Has Trump Peaked?

[g5000]

I don't think Trump is a lock in NH but as of today he's the odds on favorite. If he wins then I think Iowa is just yesterdays news. If he loses New Hampshire then he quits.

I agree. If Trump doesn't win New Hampshire, it's likely over for him.

But if he wins...Iowa is another Santorum, Huckabee one off fluke.

The down side of Iowa is...at least for me...had he won it, I think it would have been over.

South Carolina will determine Trump's viability.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her daughter were Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

tinydancer

Maybe he was "piggybacked".

Ya think?

 

[g5000]

Peaked? Hard to tell. I believe the establishment and Fox News are going to go on the offensive and push Rubio. Everyone knows Iowa isn't important as everyone makes it out to be but they are not going to let Trumps 2nd place finish go to waste. Krauthammer and the rest of the establishment dopes are going to be all over this with their "analysis."

I'll have to see this play out to get more of an opinion of how all this will impact the election and Trumps national dominance, but for now Trump has a giant target on his back and EVERYONE (media included) is drawing a bead on it. I'm not ready to say he'll survive whats coming his way, and that has me 'concerned' as a supporter.......for now.

Shit just got real

How many days before Bush quits? I figure S. Carolina should finish him.

He's waiting for Trump to quit.

 

[bendog]

Trump's support crosses lines, but he's best with older whites with declining incomes who are hanging on for medicare and soc sec.

 

[DarkFury]

View attachment 62072

Trump takes that anger and misdirects the rubes' attention like a stage performer. He says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that Mexican over there! Git 'im!"

Actually, we're angry about having to subsidize your health insurance, and take care of your food needs, etc.

You are subsidizing my health care, that's true. I served 20 years in the military and have Tricare for life.

But I can guarantee you are not subsidizing my food. It's a sure thing I earn more than you do and pay more taxes than you do.

Nice try. When you ASS-U-ME, you make an ASS out of U and ME.

Do you shop on base?

 

[g5000]

View attachment 62072

Trump takes that anger and misdirects the rubes' attention like a stage performer. He says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that Mexican over there! Git 'im!"

Actually, we're angry about having to subsidize your health insurance, and take care of your food needs, etc.

You are subsidizing my health care, that's true. I served 20 years in the military and have Tricare for life.

But I can guarantee you are not subsidizing my food. It's a sure thing I earn more than you do and pay more taxes than you do.

Nice try. When you ASS-U-ME, you make an ASS out of U and ME.

Do you shop on base?

I don't live near a base, and even when I did, I did not shop on base.

Nice try.

human being obviously meant he was subsidizing me on welfare. What a tard.

 

[Jroc]

Peaked? Hard to tell. I believe the establishment and Fox News are going to go on the offensive and push Rubio. Everyone knows Iowa isn't important as everyone makes it out to be but they are not going to let Trumps 2nd place finish go to waste. Krauthammer and the rest of the establishment dopes are going to be all over this with their "analysis."

I'll have to see this play out to get more of an opinion of how all this will impact the election and Trumps national dominance, but for now Trump has a giant target on his back and EVERYONE (media included) is drawing a bead on it. I'm not ready to say he'll survive whats coming his way, and that has me 'concerned' as a supporter.......for now.

Shit just got real

Back to reality for you. You got caught up in a cult of personality. Picking Cruz to finish third is proof of that fact.

I thought evangelicals would break from their voting pattern and vote for the best candidate...I was wrong, very wrong. Cruz is a dope but won fair and square. It's Iowa though, people shouldn't lose sight of that.

Cruz is a dope because you don't like him. Trump is the dope for going after Cruz personally. Saying he was as bad as Hillary. That's pretty friken dopey. If you ask me. it didn't help him and doesn't help the cause at all.. stupid

Did you listen to his victory speech? The guy just isn't right.

Yeah it was a bit much.... just too long that's all

 

[tinydancer]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

 

[Jroc]

Peaked? Hard to tell. I believe the establishment and Fox News are going to go on the offensive and push Rubio. Everyone knows Iowa isn't important as everyone makes it out to be but they are not going to let Trumps 2nd place finish go to waste. Krauthammer and the rest of the establishment dopes are going to be all over this with their "analysis."

I'll have to see this play out to get more of an opinion of how all this will impact the election and Trumps national dominance, but for now Trump has a giant target on his back and EVERYONE (media included) is drawing a bead on it. I'm not ready to say he'll survive whats coming his way, and that has me 'concerned' as a supporter.......for now.

Shit just got real

How many days before Bush quits? I figure S. Carolina should finish him.

He should quit before he's embarrassed in FL

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Trump blithers through his campaign rallies....free association, goes off on tangents, insults his rivals and then wanders off-stage. I can't for the life of me figure out what's appealing about a draft-dodging rich kid who made a billion dollars amid 4 bankruptcies and can't take criticism without exploding in diatribes about his imaginary enemies.

