Trump Alone at the Top

[IDBillzFan]

 

 

"Someone cut the CNN cable between the truck and the fiber box," the source said, adding that the truck staff said "the cable was shredded."

 

Perhaps Christie thought the cable was a really long piece of black liquorice.

[DC Tom]

 

CNN and MSNBC had major video trouble during the Donald Trump press conference where Gov. Chris Christie endorsed the Republican front-runner. The visual was spotty and blurry, leading to the two networks having to resort to showing still photos while airing the audio of Christie and Trump answered questions.

But it wasn't just a bad signal.

According to a CNN source, the network's cable run during the event was physically tampered with.

"Someone cut the CNN cable between the truck and the fiber box," the source said, adding that the truck staff said "the cable was shredded."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/cnns-cable-shredded-during-trump-press-conference-219868#ixzz41J0vk2J5

 

 

 

It probably spontaneously burst from carrying too large a load of total bull ****...

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

A few minutes ago i overheard a conversation with the receptionist and UPS deliverywoman. It sounds like they're both Trump voters, and I wouldn't have pinned either as such.

[Chef Jim]

A few minutes ago i overheard a conversation with the receptionist and UPS deliverywoman. It sounds like they're both Trump voters, and I wouldn't have pinned either as such.

 

I'm finding a lot of those. Weird.

[DC Tom]

 

I'm finding a lot of those. Weird.

 

The working class feels unrepresented by the federal government, and has been becoming progressively more angry about it over the past 20 years or so. Trump's message resonates strongly with that undercurrent of anger.

 

Like I keep saying...he's not a person. He's a brand, and a master at marketing his brand. (And that is not part of CRT.)

[Deranged Rhino]

 

The working class feels unrepresented by the federal government, and has been becoming progressively more angry about it over the past 20 years or so. Trump's message resonates strongly with that undercurrent of anger.

 

Like I keep saying...he's not a person. He's a brand, and a master at marketing his brand. (And that is not part of CRT.)

 

My only quibble with this would be the bolded word. They don't feel unrepresented by the federal government, they are unrepresented by the federal government.

[3rdnlng]

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/40890

 

 

There are three factors propelling Trump’s lead.

But before defining those factors, by way of disclosure up front let me say that I will “vote early and often” for Donald Trump if he is the Republican nominee.

Here is what I know about Trump.

Beyond all the bluster, he surrounds himself with smart and capable people. He is, first and foremost, a promoter and negotiator — and those are useful presidential attributes. He treats his people well and is liked by most of those who work for him, top to bottom. He can be as amusing as he is annoying. Notably, he has a similar demographic appeal to that of Ronald Reagan. Though President Reagan had a long and distinguished conservative record prior to his election in 1981 — which Trump most certainly does not — Trump does attract “Reagan Democrats,” blue-collar workers who helped secure sweeping Republican victories in 1980 and 1984.

On the flip side, I believe that Trump is a textbook narcissist, not unlike Barack Obama, and I have grave reservations about trading one for the other — because those with such pathology are driven primarily by self-interest, which may or may not coincide with the national interest.

Having said that, my greatest concern in 2016 is that the Republican nominee be able to defeat Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Michael Bloomberg or whoever comes out of their convention if Clinton is indicted. My preference would be a genuine conservative nominee with a track record to back it up.

The three factors propelling Trump’s candidacy thus far have created something of a “perfect storm” for him, but there is no guarantee those winds will prevail on November 8, 2016.

1. The Obama Effect

Despite his decidedly liberal “New York values” and the fact that his brilliantly timed and superbly calculated rhetoric is mostly fragrance and not substance, Trump’s broad appeal is sustained because that rhetoric affirms a broad spectrum of anger — anger that has been seeded by Obama’s unprecedented executive arrogance and the failure of Republicans to counter his populist policies. The net effect after the last seven years is that most conservatives, many moderates and even some centrist Democrats are exhausted, and desperate for anything but status quo.

