Halperin: Trump Poised To Win Iowa, New Hampshire and Then Run The Table!!!

[Vigilante]

And the Great Conservative Ronald Reagan campaigned for DemoCRAT Trumen!

Reagan was in his 30s then not his 60s

He was 37 and KNEW what he was doing!

Yeah and four years later he supported Eisenhower and never look back

Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’
  
  
  Breitbart ^ | 1/20/2016
  Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talk Rush Limbaugh offered his analysis on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's rise, which he argued wasn't a sign that conservative orthodoxy was winning the day, but instead it was a pushback against the modern-day Democratic Party and President Barack Obama. And that according to Limbaugh is a sign of the rise of nationalism and populism overtaking conservatism. "What's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people hate it, populism, even dirtier word," Limbaugh said. "Nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this has happened, when it exposes -- what...

 

[Jroc]

When people vote for a cult of personality that's what we get. Run on the issues, not the stupidity he's been using on Cruz.

 

[Vigilante]

Jroc, he's LEARNED what you have to do in order to WIN in Iowa.... Principles be damned, the PRIZE at the end is what your eye is on!

Cruz didn't sell out. if Trump wins, i'll support him, but he sold out on ethanol

To paraphrase Donald Trump, only the pathetic losers and dummies in the political establishment could think it’s a good idea to take 40% of the corn crop and shove it into our engines, thereby raising the cost of food and fuel—the two staples of middle class households in America.
Just how devastating is the ethanol mandate?

According to a study cited by the Heartland Institute, families are forced to pay $2,055 more for food every year because 40% of the corn crop – the antecedent of the food chain – is used for fuel. A study from PricewaterhouseCoopers found that restaurants pay $18,000 more per year.

Ethanol is so impotent as a fuel for automobiles that when Rep. Ron DeSantis offered an amendment to repeal the mandate, he was told by the Congressional Budget Office that it would increase the deficit by decreasing tax revenue. How? By alleviating consumers from purchasing diluted fuel and allowing them to actually fill up their tanks with unvarnished gasoline, motorists wouldn’t have to refill their tanks as often as they do now. That would result in less revenue for the government!
Hence, we have an entire venture socialist, government/corporate racket embedded in our economy that relies upon coercing individuals to purchase a terrible product. Much like Obamacare has wreaked havoc on affordable insurance plans, we have an energy mandate that bankrupts food producers, restaurants, and consumers, all so a few cronies can slurp off the gravy train

Horowitz: Ethanol is the Anchor Baby of our Economic System

You DO what you have to do to WIN.... You can always, as Reagan did after 1948, CHANGE YOUR MIND!!!

Run on conservatism, not cronyism. We don't need to make deals with the crony capitalist. Reagan didn't change his philosophy when he was in his 60s running for president, sorry bad analogy

No matter what, he's in the race to win, and that is exactly what he is doing!

We'll see, he needs to stop with the crazy talk, saying Cruz is like Hillary ...Give me a friken break

You do realize that polls right after this last debate where he had his N.Y. spat with Ted, Trumps polls went up 4% and Ted's fell by 2%!... You know as well as I that NEGATIVE campaigning moves the polls more than anything else, and Trump is very good at that...I can't wait to see what he does to the Hildebeast, or The BERN, if Republican's get lucky!

 

[Jroc]

Cruz didn't sell out. if Trump wins, i'll support him, but he sold out on ethanol






Horowitz: Ethanol is the Anchor Baby of our Economic System

You DO what you have to do to WIN.... You can always, as Reagan did after 1948, CHANGE YOUR MIND!!!

Run on conservatism, not cronyism. We don't need to make deals with the crony capitalist. Reagan didn't change his philosophy when he was in his 60s running for president, sorry bad analogy

No matter what, he's in the race to win, and that is exactly what he is doing!

We'll see, he needs to stop with the crazy talk, saying Cruz is like Hillary ...Give me a friken break

You do realize that polls right after this last debate where he had his N.Y. spat with Ted, Trumps polls went up 4% and Ted's fell by 2%!... You know as well as I that NEGATIVE campaigning moves the polls more than anything else, and Trump is very good at that...I can't wait to see what he does to the Hildebeast, or The BERN, if Republican's get lucky!

