Author President Donald J. Trump  (Read 891319 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #180 on: January 16, 2016, 01:06:26 PM »
He's finished after last night.

Hardly. Cruz is a brilliant campaigner. While the "New Yorker" bit may have garnered some antipathy from a few in the media, it clearly resonated with early primary voters. Trump, on the other hand, came off as squishy, exploitative (9/11 was never brought up by Cruz) and juvenile.

Cruz is building momentum. His funding is through the roof, he`ll most likely win Iowa, and I suspect he will do quite well in South Carolina.

Frankly, I get the feeling (actually, not just a feeling -- I know for a fact) Trump is beginning to rub many earlier conservative supporters the wrong way. It`s still Trump`s nomination to lose at this point, but his alarming proclivity toward shooting himself in the foot is beginning to cause some concern. And you can fully count on Cruz to not make the same mistakes.

Another thing to consider: the democrat party is in shambles. They may disappear for a generation or longer. They have absolutely zero fresh talent, and they`ve run out of Clintons (Hillary will face indictment and will be forced to retire -- as I predicted many months ago). The power brokers in the GOP will want to take full advantage of the democrat`s quandary. Thus, they will not be of a mind to play ball with a wild card like Trump, who might end up being a one-term disaster in the WH, and subsequently breathing renewed life back into a flailing DNC.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #181 on: January 16, 2016, 02:42:06 PM »
I'm not debating immigration, nor the Secure Fence Act, just the bombastic response Trump brought to the discussion.

There was no discussion until Trump brought it up.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #182 on: January 16, 2016, 02:44:39 PM »
While the "New Yorker" bit may have garnered some antipathy from a few in the media, it clearly resonated with early primary voters.

What is your evidence of that? It'll take at least a week for polls to reflect anything.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #183 on: January 16, 2016, 02:46:20 PM »
Hardly. Cruz is a brilliant campaigner. While the "New Yorker" bit may have garnered some antipathy from a few in the media, it clearly resonated with early primary voters. Trump, on the other hand, came off as squishy, exploitative (9/11 was never brought up by Cruz) and juvenile.

Cruz is building momentum. His funding is through the roof, he`ll most likely win Iowa, and I suspect he will do quite well in South Carolina.

Frankly, I get the feeling (actually, not just a feeling -- I know for a fact) Trump is beginning to rub many earlier conservative supporters the wrong way. It`s still Trump`s nomination to lose at this point, but his alarming proclivity toward shooting himself in the foot is beginning to cause some concern. And you can fully count on Cruz to not make the same mistakes.

Another thing to consider: the democrat party is in shambles. They may disappear for a generation or longer. They have absolutely zero fresh talent, and they`ve run out of Clintons (Hillary will face indictment and will be forced to retire -- as I predicted many months ago). The power brokers in the GOP will want to take full advantage of the democrat`s quandary. Thus, they will not be of a mind to play ball with a wild card like Trump, who might end up being a one-term disaster in the WH, and subsequently breathing renewed life back into a flailing DNC.

Cruz is going to have an uphill battle proving he is even eligible to run. There has already been a lawsuit filed in Texas challenging his eligibility.

Whether or not you like Ann Coulter, this articles makes some excellent arguments that he is not. And she started out as a Cruz supporter.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-01-13.html#read_more

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #184 on: January 16, 2016, 02:51:37 PM »
What is your evidence of that? It'll take at least a week for polls to reflect anything.

I live in an early primary state. And, I am, shall we say, quite active in the Republican community.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #185 on: January 16, 2016, 02:55:15 PM »
Cruz is going to have an uphill battle proving he is even eligible to run. There has already been a lawsuit filed in Txas challenging his eligibility.

Whether or not you like Ann Coulter, this articles makes some excellent arguments that he is not. And she started out as a Cruz supporter.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-01-13.html#read_more


That's all complete nonsense. It's settled law. It will all be thrown out of court for having no standing. Further, this only serves to piss off more conservative voters. I, for one, and many others like me, have already increased our fundraising for Cruz in South Carolina.

P.S. Ann Coulter is a rabid Trump supporter. So you know...