The Obama effect was plain in 2010, giving rise to the most authentic grassroots movement in generations – the Tea Party. As a result, Republicans gained 63 seats in the House, retaking control in the biggest shift since 1948. They gained six seats in the Senate and the gains were wide and deep nationwide, as Republicans picked up 680 seats in state legislative races, an all-time record. That gave Republicans control of a majority of state legislatures and 29 governorships. But, regrettably, establishment Republican leaders in the House excluded the new conservatives from leadership positions.

However, as I warned then, if the Tea Party was coopted by special interests and became an entity rather than a pure grassroots movement, it would divide Republicans. Indeed, in 2012 it did just that. Republicans lost two Senate and eight House seats, while Obama won re-election with a narrow 51 percent of the vote, defeating an outstanding candidate, Mitt Romney, who Tea Party principles labeled “establishment.” So, how did that turn out…?

Because of Trump’s celebrity, he came into the race with enviable name recognition, but his fearless and often inflammatory remarks have propelled the wealthy populist to the top of the Republican heap.

Now, I know what you’re thinking: Isn’t “wealthy populist” an oxymoron?

Actually, it isn’t — at least not among Democrats. Look no further than Franklin Delano Roosevelt, JFK and the current generation of “useful idiots” they spawned.

In truth, Trump’s support reflects very little about his history or qualifications, but it reflects a whole lot about his message and how dissatisfied millions of disenfranchised Americans are with Republican “leadership.” The status quo represented by former House Speaker John Boehner who splintered party loyalty, and current Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, has, in effect, underwritten Trump’s rising stardom.

Despite greatly increasing the numbers of genuine conservatives in the House and Senate in the historic “2014 Republican Wave,” bolstering their numbers from the 2010 midterm, the much-loathed remnant of “establishment types” still held the reins and failed to counter Obama’s Socialist Democratic Party policies. Worse, GOP “leaders” marginalized or ignored the concerns of the conservative/Republican base, and we are rightly outraged.

Additionally, if Trump is anything, he is brash — and America is brash. His rhetoric brings some much-needed humor and levity to an otherwise dry quadrennial Republican presidential field. Though his trademark “Make America Great Again” slogan lacks any substantive policy positions or insights to back it up, it certainly resonates with grassroots folks. As National Review’s Rich Lowry concludes, “One lesson of the success of the Trump for president campaign is that as long as you are not making sense with great certainty and forcefulness, no one will care too much that you aren’t making sense. For now, it’s part of the genius of Trump as communicator.”

Edited February 26, 2016 by 3rdnlng

[Chef Jim]

 

The working class feels unrepresented by the federal government, and has been becoming progressively more angry about it over the past 20 years or so. Trump's message resonates strongly with that undercurrent of anger.

 

Like I keep saying...he's not a person. He's a brand, and a master at marketing his brand. (And that is not part of CRT.)

 

When I said "a lot of those" I wasn't referring to working class people. I meant people I'm surprised to learn are backing or at least favoring Trump. Well educated upper middle class people.......like my wife.

[....lybob]

 

When I said "a lot of those" I wasn't referring to working class people. I meant people I'm surprised to learn are backing or at least favoring Trump. Well educated upper middle class people.......like my wife.

The fact that she married you, puts all her decisions into question or maybe she just has a soft-spot for arrogant dumbasses.

[DC Tom]

 

When I said "a lot of those" I wasn't referring to working class people. I meant people I'm surprised to learn are backing or at least favoring Trump. Well educated upper middle class people.......like my wife.

 

Hey, I'm favoring Trump.

 

Admittedly, my reasoning is that he'll be so destructive that the parties will come to their senses and start cooperating, rather than use the governance of the country as a grudge match. But I am favoring him.

[Chef Jim]

 

Hey, I'm favoring Trump.

 

Admittedly, my reasoning is that he'll be so destructive that the parties will come to their senses and start cooperating, rather than use the governance of the country as a grudge match. But I am favoring him.

 

My wife is favoring him because she is further right than Attila The Hun and that's why I love her.

[DC Tom]

My wife is favoring him because she is further right than Attila The Hun and that's why I love her.

 

If anything, Attila was liberal.

[unbillievable]

A few years ago, I told my conservative friends that I would vote for Hilary. I think voting for Trump would annoy them more.

[Chef Jim]

If anything, Attila was liberal.

You know you're right. Someone that considered themselves a decendent of the great nimrod could only be a liberal.

[Dante]

 

Maybe you can explain how Trump will do what you claim he intends to do, because Trump hasn't really explained it.

Candidates rarely do explain. In the current climate that's not how to sell the American public. It's all about sound bites, marketability. For him to get up there and start outlining strategy he would probably lose most people. Like you I would like to know so I'm not disagreeing with you. I just don't think that's how to win these days. In my opinion he is a guy that is determined, strong willed and yes arrogant. He ego won't let him fail. In the end all I go by is track record. Rubio, Cruz are career politicians who haven't done anything for anyone except live off the public funds. Trump is a person that I respect much more than any of them. There are other reasons why I don't like Rubio or Cruz but that's irrelevant.

[DC Tom]

You know you're right. Someone that considered themselves a decendent of the great nimrod could only be a liberal.

 

Plus...y'know, Attila was a big believer in "wealth redistribution."

[Dante]

 

Hey, I'm favoring Trump.

 

Admittedly, my reasoning is that he'll be so destructive that the parties will come to their senses and start cooperating, rather than use the governance of the country as a grudge match. But I am favoring him.

More destructive than Barry and Bush? And Bubba for that matter. All three of those guys don't add up to Trump. When you say destructive do you mean to the establishment or to the country?

 

His language, how fake he is, how he probably doesn't know the last thing about leading and how he was a terrible businessman.

 

He hasn't built ****. The last competent guy running for president lost in 2012.

Ok well I don't get the terrible businessman part. He's proven otherwise. Fake is purely subjective. It is kind of ironic that you think a career business man in the private sector is fake and somehow career politicians aren't? Leadership is purely speculative. You just seem to hate the guy and I really can see how he rubs the wrong way because he is arrogant. Not me though I could give a shite as long as busts down the establishment so we can do some house cleaning.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Dante

[DC Tom]

More destructive than Barry and Bush? And Bubba for that matter. All three of those guys don't add up to Trump. When you say destructive do you mean to the establishment or to the country?

 

To the country. FAR more than Barry or Bush, in no small part because he has their precedent of authoritarian action to build on, but absolutely no sense of personal restraint.

 

That's one of the reasons why the government was set up as it was 200+ years ago - checks and balances to prevent a single damned fool in the White House from wrecking the country. We're at the point now where we need a damned fool in the White House, just to demonstrate how completely unconstitutional the nation has become.

 

Trump 2016. Making America Great Again! Out of the Ashes of the Trumpster Fire.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

To the country. FAR more than Barry or Bush, in no small part because he has their precedent of authoritarian action to build on, but absolutely no sense of personal restraint.

 

That's one of the reasons why the government was set up as it was 200+ years ago - checks and balances to prevent a single damned fool in the White House from wrecking the country. We're at the point now where we need a damned fool in the White House, just to demonstrate how completely unconstitutional the nation has become.

 

Trump 2016. Making America Great Again! Out of the Ashes of the Trumpster Fire.

I share this sentiment.

 

Burn the whole damn thing down.

 

Trump / Volmemort 2016

[Dante]

 

To the country. FAR more than Barry or Bush, in no small part because he has their precedent of authoritarian action to build on, but absolutely no sense of personal restraint.

 

That's one of the reasons why the government was set up as it was 200+ years ago - checks and balances to prevent a single damned fool in the White House from wrecking the country. We're at the point now where we need a damned fool in the White House, just to demonstrate how completely unconstitutional the nation has become.

 

Trump 2016. Making America Great Again! Out of the Ashes of the Trumpster Fire.

Even if Trump is a fool I would rather have that than a treasonous Obama and the enabling established Republicans. I think your wrong about Trump being a fool. How could he be it doesn't make sense and I would much rather have him at the helm than schmucks that couldn't make it in the private sector. But hey if your right and he does destroy everything(like Barry hasn't been doing his best to this point) he will have achieved what we both want. A return to the Constitution. I hope it can be done without the messiness of a total fall into chaos. Honestly I would have loved Paul to make it but he has not marketability.