Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space.

The book is on Kindle. Order here.

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Clinton meltdown is two months early

That came quicker than I thought.

Two weeks after Trump cinched the nomination, he has topped Hilary in two polls: Fox News by 3 among 1,000 registered voters and Rasmussen by 5 among likely voters. And of course, all the political experts in Washington predicted this, just as they did his nomination.

From Real Clear Politics:
Democrats are increasingly bullish about their chances to take back the Senate, where Republicans now dominate 54-46, with Trump atop the Republican ticket. The challenges for Democrats in the lower chamber, however, where Republicans outnumber them 246 to 188, are much steeper. They hope a landslide win by Hillary Clinton, their likely presidential nominee, would lead to significant gains in the House, but plenty would have to break their way to have a legitimate shot at retaking the chamber. 
Democrats have made their strategy clear: link every Republican to Trump at every opportunity. At a press conference Wednesday, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi pointed out Trump’s controversial and offensive statements, comparing them to rhetoric from House Republicans, arguing they are inextricably linked regardless of whether individual members support their party nominee. Asked afterwards whether Democrats are in a position to regain their majority, Pelosi answered, “Of course.”
Sigh. These morons never learn. Making the 2016 presidential nomination a referendum on Trump is just what he wants because that is how he wins.

And there was this from Stephen Hayes:
Conservatives looking for some bit of consolation in the prospect of a Donald Trump nomination have begun to suggest that Trump’s probable general-election defeat to Hillary Clinton, though a disappointment, might portend a new, invigorated conservatism — much like Barry Goldwater’s landslide defeat to Lyndon Johnson in 1964. If history doesn’t repeat itself, as the saying goes, perhaps it rhymes. And, indeed, Goldwater’s crushing defeat is surely the most fruitful loss in American political history. His campaign galvanized the conservative movement and wrested the Republican party from the grip of its eastern moderate faction, setting the stage for the ascendance of, among others, Ronald Reagan. 
Screw Goldwater.

The only thing Goldwater accomplished was tarring Republicans as racists because he ran on his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That landmark law finally overturned the 1883 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Republican post-Civil War act.

The party abandoned Goldwater because Republican Senate Leader Everett Dirksen had worked so hard to get that law passed. Johnson needed 22 of the 33 Senate Republicans to break Bob Byrd's filibuster. Dirksen delivered 27. And then along came Goldwater to undercut that effort and alienate the very black voters Republicans helped.

What got Reagan was dogged determination and President Carter. That was four elections after Goldwater, but liberals are not the only revisionists in Washington.

Look, eight years ago Hillary Clinton was despised by enough Americans to cost her the nomination.

What has made her any more likable or even tolerable today? Benghazi? Her email server? Her crooked foundation? Scandal clouds Hillary like dust surrounded Pigpen in the Peanuts comic strip.

Get a clue. Buy a vowel.

But no. Do not expect these fools to learn a darned thing because they know everything. Remember how Wisconsin was the turning point of the nomination?

There was this from John Fund:
Last year, Stephanie Cegielski agreed to become communications director of a pro-Trump super PAC that was later shut down over allegations that it was illegally coordinating its activities with the campaign. Cegielski has since turned on Trump and this week wrote an impassioned article describing how Trump’s own staff intended for him only to place second in the primaries and have a major impact on the GOP race: “I don’t think even Trump thought he would get this far. And I don’t even know that he wanted to, which is perhaps the scariest prospect of all. He certainly was never prepared or equipped to go all the way to the White House, but his ego has now taken over the driver’s seat, and nothing else matters.”
Sure, take the word of a political consultant rather than look at Trump's career in which he wins or dies trying. He said all along that if he does not win the presidency, he has wasted $100 million.

Has he won it? Of course not. He will have to work his as of, and stay in good health to win the presidency.

But the last two polls show Trump can win the election -- and without the sneering snobs in the Never Trump crowd.

16 comments:

  1. With Newt as VP and John Bolton for Secretary of State all The Donald would need is a new Contract For America. Every Republican Swingin' Richard downticket from The Donald would be a shoo-in and the GOP would probably increase their majorities in the House and the Senate. - Elric

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think we need to implement a major paradigm shift especially on immigration (as in "stop it!") and trade issues in the Trump administration. I hope that Trump reaches beyond old Beltway insiders like Newt and Bolton to move us into a new era. I don't necessarily dislike those guys (w due respect to Anonymous' views) but we need to make a clear break with the past 25 years of horrible federal government policy. I want to see some new faces. Won't Steve Hayes and Mark Levin and Don's buddy George Will be happy!

