Trump!!!

You're not going to get that. The media wants Trump to get the nomination, because of the ratings he draws, but they don't want him to win the election. That means they're going to report stories in ways that make him and his supporters look antagonistic (even more than they actually are), and they aren't going to be quick to correct the record when they're wrong. The only way to fight this problem is not to give them the ammunition to build this narrative the first place. That means nor nominating a freak show like Trump.

 

Polls don't look good for Trump. Link.

Let's be clear. Hillary isn't going to carry Utah. However, a Republican who isn't a slam dunk to carry Utah is like a Democrat who isn't a slam dunk to carry Massachusetts or the District of Columbia. He's in serious trouble.

 

OK, OK, so yes I am posting a 'Harry Potter on politics' video -- here, she manages to string together some interesting data on the US Virgin Islands' Republican Party and convention delegates. It, of course, takes her way too long to make her point (nearly 10m) but she digs out John Yob (who wrote book below) somehow managed to worm his way into the USVI delegation and will be in Cleveland.

 

Trump keeps getting downgraded
First he was Hitler
Then Mussolini
Now Berlusconi!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/20/trumpism-america-s-berlusconi-moment.html

 

If MSM really wants Trump to win nomination they probably should start using actual truth some. The way he is painted and reported isn't likely to help him win the nomination.
Take for instance just the anti black racist tag. Apparently Trump opened his club to blacks and Jews in Palm Beach And Trump refused to join any club in PB because they didn't allow blacks or Jews.
For me there is enough actuality about Trump to not make him my choice BUT it is the way he is being treated from all sides that I find myself laughing when he again shows up media leftists and the GOPe.

 

Even the haters have to concede he has a clever sense of humor.

Asked about a jab from Elizabeth Warren, he said --

“I think it’s wonderful because the Indians can now partake in the future of the country. She’s got about as much Indian blood as I have. Her whole life was based on a fraud. She got into Harvard and all that because she said she was a minority....”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/opinion/sunday/will-trump-be-dumped.html?_r=0

 

well, it isn't like they are calling him Clinton...at least not yet

 

Do you honestly think making Trump look like a racist hurts him in a Republican primary? I don't think it does. Most Republican primary votes know that being called a racist by liberals and media pundits goes with the territory of being a conservative. In fact, if you've never been called a racist but claim to be a conservative, I'm a little suspicious of you.

 

MrD
I do think being called a racist is a negative even among Repub voters. The whole white guilt and everything bad is all white people's fault affects even conservative people.
But it isn't the repub voters who are being targeted to be outraged by many MSM when they 24/7 call Trump a racist and nativist. It is the dems and independents
Not to mention that calling him or anyone racist over and over spurs people who would otherwise not be interested. Look at how many legal immigrants are rushing to try to become citizens so they can vote against Trump. Mexico is actively calling for legal immigrants here to become citizens to vote against Trump.

 

Uh, look at the language Trump has used. Recognizing the MSM is often the boogie man to the right, Trump has repeatedly given them ammunition. I have to laugh though at the "he's not a sexist, misogynist, or racist" defense though when Trump's own quotes/actions are exhibit A. Yes he disavowed David Duke...after equivocating on the subject. He claims Mexican illegal immigrants are "rapists" and wants to deport 11m people then in the next sentence says "I love Mexicans". It's as if Trumps defenders only hear the second sentence and wonder why he's being criticized.

Do you want to know why the Mexican government has issues with Trump? Start with "Mexico will pay for the wall" with threats of a trade war. You could carry that theme to any other nation including Canada where PM Trudeau has expressed similar sentiment albeit more eloquently.

 

Like I've said before, the Left (including media figures) will always expressly or impliedly suggest that a leading Republican is a racist. They did it with Mitt Romney. They did it with Reagan. They'd do it with John Kasich if he was the nominee. The "Republicans are racists" rap is a tool designed to make some whites feel ashamed to vote Republican and motivate minorities to turn out and vote Democratic. It's deployed regardless of whether it's true or false, because it's part of a strategy.

A smart Republican doesn't actively combat the strategy, because it's pointless and takes him off message. However, he doesn't give the opposition ammunition either. Guys like Kasich get this. Trump leans right into it, and your "I love Mexicans" reference is right on and hilarious. Remember his rapist comment. He shouted, "They're rapists!" Then he immediately said calmly, "and some I assume are good people."

 

I'm not saying you're wrong but I don't remember a "racist" label being applied to Romney. He was definitely tabbed an "elitist" based on his successful business background and the "46%" comment didn't help either.

The D's certainly leverage the R's platform as a wedge issue. The R's need a more inclusive immigration stance because the "build a wall then we'll talk" mantra isn't really a plan at all and opens them up criticism.

Then again, the R's do the same with welfare.

 

By moderating on welfare, Democrats have mostly neutralized this though. The pre-1995 system that allowed people to get on welfare and stay there forever was pretty much impossible to defend. Simply going along with time limits dramatically changed the political dynamics of welfare.