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #186 on: January 16, 2016, 02:57:28 PM »

That's all complete nonsense. It's settled law. It will all be thrown out of court for having no standing. Further, this only serves to piss off more conservative voters. I, for one, and many others like me, have already increased our fundraising for Cruz in South Carolina.

It is not settled law. You are mistaken. It might be thrown out for not having standing, but only because he has not been nominated yet.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #187 on: January 16, 2016, 03:06:16 PM »
It is not settled law. You are mistaken. It might be thrown out for not having standing, but only because he has not been nominated yet.


Trust me; it is. Rather than explain it myself, I'll just post a link here and let my friend Mark Levin explain it a little better than I could:


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #188 on: January 16, 2016, 03:09:51 PM »
my friend Mark Levin explain it a little better than I could:

That's just like, his opinion, man.

Cruz will get nowhere near the nomination, so this question is moot.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #189 on: January 16, 2016, 03:20:29 PM »
That's just like, his opinion, man.

Cruz will get nowhere near the nomination, so this question is moot.

What do you not understand about being a natural born citizen? Very simple question. Please explain why Cruz is not qualified.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #190 on: January 16, 2016, 03:41:46 PM »

Trust me; it is. Rather than explain it myself, I'll just post a link here and let my friend Mark Levin explain it a little better than I could:



I'm not trashing Cruz by any means.  Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law (Whom The Great One references concerning the 2008 McCain questions) states that it is "murky and unsettled". The cases Marc Levin references (George Romney and Barry Goldwater) were never adjudicated because neither was elected.

The SC may well rule in Cruz's favor. Cruz is smart. He should have gotten out in front of this and asked for a court ruling.

I took the time to watch the video. Did you take the time to read the article?

Saying this is settled law is specious. I hope it can be settled, and settled in Cruz's favor. But having opinions (one way or another) does not make it settled law.

And I hope the case against Rubio is settled as well. It amazes me that both Rubio and Cruz were not more proactive in getting these matters put to bed.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #191 on: January 16, 2016, 03:43:17 PM »
What do you not understand about being a natural born citizen? Very simple question. Please explain why Cruz is not qualified.

Read Ann Coulter's article at the link I posted above.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #192 on: January 16, 2016, 03:45:48 PM »
What do you not understand about being a natural born citizen? Very simple question. Please explain why Cruz is not qualified.

I don't have a problem with Cruz's citizenship, I have a problem with his electability. There is just zero way that guy can win against Hillary. Running him would simply be throwing the election.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #193 on: January 16, 2016, 03:52:45 PM »
I don't have a problem with Cruz's citizenship, I have a problem with his electability. There is just zero way that guy can win against Hillary. Running him would simply be throwing the election.

Plus he's already lost the nation, according to polls.  Only place he's treading water is Iowa.  Everywhere else, the gaps are impossible to bridge.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #194 on: January 16, 2016, 03:54:40 PM »
I'm not trashing Cruz by any means.  Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law (Whom The Great One references concerning the 2008 McCain questions) states that it is "murky and unsettled". The cases Marc Levin references (George Romney and Barry Goldwater) were never adjudicated because neither was elected.

The SC may well rule in Cruz's favor. Cruz is smart. He should have gotten out in front of this and asked for a court ruling.

I took the time to watch the video. Did you take the time to read the article?

Saying this is settled law is specious. I hope it can be settled, and settled in Cruz's favor. But having opinions (one way or another) does not make it settled law.

And I hope the case against Rubio is settled as well. It amazes me that both Rubio and Cruz were not more proactive in getting these matters put to bed.
Tribe is so liberal that he can't even be properly be called even a Democrat. And, although he is actually member of the 'tribe' he was born in China and so he can never be elected President though he could become a Justice.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #195 on: January 16, 2016, 03:57:22 PM »
I don't have a problem with Cruz's citizenship, I have a problem with his electability. There is just zero way that guy can win against Hillary. Running him would simply be throwing the election.

I voted for Cruz for Senator and if I take that quiz thing, my values match up closest to his with Trump second. I have similar concerns as you SFA, but I will add my own. I have a real issue with electing a first term Senator to be President, especially one with no executive experience. Ted Cruz was a great Solicitor General. He has been consistent as a Senator and not afraid to put his neck on the line. But he doesn't have the ezecutive experience I would like to see.

