Did Trump Jump the Shark?

[Aaron]

Ted Cruz pulls to within 3 points of Donald Trump nationally

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/24/ted-cruz-pulls-within-3-points-donald-trump-nation/


This will be interesting to watch. My feeling is that this is a temporary flinch, and that War of the Wives will end up helping Trump in the end. I feel that way because it's a well-known fact, that Cruz's campaign started it. Super PAC or not Cruz knew, and I can't find anywhere that Cruz has criticized their tactic. (Doesn't want the money well to dry up, I'm sure.) So he's beginning to look hypocritical, and, I'm sorry to say, untruthful.

And despite Cruz's grandstanding on "wives and children are off limits," that hasn't been the case for Trump, accused of molestation and incestuous affections for his daughter day in and day out by the Bernie rioters.

But, this will be interesting to watch

 

[kyredneck]

Did Trump Jump the Shark?

That's what many, including myself and especially 'the establishment', have expected to happen from the very beginning. It WILL be interesting to see if he keeps winning primaries like he has or if this nasty exchange ultimately backfires on Cruz. Anyway, it's revolting to me to see aspiring POTUS's wallowing in the mire for all to see.

Hillary will do great damage to our freedoms with her SCOTUS picks alone.

 

[InTheLight]

Hillary will do great damage to our freedoms with her SCOTUS picks alone.

What indication do you have that Trump will pick conservative, pro-life, pro 2nd amendment justices? Hmmmm...???

 

[kyredneck]

What indication do you have that Trump will pick conservative, pro-life, pro 2nd amendment justices? Hmmmm...???

Don't have time to read all this right now but perhaps we'll all have some 'indication' real soon:

Donald Trump on supreme court picks

 

[Zaac]

He was swallowed by the shark. Hopefully all of the delegates will be legally apprised that they are NOT bound to vote in accordance with the results of their state primaries on the first ballot .

 

[Benjamin]

Hopefully all of the delegates will be legally apprised that they are NOT bound to vote in accordance with the results of their state primaries on the first ballot .

So you hope the will of the people who voted for him is disregarded by the establishment?

Wow...no wonder the man most suited to oppose the establishment continues to rise toward victory despite his lack of political correctness and over the top rhetoric.

 

[InTheLight]

So you hope the will of the people who voted for him is disregarded by the establishment?

Wow...no wonder the man most suited to oppose the establishment continues to rise toward victory despite his lack of political correctness and over the top rhetoric.

The GOP has rules for selecting the candidate at the convention. It's 50.1% of the delegates, not 40% (the amount Trump will likely command going into the convention.) 40% is not the will of the people.

Trump is not "continuing his rise" to victory. He's holding steady at the same level of support he's had for months.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

[Benjamin]

The GOP has rules for selecting the candidate at the convention.

Well, let me tell you, in short (haha) what I think of these "rules":

My point being the good-ole-boy GOP Establishment “RULES” are already, in typical fashion, being manipulated by every means possible to sway the numbers “hopefully” (as per Zaac) just enough so that “they” (these elitists) can decide what or who is best for the little people commoners of the Republican Party who are working just as hard to have the majority of the will of the people heard.


Of course, to further my point it is understood that Zaac by his statement isn’t interested in going against the GOPE (GOP Establishment) and standing up for the will of the people which are working to oust the same-ole do-nothing elitist out of their power base but he and many others are rather more interested in focusing on the PERSONAL CONFLICTS than the ISSUES – as long as if it serves to bring down the Republican Party in whole and thereby either purposefully or in ignorance help maintain the Democratic Progressive Socialist agenda.


To me, parroting the media’s personal conflict smokescreen is a way to manipulate public opinion away from the issues -and- has peculiar similarities to what should be the deplorable ploys to interfere with the fundamental rights of freedom of speech regarding Trump to be heard at rallies – YET unfortunately this is viewed as an acceptable practice by them if other views go against theirs.


It is NOT my desire to support the GOPE manipulators which have been failing us so, frankly, you won’t be seeing me defend their agendas to take control of the nominee process under the guise to manipulate the “rules” while they continue to fail us while our country is on the verge of collapse.