We''ll see what happens

 

[candycorn]

GOP Polls for Jan. 16: State of the Race in Iowa & New Hampshire

Jan 16 is old news now. If on the 16th 3 points separated Cruz and Trump, then Trump could very easily have closed and exceeded that by now. If Trump takes Iowa and New Hampshire he may very easily run the table. He has enormous leads in South Carolina and Florida.

He wont take Iowa..Sarah Palin is not going to help him..Although now he's falling back to crony capitalist ethanol support ...Disappointing actually

Jroc, he's LEARNED what you have to do in order to WIN in Iowa.... Principles be damned, the PRIZE at the end is what your eye is on!

Cruz didn't sell out. if Trump wins, i'll support him, but he sold out on ethanol

To paraphrase Donald Trump, only the pathetic losers and dummies in the political establishment could think it’s a good idea to take 40% of the corn crop and shove it into our engines, thereby raising the cost of food and fuel—the two staples of middle class households in America.
Just how devastating is the ethanol mandate?

According to a study cited by the Heartland Institute, families are forced to pay $2,055 more for food every year because 40% of the corn crop – the antecedent of the food chain – is used for fuel. A study from PricewaterhouseCoopers found that restaurants pay $18,000 more per year.

Ethanol is so impotent as a fuel for automobiles that when Rep. Ron DeSantis offered an amendment to repeal the mandate, he was told by the Congressional Budget Office that it would increase the deficit by decreasing tax revenue. How? By alleviating consumers from purchasing diluted fuel and allowing them to actually fill up their tanks with unvarnished gasoline, motorists wouldn’t have to refill their tanks as often as they do now. That would result in less revenue for the government!
Hence, we have an entire venture socialist, government/corporate racket embedded in our economy that relies upon coercing individuals to purchase a terrible product. Much like Obamacare has wreaked havoc on affordable insurance plans, we have an energy mandate that bankrupts food producers, restaurants, and consumers, all so a few cronies can slurp off the gravy train

Horowitz: Ethanol is the Anchor Baby of our Economic System

You DO what you have to do to WIN.... You can always, as Reagan did after 1948, CHANGE YOUR MIND!!!

GOP ethics explained....

 

[Toro]

Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’
  
  
  Breitbart ^ | 1/20/2016
  Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talk Rush Limbaugh offered his analysis on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's rise, which he argued wasn't a sign that conservative orthodoxy was winning the day, but instead it was a pushback against the modern-day Democratic Party and President Barack Obama. And that according to Limbaugh is a sign of the rise of nationalism and populism overtaking conservatism. "What's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people hate it, populism, even dirtier word," Limbaugh said. "Nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this has happened, when it exposes -- what...

You got that right, Vag.

Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector. ...

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or "unrealistic" proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy).​

Populism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unrealistic proposals include

• Getting Mexico to pay for a wall
• Slapping big tariffs on our trading partners
• Banning Muslims
• Seizing ISIS oil fields with minimal to no casualties to pay for vet benefits
• Winning at everything

Etc., etc.

Or, pretty much all of Trump's campaign.

 

[Mac1958]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

 

[candycorn]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

 

[Mac1958]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

 

[Vigilante]

Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’
  
  
  Breitbart ^ | 1/20/2016
  Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talk Rush Limbaugh offered his analysis on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's rise, which he argued wasn't a sign that conservative orthodoxy was winning the day, but instead it was a pushback against the modern-day Democratic Party and President Barack Obama. And that according to Limbaugh is a sign of the rise of nationalism and populism overtaking conservatism. "What's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people hate it, populism, even dirtier word," Limbaugh said. "Nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this has happened, when it exposes -- what...

You got that right, Vag.

Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector. ...

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or "unrealistic" proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy).​

Populism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unrealistic proposals include

• Getting Mexico to pay for a wall
• Slapping big tariffs on our trading partners
• Banning Muslims
• Seizing ISIS oil fields with minimal to no casualties to pay for vet benefits
• Winning at everything

Etc., etc.

Or, pretty much all of Trump's campaign.