Ideally, I would prefer a governor from a large state. But none of the ones that are currently running.

I'm not sure I could have even supported Rick Perry. I started out in Cruz's camp, but I may end up voting for Trump.

I wish the Republicans would stop falling into the trap of attacking each other and start attacking Sanders, Clinton and Obama.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #196 on: January 16, 2016, 04:00:12 PM »
Tribe is so liberal that he can't even be properly be called even a Democrat. And, although he is actually member of the 'tribe' he was born in China and so he can never be elected President though he could become a Justice.

The only point I was making with the reference to Tribe is that Marc Levin used him as a reliable source from back in 2008. Now he is discounting his opinion.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #197 on: January 16, 2016, 04:10:31 PM »
The only point I was making with the reference to Tribe is that Marc Levin used him as a reliable source from back in 2008. Now he is discounting his opinion.
Oh I know. No problem. I just wanted to point out that allow so many kids have to read his stuff in schools and he is vaunted as a great legal mind, which I won't dispute, he is very, very liberal.

With regard to your comments about Republicans. That is the way, for some reason. The GOP is so "diverse" that it is hard to come around and support a single candidate. The Democrats, who claim diversity, are much more lock-step and rally-round the candidate types- whoever it is eventually and don't tolerate diverse opinions and punish those who don't put party first and foremost. They also are more clever and will "pick less of evils" and slowly advance agendas over time, even decades. The GOP tends to want a fix "now" and, on the extremes, even revolutionary change immediately. This comes from both being more honest and also from business experience in which shareholders (or you as owner) look to profits and what is happening now and next quarter. Another big problem is some blocs who won't budge on key items and hold principles more important than results and almost rather defeat than a partial victory.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #198 on: January 16, 2016, 04:13:21 PM »
Read Ann Coulter's article at the link I posted above.

I did. Coulter is confused right from the beginning. She maintains there is some equivalence between Obama and Ted Cruz. There isn't. She misunderstands the facts of the case that the birthers were raising against Obama.

The Constitution clearly states that as long as one parent is an American citizen and has lived at least 10 years in the United States, and at least 5 years after the age of 14, it does not matter where the child is born, they are a natural citizen. That's it. That's the law. End of discussion. Ted Cruz qualifies. Done.

Now, if what the birthers we're saying about Obama was true, he would not have qualified. His mother was only 18 years old when she gave birth to Barry. If she was in another country, Obama would not qualify as a natural born citizen because his one American parent, his mother,  would not have lived in the United States for 5 years after the age of 14, prior to his birth. That's the big difference. And Ann Coulter gets that all wrong in her article when she compares the two. A little surprising from Ann. She's smarter than that.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #199 on: January 16, 2016, 04:16:42 PM »
I don't have a problem with Cruz's citizenship, I have a problem with his electability. There is just zero way that guy can win against Hillary. Running him would simply be throwing the election.

Hillary is soon to be under indictment for multiple  felonies. Stick a fork in her.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #200 on: January 16, 2016, 04:22:37 PM »
Hillary is soon to be under indictment for multiple  felonies. Stick a fork in her.
Hopefully, but seriously people have been saying that since the glory days of Art talking about that.  Never underestimate the Clintons for surviving, or even profiting, from crimes and scandal and with willing press? Who knows? I hope you are correct though.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #201 on: January 16, 2016, 04:22:45 PM »
Hillary is soon to be under indictment for multiple  felonies. Stick a fork in her.

I'll believe it when I see it. I've been waiting for the downfall of the Clintons for decades and it never seems to pan out.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #202 on: January 16, 2016, 04:34:33 PM »
I voted for Cruz for Senator and if I take that quiz thing, my values match up closest to his with Trump second. I have similar concerns as you SFA, but I will add my own. I have a real issue with electing a first term Senator to be President, especially one with no executive experience. Ted Cruz was a great Solicitor General. He has been consistent as a Senator and not afraid to put his neck on the line. But he doesn't have the ezecutive experience I would like to see.

