *Trump fans and the rest of the GOP. Last night Trump said he didn’t “need” Cruz’ endorsement, support. I believe that also applies to Cruz supporters. And it’s a good thing - because I don’t think that that is going to happen.

And Trump has said he will not support the GOP nominee if it is not him.

 

[Little_Sheep]

Trump doesn’t benefit from things like this dying down. He’s a drama queen and this is his new reality show: Celebrity Apprentice Presidential Edition. He’s in his element when this kind of drama is taking place and is completely out of his element when the topic shifts from his latest drama du jour to substantive issues.

This was painfully clear if you watched his press conference yesterday or the town hall last night. In both cases, when he was asked about the new drama, he was animated and excited in his answers-going into great detail with his responses. He even brought the incident back up when the subject did switch to other issues. In contrast, when he was asked about substantive issues like NATO, the effects of his proposed immigration policies on the agricultural industry, etc., his answers were short, perfunctory and filled with his standard talking points about his poll numbers and the wall and how great a business man he is. Much better for Trump when the topic stays in Kardasian/Honey Boo Boo territory-a.k.a Trump territory.

Yeah, I believe you are absolutely right, but I also think eventually that strategy is going to backfire on him.

 

[Peter_J]

This is a great point though - right - Trump is back in the news fighting the good fight. Can you imagine three weeks without a Trump story? We’re being played.

I wonder about that too.

Like not too long ago when Cruz got the endorsement of (I forget was it Jeb?) but everybody was just talking about the public’s reaction to Trump’s latest speech.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Yeah, I believe you are absolutely right, but I also think eventually that strategy is going to backfire on him.

Of course it is going to backfire - the question is when. How much damage will this nonsense do before that point is reached. Will it cost the GOP the election? Very likely.

 

[Little_Sheep]

Of course it is going to backfire - the question is when. How much damage will this nonsense do before that point is reached. Will it cost the GOP the election? Very likely.

I honestly feel like it already has, FC34. At this stage of the game, I really don’t think it matters who the Republican candidate is - the country’s faith in the Party’s unity and leadership is just shredded.

 

[Peter_J]

And Trump has said he will not support the GOP nominee if it is not him.

Well yeah! You don’t expect him to support Ted Cruz after his proposal to patrol “Muslim neighborhoods” do you?

Heh. But seriously, I don’t know what to say about Trump’s *recent *statement about that, but I think he was the voice of reason last summer, when he was the only – only – GOP candidate who was prepared to defy “Republican orthodoxy” by questioning whether to support the eventual nominee. (Compare that with the stuff coming out of Eric Bolling’s mouth. )

 

[Ridgerunner]

Yeah, I believe you are absolutely right, but I also think eventually that strategy is going to backfire on him.

I don’t think we really know for sure what Trump’s strategy is. Some of these people with a lot of high-level experience in business can be more multi-layered than one would ever dream. It’s part of the skill set. Trump might, indeed, be a “one trick pony”, but I sure wouldn’t count on it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I honestly feel like it already has, FC34. At this stage of the game, I really don’t think it matters who the Republican candidate is - the country’s faith in the Party’s unity and leadership is just shredded.

Maybe so. But I also remember when Hillary Clinton was “bound to win” in 2008 against an upstart with no experience in anything but neo-Marxist tomfoolery. But she didn’t.

 

[Little_Sheep]

Maybe so. But I also remember when Hillary Clinton was “bound to win” in 2008 against an upstart with no experience in anything but neo-Marxist tomfoolery. But she didn’t.

Sure, but this year doesn’t feel a thing like 2008. At this point, HRC is the presumptive nominee. Bernie’s great, but he can’t secure the nomination.

My point was not that Hillary will win (though I believe she will); it was that the Republicans have damaged themselves so thoroughly that they are incapable of winning this election.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Well yeah! You don’t expect him to support Ted Cruz after his proposal to patrol “Muslim neighborhoods” do you?

Heh. But seriously, I don’t know what to say about Trump’s *recent *statement about that, but I think he was the voice of reason last summer, when he was the only – only – GOP candidate who was prepared to defy “Republican orthodoxy” by questioning whether to support the eventual nominee. (Compare that with the stuff coming out of Eric Bolling’s mouth. )

The problem with Trump is that he makes all of this personal, a vendetta. There is no agenda, no big vision behind it, sorry. It all started when Macys and NBC fired him for saying Mexicans were rapists. He had to do something after the Apprentice, right? And it will end with him decimating the GOP. As Coulter put it, a 16 year old son in prison, again and again. I say let him stay there; stop bailing him out. Newt is also worried that the campaign is clueless; I’ll take his word for it over Trump’s any day of the week.

 

[sallybutler]

And Trump has said he will not support the GOP nominee if it is not him.

And Cruz said he will not support Trump. I believe that Trump’s statement was in response to Cruz’ statement.

However, we all know the original reason for the pledge to support the winning candidate was to try to prevent Trump from mounting a 3rd party run, not to support Trump if he came out on top. Now that he might win, the rest of the GOP hierarchy is back-pedaling.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Sure, but this year doesn’t feel a thing like 2008. At this point, HRC is the presumptive nominee. Bernie’s great, but he can’t secure the nomination.

My point was not that Hillary will win (though I believe she will); it was that the Republicans have damaged themselves so thoroughly that they are incapable of winning this election.

Obviously, I did not express myself clearly. Let me try again, and perhaps more directly.

An electorate that is capable of spurning its clear favorite (Hillary) in favor of a candidate who comes from nowhere, has accomplished nothing, and has breathtakingly questionable ideological antecedents, (Obama) is capable of anything.