I would rather see higher Christian values than what we have in our choices for a nominee BUT FIRST we need to keep from falling apart through the progressive socialist agendas. Therefore, my logical choice is based on who is more likely to oppose the “ruling class” that is ruining this country – which leaves looking at who is available to do that – and abiding by the common sense reasoning that I have to work with what we have.


I hate the fact that so many are getting caught up in that if Trump is not perfectly defendable because of his over the top rhetoric (without which I doubt anyone would be left standing after the liberal media got through them) then they will fall into the very convenient for the Democrats “throw away vote” category that in NO LOGICAL WAY will count against them. What a great plan (ploy) for them! No wonder we hear so many Dems supporting the efforts of #NEVERTRUMP!!


“Hopefully” enough rational people see the ISSUES need to focus on real change and these will far outweigh the numbers who consider jumping ship at the persuasions of the GOPE and Progressive Socialist Dems trying to manipulate opinions based on personal conflict. “Hopefully” a majority of the people ends up overriding the tactical convention interventions of the nowhere headed GOPE elitists that will undoubted continue to fail the will of the people and a new Republican Party will put an end to these unprofitable political games.

It's 50.1% of the delegates, not 40% (the amount Trump will likely command going into the convention.) 40% is not the will of the people.

Trump is not "continuing his rise" to victory. He's holding steady at the same level of support he's had for months.
.

Ahh, who could have ever broke that percentage with such a large field? The field is smaller now (although the % is still being manipulated by a "spoiler's" attempt to disallow the magic numbers) ...yet, what was Trumps delegate % in the last caucus, hmm?

I disagree, that Trump is not on the rise and believe despite all the ploys to sabotage the numbers is likely to foil the GOPE Elitist's plans to control the process with an open convention. My only hope is that when the sore losers take their toys and run that there are enough people to replace them when the door hits them in the butt on the way out! Also, I find it hard to believe that so many would opt (threaten) to throw away their vote considering the only logical alternative to losing too many "Republican" (supposedly, hmm???) votes.

 

[Zaac]

So you hope the will of the people who voted for him is disregarded by the establishment?

I hope they vote for who they want to vote for. If the people have a problem with that, protest it. The will of the people isn't static. If he hasn't won a state with a majority of the vote, he can't say that the will of the people is disregarded.

 

[Benjamin]

If he hasn't won a state with a majority of the vote, he can't say that the will of the people is disregarded.

Well, isn't that convenient!?! In eliminating, through manipulation, the possibility for a majority of 50.1% to exist then there is no majority and I suppose therefore it follows there is no will of the people - to disregard.

Something wrong with this picture if you ask me (non-existent will of the people), but I'm thinking the field may just be narrow enough now to allow for these "standards" to be met. We will see...

 

[InTheLight]

Well, let me tell you, in short (haha) what I think of these "rules":

My point being the good-ole-boy GOP Establishment “RULES” are already, in typical fashion, being manipulated by every means possible to sway the numbers “hopefully” (as per Zaac) just enough so that “they” (these elitists) can decide what or who is best for the little people commoners of the Republican Party who are working just as hard to have the majority of the will of the people heard.

<snip rest>

The requirement to get more than 50% of the delegates is not a new rule. It's been in place for a long, long time. It's a hurdle. If Trump can't get there, then he shouldn't be suggesting that the rule be changed. It wasn't changed for Goldwater, it wasn't changed for Reagan in 1976.

 

[Benjamin]

The requirement to get more than 50% of the delegates is not a new rule.

I didn't say it was a new rule, I said the rules were being manipulated by the GOPEE (GOP Establishment Elitists). - for other than what they were intended. IOW's there is an attempt to put quick sand in front of and raise the "hurdle" to 10 feet to try to insure it can't be cleared and facilitate GOPEE control from cigar smoke filled back rooms.

 

[Benjamin]

Read this article this morning from the Washington post:

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson said Monday that if there are “shenanigans” with delegates to the GOP convention this summer, it could end up costing Republicans not only the White House, but the House and Senate as well.

“I can tell you this: If there are shenanigans, if it’s not straightforward, all of those millions of people that Donald Trump has brought into the arena are not going to stay there, and the Republicans are going to lose, and it’s going to be not only the presidency, but it’s going to be the Senate and it could even be the House,” Mr. Carson said on “Fox and Friends.”