That quiz thing was weird. I lined up with Trump, 93% or something with Sanders second  :o. I guess that makes sense though, I'm sort of all over the place with my politics.

Quote
Ideally, I would prefer a governor from a large state. But none of the ones that are currently running.

Under normal or previous conditions, I would concur. But I think the country has shifted and it is no longer possible, as a matter of the electoral college map, for Republicans to win the presidency on their platform so long as it remains tied to social conservatism. Only anomalies can win, and the only anomaly is Trump due to his media presence.

Quote
I wish the Republicans would stop falling into the trap of attacking each other and start attacking Sanders, Clinton and Obama.

It's funny you say that. I've noticed a general reluctance on the part of Republicans to go after Hillary. I don't know why, but they always seem to put the kid gloves on. Personally, I despise her and would vote for anyone the Republicans put up there, but whoever it is is really going to have to attack her hard and I don't know if anyone but Trump will do that.


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #203 on: January 16, 2016, 05:42:35 PM »

It's funny you say that. I've noticed a general reluctance on the part of Republicans to go after Hillary. I don't know why, but they always seem to put the kid gloves on. Personally, I despise her and would vote for anyone the Republicans put up there, but whoever it is is really going to have to attack her hard and I don't know if anyone but Trump will do that.

IMHO, Romney could have beat Obama in 2012 if he would have just been aggressive and attacked hi performance. I know it gets overused, but you don't take a knife to a gunfight. Maybe as your third backup weapon.

You and MV need to keep talking to convince me that Trump can get elected.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #204 on: January 16, 2016, 05:47:01 PM »
I did. Coulter is confused right from the beginning. She maintains there is some equivalence between Obama and Ted Cruz. There isn't. She misunderstands the facts of the case that the birthers were raising against Obama.

The Constitution clearly states that as long as one parent is an American citizen and has lived at least 10 years in the United States, and at least 5 years after the age of 14, it does not matter where the child is born, they are a natural citizen. That's it. That's the law. End of discussion. Ted Cruz qualifies. Done.

Now, if what the birthers we're saying about Obama was true, he would not have qualified. His mother was only 18 years old when she gave birth to Barry. If she was in another country, Obama would not qualify as a natural born citizen because his one American parent, his mother,  would not have lived in the United States for 5 years after the age of 14, prior to his birth. That's the big difference. And Ann Coulter gets that all wrong in her article when she compares the two. A little surprising from Ann. She's smarter than that.

I don't pay as much attention to her as I used to. I still have my talking Ann Coulter doll though. I am surprised she is in the Trump camp now. She blasted the GOP for going with a moderate in Romney IIRC. Said the only way to get the base out was to go with a Reagan conservative IIRC. Not giving up my doll though.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #205 on: January 16, 2016, 06:01:03 PM »
Please explain why Cruz is not qualified.

He's a milquetoast corporate shill, or so indistinguishable from one as to make no difference. At this point in a campaign for President, it should be simple to point at a candidate, and say, "oh yeah, that guy, he's famous, he did that thing."

Cruz's image on the national stage is "that vaguely Latin guy, who did... uh, something, I guess. After being born in Canada." There is no chance this guy is anything other than a stuffed shirt for the mainstream power brokers, and if you've got yourself thinking he's got a real shot, I wanna know what you're putting on your steak, because it's gotta be delicious and hallucinogenic.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #206 on: January 16, 2016, 06:32:07 PM »
Anybody see the Trumpster's Twitter barrage on Cruz today?   I had to chuckle...........

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #207 on: January 16, 2016, 06:45:28 PM »
Please explain why Cruz is not qualified.

Because he's a punchable televangelist who should be selling prayer cloths.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #208 on: January 16, 2016, 06:48:06 PM »

I wish the Republicans would stop falling into the trap of attacking each other and start attacking Sanders, Clinton and Obama.

That'll come. It's all a part of the process.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #209 on: January 16, 2016, 06:51:09 PM »
Hillary is soon to be under indictment for multiple  felonies. Stick a fork in her.

Agreed. I don't believe she'll even be the nominee. I've believed for months that she's going to be indicted. Others are now coming around on that.