I think the GOP could do the same on immigration. Honestly, I don't think the wall hurts them per se. I think the refusal to deal with otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants through any means other than deportation is what really hurts. And of course, the demonization of the immigrants hurts a lot too.

 

That Utah poll Deez linked is scary, on all fronts scary.

 

Just when you think you have figured out Trump by what he says, he switches and throws a curve at you. This is a Fox panel interpretation of Trump's speech at AIPAC He has switched from being "neutral" to pro-Israeli. It looks like he is definitely going into general-election campaign mode by giving scripted speeches from a teleprompter. Seems like there are all kinds of interpretations now coming out, but it is apparent that he has decided it is important to go after the Jewish vote.

All this is quite strange when the speech is given after recent declarations by Jimmy Carter, who states that US policy is that Israel should go back to its pre-1967 borders with Palestine. This coincides with efforts by Kerry/BO to have a world conference to force Israel peace with such a goal. If Trump wants controversy and free news advertisements, he has just accomplished more of it.

 

There are no good options. Link.

 

At least some of the Trump-hater-protestors are paid (found via Craigslist). And it is Clinton operatives behind it although the perception created is that they are all Bernie-supporters (which might even be true but still deceptive under these circumstances). Funding comes from Soros/MoveOn.org and the idea is "pushed by" David Brock/Media Matters. "It’s also funded by reclusive billionaire Jonathan Lewis, who was identified by the Miami New Times as a 'mystery man.' He inherited roughly a billion dollars from his father Peter Lewis (founder of Progressive Insurance Company)." [all Clintonistas]

".... A march and demonstration against Trump at Trump Tower essentially fizzled Saturday when only 500 “protesters” of the promised 5000 showed up. Infiltrating the crowd, I learned most were from MoveOn or the Occupy movement. Soap was definitely in short supply in this crowd. Several admitted answering a Craig’s list ad paying $16.00 an hour for protesters....."

* * *

".... This is why David Brock’s dirty trick solves two problems at once: it helps discredit Bernie because it appears that his followers are violent; and it also disqualifies Trump for a future vote, by portraying him as a racist or a bigot. The whole thing is a kabuki dance. Blaming Sanders for these riots is like blaming the Communists for the Reichstag fire....."

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/21/c...ource=Twitter&utm_medium=Social#ixzz43ZMFWpQT

 

"The first rule of the GOP convention is that there are no rules"
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/first-rule-of-gop-convention-is-there-are-no-rules/article/2586549

 

Polls about hypotheticals are not always helpful. But if Cruz gets to go one-on-one with Trump, he might not like the outcome. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/2016-republican-poll-trump-cruz-kasich-221111

I know Cruz keeps bragging about beating Trump "over and over again" but the victories, outside Texas have been in really small population states. I believe Cruz's second most populous win was in Oklahoma. Suburban Denton County where I live has about as many voters as Alaska and Wyoming.

 

I've read that Cruz has been most successful in "caucus" states where his ground game can have the greatest influence. In areas where R's get to vote, Trump runs away from the crowd.

 

Is some of the Trump protesting staged? Absolutely. Is it all staged? Doubtful. Is this article just as much of a "dark arts" attempt as the purported Clinton strategy? Likely.

Is the anger at Trump real? Without a doubt.

 

Even if that were true (which it may not be), they are not 'moral equivalents' as you seem to suggest. Always hated those. After the election, only one of them could be the most powerful person in the world.

Anger is also part of what gave Trump initial momentum. Always curious how you folks reach your conclusion that this anger 'good' while that anger is 'bad.' Seems like a double standard, again.

 

On a lighter note in this thread ... Joe Fan -- I've been waiting for you to post the Melania Trump ad!
How stupid are Cruz's supporters to think that ad would do anything but boost Trump's numbers?

*edit to change 'people' to 'supporters'

 

I can't even follow this **** anymore. The freak show is making my eyes hurt.

 

Chango?
The info I read said it was an anti trump organization that posted the Melania garbage. Can you provide a link that it was Cruz or his people?
Anti Trump people are not guaranteed pro Cruz people .

 

OK -- it wasn't Cruz that posted the horrific ad featuring Melania, it was a Super PAC supporting Cruz, a Constitutionally enabled entity designed to collect and spew political sewage without having to name its funding sources. Of course, Trump took it as if it came directly from Cruz and responded in a way that was inelegant and not the least bit gallant. He posted an ugly picture of Heidi Cruz, who, while attractive for a brainy political wife, probably didn't turn down lucrative modeling contracts before going to work at Goldman Sachs.

 

Fixed it, my bad. I was really just trying to say Melania Trump is hot.

 

Chango
Oh yea
Croc
I did not know the super pac was a Cruz supporter. Can you provide a link that explains that?

 

I think the point is that we don't know who is behind the SuperPac unless they expose themselves. Citizens United created these modern day SuperPacs to operate in the shadows with the lone rule that they can't work directly with the candidates albeit without any means to audit/enforce that rule. This is how Perry can operate a campaign for weeks after firing all his staff.

 

Sure
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...book-ads-seeking-to-rally-mormon-v#.jeB1rrPAA