Especially since he offers the country nothing but sky high taxes on the working class and slashed taxes for his 1% cronies.

His fans keep saying he can't be bought but everything he has said or done proves just the opposite.

His fans also say he's good at making money so he'll make them some money too. Wrong again. Daddy left him hundreds of millions. Without that, he'd be slinging burgers.

 

[Jroc]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

a big deal over nothing really

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

Yabut, he didn't really do it. He was "piggybacked". That's very common, right tinydancer ?

 

[blackhawk]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

I think his skipping that last debate was very telling in how serious he really is about this. I think many people who were on the fence about him were put off by that I don't think his campaign will do a nose dive but a slow but steady fall as you said his fall has been predicted before so I wouldn't put any money on this.

 

[g5000]

View attachment 62072

Trump takes that anger and misdirects the rubes' attention like a stage performer. He says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that Mexican over there! Git 'im!"

It's simplistic answers to problems. Bernie does it to with classism, although he's much too much a gentleman to use race gender or religion. Segments of the electorate feel disenfranchised.

Sanders says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that rich guy over there! Git 'im!"


Sanders and Trump attract the angry losers "who have no strong convictions of their own".

If someone believes they are a loser because of Mexicans, they go with Trump. If someone thinks they are a loser because of rich people, they go with Sanders.

 

[bendog]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

Cruz didn't do anything he hasn't done before. There's a reason everyone (literally everyone) hates his guts.

 

[bendog]

View attachment 62072

Trump takes that anger and misdirects the rubes' attention like a stage performer. He says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that Mexican over there! Git 'im!"

It's simplistic answers to problems. Bernie does it to with classism, although he's much too much a gentleman to use race gender or religion. Segments of the electorate feel disenfranchised.

Sanders says, "The reason you are such losers is because of that rich guy over there! Git 'im!"


Sanders and Trump attract the angry losers "who have no strong convictions of their own".

If someone believes they are a loser because of Mexicans, they go with Trump. If someone thinks they are a loser because of rich people, they go with Sanders.

Yes. Possibly some construction wages are lowered because of illegal aliens, and govt support for higher educ has declined. However, deporting 10 million isn't happening, and by itself would have little impact on wages ... beyond making goods and services more expensive ... and higher education's cost drivers are out of control in terms of 4 year residential bachelors programs.

 

[Missourian]

South Carolina will determine Trump's viability.

I agree. Third place in South Carolina and he's definitely out. Second to Rubio...it could go either way. Second to Cruz...probably out.

 

[Tom Horn]

His fans also say he's good at making money so he'll make them some money too. Wrong again. Daddy left him hundreds of millions. Without that, he'd be slinging burgers.

No, he'd be successful because he used to be a brilliant man. His pop gave him a $10M start and he probably inherited several times that. He's without a doubt an extraordinary salesman and showman. What he'd bring to the presidency is completely unknown. I once voted for a billionaire named Ross Perot.....now I'm rooting for Rubio but would vote for Trump over any Rat shyster.

 

[Jroc]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

Cruz didn't do anything he hasn't done before. There's a reason everyone (literally everyone) hates his guts.

Which is why he won Iowa

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>

If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.

He has not peaked. What you saw was the culling of the herd. Trump/Cruz/Rubio are in and every body else on the GOP side is out.

Now the numbers will not only adjust but firm up.

If Carson supporters got those tweets and they come forward and say they switched to Cruz based on that falsehood things are really really going to heat up.

A woman called into Rush today just seething over this. She and her family were all Cruz supporters and now they are not going to vote for him based on this dirty trick that was played against Carson.

Man oh man she was pissed.

Very doubtful that effected anything..You guys hating on Cruz, he won fair and square. His organization was better. Trump thought he could win on his mouth alone. His slandering of Cruz didn't work

Whoa whoa whoa with me! I've liked Cruz from the get go and defended him on a consistent basis. Extraordinary intelligence and awesome legal track record.

But what happened here is really pissing people off. I'm disappointed as all get out.

Not that the campaign made the mistake to begin with but that they took no corrective action when the truth became known.

It's disturbing. Now not in a lot of races but because there's always some sleaze. That's just the nature of politics. But I really had hoped his team would stay above the fray.

And sadly, now this incident with Carson has tainted his win.

a big deal over nothing really

You really think so?

I disagree. I don't want a candidate sending my name and voting record around to my neighbors and, IMO, it should be illegal.

We recently got a mailer from some R nutter org, said they'd gotten our name and address from the registration records.

Last time I had a D sign in our front yard, it was stolen and our car vandalized.

Who I vote for is no one's business.