AND HE DOES IT SO WELL....LEARN TO SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP, BULLSHITTER!!!!!

 

[candycorn]

Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’
  
  
  Breitbart ^ | 1/20/2016
  Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talk Rush Limbaugh offered his analysis on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's rise, which he argued wasn't a sign that conservative orthodoxy was winning the day, but instead it was a pushback against the modern-day Democratic Party and President Barack Obama. And that according to Limbaugh is a sign of the rise of nationalism and populism overtaking conservatism. "What's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people hate it, populism, even dirtier word," Limbaugh said. "Nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this has happened, when it exposes -- what...

You got that right, Vag.

Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector. ...

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or "unrealistic" proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy).​

Populism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unrealistic proposals include

• Getting Mexico to pay for a wall
• Slapping big tariffs on our trading partners
• Banning Muslims
• Seizing ISIS oil fields with minimal to no casualties to pay for vet benefits
• Winning at everything

Etc., etc.

Or, pretty much all of Trump's campaign.

Great analysis.

What you could probably add is this...if he could get Mexico to pay for the wall....he would still have to get Congress to approve it. All politics being local, border states are heavily influenced by the heavy Hispanic footprint there...those reps have to run for re-election in 24 months while the wall is being built. Also recall that the wall is just the beginning....the draconian measures to expel a lot of their aunts, uncles, brothers, cousins, etc....will likely be felt along the wall too.

The idea that any of the above will get passed is absurd.

But the truly disturbing thing is that his supporters are not only gullible enough to believe any of that will happen....that they seem to think banning people on the basis of their religion, starting our 3rd war in 25 years in the Middle is a good thing, and they seem to fully believe that there will be no retaliation from our trading partners if we impose a tariff; many of whom own a sizable amount of our debt. Perhaps it also would be news to them that the imports that are going to be taxed are the same things that are in their homes.

---------

I'm not a democrat. I would like to have a choice of parties to support nationally. I split my vote locally. Almost all of the big decisions are made locally. But every so often the weight of the Federals is needed. Right now, its Hillary or nobody. There isn't much choice...

 

[candycorn]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

Clearly influence?

Who influences whom? Its easy to say the guy with the show is leading the thought. I think that it goes both ways at times. If you're a conservative talkshow host and you see multiple thousands of folks in the crowd listening to someone who says they are a conservative, are you going to keep bringing up all of the liberal stuff or are you going to try to highlight the conservative credentials and play down anything that may not fit in?

I think it goes both ways sometimes. Perhaps not often because there re not a lot of elections compared to shows in a year or two.

 

[Mac1958]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

Clearly influence?

Who influences whom? Its easy to say the guy with the show is leading the thought. I think that it goes both ways at times. If you're a conservative talkshow host and you see multiple thousands of folks in the crowd listening to someone who says they are a conservative, are you going to keep bringing up all of the liberal stuff or are you going to try to highlight the conservative credentials and play down anything that may not fit in?

I think it goes both ways sometimes. Perhaps not often because there re not a lot of elections compared to shows in a year or two.

Yeah, fair point, I think we're talking about an echo chamber.

I do know this - it's not difficult to recognize the same words and premises used by the media types when I speak with some individuals.
.

 

[Jroc]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

Clearly influence?

Who influences whom? Its easy to say the guy with the show is leading the thought. I think that it goes both ways at times. If you're a conservative talkshow host and you see multiple thousands of folks in the crowd listening to someone who says they are a conservative, are you going to keep bringing up all of the liberal stuff or are you going to try to highlight the conservative credentials and play down anything that may not fit in?

I think it goes both ways sometimes. Perhaps not often because there re not a lot of elections compared to shows in a year or two.

Coming from a person who was influenced by a dumb, collage student Who wasn't able to find, or pay for her own birth control....You cant make this stuff up

 

[Toro]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Trump isn't a conservative.

Never has been, never will be.

That's why it is so funny that so many "conservatives" think he is.

