US Presidential Election 2016: Donald Trump is the leading Republican candidate in the polls
So a guy who has in the past contributed funds to Barack Obama, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry is leading the… Republican… pack? 😀
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Donald Trump? Is this a joke?July 22nd, 2015 |
 22 comments to Donald Trump? Is this a joke? |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
All someone has to do to overtake Trump is to be a better politician than he is.
It ISN’T a high bar.
So far no one in the field has done it.
What if politicians refused to discuss the economy? And then a buffoon came along and said, hey, I’m going to boost GDP by doing x, y and z.
This is Trump and illegal immigration.
And I think a lot of conservatives suspect, probably correctly, that the real goal of the Democrats here is to eventually enfranchise millions of new statist voters and permanently alter voting patterns in the U.S.
Hillary Clinton is going to be given the Democrat nomination essentially unopposed. She is a very flawed candidate with many obvious weaknesses, and a strong Republican candidate is likely to be able to beat her. If there isn’t a strong Republican candidate, it’s likely president Hillary, however.
Right now, I don’t see much sign of one.
Let me put it this way:
There’s nothing wrong with The Donald except that he’s a dishonorable, disgusting, opportunistic cronyist blowhard who has no problem getting the State to do his dirty work if all else fails, and maybe even if it wouldn’t. Either a liar or someone whose opinion depends on how the wind’s blowing, or both. Given a choice between Shrill and The Donald, one would have to wear waders that come up to the armpits to make it into and out of the polling place.
(Still, maybe it would be Bernie Sanders. And remember, Vermont is one of the few states with “Constitutional Carry,” i.e. no permit or (state) registration or any other encumbrance required.)
Trump could conceivably run as an independent, I suppose, which would probably give the Jackasses the win, just as Ross Perot’s run did. Some people think he’s smart enough not to want to sink his own money (whatever he has on any given day) into a lost cause. I hope they’re right.
The Republicans may end up with Jeb. (Their PTB seem to consist of RINOs and the terminally frightened, who mostly squeak a lot.) Then Cruz, Rubio, then Rand Paul, then Scott Walker. If any of you guys & girls offshore want to disguise yourselves as Illegal Aliens and come on in so you can vote in the primaries (as many as you like), don’t let me stop you. The more the merrier. :>)))
Please, Mike Rowe. Just announce.
First Madam Hillary Clinton will make the Congress irrelevant.
Trump is the first easy target among the top Republican candidates, and the media have responded with an almost relieved gusto. Paul, Walker, Cruz, and Rubio have been able to build support amongst conservatives with feeding too much rhetorical red meat to stir up the ignorant left. The Democrat party was showing nervous signs that they understood that without any strong issues under their belts they needed to resort to scaring their electorate to the voting booth, and until now the Republicans weren’t giving them any bogeymen.
Cue Donald Trump. Like Baby Huey in a china shop, he has crashed the party and handed the Democrats their golden opportunity. He has caught the attention of the most ignorant daytime telly watchers in the RNC and given the media what they want, a news story that writes itself.
My hope is that, like the boorish teenager he is, he has expended his excitement early and will beat a hasty and embarassed retreat, pulling up his knickers and stumbling for the door. It will be a better party after he goes.
“Leading the republican pack?”
It doesn’t matter. Except for the silly misdirection wedge issues, they’re the same. Both want more governmnet telling people how to live their lives, both want more tax revenue. (Lower tax rates according to the Laffer Curve brings in more revenue). Both parties will have a presidet whose monitary policy involves the fed constantly fucking with the prime interest rate. Both sides will lie about “creating jobs”, and both would rather play political Kabuki theature than actually accomplish anything useful. So what do the “debate” hosts ask questions about? Stupid shit like “do you believe in evolution” or “what’s your opinion about right to life?” or “reproductive rights”. The latter being a code phrases for abortion. (Shhh…don’t actually say “abortion”). Since when does the president have anything to do with evolution theory of species?
Trump will pretend to be against abortion, against gay marriage (as if that fucking matters now) and he probably IS skeptical about the latest transgender push. I HOPE he’s pretending to be a protectionist and realizes that the chinese aren’t the spawns of Satan. Protectionism “to create american jobs you know”. LOL I would really hope the author of The Art Of The Deal has at least a clue about Comparitive Advantage and how free trade is win-win. But…alas, hoping that he understands that there is no such thing as a trade deficit is probably too much to wish for.
Cheers.
Trump is polling well in the same way Labour were polling well going into the last UK election. People who haven’t the faintest idea of voting for him are saying they will to send a (fucked up) message to the incumbents to not rest on their laurels.
He is a buffoon, and even the US couldn’t elect an obvious buffoon. That would take Italy.
Ah, it’s early days and Trump is rich enough to survive kicking the weasel’s nests. Relax, enjoy the show.
Chester, do you really think our current Neomarxist in chief isn’t a buffoon?
Leading Republican candidate… Isn’t there a saying “surrounding yourself with dwarves does not make you a giant”?
The unofficial-but-very-real American aristocracy has designated Hillary as the next president. Everything else is just part of the show put on for the peasants.
“He is a buffoon, and even the US couldn’t elect an obvious buffoon. That would take Italy.”
“our current Neomarxist in chief isn’t a buffoon?”
The current Marxist (forget about the “neo”), is, like all Marxists, a bore, not a buffoon. Buffoons are preferable.
Donald is much more shrewd, savvy, experienced, and has much greater accomplishments then the Marxist in Chief. I’d buy Donald over Obama or even Hillary – any day. It is sad, though, that these are the choices.
“o a guy who has in the past contributed funds to Barack Obama, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry”
That was a business decision, not an ideological one…
Nevertheless, one has to draw a line somewhere. John Kerry – that is too much…
a business man has to pay off the correct party leeches to prosper…..
Seems a bit odd he’s standing as a Republican given:
“As San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders points out, Trump is not really any kind of Republican, and, what’s more, his links to the Clintons are well-documented and close:
In 1987, Trump registered as a Republican in New York. But in 1999, he registered with the Independence Party. In 2001, he registered as a Democrat. In 2009 he was back in with the GOP.
Hillary Rodham Clinton sat in the front row at Trump’s 2005 wedding with Melania Knauss.
According to Politico, Trump has donated more than $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
In the 2006 cycle, Trump donated $5,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $20,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, but only $1,000 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
When Trump flirted with running for president in 2012, CNN reported he had given $541,650 to federal Democratic candidates and committees since 1990 – more than the $429,450 he contributed to GOP candidates and committees.”
Cue conspiracy theory – is he in fact a false-flag candidate? http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-13/donald-trump-false-flag-candidate
Or are both parties just so alike now that it doesn’t even matter anymore.
Mark Steyn on supebowl of superholes
“And a citizenry that votes for an asshole is less deluded than one that votes for a messiah. Thus, voting for, say, Silvio Berlusconi (a kind of wealthier mini-Trump, and yet the third longest serving prime minister in Italian history, after Mussolini and Giolitti) is less psychologically unhealthy than voting for Barack Obama. And, come to that, less damaging to republican virtue than voting for the previous guy’s wife or brother.”
“Cue conspiracy theory – is he in fact a false-flag candidate?”
I won’t say it hasn’t crossed my mind. If anyone else was leading the Democratic race, I’d dismiss it out of hand as tinfoil-hatted lunacy, but, well… would anyone seriously put it past the Clintons? (And that ZeroHedge article makes some arguments I hadn’t even thought of.)
The thing is though, even if he isn’t, he still is. If he fails to win the nomination, likely as not he’ll run as a third party and split the Republican vote (which, to my mind, would only reinforce the suspicion). If he wins it, he’ll lose the election. Even in the unlikely event he manages to win it, he’ll be a terrible president with close ties to the Clintons.
I can hardly believe people are buying him.
National polls are meaningless at this stage.
And in the first State to actually vote (Iowa) Governor Scott Walker (who was born there) is leading.
Winning in Iowa would give Walker the bounce he needs to win in New Hampshire – and then take on J.E. Bush in the south.
Mr Trump?
He will not win a single Caucus or Primary in any State.
HOWEVER.
All the above could be changed by the debates.
Governor Walker may prove to be a weak debater – he is a quiet man, and that does not play well in American politics (especially when there is a large group of candidates competing for attention – it is Mr Trump ability to get attention that is his great advantage, in business as well as politics – LOOK AT ME).
Also Governor Walker is going bald (look at him from behind).
No openly bald man has won the Presidency since 1956. He should seek treatment urgently.
This is what American politics is about.
Having a loud voice (attracting attention) and looking good – either naturally or artificially.
Remember people voted for Obama without knowing anything about his background or policies.
He was “cool” according to the media – and that won him the elections of 2008 and 2012.
Being a good Governor who saved Wisconsin from total collapse – may count for nothing.
If you prove to have a quiet voice, and may well be going bald.
Actually I prefer Rand Paul to Scott Walker – but the polls in Iowa do not show Rand getting much traction.
This is true, bur Eisenhower was bald enough to tide us over the intervening sixty years.
People, incidentally, aren’t taking Trump all that seriously: but they’re using him to tell the GOP to take his combative tactics very seriously.
There are always a few flashes-in-the-pan who stir up interest in the early days of a presidential campaign but quickly burn out. Trump is one of those. Like Paul, I don’t think Trump will win (or even do particularly well) in any of the early states* and he should drop out fairly soon thereafter. And I don’t really see him running a serious third-party or independent campaign. Trump’s goal is to get attention, which he is doing (for now). That’s worth a few spare millions to him, but I seriously doubt that it’s worth hundreds of millions. Remember, he’s rich but not cash-rich; most of his wealth is in real estate, and I can’t see him liquidating much of that on a quixotic campaign with no chance of success. He’s an egomaniac, but not a fool.
* Note that Iowa isn’t really a vote; it’s a caucus where only the politically active participate. The actual numbers are quite small, so other than providing some early bragging rights it doesn’t really mean much.