Mr. Carson, who endorsed Mr. Trump after ending his own 2016 campaign, was asked about the notion of a second ballot at the GOP convention, when many delegates bound to support Mr. Trump on the first ballot would presumably be freed up to back another candidate if nobody wins a majority.

Mr. Carson asked whether establishment Republicans are more concerned about maintaining control and their positions, “or are they more concerned about America?”

“And if they’re more concerned about America, they will not blow up [a] straightforward process,” he said. “They will let the will of the people prevail.” ~ Ben Carson

 

[Zaac]

Well, isn't that convenient!?!

Nope. We've been doing math the same way for thousands of years.

In eliminating, through manipulation, the possibility for a majority of 50.1% to exist then there is no majority and I suppose therefore it follows there is no will of the people - to disregard.

I didn't eliminate anything. The will of the people of many of the states didn't by a majority support him. They supported someone else. So in keeping with the rules of that convenient math that we've been doing the same way for thousands of years, he has no more of a claim to the " will of the people being disregarded" than would the MAJORITY of the folks in those states who didn't vote for him. What about their will?

Something wrong with this picture if you ask me (non-existent will of the people), but I'm thinking the field may just be narrow enough now to allow for these "standards" to be met. We will see...

The only thing wrong with this picture is you thinking his 30 something percent of the vote in some of these states should be a better expression of the "will of the people" than the other 60+% of the vote that wasn't for him.Sneaky

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

Currently, if you add up the Trump + Carson delegates, you get to 763. If you add up the Cruz + Rubio + Kasich delegates, you get 778. So in other words, right now it's a bit of tie between the Trump vs. Non-Trump delegates, as perhaps not all Rubio and Kasich delegates will go to Cruz. So, it seems a bit early for all to jump on the Trump bandwagon right now.

Also, quick question: what state did Trump win that would not go Republican if he were not the nominee? In other words, electorally, is the party better off with or without Trump? Shouldn't that be a key question for the party? Just wondering.

 

[Zaac]

Currently, if you add up the Trump + Carson delegates, you get to 763. If you add up the Cruz + Rubio + Kasich delegates, you get 778. So in other words, right now it's a bit of tie between the Trump vs. Non-Trump delegates, as perhaps not all Rubio and Kasich delegates will go to Cruz. So, it seems a bit early for all to jump on the Trump bandwagon right now.

Also, quick question: what state did Trump win that would not go Republican if he were not the nominee? In other words, electorally, is the party better off with or without Trump? Shouldn't that be a key question for the party? Just wondering.

Excellent questions FoS. I found the following:

Bombshell Poll Shows Democrats Would Win Utah If Trump Is The GOP Nominee

A Deseret News/KSL poll shows that if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, Democrats would be favored to win the deep red state of Utah in November.

A Deseret News/KSL poll shows that if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, Democrats would be favored to win the deep red state of Utah in November.

The poll revealed that Utah voters would completely reject Trump. Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump 38%-36% while Bernie Sanders leads Trump 48%-37%. Both John Kasich and Ted Cruz would win Utah. Kasich would beat Clinton 59%-29%, and Sanders 54%-35%. Ted Cruz would beat Clinton 60%-32%, and Bernie Sanders 53%-39%. Sixteen percent of those polled said that they would not vote if the matchup is Trump vs. Clinton. If the matchup is Trump vs. Sanders, 9% of Utah voters would not vote.

As polls in Michigan and Ohio previously revealed, a potential Trump nomination would see Republican voters vote in droves for the Democratic nominee. The poll in Utah highlights the degree to which many Republicans won’t vote at all if Trump is the nominee. Republicans aren’t going rally around Trump. Donald Trump also isn’t bringing millions of new people into the Republican camp.

If Donald Trump is the Republican presidential nominee, the GOP could face a nationwide disaster of their own creation. Trump could turn dark red states like Utah blue. A Trump nomination could trigger a Democratic landslide. It doesn’t matter who the Democratic nomination is, Donald Trump puts states that have been comfortably in the Republican column for decades in jeopardy.

Utah hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in 50 years, but the Donald Trump will push towards supporting Clinton or Sanders in November. If Utah is willing to vote Democratic to stop Trump, the scope of the damage that Donald Trump will do to the Republican Party is unlimited.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03...ows-democrats-win-utah-trump-gop-nominee.html

Could a Trump Nomination Make Arizona a Swing State?
March 21, 2016


Both Republican and Democratic strategists say a Donald Trump nomination could put the normally rock-solid red state of Arizona in play in November.