 

[Toro]

Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’
  
  
  Breitbart ^ | 1/20/2016
  Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talk Rush Limbaugh offered his analysis on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump's rise, which he argued wasn't a sign that conservative orthodoxy was winning the day, but instead it was a pushback against the modern-day Democratic Party and President Barack Obama. And that according to Limbaugh is a sign of the rise of nationalism and populism overtaking conservatism. "What's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people hate it, populism, even dirtier word," Limbaugh said. "Nationalism and populism have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this has happened, when it exposes -- what...

You got that right, Vag.

Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector. ...

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or "unrealistic" proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy).​

Populism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unrealistic proposals include

• Getting Mexico to pay for a wall
• Slapping big tariffs on our trading partners
• Banning Muslims
• Seizing ISIS oil fields with minimal to no casualties to pay for vet benefits
• Winning at everything

Etc., etc.

Or, pretty much all of Trump's campaign.

AND HE DOES IT SO WELL....LEARN TO SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP, BULLSHITTER!!!!!

Just like the millions who were going to die of Ebola, eh Vagifail?

 

[peach174]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Trump isn't a conservative.

Never has been, never will be.

That's why it is so funny that so many "conservatives" think he is.

How many Cons have actually said that?
I have not heard any say that.
Just because you think they think that way, is some form of mind reading and no one can read minds.

 

[Mac1958]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Trump isn't a conservative.

Never has been, never will be.

That's why it is so funny that so many "conservatives" think he is.

How many Cons have actually said that?
I have not heard any say that.
Just because you think they think that way, is some form of mind reading and no one can read minds.

Okay, hold it.

I can't speak for Toro, but I need some clarification here.

I/we keep hearing about how the conservatives are so angry that their recent candidates (Romney, McCain, even Bush) were not conservative enough and have caused the party and country grave damage. Then many of the same people saying that are backing Trump.

It's not unreasonable, then, to assume that those same people back Trump because they think he's a conservative.

Seriously, help me out here. Is it safe to assume that the priorities of these people have changed?
.

 

[candycorn]

[Perhaps this will explain it better than I can....

• Limbaugh: ‘Nationalism and Populism Have Overtaken Conservatism in Terms of Appeal’

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

Clearly influence?

Who influences whom? Its easy to say the guy with the show is leading the thought. I think that it goes both ways at times. If you're a conservative talkshow host and you see multiple thousands of folks in the crowd listening to someone who says they are a conservative, are you going to keep bringing up all of the liberal stuff or are you going to try to highlight the conservative credentials and play down anything that may not fit in?

I think it goes both ways sometimes. Perhaps not often because there re not a lot of elections compared to shows in a year or two.

Coming from a person who was influenced by a dumb, collage student Who wasn't able to find, or pay for her own birth control....You cant make this stuff up

Ms. Fluke, who is now a practicing attorney is likely more successful than you could be in 10 life times. But that isn't remotely interesting to me; I'm sure there are thousands who are your better.

 

[Jroc]

Wow.

I'm surprised to say this, but I think he's on to something.

But what does that say about the support that Trump has gotten from Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, among others?

Does this mean that they are no longer conservatives, that they are really populist nationalists?
.

Were they ever conservatives?

They are entertainers. All entertainers play to the crowd whether it is Amy Schemer or Rush Limbaugh.

I agree with the "entertainers" part, but there's more to them.

They clearly influence the political thought of millions to some extent, yet they remain completely unaccountable for the ramifications.

I don't know if there's a word for that.
.

Clearly influence?

Who influences whom? Its easy to say the guy with the show is leading the thought. I think that it goes both ways at times. If you're a conservative talkshow host and you see multiple thousands of folks in the crowd listening to someone who says they are a conservative, are you going to keep bringing up all of the liberal stuff or are you going to try to highlight the conservative credentials and play down anything that may not fit in?

I think it goes both ways sometimes. Perhaps not often because there re not a lot of elections compared to shows in a year or two.

Coming from a person who was influenced by a dumb, collage student Who wasn't able to find, or pay for her own birth control....You cant make this stuff up

Ms. Fluke, who is now a practicing attorney is likely more successful than you could be in 10 life times. But that isn't remotely interesting to me; I'm sure there are thousands who are your better.

Sorry, but I don't warship political hacks..thats a leftist thing