    ReplyDelete
  3. No, no, no! Hillary can't collapse yet! We've got to get her nominated by the Dems!

    Really Genghis Don needs to back the heck off, at least for a little while.

    Otherwise the Dems might nominate Crazy Bernie, who might actually be a problem...except for the fact that he is crazy and a commie and in favor of open borders...other than that.

    OK, who else the Dems got? Slow Joe? Lieawatha? How about Nancy Pelosi for president!

    Trump could beat any of those clowns and Marco Rubio would lose to any of them.

    Steve in Greensboro

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget Bernie, the 21st century's McGovern.

      Delete
  4. Though a Trump presidency will either bring about enormous international conflicts or have Trump quitting after about a year because he will be so bored with what a presidency entails, I am grateful to Trump for one thing.
    He got all of you "blind to the label" Republican gas bags - especially Surber - to finally see the light that it doesn't matter if you are R or D. If you sit upon Capitol Hill, you are Wall Streeter first and only.
    Don, I like how you removed "conservative writer" from your bio. Glad that you finally realized that Rs are slaves to the conservatives, elites and establishments and not the common man like you and me (and Teapartydoc) and you no longer blindly defend R politicos simply because they have an "R" next to their name. Ds are WS slaves as well. Same fleas as Rs, just a different dog.
    I've been saying this for years and until Trump came along, I was a leftist Obama sympathizer even though I have never voted for him ... or Gore ... or Manchin. Glad you former REs and former conservatives have found the light in Trump and are shedding those with Rs next to their name. I applaud Trump's anti-Wall Street campaign like you. I just seriously doubt he will be able to carry it through though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We've had more conflicts the last 8 years thanks to the team of Zero, Cacklepants, and Lurch than we ever had with even Dubya.

      Russia and Red China look down their noses at the Choom Gang.
      They do, however, seem to respect Trump. Strong horses don't start wars.

      Delete
    2. The U.S., Russia and China are always going to taunt each other. It's in the Middle East hot spots and other ISIS infested areas where factions, not rulers or governing bodies, will set Trump off.

      Delete
    3. You might want to look at the foreign policy paper he worked up with Sessions.

      He is explicitly against the kind of interventionism we've seen from the current Administration.

      Buzz off, troll, and do a little research before you make a fool of yourself.

      Delete
    4. Please explain these Trump quotes then if he is against interventionism. "were going to bomb the sh_t out of them" and "we will get rid of ISIS so fast it will make your head spin" and "I would listen to the generals ... but I would - I'm hearing numbers of 20 to 30,000. We have to knock them out fast."
      Explain those Trump quotes .... fool.

      Delete
  5. People need to be able to learn as they go like you said. It seems eons ago now that my sons, realizing I was leaning Carson or Cruz (mostly Cruz), sat me down and explained that Trump was the genuine outsider, and that I needed to be able to look past my prejudices against him. I at that time shared the sentiments of that many nevertumpers display even today. It is pride that holds them back. And we all know what kind of people are prideful these days.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If RCP is correct on Dem thinking, the Dems are in a HEAP o' trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hillary doesn't know how to do anything. She relied on Willie. Problem is. he relied on Morris and, since Morris left, he has yet to make a smart move.

    PS For those who haven't run the numbers, '80 was a worse blowout than '64.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Absent an election victory, she's not the Wicked Witch of the West yet. She's still just a Flying Monkey.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The 1964 election took place in the shadow of the JFK assassination and Johnson ran on JFK's legacy. It would have been a tough year for any GOP candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As Trump gets closer and closer to the Oval Office, the wife of the King of Carnal gets shriller and shriller.

    At some point, she'll hit that particular pitch ... they call it a Note of a Particular Composite Color ... and at that point, The Donald runs the table.

    Stay alert, because your grandkids are going to ask you about this in years to come.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I will vote for Trump though I did not support him in the primaries. This was not a hard decision. There are some who call Trump a demagogue. I looked up the definition: a person who appeals to the interests and prejudices of people instead of making a rational argument. I just finished listening to Trump's NRA speech. He did indeed appeal to people's interests (and fears), but he also made rational arguments. To me, Trump comes across a lot like a champion prize fighter before the fight: bragging, trash-talking, full of piss and vinegar, all in the best American tradition. What a refreshing break from the bland pap of poll-tested, consultant-approved dreck that passes for political discourse. So is Trump a demagogue or an inspirational leader?

    ReplyDelete