Though the Sun Belt state has gone for Republican presidential candidates by wide margins since 2000, advisers from both parties see putting the real estate mogul at the top of the ticket as throwing that into limbo, thanks to a growing Hispanic population and a large bloc of moderate women.

Top officials at the Democratic National Committee have begun considering plans that would include a general election battle in Arizona. Joel Benenson, the Hillary Clinton campaign’s pollster and strategist, told TIME that if Trump is the nominee, Arizona will be one of several states “on the periphery of the Republican universe that get into play” for Democrats.

Republicans are preparing for a real race too. “In a stand-up race with Hillary and The Donald, I definitely say Arizona is in play,” said Chuck Coughlin, a Republican operative in Arizona who engineered Jan Brewer’s gubernatorial campaigns, adding that Clinton would have a serious shot at winning the state against Trump—particularly if Trump is unable to swing more toward the center.

In an early sign of unrest in the state, Republican Sen. John McCain is now in a statistical tie in a poll against Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, who is running for his seat, after years of blowout victories over Democratic challengers. McCain has generally said he’ll support the eventual Republican nominee, but he issued a short statement saying he shared the concerns of anti-Trump campaigner Mitt Romney earlier this month.

“The big swing demographic is white women and the big turnout factor is young Latinos ,” said Andy Barr, a Democratic operative in Arizona who has worked on congressional and statewide initiatives. The Republicans “really may have awoken a sleeping giant in the Southwest if these folks turn out and vote.”

Arizona has not been kind to Democrats in the past. As the Republican presidential nominee in 2008, McCain won Arizona by eight points, while Mitt Romney beat Obama by a nine-point margin in 2012.

The primaries on Tuesday could provide a hint. Clinton and Trump are expected to win the state by significant margins and have been campaigning there in weeks, but two voting blocs in the state are likely to see swings in turnout: Hispanics and moderate women.

Hispanics make up about 30% of Arizona’s population, but in 2012 were only about 18% of those who showed up to vote, according to exit polls. Democrats, who have waited for years for the latter number to catch up, say that Trump could be the ticket. He has a 77% unfavorable rating among Hispanics nationally, according to Gallup, but observers say even that understates the depth of dislike for him.
...
http://time.com/4267119/donald-trump-arizona-john-mccain/

I think that if Trump is the nominee and it's Hillary vs Trump, a lot of Republicans in a lot of red states will either vote for Hillary or simply not vote. And thus you end up with a lot of states that weren't in play suddenly being in play.

Even the Bible Belt becomes iffy for the GOP with Donald Trump. The more he talks, the more evangelicals and people who want to win their state elections are gonna not want to be associated with him.

They'll either not vote or not vote for him or Hillary.

 

[InTheLight]

I didn't say it was a new rule, I said the rules were being manipulated by the GOPEE (GOP Establishment Elitists). - for other than what they were intended. IOW's there is an attempt to put quick sand in front of and raise the "hurdle" to 10 feet to try to insure it can't be cleared and facilitate GOPEE control from cigar smoke filled back rooms.

The hurdle is 50% of the delegates, which this go around is 1,237 delegates. If you don't get that on the first ballot, delegates are no longer bound to vote as they did for the first vote. This is not "shenanigans" or "manipulation". It's the way it's been done for decades and decades.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

The hurdle is 50% of the delegates, which this go around is 1,237 delegates. If you don't get that on the first ballot, delegates are no longer bound to vote as they did for the first vote. This is not "shenanigans" or "manipulation". It's the way it's been done for decades and decades.

Getting just of bit tired of the Trump supporters saying that he should get the nomination regardless of whether he hits the mark or not -- just since he may be ahead or he's received more votes. Sorry. That's not how it works - the rules are the rules.

 

[Benjamin]

4 Aces beats 4 Kings in poker. Never mind that the one holding the 4 Aces planned for and then pulled one out of their sleeve. Sneaky "The rules are the rules!"

 

[InTheLight]

4 Aces beats 4 Kings in poker. Never mind that the one holding the 4 Aces planned for and then pulled one out of their sleeve. Sneaky "The rules are the rules!"

Explain how Trump is being cheated.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk